Please post your thoughts and questions regarding 'Brave New World' here. You can find the online copy here
Book Club Procedures
Please post your thoughts and questions regarding 'Brave New World' here. You can find the online copy here
Book Club Procedures
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
Apologize, but I think I'll past for this month..
'For of course some sort of general idea [the new students] must have, if they were to do their work intelligently - though as little of one, if they were to be good and happy members of society, as possible. For particulars, as everyone knows, make for virtue and happiness; generalities are intellectually necessary evils. Not philosophers, but fret-sawyers and stamp collectors compose the backbone of society.'
What do you make of this passage from the Chapter 1? What/who are the fret-sawyers?
I am amazed that BNW was written in 1930s. It is dealing with so many issues, especially social, which we can relate even today. The fact that physical looks are of highest importance, for example. And consumerism.
PS: I like the fact that I have learned new words while reading this book
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
I wanna read this so bad! I am a writing tutor at my school and I had to work with a number of students doing revisions on their Brave New World essays just this morning.
I am so jealous of them.
I have to write an essay on Matthew Arnold tonight, and my week is booked (no pun intended) until Friday. I hope to be able to catch up on some reading over the weekend. I'm looking foward to discussing this book.
Last edited by bobthejeep; 04-05-2005 at 07:39 PM.
"Gwendolyn, it is a terrible thing for a man to find out suddenly that all his life he has been speaking nothing but the truth. Can you forgive me?"
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
i got puzzled by this passage as well... i think it's a very original way of putting things, coz i used to assoicate philosophers with 'particulars' as in 'sophisticated ideas' and that character puts it the other way round. i think what he means is that the type of society we see in Brave New World relies on people who can be bothered to deal with hairsplitting minute little problems in one specific area rather than ask questions about 'general' stuff like the meaning of life, the structure of society etc.
i think he mentions fret-sawyers because fret-saw work is a hobby that requires you to concentrate on boring little details and also to persevere till you finish your job???
I have been thinking about this passage. I wonder if 'fret-sawyers and stamp collectors' symbolise people with hobbies, people who spend their free time with these things rather than reading, thinking, debating things. In this new world, people are encouraged and expected to have such hobbies, like obstacle golf. With these pass time activities, they are so busy that they don't have the time or energy to worry about things philosophers might be interested in and start questioning the system maybe.
Is anyone else finding it annoying that people are refering to having relationship with someone as 'having' them?
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
YES, very, though their kinda 'relationship' sounds more like having sex with them and that's it. Annoying nevertheless.
I have a plan: attack!
yeah.. it sounds so.. weird.. i agree w/ Jay that it sounds like they just have sex and that's it.. but i like the expression 'to have somebody' even less than the idea behind it...
hum, do you think ppl would really behave like this if we didn't have taboos and repressions? i'm not sure.. i'd like to think people are 'better' than this and wouldn't go around 'having' any old Tom Dick and Harry.. but you never know...very depressing idea... i'm not prudish or anything, but still...
Quote from Chapter XV: The Savage shook his head. 'It all seems to me quite horrible.' 'Of course it does.
Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery.
.... And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand.'
what do you think about this?
Last edited by SleepyWitch; 04-08-2005 at 05:52 PM.
I'm new and couldn't wait to respond to this. What you said about fretsawyers is what I got out of it too. I did a google search on "fretsawyer" and the only thing that pops up is BNW. So I had to do a little digging in the dictionary. Like you mentioned a fret saw is a tool to cut patterns. Sounds like today's modern scroll saw.
But this is what I came up with:
"Just to give you a general idea," he would explain to them. For of course some sort of general idea they must have, --- What he is saying is that when you begin to learn in school, teachers give you a general idea of how science works. Example, Sun and water make plants grow.
if they were to do their work intelligently–though as little of one, if they were to be good and happy members of society, as possible.---Here, you must know the general idea before you get into specifics. Example -- Inside the plant is photosynthesis. He also mentions that productive people are happy people.
For particulars, as every one knows, make for virture and happiness; ----He enforces the fact that the black and white facts are what makes for a good life. Example -- Sun, water, soil composition, photosynthesis makes for a happy plant.
generalities are intellectually necessary evils. -- Those "grey" facts are necessary in order to get to the understanding of the specifics.
Not philosophers but fretsawyers and stamp collectors compose the backbone of society.--- Here, I think, he's saying that the philosophers, the thinkers, the dreamers, no longer exist. Only the builders or pattern cutters (the clones) (fretsawyers) and classifiers (stamp collectors) are what BNW is built on. Remember it's a world of cloners and a caste system.
Well that's what I got out of it. I'm curious if any came up with this from one of the previous paragraphs:
"The enormous room on the ground floor faced towards the north." Rooms that face to the north are usually the coldest because they get the least sun. Atleast here in Michigan and in London. Strike 1 for Cold.
"Cold for all the summer beyond the panes," Cold is mentioned this time. Strike 2.
"for all the tropical heat of the room itself," While the temperature may be hot, he's making an exception to it. Cold Strike 3.
"a harsh thin light glared through the windows," This is where things get interesting, and where word choice is used effectively. He writes "thin" NOT "full sunshine." To me this is the infamous light we see when we die.
" hungrily seeking some draped lay figure," Draped = covered. Lay = past tense of lie. Figure = body. Covered dead bodies.
" some pallid shape of academic goose-flesh," Pallid = deficient in color. Academic = Student. Goose-flesh= goose bumps.
" but finding only the glass and nickel and bleakly shining porcelain of a laboratory." = Laboratory setting.
" Wintriness responded to wintriness." HUGE hint. Anger responds to anger. Huxley means 1 of 2 things that it's cold inside and out OR that the uses of the room itself haven't changed (more on this part in a bit)
" The overalls of the workers were white, their hands gloved with a pale corpse-coloured rubber." Ghosts, with "corpse-colored hands"
" The light was frozen, dead, a ghost." Now he sums up the whole thing in one sentence.
"Only from the yellow barrels of the microscopes did it borrow a certain rich and living substance, lying along the polished tubes like butter, streak after luscious streak in long recession down the work tables." What is IT? (said Faith No More) IT= The light in the previous sentence. Ok a given. But living things need to eat in order to survive. What he is saying is the light is seeking out the dead, but is momentarily ("borrow") satisfied with the cells(life) of the clones.
So to paraphrase the whole thing---
The room used to be for student doctors examining dead bodies. The light represents the light we all see when we die, either before or after the purpose of the room has changed. But Huxley is saying that while reality has changed the meaning has not. The light still feeds here, not on the corpses of the previous occupants, but now on the "newborns" which are still considered by Huxley to be "dead."
Am I close or off my rocker?
-Max
Hi Max!
Welcome to the Forum and thank you for your detailed analysis. I found some of your ideas very interesting and new to me.
I am not sure about this... I thought what he meant was that details are what is really important... Ford introduced a new production system which required people to be 'experts' in only what they are doing, one small part of the whole process and nothing else. Here, I think the Director is refering to that... although the new comers should have a general idea about what the whole process is, in reality all they need to know is the specific (particular) task they will be assigned to do. Also, the description of the way the tubes move reminds a factory line... They move slowly and specialists perform their tasks along the line... Yes, just like a factory.
My interpretation is philosophers are not useful for the society... I like your interpretation of clones/classifiers and also death bodies -almost like a morgue?-... Hadn't thought of it that way. Thank youNot philosophers but fretsawyers and stamp collectors compose the backbone of society.--- Here, I think, he's saying that the philosophers, the thinkers, the dreamers, no longer exist. Only the builders or pattern cutters (the clones) (fretsawyers) and classifiers (stamp collectors) are what BNW is built on. Remember it's a world of cloners and a caste system.
While reading this article, I was reminded of the consumerism trend in BNW and thought you might find it interesting, too.
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
Scheherazade,Hi Max!
Welcome to the Forum and thank you for your detailed analysis. I found some of your ideas very interesting and new to me.
I am not sure about this... I thought what he meant was that details are what is really important... Ford introduced a new production system which required people to be 'experts' in only what they are doing, one small part of the whole process and nothing else. Here, I think the Director is refering to that... although the new comers should have a general idea about what the whole process is, in reality all they need to know is the specific (particular) task they will be assigned to do. Also, the description of the way the tubes move reminds a factory line... They move slowly and specialists perform their tasks along the line... Yes, just like a factory.
My interpretation is philosophers are not useful for the society... I like your interpretation of clones/classifiers and also death bodies -almost like a morgue?-... Hadn't thought of it that way. Thank you
I think you and I have the same thoughts about my post, however, using the sun, flowers, water, etc. was a bad example.
In order to enforce the production theory I should have stuck with generality = tire goes on rim. Specifics to do the job = tire goes on rim, take 5 nuts and tighten on bolts.
The only thing I would disagree with your morgue theory is the word "academic" that Huxley puts in there. In class it was discussed that the lab used to be a school. (And that's as far as the discussion got, the above theory is entirely mine)
If "academic" is removed from the passage then it could be argued that the room definitely used to be a morgue before the lab.
Another point I wish to bring up--- Did anyone notice that the people of the savage land were Indians. Which was the race we Americans tried to condition into our society back in the late 1800's?
-Max
Unless you work for it, you don't appreciate things properly? Especially your happiness? In World State, people don't have to work hard for things... They do not experience strong passions/ambitions and when they feel down or trouble, they seek refuge in soma. Their 'soma' induced happiness is an artificial one. Savage, who is not conditioned to avoid feelings, can see this and finds it all meaningless; only a parody.
Max, I did not mean that the room used to be a morgue but feels like one and it is ironic as it is a room where 'life' is created as opposed to a room where dead people kept.
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
yeah, i thought something along these lines too... but also it reminds me of the romantic ideal of unattainability.. i mean, the savage is quite romantic, and in essence, he couldn't have all these passionate feelings if life was easy.. e.g. if he could have Lenina on the spot, there would be no need to build up all this passion.. i mean, even when it turns out she's not unattainable (i.e. when she strips in front of him) he prefers to idealize her and not fulfil his desires .. coz according to his romantic ideals she's not supposed to behave like that... hehe, i think i'm a bit like the Savage myself, so i can't see much wrong with his behaviour... but, I think the question of what is r e a l happiness ('happy-clappy +soma' or 'Savage marries Lenina') still remains unresolved.. plus, do you think he would live happily ever after if he married her and had 7 children? i mean, on the one hand 'having' lots of ppl all the time and taking soma in between is shallow but on the other hand Savage's passion might be a bit too intense? plus, if if he really is into romantic/courtly love, than he's not supposed to 'attain' Lenina anyway but to pine and perish from a distance.. i.e. he's not meant to be 'happy' in any conventional sense of the word... errrr.. what was my point
I felt that Huxley was being a little unfair to Savage... He was offered only two options:yeah, i thought something along these lines too... but also it reminds me of the romantic ideal of unattainability.. i mean, the savage is quite romantic, and in essence, he couldn't have all these passionate feelings if life was easy.. e.g. if he could have Lenina on the spot, there would be no need to build up all this passion.. i mean, even when it turns out she's not unattainable (i.e. when she strips in front of him) he prefers to idealize her and not fulfil his desires .. coz according to his romantic ideals she's not supposed to behave like that... hehe, i think i'm a bit like the Savage myself, so i can't see much wrong with his behaviour... but, I think the question of what is r e a l happiness ('happy-clappy +soma' or 'Savage marries Lenina') still remains unresolved.. plus, do you think he would live happily ever after if he married her and had 7 children? i mean, on the one hand 'having' lots of ppl all the time and taking soma in between is shallow but on the other hand Savage's passion might be a bit too intense? plus, if if he really is into romantic/courtly love, than he's not supposed to 'attain' Lenina anyway but to pine and perish from a distance.. i.e. he's not meant to be 'happy' in any conventional sense of the word... errrr.. what was my point
1. life in the Reservation
2. life in the World State
And due to his nature/background, he cannot survive in either of them. He is destined to be an outsider wherever he went. In the reservation, he is not accepted as he is not one of them although he really wants to be one. In the World State, he feels like an outsider, refusing to accept their moral values and life style. As I finished the book, I really wished Huxley made him a little more adaptable so that he could survive somewhere or there were a place for the likes of him to go. Why is the suicide the only way out for him?
Savage, I felt, was in love with the idea of love. He wanted to have this romantic love affair with Lenina and the Lenina he loved was the one, he desperately wanted her to be, rather than what/who she really is. So, it seems like their affair is doomed from the begining. When confronted by this fact, he turned against Lenina...
Talking of which... What happens to Lenina at the end? I thought Savage killed her by whipping and when he realised what happened, he killed himself. Or did he?
~
"It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
~
my thoughts exactly
i didn't understand if he kills Lenina, either
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
