Brave New World - Aldous Huxley BOOK REVIEW
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 พ.ค. 2021
- SUPPORT COREY:
gofund.me/f2a28f2e
KD Evans:
/ worldtakeyourplace
BUY BOOK HERE:
USA: amzn.to/2SzTJzW
SUPPORT / PATREON:
/ booksarebetterthanfood
INSTAGRAM: @booksarebetterthanfood
/ booksarebetterthanfood
MUG:
www.zazzle.com/better_than_fo...
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984,
Huxley added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.”
― Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
Your paragraph does not make sense since you misquoted it
@@jonasjorgensen8759 It made sense to me. Although I may be blinded by my ignorance of this apparent misrepresentation of what the source material included. I'll have to find this comments progenitor I suppose.
Who on earth would want to read Shakespeare when you have feelies like 'Three Weeks in a Helicopter'?
Love or desire?
@@jonasjorgensen8759 What is misquoted? I have the book and it appears as though dabrupro has correctly quoted text from the forward on pages XIX and XX.
It’s great that you’re reviewing more Non-Fiction here.
lol. When he goes back to reviewing fiction, more specifically fantasy, I recommend The Bible.
The author of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, had a brother named Julian Huxley who ran the science division of the United Nations (UNESCO). Aldous was revealing in this book what he knew about the globalist plans for humanity
Huxley also taught George Orwell at university, and introduced him to the Fabian society (Globalist), which is like some paranoid shit out of Gravity’s Rainbow
@@acechandler6440 define globalism
@@willwilder622 Where are you getting that BS about Huxley and Orwell from?
Brave New World is one of my favorite books. I think it's way better than 1984. It's honestly amazing just how much Huxley was able to predict, and I don't just mean the dystopian elements. Genetic engineering, porn theaters, Pavlovian mental conditioning, etc. It's probably one of the most prescient books ever written.
what;s what's Prescient
Have u read or seen Equilibrium, it like the modern interpretation of BNW
7:47
A story doesn’t have to be prescient to apply or be valuable
8:18
This part is channelenged in the end of the book whereas brave new world is simply a tour of a society
Excellent Review. I agree with you when you say the best part of the book is Mond explaining his reasons for the society.
You say that you're weirded out by the direction Huxley took Bernard, but I like it. Bernard is all of us; we pretend to be the hero. We pretend that we are the ones that hate "the man" and want to fight back, but just like Bernard, we would all falter. The second power comes the way of Bernard, he becomes corrupt and blinded by the power and fame he receives. When he loses it, he is willing, just like everyone else, to get it back at all costs. When the novel starts out, everyone assumes that Bernard will be the hero of the book; the one to fight back against the system....but instead, he becomes conformist and greedy; how can you not love that?
Huxley was an essayist at heart, like Orwell. Even his novels were essays. He's more enjoyable a writer viewed that way.
Yahoo for Ballard!
The author of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, had a brother named Julian Huxley who ran the science division of the United Nations (UNESCO). Aldous was revealing in this book what he knew about the globalist plans for humanity.
@@acechandler6440 is this true?
@@nadine338 yeah it's true search Wikipedia for his brother. His brother is even one of the first members of the league of nations the predecessor of the UN (United nations).
@@acechandler6440makes sense! Because it is uncanny how so many things he wrote about are becoming true
One of the best distopian novels of all time. Its also interesting to read Doors of perception along with this book to understand Huxley knowledge of drugs and psychedelics.
(Spoilers)
The climactic conversation between the Mond, Watson, and John is the verbal expression of ideas that had been circulating under the narrative the entire book. The admission of Mond that happiness and stability are the ultimate goals of his society, a society that functions more like a factory than a civilisation. It was a great exposition that gave a balanced assessment of John's embracement of the hard life (and thus "authentic" happiness) as being neither more 'right' nor more 'wrong' than Mond's artificially happy life. John persists that there is something unsatisfactory that remains in an artifically happy life and Mond appears to take that as a personal shortcoming on behalf of John - A figure who simply isn't fit for life in the brave new world. An opinion that John himself agrees with and which we see manifest in a literal manner with John taking his own life.
Bernard's descent into an unlikable opportunist is an appropriate and realistic diorama of a subject of the brave new world who knows something is systemically wrong deep down, but enables and at some points even flourishes in a system that only values amenities and luxuries. He embraces society once it suits him and rejects it once more when it doesn't. He is a walking testament to all the manipulative traits in humanity that no manner of genetic modification can hope to remove, and yet of the acuteness of human intuition, opportunism, and self-interest
John's naturalist values are not just a result of his upbringing or Shakespearean 'old' values but come from deep within himself - his very conception of what it means to be human. Struggle, suffering, despair, are all deeply human traits. They are what make triumph and happiness meaningful. To anyone who read this book without having read Plato's Republic beforehand, I highly encourage you to do so and then come back and revisit BNW.
Well said!
Love this book, one of my favorites. One of the parts that really stick with me is when Bernard takes his date to see the beach and watch the ocean hoping she might enjoy it like he does, however she cries how terrible it is since their is no constant stimulation or people and even finds it scary. Being in nature is scary to them, they can't even find joy in a hike or a walk on the beach.
This book, along with Orwell's 1984, was my introduction to literature
Tack on Slaughter House 5 and you have my eyes opening.
It's sad when you see adults quoting this stuff as if it's deeply revelatory. "Yes... the basics of modern western literature. Welcome to the world."
You see it with 1984 a lot...
Edit: only difference is the government gives me soma and the government arrests me for using any substance but alcohol.
They all encourage the rampant sexuality.
Ah well.
@@SuperMrHiggins yeah, and how does anybody learn the basics?
The author of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, had a brother named Julian Huxley who ran the science division of the United Nations (UNESCO). Aldous was revealing in this book what he knew about the globalist plans for humanity.
@@acechandler6440 this sounds like conspiracy bullshit
I was thinking about re-read this book, that I read was a teenager, but I remember everything, apparently. So sad that our brains turns into mashed potato as adults.
Loved the review, the chanel, everything. Came here the first time like every other brazilian, to see Machado or Clarice, but ended up staying and enjoying.
For me, the comparisson between this book and 1984 that I think all the time is that in New World, we become slaves of what we love, and in 1984, of what we fear.
After the Plague and Divine Comedy, now BRave new world? Look what Quarantine gave us! :) Love your work :)
That's seriously the best damn moustache on TH-cam.
i would not say it's the best but it is up there i suppose
"Biggest international catastrophe of our lifetimes"
I didn't take you for an optimist, but it's nice to hear.
... so far ;)
The title for this work is taken from The Tempest by Shakespeare. It is a line said by Miranda, "O, Brave new world, with so many wonderful things in it". "The Doors of perception" title is taken from canto 94 of William Blake's The mystical marriage of heaven and hell........ "man lives in a prison of his own making, but once the doors of perception are cleansed, he sees himself for what he really is, immortal and divine". Noel
Another battle right after the utter exhaustion the battle with horrible disease brings. That's just so brutal. I can't imagine the trials he's endured and is enduring now, he sounds like a truly tough and inspiring man.
If I was anything more than flat broke and unemployed I would contribute. I wish him the best, truly.
Cliff you're a good man, and as always, thank you for all the hard work.
Orwell was a student of Huxley's at Eaton.
When I was very young Aldous Huxley was one of my favourite actors. The book I liked best was not Brave New World but Point Counter Point, a novel about real people with real faults trying to get bye in life.
You are living the best life ever sgt. You have no idea how many people are dragging through life doing things they dont like. Happy to see someone doing great.
I think Jorge Luis Borges was good at using literature like that.
Yo longtime fan, you helped get me reading so many new things and have expanded my love of literature and got me reading so much. I was wondering,
Do you think you could do a review of A Confederacy of Dunces?
I think this is the first time you’ve reviewed something that I’ve actually already read! Completely agree with your bottom line here, it’s prophetic with immense historical significance, but it’s hardly a story at all. Fairly light reading though so definitely worth the time, but only once. Love the review and love the channel! Cheers Cliff
The novel also posed a question: if everyone is 'happy' and the process of achieving it isn't immoral, then should there be a problem with regards to the 'artificialness' of their happiness (if such a thing even exists)?
I read this a few years ago but this was the perfect refresher. Great review, thanks!
"Some guy on TH-cam" Don't underestimate yourself Cliffy, you da mahn!
I just picked this up last week! Glad you did this review
This book is easily the book that made me think the most. Not the most entertaining to read but such good way to make you think.
Feel like it is much better than 1984 for some reason.
This book is basically showing us a perfect world where everyone is fully happy, yet we hate this world. Just made me think how much we value happiness, like we are not ready to sacrifice everything for happiness, cause if so we would be in this brave new world
I prefer Brave new world over this endless war world we are living in
Okay, whether I agree with anything you say or not the one thing that brings me to your videos is your charm. You are like the Bob Ross of book reviews. I stumbled on your videos and I think that I will sub and stick around for more.
I will say, if you're looking for more character-driven science fiction then "The Forever War" by Joe Haldeman is superb. Military sci-fi in a very loose sense; it's more about alienation and the passing of time than anything. Better than food imo.
Great call. Sci-Fi has a rich history of exploring human alienation. PKD "A Scanner Darkly", J.G. Ballard's "Crash" (mentioned), Ursula le Guin "The Dispossessed", or one of my personal favourites "Flowers for Algernon" by Daniel Keyes.
That book is amazing! I call it the anti-Starship Troopers.
Love seeing the variations on those intro increase with every review
This was the first book that got me into literary fiction (whatever that means) - the society is sorted according to intelligence which is determined before. However when they are foetuses, their oxgen levels are depleted according to the class which is agreed upon
Just read this last week and I am following it up with 1984 right now.
They are two sides of the same coin
Thanks I was actually just looking at this in the store. Its always been in the back of my mind to read. I'll put it on my list for down the road. Keep it metal, keep it classy 🤘
Woah this is surreal, I was just a few pages into this book and I saw this video in my feed. Now I have to finish it!
Such a classic book! Character wise for classic dystopian books, 1984 is way better
Saw the film version of Crash and it turned me on to Ballard. Love all his stuff but most especially Crash. So...when are you going to read and review Moby Dick?
EXCITED.
Liked before watching
I read this in high school and hated it. Although; the last few years I’ve read similar novels and loved them. I just don’t think I appreciated it, so I’ve been wanting to read it again lately. Your review made me want to push it up my list of books to read. Thanks Cliff!
Awesome video, Cliff!
Man I love Snow Crash. So happy to see others liking it. I found that book in library 10 years ago, didn't really know much about anything but I just loved it.
Any Murakami's book review?
I agree with your review I found the society that Huxley imagined interesting but the story itself was lacking. It is an odd narrative choice to have the main character of the book fade into irrelevance in the second half of the story.
Amen on your point on history and the news.
Actually though I'm a fan of Huxley I think it's by far one of his weaker books, still as a Georgist I was interested to find out the 2nd edition of Brave new world included the following preface from Huxley himself.
'If I were to rewrite the book, I would offer the Savage a third alternative. Between the utopian and the primitive horns of his dilemma would lie the possibility of sanity - a possibility already actualised, to some extent, in a community of exiles and refugees from the Brave New World, living within the borders of the Reservation. In this community economics would be decentralist and Henry-Georgian, politics Kropotkinesque and co-operative. … a society composed of freely co-operating individuals devoted to the pursuit of sanity. Thus altered, Brave New World would have possess an artistic and … a philosophical completeness, which in its present form it evidently lacks.'
Great review! Loved this book. Would be interested to hear your thought on anything by Philip K. Dick, particularly Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep
No, they don't. People don't dream of sheep, they count them to get to sleep. The question should be 'do androids count electric sheep to send themselves to sleep' and the answer is no because androids are robots.
@@juskahusk2247 You must be fun at parties.
@@DariusVincentHughes Yes I am. I do the robot.
Awesome vid! Thanks so much!
WE, by Yevgeny Zamyatin.
Was informed aeons ago to get all 3. "1984", which was written in 1948 on Jura, one of the Orkney Islands, off Scotland, Brave New World, and, WE.
I've only read 1984.
Well I read we and 1984, hopefully will get to Brave New World this hear itself 🙂, hopefully .
Very interesting view on the book. At least a more critical view, I like that. Personally I like 1984 as a classical dystopian more and I think you will too, if you not already have read it.
I definitly like your style of videos and view of books, as well as your argumentation. Looking forward to watching more. (After my exams...)
Great review...Thank you
Antidepressants and Tinder: *exists*
Aldous Huxley: "I don't want to live on this planet anymore..."
I totally agree with your critique of the book's characters and other points of weakness - despite it being a favourite of mine, these were points of poverty in the writing that were markedly highlighted by the level of genius reached in much of the extrapolation Huxley was engaged in. However, it was that ending that aced this one up in my book - the high card in its back pocket I did not expect Huxley to play. In contrast with the poor decision to have the Mond character step in with such a clear world explanation (yawn), we have John the Savage attempting the only metaphysical response possible to this world, an ascetic rejection of it and of the guilt present in his own desires for bearing any resemblance to that 'civilized' world. After being consumed by the orgiastic ecstasy of the mob, John finds no salvation, only despair - he is incapable I think of the self sacrifice needed to transcend the world and falls to a brutalist, unforgiving form of self-religious impulse that denies himself that transcendence as well as the society around him any possibility of understanding through him. He is a failed religious figure for a society incapable of seeing.
There was an inversion in the symbolism of the ending that really caught me - a last ten pages kind of deal. Prior to that, I'd enjoyed it but it has its flaws, as you point out. That ending though... there's something I can't pinpoint easily, but it makes the novel for me, it really does.
Perfect timing 👌🏾
Mustafa is definitely the best character, the reason for that is kinda obvious, but I also found Helmholtz, the guy who is actually "breaking free" from the stability he was indoctrinated into loving, really interesting as well.
I agree the characters weren’t fully developed and I wish Huxley had added more perspectives in the book, especially from the outsiders, “lower” people and women, so we could have a better understanding of their interactions, but I still liked it a lot, even the “lecture” parts. I know a lot of people considere that a pet peeve, when a book explains instead of showing, but I think it fits the “preaching” tone of the story very well. Like you said, Huxley wrote Brave New World as a doomsday warning. However, it didn’t live up to the hype for me. Have you read Blindness (Saramago) and Canticle for Leibowitz (Miller)?
wishing the best for corey
My first "serious" read when I was fifteen, still have it and love it
My regret that when I read this book I was too imature, a lot of the message got lost on me then, now I really need to re-read it
@@NoxShadow this is why this book shouldn't be assigned during high school. Most teenagers are not mature enough the grasp the message and end up hating the book and/or dnfing it as a result.
Huxley taught Orwell at Eton and the pupil certainly returned the compliment. Orwell predicted that we would be enslaved by our fears. Huxley's view is actually much more prophetic; we would be enslaved by what we love. We are all enslaved by shiny Apple gadgets and seem to have embraced conformity and uncritical adulation of mediocrity.
For the record, in 1984, Orwell's Big Brother was a character in an advertising campaign for correspondence courses after the second world war and the novel is really a portrait of life in London in 1948.
At school we read Lord of the Flies which I didn't care for and plumped for 1984 instead. My friend recommended Brave New World as a follow up. Those two books made me think for weeks afterwards. Its funny how we now live in a society somewhere between the two.
Impressive review
Great video!!
A book dealing with similar themes but with much more beautiful (and enjoyable) prose is _The Glass Bees_ by Ernst Junger. Junger also wrote _On The Marble Cliffs_ which deals with a bucolic society and the threat of encroaching totalitarianism- this one is even more beautifully written but out of print.
I would recommend you read, and do a review, of something by Philip K Dick. His view of the future seems to be more nuanced that either Huxley or Orwell.
I love this book! I think there are elements to this book you missed, although I agree about the lack of character development and the dialogue between Mustapha Mond and John. If you have a chance, review ‘Children of men’ by P.D James. The book is much better than the film.
Brave new world is truly a utopia. Yes we sacrifice some of the things which make us human and perhaps more ethereal but we gain everything that makes us physical. Imagine a world with no war, no poverty, no decay, no loneliness ?
I'm a simple man: I see Clifford Lee, I click play.
I'm complicated and I do the same thing.
It’s not dystopian. That’s the secret to understanding this book. Every new culture looks dystopian to other eras. Huxley thought this was the best possible world for humanity. The World State even has a place for the rebels and neurotics who still emerge from time to time. Brave New World is as close to utopia as humanity will get.
"Huxley thought this was the best possible world for humanity" this was the complete opposite idea Huxely was trying to convey. I think you missed the point of the book.
It seems like both books (1984) actually became a manual for some establishments.
Let’s get Corey back on his feet! Thanks for all the great chat and cannot wait to read Blood Meridian, nothing like a beach read in Summer 😂
And lastly, appreciate the shoutout mate.
Which comes first, Brave New World or 1984?
I'm not talking books.
#LFLR
"V.B.W."
I don't know if you have read Juan Rulfo but you should try Pedro Páramo!
Bookshelf tour please!
I'd like to see you review Huxley's "Point-Counterpoint". I struggled to finish that book! :)
Yes, that was one of his best!!
see.. I loved Point Counter Point as well! I think people that don't like Brave New World don't recognize the sense of humour. Maybe I see it more because I read his earlier novels. They are all absurdly funny but he has a sly sense of humour. Almost like as if horror and humour are linked. I know Kafka didn't get a good review either. Kafka is another writer that you appreciate more if you see how funny he is. These writers have a quality that is also serious and it's completely possible to not notice the humour.
You really should read more Cioran. Recommend "A Short History of Decay", his seminal book. Rewritten 9 times. Astounding work.
When everyone is forced to be the same everyone who doesn’t like it tries to be “different” ends up being different in the same way.
Ya I thought the same thing, the book is well written and I appreciate the ideas in it. However it just didn't do it for me as a novel/story. You should definitely read 1984 its an amazing book. If you thought BNW was disturbing , 1984 will freak you out, its way darker.
I agree 100 percent. Brave New World was not a natural, organic read. I've attempted to read it several times and understood the setup but the characterization is just bizarre and there is almost no coherent unfolding of a plot.
1984, however, scares the shit out of me.
Orwell understands the sheer horror of totalitarianism, gets under your skin, forces you to feel the isolation and paranoia.
Point Counterpoint is an awesome book, quite different from Brave New World. Lots of really sharp psychollogical descriptions.
What made me more scared reading this book than reading 1984, is that Orwell was warning us, but yet belived it was possible to make sure 1984 never happened. But Huxley didn’t warn us, he wrote his story as if he knew this was going to happen.
He knew that safety for the human being will ALWAYS be more important then the wish to be free or happy, and that will be our doom.
Like he just said with a smile on his face. “This is the future. There is no way to change it. You can try, but you will fail...Enjoy it.”
I was assigned BNW for an English class I took back in high school. I didn’t really understand it then nor did I find it very interesting. Not my cup of tea either. Huxley on the other hand, what a fascinating man.
was given much more than 2 doses at the end also was loosely associated with Tavistock and Fabians
Intended or not, it makes sense in context of the culture that the protagonist is an incomplete character.
I’m curious as to how you go about your analysis of books. Is there a certain method or structure you follow? Or is it things that you find the most relatable? Very good reviews. Thanks.
He reads the comic book versions and if he likes one he reads the actual book.
Whoever reads Brave New World 🤙🏽 needs to read 1984 right after or viceversa👌🏽 I love them both.
Then read amusing ourselves to death, the writer compares both books to our life
You're just the best, man. You're the fucking best.
My thoughts exactly!
So is this just a long form version of Harrison Bergeron?
I watched the TV show and I thought it was pretty good. I wonder how closely the show followed the book. My main takeaway was the caste system.
you should read the island.... it’s huxley version of utopia
Spot on as always. 1984 is a much better book, seen from a literary standpoint. Love the videos!
I think he didn't connect with the humour in the novel. It's really dry but it's there. 1984 is great but Brave new World has a black sense of comedy. THere's a warped sense of fun in Brave New World that 1984 doesn't have. I think if he cast Jeremy Irons as Bernard, he didn't connect with the sneaky humour. THat's an indication.
I personally think that 1984 is the best of this dystopian type genre. I enjoyed it way more. BNW always seemed kinda stale to me. And your review perfectly explained how i felt about it.
maybe huxley made the characters shallow on purpose to show even the most complex characters of the day in his story were shallow to what we would expect...so we are left wanting more but thats all they are...they are simple but different from everybody else? idk just a thought because like you said huxley was a genius it seemed lmao
cool
I have the same version! Also, touching intro and great review.
I didn't really like that book? Maybe I've read it in a bad moment but it didn't really touched me, maybe because reality is now so close from the book? Idk, I didn't dislike it, but didn't love it either
You make every book sound so amazing tho
Blood Meridian sticks with you...for way too long. Careful with that read.
I very much agree with your evaluation and critique of this book. I too felt that the concept was great. The illusory nature of happiness and the superficiality of it’s achievement through technology, substance abuse, sexual promiscuity, social class acceptance/superiority, and conformity to a group mentality. I especially thought he did a great job communicating this philosophy through the conversation between the World chief and John. However, I didn’t enjoy this book a great deal because it did lack character development as well as good plat development. It really lacked in those areas. I felt that 1984 was better because it got the concepts across without sacrificing character and story. I thought this book was mediocre. I thought it would be better and was a bit disappointed. But was not terrible by any means.
Review a R.D. Laing book!
do infinite jest next :)
6:49 electrocution means death by electric shocked
8:05 While we have been steadily adding new and creative ways to threaten the well-being of our species (nuclear weapons, destabilizing the climate, bioweapons, TikTok), I agree that we'll pull through and survive for some time to come. That's not to say these threats shouldn't be taken seriously and addressed ASAP; they have the potential to inflict a disastrous toll on humanity, our world, and her species, and I doubt the fact that _some_ will live-on would serve as much comfort to those unfortunate lives most likely to be extinguished along the way. What I am saying is that I don't think the feeling that we're on the precipice of extinction is fully explained by a fatalistic pessimism growing out of a perceived decay (to those that self-identify as 'progressive,' in particular) or decadence (to those across the aisle), combined with our increasingly destructive capabilities, leading to the amorphous sense that the centre is struggling to hold. If it did, then it would either be unique to the current zeitgeist, or, if not, pop-up only rarely during similar historical periods. While those factors may contain their own grains of truth, regardless of the conclusion they draw from them, apocalyptic thinking is really a form of narcissism. There are members of every generation that claim, "This is it!" because they can't imagine a world beyond themselves. _They_ are the end of the human story; _they_ are the culmination of the entirety of our species and its history because they've taken every facet of human culture, technology, and organization to their logical conclusions, even if doing so turns our story into a tragedy made in the image of that particular generation faults and innovations.
“A perverse episode of The Jefferson” 😂
Kafka the only dystopian writer worth reading. I’ll die on that hill. Love ur channel still after all these years. Huxleys Perrenial Philosophy ain’t bad though. Btw, did u delete ur review of Lolita? I read it recently and went to go see cliff thought of it, but couldn’t find it
Thanks man, yeah I've done that with some reviews, I thought I could do them better down the road.