1) Could the World State exsist without soma?
Soma to the people of the world state represents instant gratification. In the novel the only reason that humans have essentially given up their humanity is for this reason: their desires are always met through the soma. Although one could make the arguement that it could exsist because of the genetic engineering, I still believe that without this drug, people wouldn't accept the state. They would want something deeper in their lives as is this the case with John.
2) Can people be truly happy living like the people in Brave New World?
I think that it is possible for most people living in the world state to be happy according to what they believe is happiness. They have never experienced anything but instant gratification. No true complex feelings like John has. Because of this, they are completely ignorant to people like John's (our) view of happiness and therefore, are as happy as they can be.
3) Both novels are of course portrayals of utopias turned dystopia but what are the purposes of the books really. Were they both warnings to humanity or more to point out the flaws of human ideology?
I think that 1984 was more of a warining to its audience than in Brave New World because of the stictness of its rule. The brutality seen in 1984 can be linked to brutality that was going on in the world at that time. Brave New World on the other hand I believe was more of a criticism of humanity, but still a warning of how absolute power is dangerous. In that novel, I believe it is more of a criticism of instant gratification and how humanity is slowly creeping towards that area of thought. Both books I would consider criticisms of humanity but only 1984 as a true, loud warning call.
No comments:
Post a Comment