Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 4501

I got a bit of a break after all...

What I've been thinking about, first of all, is how BNW reads as a slippery slope argument against many of the changes that were occurring around the 1930s in general, and the events that occur in the book in particular. "If we allow birth control, then parenting, love, and sex as we know it will all disappear," etc, etc.

One general concern of the times centers around birth control legislation. Up until 1936, it remained illegal for birth control to be prescribed or disseminated. Margaret Sanger, the founder of what became Planned Parenthood/Planned Parenthood International, fought for decades to reverse the old Comstock Laws. Partly what drove her in this was the death of her mother, who bore 11 children; she was convinced that multiple births ruined her health. Additional experience as a nurse taught her that the poor and working classes were most susceptible. Her birth control movement spawned quite a bit of hatred, and many of her enemies accused her of being pro-eugenics, since her efforts were largely targeted to saving those of the lower classes. How convenient of her enemies, no?

Does anyone know how Huxley felt about Sanger's birth control movement?

What I see in BNW is a society that sought to eliminate many problems originally; lack of equality between the sexes, religious domination of ideals and the intellect, harmful childhood experiences, discontent and dissatisfaction with one's life. In the opening chapters, we learn that men and women are both encouraged to be promiscuous, that birth control is used, that it is taboo to talk of motherhood, childbirth, etc, that men and women both serve in the workplace.

In chapter 3, Lenina and Fanny talk about pregnancy substitutes and men...Lenina is chastized for going out with Henry Foster yet again (ha--I love the part about brunettes with larger hips needing the substitute earlier). Funny to me how BNW removes love, parenting, relationships, and attachment, yet some strains of monogamy seem resilient to the social programming. He buys her things, they go places, they have sex; rather limited, as far as monogamy goes.

As many desires, wants, and instincts as possible have been removed, for the benefit of both society society and manufacturing/consumption.

Also strikes me as a little odd is the role science plays --ok, it's rather a utopia of human engineering, yet there's little curiosity or exploration left. Only alpha-plusses seem to do any real thinking, and what they do is ostensibly limited to what will benefit the new social conditions (such as re-engineering the epsilons to be more useful, or improving hypnopedia). It's as if they've set themselves up for evolutionary failure, but I'm not sure exactly how.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 4501

Some other things that happened in 1932 that may or may not be related:



* January: Five U.S. cities hit by bombing attacks linked to anti-fascists.

* March:Four killed, 100 wounded in riot at Ford plant as police fire on crowd. (Detroit)

* May:Amelia Earhart is the first woman to solo across Atlantic, flying Newfoundland to Ireland on Lindbergh day in record time of 15 hours.

* June 14:7,000 veterans march in Washington, demanding bonuses.

* July:10,000 die in a battle as Chiang opens campaign against communists (China)

* July 8: Summer Olympics open in LA.

* August 24: Nazi newspaper banned for inciting riots. (Berlin)

* September 12: Five Nazis convicted of killing a communist get death sentences commuted to life imprisonment.

* October:1,200 striking miners jailed for one day. (Illinois)

* November: Hurricane kills 1,000. (Cuba)

* December 26: 70,000 killed in massive earthquake


Thanks to Stephanie Iser's website http://members.tripod.com/~siser/index2.html for providing the information.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: The Bottom of the Toyem Pole
Posts: 9454

Two things that you hit on that I was going to bring up:

The first is the equality of the sexes. Lots of equality, perhaps, but did you notice that the group of kids touring the Reproductive Center were all boys? Also, the females didn't talk about men the same way the men did. Although I am perhaps influenced by Bernard's disgust with the way the guys were talking about Lenina.

Slippery Slope: I don't have the book with me at school and will get back with the specific quote, but the Director was talking about the growth problem. Humans take a long time to reach maturity, but attempts to speed it up resulted in physical adults with infant brains. The quote that stuck out was something along the lines of "all or nothing." I interpreted that as a comment on the any eugenic behavior beyond basic mendelian reproduction. One you move the line an inch to say that it is okay to, for example, chemically enhance embryos against disease (surely a good thing, no?!?), the pebbles under your feet will toss you down the hill and bury you in boulders the size of elephants.

Also, as it is sure to be a topic, we need to realize that eugenics isn't just "breeding super soldiers." It is any manipulation of the genetic makeup of who we are by artificial means. By artificial I usually mean involving tools of some sort, but I'm not sure if I'd agree that IVF is eugenic. It probably is though, especially if the paretns wouldn:t have conceived otherwise.

I found it exciting to read the director's and the Controller's history lessons from an ignorant or "objective" point. The arguments they make are fairly convincing, especially if you accept their link between interpersonal emotions and unhappiness. I mean, how can you fault people for undertaking plans to make people happy?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2000
Location:
Posts: 3030

My version of the book has a large section written in 1958 by the author discussing many of the issues he raised in the book. I haven't read it yet, but I skimmed through looking for something on birth control. This is what I found.

quote:

---

Birth control depends on the co-operation of an entire people. It must be practiced by countless individuals from whom it demands more intelligence and will power than most of the world's teeming illiterates possess, and (where chemical or mechanical methods of contraception are used) an expenditure of more money than most of these millions can now afford. Moreover, there are nowhere any religious traditions in favor of unrestricted death, whereas religious and social traditions in favor of unretricted reporcudtion are widespread.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: library
Posts: 19584

Wait, you haven't read this before?

Ok, I'm over the shock.

There were some points I was going to mention, but I left my book at work and I can't remember what they were, I'll try to remember to bring it back tomorrow.

-m

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 13002

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mordecai
There were some points I was going to mention, but I left my book at work and I can't remember what they were, I'll try to remember to bring it back tomorrow.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: library
Posts: 19584

Fuck you or I'll feed it to my dog, and bring in the shit as proof.

-m

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2001
Location:
Posts: 18139

Started it yesterday and finished it today. It's really a short book. Do I have to write a report? I suppose it had more of an impact in 1931 or whenever. It was a good read, but it didn't make me really stop and think and scratch my head. I know this is very vague, but I'm about to pop off to bed. I promise to give you something more substantial on the first four chapters in the next day or so. Like I say, it was a decent book, and I enjoyed reading it. But this is gonna be odd stretching it out over four weeks. Then again, you might teach me something as a result. My humility is boundless.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2001
Location:
Posts: 18139

I'm just glad you didn't pick Ulysses or somethin.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2001
Location: library
Posts: 19584

You know, the protagonist Kinda reminds me of Rosh. It's interesting that he's not a very likeable fellow.

-m

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 4501

I didn't mean to make it seem long and drawn out. I read very quickly as well, and so thought that I'd better extend it for those who read more slowly, have more time commitments, etc.

I'll be happy to speed it up more.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2000
Location: The Bottom of the Toyem Pole
Posts: 9454

I'd be happy if there was more discussion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2000
Location:
Posts: 3030

Maybe instead of assigning certain chapters per week, we could give everyone a week to read the book, and then put the different chapters into different threads. That way, if someone is reading it slowly, they can just not open the threads of chapters they haven't gotten to yet.

I read it in two days, and it's hard to pace myself on the discussion, trying to not get ahead of the pace of discussion.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 4501

Sounds like a plan! If anyone wants to start threads on the seperate chapter groupings, go for it.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged