Brave New World: Discussion Question for Chapters 7, 8, and 9
What did you find most interesting about the way Huxley compares and contrasts life on the Savage Reservation with life in the "Other Place" (AKA London)?
OR
Compare John and Bernard's experiences as social outcasts.
I like the way that Huxley uses John and Bernard to explore the feelings of individuals caught between cultures. In Latino / Chicano Studies, this mental, and sometimes physical, space is known as the "borderlands." The fact that Huxley chose to use New Mexico as the setting for the Savage Reservation may lend some credence to this interpretation.
The borderlands phenomenon occurs when an individual attempts to reconcile their cultural identity when it is a composite of two different cultures. Because they are a cultural bastard, they are effectively disowned by both cultures. This may happen, for example, when a Mexican immigrant comes to the United States and moves to a predominantly Mexican-American community. The Mexican-American norms that are adopted by individuals in this community are neither American nor Mexican. As a result, these individuals are, to varying extents, ostracized by both cultures. This phenomenon is particular acute for second generation immigrants. They are often objects of ridicule and, as a consequence, develop resentment toward their parents for putting them in that position.
Bernard is in the borderlands. He is fascinated by the culture in Malpais and the culture in London (his mother's culture). He is a British-Malpaisian. Natives to Malpais do not accept Bernard because of his physical features and also because his mother refuses to adhere to Malpaisian cultural norms. Bernard is, on the one hand, fascinated by the myths and customs practiced on the Savage Reservation, but they will not accept him as one of them. Bernard responds by developing an intense resentment of his mother who he feels is the source of the problem. On the other hand, Bernard is fascinated by his mother's stories of "The Other Place," which he perceives to be some sort of utopia. Throughout chapters 7,8, and 9 we see various examples of John attempting to forge an identity from these two disparate cultures.
Although Bernard is not the product of two separate cultures, he engages in some of the same struggles as John. He desperately wants to be accepted by others, but his physical and social traits prohibit others from completely accepting him. But, instead of turning his resentment toward his mother (he doesn't have one), Bernard turns his resentment toward the State (which, I guess, is really his mother).
Also, I've been thinking about some of the comments expressing disappointment with the character development in BNW. The more I thought about it, the more I began to realize that the Savage Reservation and "The Other Place" (BNW) are characters in their own right. As you read the novel, these two places become increasingly complex and nuanced.
I seems like, up to this point, the lack of character developement was necessary - BNW is a carefully controlled environment that strives to be even and uniform in all ways. It has to be void of emotion and personality to a certain extent because of that or it would just be a variation on the Savage place. When Lenina started crying and making all kinds of exclamations I realized that there has been a lack when before I wasn't giving it much thought.
The differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears. Lenina shows actual human emotion in chapter 7 because of it. She cries!! She whines. She acts in ways that BNW does not allow for, recoiling in horror at dirtiness and viviparity - its unlikely Lenina has felt any of these things since she was an infant being shown pictures for conditioning...and this is why her character has appeared flat thus far. It was flat by necessity for the story.
Its also interesting that Linda, in behaving how she was trained to behave in BNW, has become a whore in the Savage Place. Its also interesting that Huxley worked in that John was jealous of the men that Linda had sex with when he was a child. Jealousy is non existent in BNW, so it would make sense to work it in to the Savage Place, but the fact that Huxley made it this particular kind of jealousy makes the character development here a little more complex.
"The differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears."
Very interesting. I didn't really think about it like that when I read it. But, I completely agree. Lenina did show some emotion in BNW, like getting upset and worked up when Bernard wanted to float above the ocean, but, for the most part, you're right. This is a striking contrast that Huxley establishes between these two worlds.
Interesting "borderlands" concept. This concept is easily seen when considering this book.
"The differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears."
I agree....yet interesting enough you have people who still shirk their existence by taking drugs in the Savage Land... Your comment also leads me to the contemplation of a comparison between the Savage Place and London. In London you have Soma, a designer drug that leads to a lack of ill or distressing feelings. In the Savage Place, however, you have Peyote...a primitive type of drug (by "primitive" I mean one that comes from the land and is taken by the "less advanced"). The comparison here is though different, both societies cannot rid man of the the desire to escape from himself. Also interesting is that even though both societies have members that wish to escape via drugs, in one scenario it is widely accepted as the constant or norm. That scenario happens to fall under the wider label of progress.Thus, according to Huxley, more progress in BNW leads to more escape for more people.
Huxley also draws our attention to some interesting parallels between the solidarity services in BNW and the ritual practices of the savages ("These drums beat out just the same rhythms"--Lenina whispering to herself).
Both are rituals comprised of actions intended to symbolize the giving of one's self to something bigger and greater.
In BNW, solidarity services are religious ceremonies. This is indicated in at least two ways. First, the President of the group makes the sign of "T" which is a sign of deference for their "God", Henry Ford. Second, the culminating orgy is a symbol of sacrifice (an idea found in all religious ceremonies, either physically or symbolically). Each individual denounces their individual needs and desires by "giving" themselves to the other members of the group -- everyone belongs to everyone else.
While I'm not sure that I can give a coherent explanation of the savage ritual, there are some obvious symbolic parallels. As Lenina observes, the music used in both ceremonies have an almost identical rhythm. Here, I believe Huxley is saying that both ceremonies conjure the same human emotions and address the same psychic needs. Like the solidarity services, the savage ritual also includes a symbolic gesture of sacrifice. The shaman comes from the underground (life on earth) to offer his sacrifice to the Gods. Cornmeal is a symbol of the toil of man / the fruits of his labor. The savages sprinkle the cornmeal on the snakes in order to give thanks to the Gods for giving them the means to cultivate this bounty. Then, a boy is whipped. After being whipped several times, the blood pouring from the wound on his back is sprinkled on the pile of snakes and cornmeal. This gesture is akin to a human sacrifice. Global harmony -- stability -- takes precedent over individual well being. Individuals must be sacrificed or endure suffering in order for the stability of the system to remain in harmony.
It is interesting how Lenina and John are mutually disgusted by each other's method of demonstrating the same idea (that everyone belongs to everyone else).
why does rolliefngr777 get a special icon next to name?
I didn't really look seriously at the similarities between London and Savage Place until you guys started talking about it, and there are a lot. Especially the drug use. What are the implications of this?
I thought the symbology with the T was interesting because its the sign of the cross with the head cut off. I've been trying to link this and figure out if Huxley is saying something as simple as BNW is the same as old world but without the brain. I haven't been able to make this really correlate though, because while thinking is probably a no-no in BNW, I personally get the impression that the distinctions between the two places has more to do with heart. (but I'm probably just projecting own emotionality)
Samson said: "It is interesting how Lenina and John are mutually disgusted by each other's method of demonstrating the same idea (that everyone belongs to everyone else)."
- are you saying John thinks everyone belongs to everyone else?
"- are you saying John thinks everyone belongs to everyone else?"
No. I'm saying that religious ceremonies, in generally, share a lot of symbolism and that most are performed in order to reinforce/acknowledge a society's relationship to their God(s). Almost all religions teach, in some way, that we are all part of the body of God. Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation). It seems to me that this idea, depending on how it is interpreted, expresses the same sentiment as "everyone belongs to everyone else."
Whether you agree with this interpretation of Christianity or not, it is pretty clear that both the solidarity service and the savage ritual symbolize the sacrifice of the individual for the benefit of the group / society. Native American ceremonial rituals commonly exalt the connection that human's have to the world / nature. Their myths reinforce the idea that all living things live in a system of balance and that this balance is attained through the process of death and rebirth. Sometimes this myth is manifested physically in the form of a human sacrifice and other times it is perpetuated through performance ritual.
But, back to your question. I'm not saying that John necessarily believes that "everyone belongs to everyone else." He may or may not believe this. However, Huxley did describe how upset John was that he was not chosen to be whipped in the ceremony. Unlike Lenina, John is not disgusted by the savage ritual. He wants to be part of it. Conversely, Lenina believes that polygamy is natural while John has developed animosity toward his mother for refusing to be monogamous. Therefore, I am assuming that John would find the orgy that takes place in the solidarity ceremony to be offensive / savage.
John and Lenina find elements of each other's rituals to be offensive or savage. This is true even though both serve to symbolize the same concept.
Samson wrote: "Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation). It seems to me that this idea, depending on how it is interpreted, expresses the same sentiment as "everyone belongs to everyone else."
I understand the first part, I don't see the interpretation...please explain?
"I understand the first part, I don't see the interpretation...please explain?"
I was referring to my interpretation of Christianity:
"Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation)."
I was trying to say that religions teach us to become one with the world around us. They teach us to transcend our fixation with our physical body in order to connect with something larger than ourselves. As far as I know, this is true of all religions. I was trying to draw a connection between this commonality and the mantra "everyone belongs to everyone else."
rolliefngr777 asked me to clarify the following remark:
"John and Lenina find elements of each other's rituals to be offensive or savage. This is true even though both serve to symbolize the same concept."
Linda's failure to abandon polygamy (an accepted norm in BNW) has become a source of social ostracism (on the savage reservation) and shame for John and Linda. Thus, I am assuming that John has a negative attitude toward polygamy. If this is indeed the case, I think it is safe to say that John would find the solidarity ceremonies (orgy porgy) to be disturbing.
So, if what I have said above is true, I think it is interesting because both the solidarity service and savage ritual are practiced, in part, to reinforce the idea that everyone belongs to everyone else. And, even though these ceremonies serve the same general purpose, John and Linda are disturbed by each other's ritual practices.
Samson wrote that religions attempt to "reinforce/acknowledge a society's relationship to their God(s)...."
This brings up a fascinating point...and I will be brief because I realize this is not seminary.
As Samson pointed out, Christianity seeks to transcend the flesh. Yet I am not sure I agree with the notion that Christianity, in its truest nature, attempts to reinforce society's relationship to God...
What do you think? I mean obviously we have Churches, and it can not be doubted whatsoever that some of these Churches seem to be (and have been for a very long time) institutional by nature and factor into teaching and maintaining societal norms....as well as seeking to bring people together to acknowledge or reinforce their God(s). It can also not be doubted that throughout history religion has been pivotal in controlling the masses..... Yet unlike BNW London where they seem to have a figure head and a thought of bringing the society together... I'm not sure that we can be quick to imply that Christianity in its true form seeks to do this...
(Matthew 10:35-37) 35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be persons of his own household. 37 He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. 38 and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
I get the notion that Christianity is about the individual....where BNW London's religion with the Ford figurehead is about the collective coming together....
I read (Matthew 10:35-37) 35 as saying everyone belongs to God. Depending on your notion of God it could possibly be interpreted as everyone belongs to everyone else.
Whether you agree with that interpretation or not, I still believe that both ceremonies in BNW -- the savage ritual and the solidarity services -- function to reinforce the idea that everyone belongs to everyone else.
I like the way that Huxley uses John and Bernard to explore the feelings of individuals caught between cultures. In Latino / Chicano Studies, this mental, and sometimes physical, space is known as the "borderlands." The fact that Huxley chose to use New Mexico as the setting for the Savage Reservation may lend some credence to this interpretation.
ReplyDeleteThe borderlands phenomenon occurs when an individual attempts to reconcile their cultural identity when it is a composite of two different cultures. Because they are a cultural bastard, they are effectively disowned by both cultures. This may happen, for example, when a Mexican immigrant comes to the United States and moves to a predominantly Mexican-American community. The Mexican-American norms that are adopted by individuals in this community are neither American nor Mexican. As a result, these individuals are, to varying extents, ostracized by both cultures. This phenomenon is particular acute for second generation immigrants. They are often objects of ridicule and, as a consequence, develop resentment toward their parents for putting them in that position.
Bernard is in the borderlands. He is fascinated by the culture in Malpais and the culture in London (his mother's culture). He is a British-Malpaisian. Natives to Malpais do not accept Bernard because of his physical features and also because his mother refuses to adhere to Malpaisian cultural norms. Bernard is, on the one hand, fascinated by the myths and customs practiced on the Savage Reservation, but they will not accept him as one of them. Bernard responds by developing an intense resentment of his mother who he feels is the source of the problem. On the other hand, Bernard is fascinated by his mother's stories of "The Other Place," which he perceives to be some sort of utopia. Throughout chapters 7,8, and 9 we see various examples of John attempting to forge an identity from these two disparate cultures.
Although Bernard is not the product of two separate cultures, he engages in some of the same struggles as John. He desperately wants to be accepted by others, but his physical and social traits prohibit others from completely accepting him. But, instead of turning his resentment toward his mother (he doesn't have one), Bernard turns his resentment toward the State (which, I guess, is really his mother).
Also, I've been thinking about some of the comments expressing disappointment with the character development in BNW. The more I thought about it, the more I began to realize that the Savage Reservation and "The Other Place" (BNW) are characters in their own right. As you read the novel, these two places become increasingly complex and nuanced.
ReplyDeleteI seems like, up to this point, the lack of character developement was necessary - BNW is a carefully controlled environment that strives to be even and uniform in all ways. It has to be void of emotion and personality to a certain extent because of that or it would just be a variation on the Savage place. When Lenina started crying and making all kinds of exclamations I realized that there has been a lack when before I wasn't giving it much thought.
ReplyDeleteThe differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears. Lenina shows actual human emotion in chapter 7 because of it. She cries!! She whines. She acts in ways that BNW does not allow for, recoiling in horror at dirtiness and viviparity - its unlikely Lenina has felt any of these things since she was an infant being shown pictures for conditioning...and this is why her character has appeared flat thus far. It was flat by necessity for the story.
Its also interesting that Linda, in behaving how she was trained to behave in BNW, has become a whore in the Savage Place.
ReplyDeleteIts also interesting that Huxley worked in that John was jealous of the men that Linda had sex with when he was a child. Jealousy is non existent in BNW, so it would make sense to work it in to the Savage Place, but the fact that Huxley made it this particular kind of jealousy makes the character development here a little more complex.
Meghin said:
ReplyDelete"The differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears."
Very interesting. I didn't really think about it like that when I read it. But, I completely agree. Lenina did show some emotion in BNW, like getting upset and worked up when Bernard wanted to float above the ocean, but, for the most part, you're right. This is a striking contrast that Huxley establishes between these two worlds.
Interesting "borderlands" concept. This concept is easily seen when considering this book.
ReplyDelete"The differences in the Savage Place are instumental in showing how flat BNW reall is - we've been assuming lack of character development, but I would argue it is intentional flatness to show what the structuralization of BNW really does. In the Savage place we see real emotion to contrast it. People have varying wants and desires. They have dissapointments, and fears."
I agree....yet interesting enough you have people who still shirk their existence by taking drugs in the Savage Land...
Your comment also leads me to the contemplation of a comparison between the Savage Place and London. In London you have Soma, a designer drug that leads to a lack of ill or distressing feelings. In the Savage Place, however, you have Peyote...a primitive type of drug (by "primitive" I mean one that comes from the land and is taken by the "less advanced"). The comparison here is though different, both societies cannot rid man of the the desire to escape from himself. Also interesting is that even though both societies have members that wish to escape via drugs, in one scenario it is widely accepted as the constant or norm. That scenario happens to fall under the wider label of progress.Thus, according to Huxley, more progress in BNW leads to more escape for more people.
Huxley also draws our attention to some interesting parallels between the solidarity services in BNW and the ritual practices of the savages ("These drums beat out just the same rhythms"--Lenina whispering to herself).
ReplyDeleteBoth are rituals comprised of actions intended to symbolize the giving of one's self to something bigger and greater.
In BNW, solidarity services are religious ceremonies. This is indicated in at least two ways. First, the President of the group makes the sign of "T" which is a sign of deference for their "God", Henry Ford. Second, the culminating orgy is a symbol of sacrifice (an idea found in all religious ceremonies, either physically or symbolically). Each individual denounces their individual needs and desires by "giving" themselves to the other members of the group -- everyone belongs to everyone else.
While I'm not sure that I can give a coherent explanation of the savage ritual, there are some obvious symbolic parallels. As Lenina observes, the music used in both ceremonies have an almost identical rhythm. Here, I believe Huxley is saying that both ceremonies conjure the same human emotions and address the same psychic needs. Like the solidarity services, the savage ritual also includes a symbolic gesture of sacrifice. The shaman comes from the underground (life on earth) to offer his sacrifice to the Gods. Cornmeal is a symbol of the toil of man / the fruits of his labor. The savages sprinkle the cornmeal on the snakes in order to give thanks to the Gods for giving them the means to cultivate this bounty. Then, a boy is whipped. After being whipped several times, the blood pouring from the wound on his back is sprinkled on the pile of snakes and cornmeal. This gesture is akin to a human sacrifice. Global harmony -- stability -- takes precedent over individual well being. Individuals must be sacrificed or endure suffering in order for the stability of the system to remain in harmony.
It is interesting how Lenina and John are mutually disgusted by each other's method of demonstrating the same idea (that everyone belongs to everyone else).
why does rolliefngr777 get a special icon next to name?
ReplyDeleteI didn't really look seriously at the similarities between London and Savage Place until you guys started talking about it, and there are a lot. Especially the drug use. What are the implications of this?
I thought the symbology with the T was interesting because its the sign of the cross with the head cut off. I've been trying to link this and figure out if Huxley is saying something as simple as BNW is the same as old world but without the brain. I haven't been able to make this really correlate though, because while thinking is probably a no-no in BNW, I personally get the impression that the distinctions between the two places has more to do with heart. (but I'm probably just projecting own emotionality)
Samson said: "It is interesting how Lenina and John are mutually disgusted by each other's method of demonstrating the same idea (that everyone belongs to everyone else)."
ReplyDelete- are you saying John thinks everyone belongs to everyone else?
Meghin said:
ReplyDelete"- are you saying John thinks everyone belongs to everyone else?"
No. I'm saying that religious ceremonies, in generally, share a lot of symbolism and that most are performed in order to reinforce/acknowledge a society's relationship to their God(s). Almost all religions teach, in some way, that we are all part of the body of God. Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation). It seems to me that this idea, depending on how it is interpreted, expresses the same sentiment as "everyone belongs to everyone else."
Whether you agree with this interpretation of Christianity or not, it is pretty clear that both the solidarity service and the savage ritual symbolize the sacrifice of the individual for the benefit of the group / society. Native American ceremonial rituals commonly exalt the connection that human's have to the world / nature. Their myths reinforce the idea that all living things live in a system of balance and that this balance is attained through the process of death and rebirth. Sometimes this myth is manifested physically in the form of a human sacrifice and other times it is perpetuated through performance ritual.
But, back to your question. I'm not saying that John necessarily believes that "everyone belongs to everyone else." He may or may not believe this. However, Huxley did describe how upset John was that he was not chosen to be whipped in the ceremony. Unlike Lenina, John is not disgusted by the savage ritual. He wants to be part of it. Conversely, Lenina believes that polygamy is natural while John has developed animosity toward his mother for refusing to be monogamous. Therefore, I am assuming that John would find the orgy that takes place in the solidarity ceremony to be offensive / savage.
John and Lenina find elements of each other's rituals to be offensive or savage. This is true even though both serve to symbolize the same concept.
rolliefngr777 gets a special icon because he is a special guy.
ReplyDeleteSamson wrote: "Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation). It seems to me that this idea, depending on how it is interpreted, expresses the same sentiment as "everyone belongs to everyone else."
ReplyDeleteI understand the first part, I don't see the interpretation...please explain?
John and Lenina find elements of each other's rituals to be offensive or savage. This is true even though both serve to symbolize the same concept.
ReplyDeleteAgain...please explain...
rolliefngr777 said:
ReplyDelete"I understand the first part, I don't see the interpretation...please explain?"
I was referring to my interpretation of Christianity:
"Christianity, for example, teaches us that in order to be like Christ we must transcend the flesh (be selfless in order to attain salvation)."
I was trying to say that religions teach us to become one with the world around us. They teach us to transcend our fixation with our physical body in order to connect with something larger than ourselves. As far as I know, this is true of all religions. I was trying to draw a connection between this commonality and the mantra "everyone belongs to everyone else."
rolliefngr777 asked me to clarify the following remark:
ReplyDelete"John and Lenina find elements of each other's rituals to be offensive or savage. This is true even though both serve to symbolize the same concept."
Linda's failure to abandon polygamy (an accepted norm in BNW) has become a source of social ostracism (on the savage reservation) and shame for John and Linda. Thus, I am assuming that John has a negative attitude toward polygamy. If this is indeed the case, I think it is safe to say that John would find the solidarity ceremonies (orgy porgy) to be disturbing.
So, if what I have said above is true, I think it is interesting because both the solidarity service and savage ritual are practiced, in part, to reinforce the idea that everyone belongs to everyone else. And, even though these ceremonies serve the same general purpose, John and Linda are disturbed by each other's ritual practices.
Samson wrote that religions attempt to "reinforce/acknowledge a society's relationship to their God(s)...."
ReplyDeleteThis brings up a fascinating point...and I will be brief because I realize this is not seminary.
As Samson pointed out, Christianity seeks to transcend the flesh. Yet I am not sure I agree with the notion that Christianity, in its truest nature, attempts to reinforce society's relationship to God...
What do you think? I mean obviously we have Churches, and it can not be doubted whatsoever that some of these Churches seem to be (and have been for a very long time) institutional by nature and factor into teaching and maintaining societal norms....as well as seeking to bring people together to acknowledge or reinforce their God(s). It can also not be doubted that throughout history religion has been pivotal in controlling the masses..... Yet unlike BNW London where they seem to have a figure head and a thought of bringing the society together... I'm not sure that we can be quick to imply that Christianity in its true form seeks to do this...
(Matthew 10:35-37) 35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a young wife against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be persons of his own household. 37 He that has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and he that has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me.
38 and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
I get the notion that Christianity is about the individual....where BNW London's religion with the Ford figurehead is about the collective coming together....
Thoughts?
I read (Matthew 10:35-37) 35 as saying everyone belongs to God. Depending on your notion of God it could possibly be interpreted as everyone belongs to everyone else.
ReplyDeleteWhether you agree with that interpretation or not, I still believe that both ceremonies in BNW -- the savage ritual and the solidarity services -- function to reinforce the idea that everyone belongs to everyone else.