Brave New World - Character Question
"'Art, science - you seem to have paid a fairly high price for your happiness,' said the savage, when they were alone" (Huxley 230).
This quote was specifically taken from chapter seventeen, where John and Moustapha finally spar verbally. How does their verbal dispute give insight to both characters personality, and help develop the plot of the novel?
I believe the two characters are incredibly developed, and they started out with the same mentality this is shown through this passage “All the people who, for one reason or another have got too self-consciously individual to fit into community life… Everyone, in a word, who’s anyone. I almost envy you.” The controllers words here show how he had the same mentality as the savage, but he wanted to be a part of the world rather than thrust out into nothing, he changed his mind and rewrote his own happiness, while the Savage sticks with his original thoughts, he fights for what he thinks is right, because of this I believe they are foils, opposite characters developing one another more thoroughly. This quote expresses this “Whether ‘tis better in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them… But you don’t do either. Neither suffer nor oppose. You just abolish the slings and arrows.” John here is angry, but reasonable. He is fed up with the society, and apparently other people are who get banished to islands. The plot gets developed here, which develops the plot as to something will happen to John, he is either going to produce some massive movement, or he is going to succumb to the rules and be exiled as society wishes. These two characters being completely different mindsets, yet having similar qualities show how they develop each other, and progress the plot as well.
ReplyDeleteI also have to agree with Derek’s comments; I think that these two characters developed extremely. As though John and Mustapha were introduced towards the middle of the book, they still managed to develop quickly. During that little argument those two had they both had their own personal intakes on their own societies. As I read the novel it stood out to me that John, the savage, was a main and more dynamic character than Mond. Mond seemed like an antagonist character. It just seemed to me like this whole “new” kind of world was some sort of fraud and stupid. The savage, John, had expressed his unique ideas on God, Religion, and Happiness during the conversation. But Mond was more interested in science and technology advancements and didn’t understand the true value of life. As though John began to change during the end it seemed that he wouldn’t have that big of role as the story was introduced and progressed towards the rising action. We all agree that John was the major character in this novel. The verbal dispute that happened between both Mond and John was due to the intakes of their societies this led to the peak point of the climax. Such as John telling Mond “How many goodly creatures are there here… O brave new world” (Huxley 190). Now things started to get more serious and more questions were being answered. John had believed that this society was wrong and didn’t understand the true meaning of love and happiness to life. But yes these two characters dramatically changed the plot from rising action all the way to the resolution due to this verbal dispute.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with both Derek and Bikram’s comment on how this dispute was a way for the author to show the MASSIVE amount of development that both of these characters had to go through, and in such a short period of time. But Derek, you said that through this passage, “All the people who, for one reason or another have got too self-consciously individual to fit into community life… Everyone, in a word, who’s anyone. I almost envy you” it is evident that they started out same mentality, but I’m not too sure that’s factualy correct. I think that Mustapha and John had more opposing personalities that helped each other develop since they had different paths they had to travel. As for Bikram, I especially with the comment that John was a more dynamic character than Mustapha because John was introduced as this very curious and outgoing person, but completely altered to an isolated one which is a drastic change. Mustapha went through growth as well, but not nearly as much as John and I believe that was apparent throughout the novel. I also wanted to add that this dispute was almost foreshadowed throughout the book through John’s constant thoughts of his distaste of the world state which led this argument up to the climax of the story.
ReplyDeleteThis argument I believe was Huxley's way of introducing what he believed to be the pros and cons of the society. Not to mention Aldous Huxley's love of debate as shown in his publication of "Point Counter Point" in 1928, four years before the publication of Brave New World in 1932. In my opinion it also is meant to show how the world controller is aware of the loss of knowledge in order to maintain peace and that despite this society so obviously being unethical this argument demonstrates how those opposed to the society seem more fanatic that those who are in support of it.
ReplyDeleteAlso I find it strange that Mustapha Mond does not institute the labor saving machines that are available to him. I know that if they were instituted then the deltas and gammas would have nothing to do, however Mustapha Mond also has control over how many deltas and gammas there are. So why doesn’t Mustapha Mond just use the machines and decrease the amount of deltas in the society
Of course if the society operated automatically it would probably end up like H.G. Wells "The Time Machine"