The government of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World has a simple motto: “community, identity, stability.” The motto sounds harmless and maybe even ideal. But, to put it lightly, the actions taken by the state in this novel are less than ideal.
This book, written in 1932, provides not only an entertaining read but also plenty of questions and discomforts for the reader to consider. It’s a kind of satirical dystopia. It contains ridiculous sports and activities, absurd technology and customs, troubling government policy, and a delightfully sarcastic tone from the narrator.
Among the absurdities in Brave New World is the worshiping of Henry Ford. In Huxley’s fable, all crosses built to worship Christ have had the tops of them cut off so they can represent the Model T; years are counted not in how long it has been since the time of Christ, but in how long it’s been since the time of Ford; and characters in the book often say things like “For Ford’s sake!” or “Our Ford.”
You can interpret this worship of Ford as a symbol for the brave new world’s approach to ruling. They certainly take inspiration from Ford’s use of the assembly line in their approach to reproduction and education. And just like manufacturers may constantly ask how they can efficiently produce more cars, rulers of the brave new world constantly ask how they can efficiently produce more community, identity, and stability.
This may not sound so bad at first. But the relentless pursuit of these values, especially at the expense of others, ends up being quite troubling in the novel.
Conditions of the Brave New World
The novel takes place in the year 2540. Or, as the characters in the book say, AF 632 (AF meaning After Ford). One rather authoritarian government controls nearly the whole world, focusing intensely on the values stated in its motto. They’ve cured pretty much all diseases (along with aging), created some epic entertainment, and developed remarkably efficient travel, but there are plenty of downsides to their society.
Their social system is a strict hierarchy. It starts with lab-grown babies that receive social conditioning as they grow to make them ideal workers and citizens. This conditioning does much of the heavy lifting for the rulers. But they do plenty more to assure stability: The state controls all art and science, discourages deep relationships they deem unstable, and hands out a miracle-drug called soma to make sure people always have a quick way to numb negative emotions.
Sacrificing Vital Parts of the Human Experience
Brave New World is such a thought-provoking book because it is much more subtle than the stereotypical dystopian novel. Living in this fictional society does not sound terrible at first. Sure, you are far from free, and you are without deep relationships and self-expression. But, you’re conditioned to enjoy your role in society, you spend a great deal of time in leisure, and you get to have plenty of exciting parties.
Contrast this with something like George Orwell’s 1984, where the country is constantly at war and the main emotions of the population are fear and anger, and it’s clear which fable you’d rather live in. Brave New World serves as a much less intimidating dystopia. But, despite its subtlety, further consideration proves this novel to be worthy of its dystopian reputation.
People in the novel are deprived of so much that we value in our lives. Their society has, in a word, sacrificed freedom for stability.
Individuality
One of the main values of the Brave New World being identity can be misleading. Identity in their society is not something that empowers the individual, like a person being proud of their competency in a trade or their character. Identity in the their society is, as I understand it, more tied up with a person’s identification with a group.
In Huxley’s fable, citizens have their life-long jobs and place in society determined for them before they are even born. The state grows new humans in labs, where they genetically modify and organize the babies into classes. Once the babies are ready, workers condition them to like and dislike certain things depending on which class they belong to.
For example, here’s some sleep-teaching (hypnopaedia) given to “beta” kids. A sound system near their bed repeats these phrases to them over and over again. These phrases prepare the kids for their role in society. In this case, it’s towards the top of the fixed social hierarchy.
“Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they are so frightfully clever. I’m really awfully glad I’m a Beta, because I don’t work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas, Gammas are stupid. They all wear green and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don’t want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They’re too stupid to be able to…”
Page 35 of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World
Conditioners pair this hypnopaedia with conscious teaching where kids learn from a young age to admire some things and hate or fear others. Each lesson varies depending on the group (alpha, beta, delta, etc.).
This system produces a great level of stability. But the people within it lack any choice, variety, or spontaneity. They are behaviorally indistinguishable from robots. Most of them claim to be happy, but they’re conditioning has set them up for a life of dull happiness. They are practically incapable of creativity, eccentricity, and wonder. Their source of joy is limited to the shallow enjoyment of entertainment or sensual pleasure. They are blocked off from the enjoyment of creating something new, experiencing unique art, or stepping out of their comfort zone in any meaningful way.
Fulfillment
Citizens of the brave new world rarely experience discomfort or disappointment. Their leaders have decided that they’ll all be happier and more stable if they want only what is easily achievable. They may desire certain things or meet goals. But, they’ve had their desires and aspirations limited to things within their reach. There are no difficult challenges or ambitious goals in their society.
There are some possible exceptions. Some “alphas” deal with intellectually stimulating tasks and people of any class may run into unexpected obstacles. These situations are possible, but largely discouraged. Additionally, if people experience any discomfort, soma (the state’s miracle drug) prevents the individual from experiencing it for more than a moment.
In our day-to-day lives, we obviously don’t wish to experience discomfort or failure. But, experiencing some level of discomfort or failure is often a good thing. Trying times, so long as they don’t break us, build our character and bring us fulfillment. Looking back, we often appreciate them.
Think about the satisfaction you feel after pushing through the fatigue of an intense workout or a demanding project. It feels amazing to accomplish something by overcoming obstacles. This experience, arguably essential to human contentment and flourishing, is systematically prevented in the brave new world.
Spirituality
The “World Controller’s” of Huxley’s fable have decided that religion and spirituality are not necessary to their mission. So, they have done away with them altogether. The argument made by one world controller in the novel is that the idea of God mainly exists to comfort people when dealing with old age and tough times, and since these are absent from the brave new world, it follows there is no need for God.
The basic idea is that constant distraction is a more effective antidote to suffering than any quest of spiritual enlightenment.
“And why should we go hunting for a substitute for youthful desires, when youthful desires never fail? A substitute for distractions, when we go on enjoying all the old fooleries to the very last? What need have we of repose when our minds and bodies continue to delight in activity? Of consolation, when we have soma? Of something immovable, when there is the social order?”
Page 210 of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World
What the world controllers have removed is not only a belief in God. They’ve erased a layer of connection and curiosity that people massively benefit from. Citizens under their rule show little appreciation or interest in the universe – mainly because contemplation is bad for the economy! They lack curiosity about things like the origins of the universe or the nature of self. Not even asking these questions, they miss out on spiritual experiences. These can come in many forms depending on what a person believes (seeing non-duality, feeling the presence of God, transcending the ego, etc.). But regardless of specific belief, the feeling of connecting with something other than your ordinary conception of self is certainly profound and worthwhile.
Sam Harris, a philosopher, neuroscientist, and well-known atheist, described the issue at hand in the following way:
“There is a baby in the bath water of religion that is not only worth saving, but it is in fact the most important thing in human life.”
Sam Harris (From his conversation “Where Is Happiness” with Arthur C. Brooks on the Waking Up app)
In my estimation, what Harris is referring to is the experience of transcendence. There are significant problems with religion (Harris has addressed many of them). But one thing religion does is provide people with a way of seeing things that is something other than “me vs. the world.” Some religions are arguably better at this than others, and perhaps this connection need not come from organized religion. But, the experience of seeing the world through a different perspective than the ego’s is the baby in the bath water of religion. And the brave new world tossed the baby out of the bath water with a perfect spiral.
Intimacy
There is a massive surplus of casual relationships in the brave new world and a severe deficiency of intimate ones. By intimate relationships, I mean relationships which involve deep understanding and compassion, not relationships involving sex. There is no shortage of the latter in the novel’s society.
Mainly because of their likeliness to cause intense emotions, the state in Huxley’s fable discourages close relationships. They view intense emotions as unstable and unhealthy, as stated by the world controller:
“Mother, monogamy, romance. High spurts the fountain; fierce and foamy the wild jet. The urge has but a single outlet. My love, my baby. No wonder these poor pre-moderns were wicked and miserable.”
Page 47 of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World
The volatile nature of intimate relationships simply have no place in their “modern world.” They involve too much instability, too much attachment, and too much suffering. Some of us in the “pre-modern” world may argue that mitigating this suffering is possible through a change in approach. It helps to love someone without clinging to them, to truly want what’s best for someone unconditionally, etc. But these arguments would likely be seen as impractical and insufficient.
Of course, like the many sacrifices made in Huxley’s subtle dystopia, the consequences of discouraging intimacy are quite depressing. There are no families and no spouses in the brave new world. The idea of having parents is beyond taboo and having one partner for consecutive months is considered bad form.
The support of a family that will do anything for you, the joy of falling in love and building a relationship with someone, the grueling but infinitely rewarding (so I’ve heard) process of raising children, and any sense of deep connection with another person are absent from Huxley’s fictitious society. Casual relationships and leisure replaced them.
Trade-offs
Just like the rulers in Huxley’s novel, we as a society and as individuals are constantly making trade-offs, sacrificing one thing for another. The brave new world sacrificed freedom and individuality for conformity, fulfillment for comfort, spirituality for distraction, and intimacy for casual relationships. They made these sacrifices thinking they’d be better off for doing so, but they were misguided.
In their relentless pursuit of stability, they went too far. They sacrificed parts of the human experience that are beautiful and transformative to be more stable and comfortable. These sacrifices make many people, including me, look at this fictitious society with contempt. This, of course, was Huxley’s intention with the novel. Put simply, he was trying to show where society may be headed if popular attitudes of the time prevailed.
In Brave New World Revisited, which was published in 1958, Huxley addressed many of the similarities between 1958 and the brave new world. Some concerning similarities included fixation on order, loss of freedom, and mass manipulation. He addressed much more in the book; I would recommend reading it if the subject interests you.
It’s worth doing something similar today. What sort of troubling conditions of Huxley’s dystopia are we possibly inching towards now?
As a society, are we becoming so fixated on conformity and group identity that we fail to respect people’s choice in their own lives? Are we so obsessed with stability that we shun eccentrics and trailblazers, stunting creativity? Things on this front are not great (are they ever?). But, it’s possible we’re doing a little better now than we were when Huxley revisited Brave New World in 1958.
As individuals, have we become so preoccupied with entertainment that we no longer experience connection? Connection with nature, each other, and ourselves all seem to be on the decline. Is fast entertainment via the internet our soma, distracting us from problems we should address? Are we depriving ourselves of fulfillment because we would rather consume entertainment than work on something meaningful?
These are just some questions to consider after reading Brave New World, which I recommend doing.
To me, the ultimate question posed by the novel is this: What sacrifices are we making and where are they leading us?