Choice, Free-will, and Government
1. Respond to the concept of death conditioning in BNW (Ch. 14). Compare that to the way death is viewed in Gattaca. How might knowing an individual’s “expiration date” change his/her life? In BNW, people are kept in youthful condition and then die at the age of 60. How do these different societies view death? How is that a reflection of the values of the society as a whole?
2. At what point should the government intervene in the affairs of its citizens? Where is the line between a government looking out for its citizens and interfering in private matters? Give examples from society today to support your answer.
3. Describe the tension in Gattaca between human freedom and genetic destiny. How much control do/will our genes have in determining our individual and societal futures?
4. In BNW, individual choice is all but eliminated. Does this make for a better society? According to whom? According to what criteria?
There is much effort that goes into the death conditioning of BNW citizens right from their childhood. Young children of all castes are taken to hospitals and are conditioned to associate happiness with death by receiving desserts and desirable toys on hospitable visits. Through hypnopeadia they learn that their death is beneficial to the whole of society. All the effort put into death conditioning is unnecessary, however. The energy spent on extra conditioning outside of hypnopeadia is redundant because there is nothing about death that would distress the BNW citizens. Our society, for the most part, fears death because of the end of loving relationships it brings. In BNW, however, there are no personal relationships, so obviously grief over the loss of another would not be felt. The situation with John and Linda in the hospital shows the extent of BNWs’ feelings towards death and self value. While John is clearly distraught over Linda’s death, the nurse he confronts is puzzled and upset by his behavior. “As though death were something that terrible, as though any one mattered as much as all that!” she thought (206). In the nurse truly believing that no one matters that much, there is no reason for her to feel she herself matters that much either. The nurse and all other BNW civilians (with the exception of those who deviate from the norm) have no desire to live. They simply are content with existing. She exists for the good of society, but she is told her death is equally helpful. If BNW citizens are conditioned through hypnopeadia to know their death is for the greater good of society, that alone would appease any hesitation towards death. BNW needn’t waste its time on convincing civilians that death is a positive experience.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that in society, there is a line that should not be crossed in terms of a government's relationship with its people. The most important idea of this relationship, one that Brave New World clearly violates, is a government that is made "of the people, by the people, for the people." While a government makes laws on behalf of its citizens, it must be done in a republic-like format to ensure that people have the right to determine what their own government will do. Dictatorships and monarchies both violate the standards of what an ideal government should be like. If these principals are upheld, then the extreme form of mass production that Huxley describes in Brave New World would not happen. On page 240, John tells Mustapha Mond that he is "claiming the right to be unhappy." He says this after a discussion at length about Shakespeare and the high rate of consumption in the World State. Mond claims that since Shakespeare is simply old, newer products should be produced instead. This clearly violates the government's role in the lives of its citizens. It should not be up to the government to decide the rate of consumption and how products should be released for its citizens. This clearly violates the role of the government in people's lives. It is not even close to being a government "of the people, by the people, for the people."
ReplyDeleteMy question for the silent response had to do with individual choice in Brave New World and “predetermined identity” in Gattaca. (Please note that when I chose a topic I combined #4 from “Choice, Free-Will, and Government” and #5 from “Individuality, Identity, and Conformity”). In the silent dialogue there were many good points brought up by all of the people who responded to the question and to my response. One member in my group wrote that, “[in Brave New World] everyone is able to make their own decisions but they are limited by their intellectual capabilities.” I think this is a very good point that I didn’t really think of when I initially responded to this question. This to me means that people in BNW are able to make their own decisions, but they are conditioned to not really know how to think anything else other than what they were conditioned to know or do (work). The inability to make decisions or individual choices also comes up in Gattaca in the case of Vincent who overcomes his “predetermined identity” and eventual reaches his goal of going up into space. As we saw in Gattaca, when Vincent was born, although he was very smart and had the will power to achieve his goals he didn’t have the correct “profile” to be able to work and go into space. Vincent later took the identity of Jerome who was very smart and had the correct lifespan and blood type to go into space but he had be paralyzed and “fell off the map”. Jerome allowed Vincent to take his place, use his blood sample, so that he could use his abilities to achieve his goal of going into space. Therefore in my opinion, and as is visible in both Brave New World and Gattaca, not being able to make your own choices or identity is something that I think people in our society take for granted. Without choices and being conditioned to be someone we loose the part of society that makes it interesting. I think this just goes to show that what Huxley wanted to achieve through Brave New World was achieved, in that he was able to show us the extremes of what could happen if certain things in society go too far or are taken for granted. I believe that both of these works allow us to see how much society can and will shape us no matter if we are “conditioned” or not we have to fight, like Vincent did, to reach our goals and nothing is impossible.
ReplyDeleteDeath is a very complex idea for people in our society to understand because it happens so unexpected, and most people are afraid of it. However, in BNW, the people are conditioned for death from a young age so when it happens it is no big deal. People in our society are so afraid of death and will do anything to avoid it which is normal to us. John has such a hard time with the death of Linda and does not understand why the children would need to be consitioned for death. On page 206, "Undoing all their wholesome death-conditioning with the disgusting outcry-- as though death were something terrible, as though anyone mattered as much as all that!" the nurse thought. People in our society tend to ask questions about why somebody died because it is so hard to grasp. In BNW most of the "conditioned" people see death as nothing. People are just gone and that is that. Even Lenina and Fanny who seem to have a close relationship, not even would death matter to them. The people in BNW that are affected by death are the people who understand relationships and love. Those people, like John and Bernard, do not just want to "have" girls; they want to be in love with Lenina. In order for BNW to be the stable and conditioned utopia they aspire to be, death conditioning is necessary.
ReplyDeleteThe opposite of the BNW society is anarchy. When thinking of the faults in the BNW, one might be quick to turn the opposite direction. But it is important to remember that anarchy is the approval or resignation to uncensored, animalistic passion and spirit while the BNW society is the end of all passion and spirit to create tranquility. These are extremes and there is plenty of middle ground in which we live today; a struggle between order and chaos that every human needs to face. The outcome of this struggle is a recipe of order and chaos or tranquility as opposed to passion that humans write in order to lead their lives the way their morals and ambitions allow them. On page 238 in BNW John explains the over exaggerated choice the BNW chooses when he says, "Whether 'tis better in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them... But you don't do either. Neither suffer nor oppose. You just abolish the slings and arrows". Instead of attempting to answer questions that stretch the human mind, they abolish the mind and abolish questions. The BNW society sacrifices their pychological bodies for the completely physical nirvana in which they have created.
ReplyDeleteFrom reading the silent dialogue, I was able to better understand both points of view of my question. I thought of death conditioning and having “expiration dates” as terrible ideas because they lessen the impact of death and the significance of one’s life. As someone from my silent dialogue simply stated, “knowing that one is going to die either takes away their will to live or gives them determination to live their life to the fullest”. This sets up the two sides of the argument: are setting ‘expiration dates’ or death conditioning ethical? I believe that in Brave New World’s society, by teaching children that there should be no emotions tied at the concept of death, it demeans the person’s existence. I also believe that Vincent’s case of rising above the expectations of his predestined future is a rare one and that in other cases people would most likely not succeed because they do not see the point if they are expecting death soon.
ReplyDeleteIn a conversation between the Director and Henry Foster in Brave New World, the Director says, “Murder kills only the individual – and, after all, what is an individual?” (148). Because the society lacks individuality and relationships, death really means very little to them. The nurse at the hospital was appalled at the savage’s response to Linda dying and thought, “… as though death were something terrible, as though any one mattered as much as all that” (206). Similarly, in GATTACA, once the parents discover that their baby will live a fairly short and unhealthy life they decide not to name him after the father and also create another child to be exceptionally better in all aspects. I feel that in both cases the expectancy of death creates an environment in which people are to grow up with smaller expectations and less desire to succeed due to the fact that they will just die soon anyways.
2. My silent discussion concluded that government intervention and ability to become involved in private affairs reflect what a society is conditioned to. I’d like to further discuss situations in our society where we as Americans would allow the government to intervene and why we do so, besides the obvious such as homicide. Society is based around a government dictatorship in Brave New World, and Mustapha Mond demonstrates this when he says, “In a properly organized society like ours, nobody has any opportunities to be noble or heroic…The greatest care taken is to prevent you from loving any one too much” (237). I disagree with this outlook on government because primarily, it would never be realistic in our society, secondly, it promotes intense government intervention to carry these things out, and thirdly, it takes away from two of the greatest pleasures of human life. The Savage describes his desire for a natural world and free-spirited lifestyle when he firmly tells Mond “But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin” (240). Readers should be influenced by the Savage to not be afraid to be an individual, and another interesting topic to explore would be how to decondition systematic conformity in a society. I agree with the Savage’s wants and believe it would be incredibly difficult to ‘conform’ the Brave New World society to American standards, and that it could never be done. Instead of intervening on the book’s society, I think we should focus on proving to our government that we will be responsible and ethical if they stay out of our personal matters.
ReplyDeleteThe fictional societies created in these works emphasize a depiction of death that differs greatly from a modern perspective. These satirical and fictional works suggest an apathy or desensitization towards death, often existing as a result of advancements in technology. In the satirical novel, Brave New World, desensitization towards death appears most directly through “death conditioning” and systematic planned death at age sixty. Similarly, lives seem predestined in the science fiction movie GATTACA as characters are informed of all mental and physical deformities at birth, living their life according to an estimated prediction of death. Further, in his satirical piece “A Modest Proposal,” Jonathan Swift argues cannibalism as the solution to poverty, suggesting that children born to poor families be sold as food. As satires are often used as hyperboles of a present society, we must consider how technology and advancing society has revolutionized the idea of death. Has a more scientific understanding provoked apathy towards the imperfect life? Huxley illustrates this indifference through a nurse in Brave New World. Upon witnessing John’s compassion towards Linda as she lies in her deathbed; the nurse exclaims “… as though death were something terrible, as though any one mattered as much as all that” (206). For those who aren’t conditioned in this utopian society, does a greater understanding of the common expression “life is fleeting” contribute to a more rational approach to coping with death? By separating emotions from a person’s inevitable death, we are inhumanly diminishing the significance of that life. These works suggest our need to recognize the significance of life without knowing how long it will last.
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading through the silent discussion I felt that it was pretty dry, and there wasn’t much substance in the discussion as a whole. At first I attributed this to the topic I chose, which seems very generic upon retrospect. However, after my initial disappointment, I looked closer at the second response to my topic and a certain line stuck out. I found that the following line lent itself well to Brave New World, “…individuality is lost along the way. Our culture is less about “freedom” and more about following the decided trends.” This made me think about BNW and freedom. The duality as a topic freedom has in BNW is something I would like to explore more because on one hand, you have people like Lenina who say “I am free, free to have the most wonderful time.” Then, you have Marx who feels enslaved by his conditioning (p. 91). In the end, it seems BNW is following a ‘trend’ mimicking freedom, comparable to soma mimicking Christianity and alcohol. The silent discussion made me realize that in BNW, freedom is a façade. A façade encouraged by conditioning and censorship. As World Controller, Mustapha Mond is really the one determining how much of real freedom the people of BNW get to see and be a part of. When John asks why the people cannot just see Othello versus going to Feeleys in the end discussion, Mond responds “I’ve told you, it’s old. Besides, they couldn’t understand it anyway.” Mond also rationalized his censorship methods by stating, “Beauty’s attractive, and we don’t want people to be attracted by old things. We want them to like new ones.” (p. 219). This proves that the people of BNW are oblivious to what true freedom is because the World Controllers have made created a façade when it comes to freedom. Truth, a major component of freedom, is also altered through conditioning. Basic truths of the world are hidden, and truths people generally have to uncover such as what type of person one is, are already determined. People believe they know everything about their world, but really it’s fed to them by the institution that seems increasingly more like the controlling religion they tried to eliminate. On page 232, Mond reads “We are God’s property,” from one of the blasphemous books only a few know about. However, is there any freedom in “Everyone works for everyone else”? Is this concept in addition to the concept of His Fordship really better than the religions they banished as evil?
ReplyDeleteLaura brought up a good point I had never considered. In Brave New World, citizens are trained to think death isn’t sad. They are ultimately telling the people that their lives don’t matter, that they shouldn’t grieve over a loved one. It emphasizes the fact that relationships only last for days, as people move on and don’t really fall in love. I think this is horrible because the controllers of the society are basically taking advantage of its people to complete what it needs to with the jobs the people are trained to do. Then, they are forgotten when they die. In chapter five, the motto “everyone works for everyone else. We can't do without any one” is first introduced. Then isn’t everyone’s life worth something? Each death should be mourned.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Molly’s comment, I think that there is a bigger difference between Gattaca and BNW is regards to death conditioning and the expectations set for the people of their society. Molly stated that people in these societies grow up with smaller expectations. In my opinion, I don’t think that they are growing up with smaller expectations, they just aren’t meant to ever exceed the expectations set for them. In Gattaca, an invalid is supposed to live a short life and have genetic “flaws”. The difference in BNW is that the Epsilons don’t strive to be like the Alphas, Betas, Gammas, or Deltas. They are perfectly content living the lives that they live.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely with what Laura L. brought up and with Melanie's response to that. There is a great deal of significance in Huxley's idea of (not) honoring or mourning over death. In our class discussion, the idea of this desensetization to death was brought up along with individuality. We concluded that Melanie's quote, "We can't do without anyone" refers to the fact that they can't do with anyone's WORK. The individual is not prized over, honored, or mourned for. It is the labor that the individual contributes to the Brave New World society that is really important. This also helps keep the Brave New World Society running because while each individual feels important in all the tasks that they carry out, they do not realize that the work that they represent is really what matters in their society. Keeping people busy in the Brave New World society keeps them happy, and when they come to an age where their labor is not worth much anymore, and they die, they are not mourned over, because of their inability to contribute much more to society anyway.
ReplyDeleteto respond to melanie, i think that they arent trying to tell them that their lives arent important, its more like your life is only important if you do what you are told to do by the government. they dont get sad for loved ones when they die for one simple reason, they dont have loved ones. they dont have families, all they have is friends and they are not that close with the friends that they have. today though, i do not believe that it is right that the gov is listening in to our phone conversations and reading our mail. there has to be some point where enough is enough. i think the gov should only get involved when someones life is in danger.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Maayan's earlier post. Most people do not realize that they are controlled by the government as much as they are. They believe that this country which is founded on being a very free and independent one, provides them with as much freedom and independence as they want, but this statement is false. It seems like the government is controlling its people more than ever because of their growing concern of terrorism. Looking at this problem in a realistic matter, makes me realize that there is no way that the government will decrease their controll on others because the fear of terrorism and other attacks will never go away.
ReplyDeleteI think that in society, there is a line that should not be crossed in terms of a government's relationship with its people. The most important idea of this relationship, one that Brave New World clearly violates, is a government that is made "of the people, by the people, for the people." While a government makes laws on behalf of its citizens, it must be done in a republic-like format to ensure that people have the right to determine what their own government will do.
ReplyDeleteI think that in society, there is a line that should not be crossed in terms of a government's relationship with its people. The most important idea of this relationship, one that Brave New World clearly violates, is a government that is made "of the people, by the people, for the people." While a government makes laws on behalf of its citizens, it must be done in a republic-like format to ensure that people have the right to determine what their own government will do.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2b1D5w82yU
ReplyDeleteits good