Mr. Aldous Huxley states in his rather famous novel, Brave New World: "The Caste System. Constantly proposed, constantly rejected. There was something called democracy. As though men were more than physico-chemically equal" (47).
Oddly enough, he also says "family, monogamy, romance. Everywhere exclusiveness, a narrow channel of impulse and energy. 'But everyone belongs to everyone else' " (40).
The former, which I shall lovingly call Hopscotch, and the latter, which I shall not quite as lovingly, but more in a "I-only-keep-you-around-because-the-law-demands-it" kind of way, call My Little Pyrrhic Victory, both indirectly (and in a mildly sassy manner, I might add) describe the subject world's values as it pertains to both current social etiquette and past ignorance and/or ineptitude.
With their pompous commentary, Hopscotch and My Little Pyrrhic Victory both present said values just as clear as crystal. If, of course, you were to take that crystal, and maybe throw some of that magic Windex stuff that makes your windows disappear, and then take another crystal, and scrabble out a hole in the middle of the first crystal so that you could more or less see through it.
Value #1: Only those who spent their six to eight years of their childhood on the eastern coast of Noumea attempting to make a lego castle out of the dreams of other small children would believe that democracy is a good idea.
Value #2: Alphas are fantastic. Betas are kind of cool, but not really as cool as the Alphas (even though they try to sit next to them at lunch). And Deltas, Gammas, and Epsilons can go die in a hole for all the world cares. Meaning, men are not equal. Never were, never will be, and most likely aren't at the moment.
Value #3: Promiscuity rocks. Any romantic business is sheer folly. Yes, folly.
Family and monogamy: noting rule #3, we can see that these such actions/lifestyles are looked down upon. In order to produce the desired results, the government in this novel asserts that women and men should all just sleep around in one, big, happy family.
Desire, impulse, and passion: eh, I'm too lazy. Look at the paragraph above. And the judgement you just made about me really wasn't necessary.
Is it uncool to post a comment but the comment has NOTHING to do with your posting? Is it? Is it? Whatever, I'm doing it anyway.
ReplyDeleteSo, you know how in our socratic circle you asked the whole question thing about whether we thought it would be right or wrong for John to have refused to go to the party that Bernard set for him. Well, I'll just write my response here.
I think that John had every right to have refused to attend that party-ish thing that Bernard set for him. Here are my reasons why I believe John had every reason NOT to attend. 1) Bernard was trying to make himself seem better (or not exactly those words per se) therefore he asked people of high rank to attend. 2) He kind of basically just made fun of John. "A savage." Yeah, I'd be pissed. 3) It's a party for him and although he's legally under Bernard and in a sense, Bernard is his 'parent-ish' type of person, I don't think he had to go if he didn't want to. It's almost like if your parents throwing a party for you to just 'show you off' to the rest of the their people. I mean, would YOU go if you knew the reason? I mean, I don't know if John knew the reason why there was a party for him but even if he did or didn't know. He's responsible for his actions. However, that does NOT give him the right to always do as he pleases.
Eh, I hope I made sense. I wouldn't be writing this if I had spoken up and wasn't interrupted by another person but it's all gravy! No honestly, it's okay. Haha. Good stuff yo.
TOODLES! ;D
-Gold