Dystopia In Aldous Huxley's Brave New World

There were many so-called “prophetic” dystopian novels released throughout the 20th century: Orwell’s 1984, Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, Brunner’s Stand on Zanzibar, etc.. These books certainly have their moments of divination, but even casual readers see that western governments are not going down the path of totalitarian control, book burning, or mind control. However, one dystopian novel does stand in the minds of readers out as having frighteningly accurate predictions: Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. On an initial read, Huxley’s novel sounds incredible prophetic. Readers attempt to draw parallels between every aspect of the novel and the real world - the decline of religion, drug use, open sexuality, government control, mass conformity,
shallow media, growth of genetic engineering; but what is the truth of these predictions? Religion may have less presence in popular culture and media, but historians consider this era to be part of America’s “Fourth great awakening” and most citizens of the U.S. and UK state that they would never vote for an unreligious political candidate candidate, for example. Use of illegal drugs has increased, but use of alcohol and cigarettes has dropped significantly. With 84 years of separation, how could Huxley be right at all?
On further examination, much of Huxley’s predictions were products of his time.
Huxley grew up in a conservative, rich, and elite English family during the early 20th century. He lived through World War I, the roaring 20’s, and part of the Great Depression before he began writing Brave New World, giving him a wealth of issues to expound upon in the novel. As a conservative Englishman, Huxley feared both rapid progress and the growing communist and fascist powers in Europe, giving rise to his predictions about the future of art and the role of government. The terror instilled in him by nearby change and unrest likely lead to the inaccuracy and, in some cases, the reversal of his predictions. Huxley was able to see the importance of the issues addressed in Brave New World, but ultimately the predictions themselves are actually inaccurate due to the perspective of
Huxley.
Before looking into Huxley’s predictions themselves, let us establish a deeper historical context for the time period. Brave New World was released in 1932, putting Huxley in a difficult time period. He grew up during World War 1 as a close witness to the devastation it caused, which instilled a deep sense of fear and mistrust among citizens of the time. Following WWI came the roaring twenties, a decade long period of opulence and celebration. Huxley was a member of the elite class, who saw this period as being devoid of moral standards or high art, enhancing his embittered view. The 20’s were quickly followed by the great depression, a phenomena that Huxley was fortunate enough to view from afar as a member of a rich family. Still, the occurrence caused him and other elites to look down on the practices of lower classes, viewing them as deleterious to life and, by extension, the economy. England, Huxley’s homeland, was also flanked by growing unrest in Europe during the post-WWI era. Italian and German fascism combined with eastern communism scared citizens of western democracies, as they were known to be volatile, hostile, and despotic. Technology was advancing rapidly as well. Movies and cars had recently become mainstays in the middle class and television, recorded music, and radio were all beginning what would come to be a long reign of popularity. Huxley, however, looked down upon the middle class coming off of his experience in the 20’s, and saw these new commodities and entertainments in a harsh light.
We can first examine Huxley’s feelies in the context of his view on contemporary art and use of government propaganda. The name itself - feelies - comes from two sources. The first is an early 20th century romance novel that placed particular importance of tactual effect. Huxley considered the novel to be exemplary of the sad state of art at the time. The other source of inspiration is the recently invented “talkies,” which were movies with sound. Huxley despised the talkies, believing they forgoed art in favor of mindless pleasure and would inevitably be used to quell masses of citizens by western democracies. Huxley’s prediction ended up being nearly opposite: film in the west have often been used to criticize and satirize the very issues Huxley feared. “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington,” “V for Vendetta,” “Mulholland Drive,” among many others, have all criticized corrupt aspects of government and conformity to widespread commercial success. Huxley’s criticism, however, was not entirely unfounded. He feared the growth of government propaganda, which had catapulted due to the powerful fascist and communist nations in Europe. His prediction, ironically, ended up opposite reality. Communist Russia created an incredible mass of propaganda films that they distributed among their population in order to placate them, just as Huxley predicted the west would do.
Huxley was likewise incorrect about the future purpose of drugs and sex in the western world. He was certainly correct in pointing out the future importance of these desires, but the parallels typically drawn from initial reads are all but accurate. Michael Siegfried discusses one parallel in his article “The Inner City in the 21st Century: Huxley’s Brave New World Revisited?” Siegfried draws parallels between Brave New World and the culture of pleasure in the inner city; like in BNW, drug and sex are used as escapist pleasures that placate inner city dwellers and contribute to the existence of predetermined class. However, one major difference persists: in today’s societies, such occurrences are often illegal, looked down upon, and actively fought against by charity organizations and the government itself rather than promoted. Additionally, it is the lower class in this situation who is placated by drugs and sex, while in BNW the upper classes have the best access to sex and soma. This glaring inaccuracy by Huxley can be explained, however. Huxley wrote this novel in the wake of the twenties, where two activities increased rapidly among the higher classes: drug use and sex. Easy access to drugs was at an all time high and prices of discreet mail-order contraceptives had plummeted since their introduction in the early 20th century, giving rise to a complacent, divulgent, and morally loose culture. When the market fell, Huxley likely saw it as a sign of the dangers of loose morals, therefore seeking to criticize them in his book. Huxley doubtfully realized the importance of two other rising phenomena - education and drug resistance groups. The western world took a conservative turn after the 1920’s, but also began investing more money into quality of life improvements for citizens. With greater education about the dangers of drug use, more available forms of entertainment in the post-WWII era, and temperance-esque groups successfully banning most mind altering drugs, drug use in the western world would be relegated to the poor, criminal masses rather than as a tool to placate the higher classes as Huxley predicted.
Huxley’s final overarching prediction, that religion and high art would experience significant decline, was inaccurate as well.
John Attarian, in his article “Brave New World and the Flight From God,” characterizes Huxley as a deeply reverent man. He asserts that religion is, if a little understated, the actual main purpose of the book, as shown by the highly secular society and classification of high art and religious texts as “smut.” Attarian believes this to be highly accurate, stating, “In its essentials, Brave New World is dangerously near fulfilled prophecy.” conversely, Attarian and Huxley himself are wrong in this matter; we are not even on the path Huxley predicted. Huxley in fact had a profound misunderstanding of where the modern world was headed, and it permeates into Brave New World. At one point in the story, the savage, which is intended to be Huxley’s “voice of sanity,” does something that sounds like self parody to the modern reader: in trying to woo Lenina he states that he wants to do something noble for Lenina, crying out “No, of course it isn’t necessary. But some kinds of baseness are nobly undergone. I’d like to undergo something nobly. Don’t you see?” (195). The modern reader, like Lenina, does not see; but why would they? The role of religion, struggle, and art in modern society has changed drastically, and not in the direction predicted. Its importance never diminished, only changed. Most of the western world, remains deeply religious and even
mistrusting of irreligious people. The minor decrease and role change of religion is happening, but unlike Huxley believed high art and human experience have only increased; society found other sources of meaning and art fully independent from religion. The context surrounding Huxley gives reason for this discrepancy. Huxley lived during a period when religion was leaving the artistic world. Modernism, the major literary movement at the time, entirely abandoned religion as a basis; new movies focused on representation of the physical, rather than metaphysical, world; and the latest music, jazz, focused on human experiences and the troubles of real life. Conservatives like Huxley lashed out against the change, He wrote countless articles condemning the flight from God and declaring his belief in the necessity of struggle but ultimately all these essays and stories merely represented a failure for Huxley to adapt to changing times, giving rise to his deeply inaccurate predictions.