We are finally done with The Tempest! now onto something completely different.. sort of.
In Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, the government, like that in 1984, works to control the population through the desensitization of sexual desire and the obliteration of the concept of family. In chapter three, Mustapha Mond talks about the inter workings of the function of the government: "Wheels must turn steadily, but can not turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as sturdy as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment." Ultimately this means that everything must work in unison, with no unnecessary parts, but if left alone it will be demolished. Those who tend to this process are men who have had the values of family and desire stripped from them since birth so that the only thing they know to love and are content with is in the work they do to provide for the success of the government. You may ask though, how does the government handle what has happened in the past and the questions that rise from it? Well, according to the Controller, "history is bunk." Or in other words, a lie or unnecessary in accordance to the world in which they live in. This means that all the family values and desires of the body that happened in the past were obliterated for the new age of babies being made in factories, deeming the process of childbearing pointless and a waste of time. The reason why this is done is so the government can condition the babies when they are born to like what they were born to do and be afraid of whatever the government wants them to be afraid of; so in a sense they control society through fear and manipulation. Although this is not the only method the government uses to control its own, it is definitely a big part of it.
This was a very good and informative blog for me. I really enjoyed how you kinda connected 1984 to A Brave New World. I never even thought of thinking about how they use fear as a manipulation for the society. I would have never thought of this theory because you really have to dig deep in order to think of this. In the end "I" really do not agree with this because I do not really see any evidence in the book of this. You have a little bit of evidence so if you added more I would probably be more convinced to the idea. I just like to see a lot of proof in order for me to pick up a new idea. Not hating on the idea or anything. In the rest or your blog though I believe you really hit the nail on the head. Especially with how you explained the quote in the beginning. That is pretty much the same idea i had for that quote also.
ReplyDelete