Desiderata

This one hit me hard and put me in my place...mostly because of where I happen to be at this point in my life. I think at times we all lose track of the fact that life retains its beauty in spite off all of the compromising circumstances we may encounter. This is why the last stanza rings true for me, because above all it is important that we do not lose sight of hope in the face of adversity. I cannot articulate well enough how important this is. For me, it manifests itself in faith... in people, in nature, and in God. The past year has put me through trials in all of these areas. But the remarkable thing is that I never lost faith in all three at the same time... and that remaining element would pull me back to the others. Perhaps this is why I am having such a difficult time now. When that faith is not returned, it hurts quite a bit more than it would if it were not there in the first place. I am rambling now, but my point is that it is important to remain true to oneself, and have faith in the fact that we are all children of the universe, as the poem says. We have a right to be here, and it will work out in the end... even if it's not exactly how we wanted it to be.

Creeper

Have I ever mentioned how much I enjoy Ray Bradbury? This is a haunting story that is reminiscent of Brave New world moreso than 1984. It just makes one think about how careful we should be with technology. Granted, this specific scenario is probably out of the realm of possibility, but it still provides something to think about. Most of the parallels to Brave New World come in the warnings about the possibilities of technology. But really I would just like to ramble coherently about how interesting I found The Veldt to be. So this is what I will do.
While the concept of patricide (or matricide...) does not enchant me, it is a captivating story. I have read Bradbury's The Illustrated Man... and became an early science fiction fan because of it. Thus my familiarity with this story... that I have just now realized. In my own defense, it was a long time ago. Anyway, I am getting to the point. I enjoy dystopian literature because it provokes deep thought about the human condition. This is not something many people enjoy thinking about, but it's why I love Shakespeare and science fiction... and all of the things I love. I like to think.. deeply, about the things I do not understand.

Jealousy is a wicked emotion

Yes. Jealousy is a wicked emotion. So wicked, in fact, that it would overcome life in this battle. The princess cannot bear to lose her love to another, and so she would rather have him die. This is selfish, but jealousy is the most difficult emotion to combat. There is no direct opposite... at least not one I can think of, making it hard to stop once one falls victim to it. The author spends a great deal of time discussing how much the princess hates the woman behind the door, and that she had previous worries about her lover and the woman potentially getting involved. Unfortunately, the man would probably not expect this of the princess, and would trust her one hundred percent...and would walk to his death.

Well, I am an expert about this. #1.

Oh, the feeling. I would love to say I don’t know what it feels like. I think everyone is subject to this kind of rejection at some point in time. It is, indeed, the deepest hurt one can experience next to the death of a loved one. It strips one of any honor they have, takes away all self-confidence… it throws you to the ground and pins you there. You cannot think straight, and everything is more difficult than it was before the rejection or betrayal. It literally takes the life out of a person. Perhaps the worst part is trying to figure out how to deal with these emotions. To contain them drains the rest of the emotional energy one has, so that almost any negative stimulus or question will cause a person to break down. Been there, done that.

If let go far enough, these emotions can drive a person to insanity. Unfortunately, Lear falls victim to this trap. To be betrayed by one’s own family members, much less one’s children, is so painful that it forces a person into another reality because they must escape their own. Through all of this, Lear begins to show his compassionate side, trying to do for others what he has been denied by Regan and Goneril. Gloucester somehow maintains his sanity (at least up to this point) through Edmund’s betrayal. I don’t know how he will do now that Cornwall has taken out his eyes… this may very well result in insanity. Edgar is in the same position as his father, and can do nothing to stop the process. He is trapped by Edmund’s cunning, but still tries to find a way around the problem. Cordelia parallels Edgar, in the fact that neither has done anything heinous and yet, both have been disowned by their fathers. I know how betrayal and rejection feel from those that I love, but I cannot imagine the incredible pain that comes from betrayal of a family member.

Act 2 (#3)

Edgar probably assumed this disguise because Tom O’Bedlam is an actual human being who Edgar can relate to. I’m not saying Edgar is crazy, because I don’t believe that to be the case. He can relate to Tom because they are both running away from something. This disguise also allows him to sneak around efficiently and without detection, because he has tried to blend himself in with the woods. If anyone finds him, they’ll probably assume he is the crazed Tom O’Bedlam himself, and leave well enough alone. I feel for Edgar- mostly because he has done nothing wrong and is forced to flee his home. We have now established that he is certainly an intelligent character, and has discovered Edmund’s plot. How he will circumvent it, I am not sure… but by assuming this disguise he also remains loyal to his father’s wishes. He is no longer inside the castle, but will do his best to right Edmund’s wrongs.

Edgar is a compelling character, and clearly he will become important in the second half of the play. He is one of the more honorable characters, and parallels Cordelia. He cannot be disloyal to his father, even when his own life is in danger. Assuming the disguise of a madman is a risky venture, because he runs the risk of being thrown into an asylum. While most people would probably be too afraid to act on seeing Tom O’Bedlam, but if Edgar were to be caught by the authorities, it would not end peacefully. I am interested to see where Shakespeare takes Edgar through the remainder of the play. It may end up that he and Cordelia suffer similar fates.

Cinderella (#2)

Regan and Goneril’s only motivation lies in assuming Lear’s kingdom when he grows old. Clearly this is their motivation now, but it must have been when they were younger. One does not change from loyal, loving daughter, to cruel and selfish even in a lifetime. They have most likely always been the way they are, and were suppressing it in order to win Lear’s favor. They are clearly very skilled at lying, as they convince Lear, without a doubt, of their love during the first act. Cordelia is at a disadvantage here, because she cannot lie to please her father…and she turns out to be the only loyal member of the family.

I cannot say that I entirely understand where resentment for a parent comes from. It is possible that Regan and Goneril had some sort of terrible upbringing that led them to spite their father, but it is unlikely, as Cordelia did not turn out the same way. Selfish motivation drives people further than one may think. Another factor may be natural resentment, because there is a time in everyone’s life where they want to be their own person (especially the teenage years) and parents restrict that natural impulse. The move for independence is one that comes to everyone differently, and obviously Goneril and Regan’s obsession with power had a little more than something to do with their extreme cruelty towards their father.

This relationship is powerful because, while it may be a natural impulse, it goes against any decent person’s moral code. Sure, we all feel some degree of resentment toward our parents in our lifetimes, but it should not escalate to the level that Regan and Goneril take it to. They are utterly disrespectful despite the fact that Lear has given his entire kingdom to them.

Lear Blog 2

They love each other in the nature of a father and daughter, though Lear’s foolishness ruins their relationship. Cordelia is the only daughter that truly loves Lear, and she cannot embellish her love for this fact. Regan and Goneril have mastered the “talk” but are unfaithful and seek only to overthrow their father. Lear cannot understand this, even with Cordelia’s truth. His inability to hear her honest truth comes in his foolishness. He believes in words, not actions, and Cordelia loses the word battle because she is not dishonest.

I have been in the middle of situations like this, and the outcome is not necessarily the same every time. I have also seen situations like this… it’s an interesting exercise in human psychology. Though parents are usually hardest on their children during the teenage years, this causes teenagers to improve their skills of manipulation. The cycle is a vicious one, because as parents increase their punishments, kids find new ways to outsmart them. This often leads to lying as a form of manipulation, which never goes over well. One may get away with it at first, but eventually they are found out, and the repercussions are far worse than expected. I cannot say that I am exempt from using my powers of manipulation to get what I want… unfortunately. I believe honesty is the best policy, so I won’t lie to my parents, but I am very skilled at being nice at the right time in order to get what I want. This is not something I do as often now, because I realize that I am essentially lying to my parents emotionally. On the flip side, I have also been the loser in this “game.” Many times when I should just step down from an argument or issue, I continue talking because I have to prove my point. I suppose that is what I get for being stubborn.

Lear Blog 1

The unhappiness in Gloucester’s family lies in Edmund’s illegitimacy, while Lear’s family is torn apart by poor decisions and unfaithfulness. Edmund feels wronged by his father’s shame toward him, and so he finds a way to get back at Gloucester by turning Edgar against him, and he against Edgar. This is the beginning of the tearing apart of Gloucester’s family. The fault here lies within both Edmund and Gloucester. Gloucester is ashamed of Edmund’s illegitimacy, and this rightfully upsets Edmund. Edmund takes it to too much of an extreme when, in order to get “his share” of the inheritance, he pits his father and half-brother against one another. Here we begin to see that Edmund is not quite as innocent as he seems in the opening scene. It is a combination of Gloucester’s shame and Edmund’s vindictiveness that create the unhappiness in their family. While Edmund is somewhat justified in his unhappiness, he creates a larger problem by pursuing it beyond a feasible boundary.

Lear contributes greatly to his family’s unhappiness, primarily due to his mental instability. Even early on in the play, the reader is aware that Lear does not know his own mind. He makes a poor decision to disinherit Cordelia, his only truly faithful daughter, and resign his kingdom to the unfaithful Regan and Goneril. This soon comes back to haunt him, when Goneril turns against him and sets Regan on that same path. Lear realizes his mistake, but it is, of course, too late.

Some similarities lie between the two families in the fact that both are destroyed by fault of the fathers and the children. Regan, Goneril, and Edmund are similar characters in the fact that all three are after revenge. They have different motivations, but the result is the same; it tears their families apart.

BNW

4. Huxley’s vision of the future is not what I would call “horrifying”; it is simply not humanity. He has created a perfect state where nothing can possibly go wrong. Citizens are free from war, pain, suffering, and unhappiness. From before birth, every aspect of their lives is regulated. There are different castes, but within those castes, abilities are the same. Emotional attachment does not exist, and the community comes first, always. At first glance this does not seem so bad. Who wouldn’t want a world without war, fear, and pain? I know many people who would do anything to be happy constantly. But in the end, life is not about consistent happiness. My opinion lies on the same plane of John Savage. As the quote says “…I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness, I want sin.” Every aspect makes life worthwhile. Some hurt more than others, but if everything came for free, it wouldn’t have nearly as much value. Instant gratification, the basis of the World State, serves no purpose.
The world that we live in is far from perfect, and I’m a little misanthropic, but we give and we take, and life goes on. There are always things worth living for, and the pain to get to those things is what makes it all worth it. I want all the things that John wants and realize that some of them come at a cost. Wanting God puts one in the hands of something one cannot see. Faith is a terrifying thing, and it is far easier to dismiss the concept than to embrace it. Faith teaches people to beware of sin, for it is humanity’s downfall. But I want that too, because to be human is to sin. We cannot live without it.
I do not want Huxley’s world. It is too perfect, too farfetched, too impossible. I want life and all its brutalities. As John says, “I claim them all.”

BNW

3. In chapter seventeen, John is arguing the right to be human. The problem for him with the World State is that it fails to embrace all human emotion. In life, the bad is just as important as the good, and to be truly human one has to embrace both.
On page 239, John says “What you need…is something with tears for a change. Nothing costs enough here.” He is not speaking of monetary cost, but emotional cost. To John, life is not worth living without the tears. The most meaningful things are the ones that do not come easily. I’m sure part of his philosophy comes from his extensive knowledge of Shakespeare. The constant allusions to Hamlet define John’s views on life. Hamlet is a tragedy, no doubt, and John is much like Hamlet. He would rather suffer the blows that life throws to him, or make a valiant attempt to defeat them. There is no other way to live life. One must take what they are given, no matter how bad or good it may be.
Mond stands in stark opposition to John. Life in the World State is just as it should be, without the inconveniences that John so passionately believes in. Mond, too, has read Shakespeare and therefore knows John’s side of the argument. He agrees that there is something in living dangerously, but technology comes in to eliminate the “inconveniences” of doing so. The world he has created is one free from unhappiness, and it is perfect in his eyes. The World State is set up to run flawlessly, without all the troubles of humanity.

BNW

2. There is no concept of sexual morality in Brave New World. “Everyone belongs to everyone else”, as the hypnopaedic phrase goes. The citizens of the World State are conditioned to have strictly sexual relationships with no emotional attachment. They can be loyal to no one but the State. The hypnopaedic conditioning that everyone undergoes sets up the State’s control over the individual, because to the people they are not phrases, but absolute truth. The individual knows nothing different, so they believe only the things the State tells them.
Sexual immorality provides “release” from the rigidity of the World State. The solidarity service in chapter five illustrates this point. Even though the State retains control over the individuals, it has not yet eliminated human nature. That being said, even through conditioning, human desires have not been wiped out. The need to experience strong emotion is still intact, and so the State facilitates solidarity services as a means to do so. This will channel the emotion in a way that it does not serve as a threat to the State, and keeps the people in their perpetual state of happiness.

Brave New World

1. Huxley’s vision of the future world does contain elements present in our society today. In Brave New World, technology controls society. This begins with the surgical removal of ovaries when the time comes to produce new humans and continues with the Bokanovsky Process and hypnopaedic conditioning. Everything in the World State is regulated by some form of technology. While these are extreme examples that do not hold true to our society, technology has become a ruling force in the twenty-first century. Our school is a perfect example of reliance on technology; this assignment as well as the majority of other assignments, is done on a computer. As technology advances, meaningful human contact decreases. Advances in the cell phone brought the text message, which has distinct advantages and disadvantages. Texting is now often preferred to a legitimate conversation. Where is the human contact? It’s interesting and frightening to imagine what will happen next on this front.
Huxley satirizes the consumer society that exists when he wrote the book, and continues to exist today. Happiness is quantified by the ability to satisfy one’s needs, and a successful society is one that contains economic growth and prosperity. The ‘American Dream’ also fits this definition. This dream, in my opinion, is one that is nearly impossible to achieve. Belief in it risks destroying true happiness.
Huxley’s soma is similar to certain prescription drugs of this day and age. While they are obviously not as widespread as soma, the concept remains the same. In the World State, if anything goes awry, a citizen takes a dose of soma and it simply goes away. This instant gratification is a major control factor for the World State.