Brave New World by Aldous Huxley

For Morgan.

1. The construction at the start is quite good. A long, two chapter intro to the novel and world feels stable three straight narrative. This stability helps to reinforce the stability of the world described. However, chapter three starts to crazily reel between points of view in different locations, and ramps up the tension through this. By the time that chapter seven comes around to compare 20th century western culture to the described world, the reader has had enough time to get used to that described world and understand the comparisons. It is a fine line to draw between boring the reader and giving them enough time to get used the ideas explained. I think Huxley nailed it.

2. The release of tension, John throwing soma out the window, is a bit of a letdown. I understand that some act is necessary to collide the controller and John, and that the controller would try and cut off any of this type of behavior before it got out of hand, but even with all the punching, it seems a little unlike John. I think he would understand the physical differences between classes and try and change some betas or Alpha minuses. His attempts to change some deltas seems stupid and hopeless. None of the rest of the novel communicated John as stupid to me.

3. This letdown is especially disappointing as the rest of the novel makes such sense. I've already mentioned my admiration for the beginning and it's pacing, but the rest works too: the trip to the preservation not only shows more of the world outside the cities, but gives the reader time to adjust to new environment through the shown lessening of city culture as the characters progress away from the city; the conversation with the controller is interesting, illuminating, and punctuated by enough actions to keep it moving nicely; John's exile is fascinating and further reiterates the differences between the city and him; and the ending is tragic and appropriate for both the story and John's goal of affecting society. It all fits so well except for that one part with the punching and the soma. The lead up to that part, with Linda's death, is well done. John's rash, useless outburst makes some sense, but it doesn't quite seem to fit John.

4. The whole novel is so tight. Bernard's friend Helmholtz becomes an important part of the plot after seeming to merely illuminate Bernard initially. The video of savages whipping themselves comes back at the end to profoundly impact John's actions. Even the personal helicopters, which at first appear to be little more than window dressing, are integral to the breaking of John's solitude. The examples go on and on. Huxley examines every part of the world shown and told and allows each to impact the plot and characters in meaningful ways. This tight production is all encompassing. I think it might be a little too tight—only the discussion of God is allowed a bit of breathing space—but it helps keep the book focused.

5. The ending is perfect: John is comfortable as an equal or an inferior, but the minute he thinks himself superior, or is told that he is by the controller and Lenina's obsession, he goes back to his comfortable, solitary conflict with nature. And when the city culture intrudes again, telling him by their interest that he is caricatured, not a human, the disparity forces actions upon him that he regrets in kills himself over. In this way he reintroduces tragedy into the culture, just like he wanted, in a single act that denies the culture any ability to ignore him because he chooses the time of their greatest interest to act. He uses their curiosity and consumption—of the movie, media, and helicopters—against them.

6. I thought that the sex was overdone for what it added to the story and world. I got the point that he was trying to make early on and did not need it hammered home again and again. This characteristic shows why I believe that the novel is heavy handed. The constant sex and soma and reminding the reader of the differences between the classes makes it seem like Huxley doesn't trust the reader to get it, so he simply hammers it home over and over.

7. The writing was fine. It's efficient. Nothing stood out as either good or bad. It communicated the plot and ideas well, but the novel relies on those more than the writing. In this way, the writing is matched to Huxley's capabilities: it gets out of the way and lets the plot roll.

8. I think the theme is that stability leads to stagnation, not progress. The basic premise is that progress is an inherent drive in humanity, and the only way to rid us of it is to transfer it to consumption and sexuality. He takes Ford and Freud and pushes them to utopian extremes, then shows what they lack through John, condemning them through contrast with the reader's sympathy and understanding of John.