|
I
think that one of the most important aspects of the book Brave New
World written by Haldous Huxley is the relationship between
individual and society. More particularly between the individuals
and the society, between
mass and power.
Huxley,
first of all is a big writer, but for me and for many critics he
is a great politician, and this type of novel (generally called
utopian) really represents a perfect theorisation of the future
society. Good or bad? Up to our descendants
the
arduous sentence!!! The readers of this argumentative text,
probably know that Huxley wrote this book
in 1932, during the period between the first one and the
second world war. In those years in England there were a lot of
political, psychological and philosophic influences: the threat of
the German project, the red terror, the English democracy, but all
that was, only a consequence of the diffusion of the connections
of mass. Then in the humanity a small group of persons had the
possibility to control millions of persons, the mass, the
proletarians, the electors . Huxley analysed this situation with
rationality, coldness, historical sense, in conclusion for me
"perfect". But where is the truth in this theorisation
and in the relationship between individuals and society?And what
is the political situation in our society? Huxley during the
layout of this masterpiece thought about Lenin, Hitler, Stalin,
English democracy, but it is not a sterile comparison; in fact he
compared two different types of control of the individuals. There
is a passage from an old political base to a new perfect political
choice. During the 20th century the lesson of the
history brought to the passage from the punishment to servile
happiness!!!!
In
this context it is fundamental to read the phrase of Huxley (p.
238-239 BNW): “With the last discoveries of the animal conduct,
it is clear that the new type of control doesn't resort to the
punishment, but it induces the behaviour to desire through prizes,
a government of the terror works less well than a government that,
with half not-violent, manipulates the environment and the
thoughts".. in this sense Huxley overcomes Orwell! Democracy
overcomes tyranny! Stalinism teaches….
The
soma (the drug used in the society described in the novel),
indifference, the deltas, the epsilons …. are the final part
of this terrifying project
! .
For
this reason, I think that the political aspect of the novel is the
most important, the other aspects (the drug, the manipulation) are
secondary, the importance of these types of aspects is subordinate
to the priorities of power.. For example in the novel 1984
(G. Orwell) manipulation and the drug are completely absent "because
this society is completely controlled by the punishment and by the
fear of it" (Huxley, BNW).
But
there is probably another "reading key " of BNW, in fact
this type of novel is an important example of a literature genre,
called “utopian novel” .
"Huxley
is the successor of Bacon, Campanella, Giordano Bruno. The
theorisation of the
future is a dream of the individuals of comfort, happiness" (
La Repubblica, 5 maggio2001, Sergio Zavoli).
But
for me the true intentions of Huxley are others. He analysed the
individuals of the society for cognitive and political purposes.
Now the question is: what's the relation between our society and
BNW?
There are
fundamentally two different currents of thought. I have tried to
select some
quotations of these
different interpretations :
The
first two writers agree with Huxley, instead W. Adorno expresses
negative judgements of the English writer:
"Unfortunately now the liberty exists only for a few chosen people, power
has never belonged and it will never belong to the big number. The
communist revolution was much more reactionary than we could
imagine. The technical progress destroyed the secular structure of
human life. The modern science became destructive after the end of
the Renaissance stability of the physical-mathematical point of
view: the discovery of the entropy, of the radioactivity, of the
relativity is not perhaps a kind of apocalypse of modern physics
?. Words written 20 years before Hiroshima." says John
Adams. (“IL GIORNALE, 2 JUNE
2002")
"Manlio Miserocchi tries,
with not entirely convincing results, to show the coincidence of
the ideal of Huxley with the of Christian humanism." (Nazism,
communism, totalitarianism,
John
Wise, RIZZOLI).
W.
Adorno expresses heavily negative judgments
of BNW:
“Huxley reproaches not so
much inhumanity of the industrial period how much the decadence of
customs. Any space doesn't stay for a concept of the man that
doesn't become exhausted neither in the coercion of the
collettivist system. The construction of thought that
denounces the totalitarian universal State while it exalts
individualism of the same powers !!!!":
My
opinion is that this writer (with Orwell), is the biggest theorist
of the modern age.
For
example today the separation between city and country is similar
to the difference between BNW and the Indian reserves. Besides the
process of democratic emptying (always the same parties to the
command) is the
result of some politicians that completed the
utopian plan of Huxley. …… Terrifying….., but this is
the truth…
MAURIZIO
DEL MONTE
|
