Controlling the Masses

My favorite thing about Brave New World is how real it feels. It's plausible enough to be a little bit scary. The society described in Brave New World is carefully controlled, but the control is engineered to be desirable. After years upon years of rigorous conditioning people want to not have to think, they want to be told what to do, they want the temporary oblivion that soma brings. I've always disagreed that it is better to be feared than loved. People who fear you will despise you, and eventually there will be rebellion. People who are content won't feel that pressure. I can see the society of Brave New World continuing forever, because almost everyone is happy. 

SO VERY HAPPY.

1984 doesn't have any content citizens. Everyone is living in fear, afraid of being vaporized, afraid of talking in their sleep, afraid of breaking the unwritten rules, afraid of being turned in by their own children. Totalitarian regimes don't last forever. Everyone has a breaking point. Some people crumple inward, but others explode outward. Everyone that holds power in 1984 is confident that they can hold power forever. But, no matter how watched and how controlled, there is only so much a body of people can take. Keep your head down, smile when needed, hate when needed, never miss a step, never say the wrong thing, never think the wrong thing. It's impossible. I don't see the Party as long lasting, because no one is happy. Unhappy people will always find a way to rebel, no matter how thoroughly they are watched and controlled.

All of the sad feelings, all of the time.

The motivation behind the leaders who control the society of London in Brave New World is also more realistic than that of those in the London described in 1984. (From here on out, Brave New World's London will be referred to as Ford's London. 1984's London will be Big Brother’s London.) The leaders in Ford's London are not motivated by utter malice or a mad desire for power. They enjoy having privileges that no one else has, but they also view it as their duty to keep the people of London happy and occupied. The people in charge of Big Brother's London don't care about keeping their citizens happy, healthy, or even alive. They operate through intimidation alone. They also don't seem to care the least bit about their own happiness or lives. They don't care about their perks, or how long they live.

O'Brien raves about how it is power, pure power, that motivates him and the Party to opress and dominate and watch the people. It's all almost cartoonish. The power for power's sake, the perpetual war just because it's the easiest way to get rid of resources. O'Brien ceases to be a realistic villain, and becomes a power mad characture. He laughs and explains his plans to his “invisible audience” and I stop feeling unsettled and start feeling exasperated and a little bit cheated. This doesn't feel like something that could happen, or something that could last a long time. It reads like a bad movie.

I'm also very skeptical of the Party's method for retaining control. It's counting on the fact that the Proles will never, ever rebel. Sure, the current generation is content with living their lives and occasionally dodging a bomb. That does not mean the next generation will be. If the Party's only fail-safe against a prole rebellion is the prediction that a prole rebellion just won't happen, they will find themselves very unprepared when the rebellion does come.

The leaders who oversee Ford's London have taken every precaution against a rebellion. They have given everyone on the reservation no reason to rebel. The people on the reservations are able to live their lives without interference. They are not controlled or oppressed. No one is bombing them. And on the rare occasion there is an upset, it is fixed with gas and a soothing voice on some speakers. There is a plan for upsets, and so all the upsets are little ones. I find Ford's London to be a London that will last much longer than the one described in 1984.

(Pictures taken from stockphotos.com)

Desserts Are The Backbone of Peace

Presently, I am wrapped up in Plato's The Republic, getting a head-start on the next reading for class. I am merely on the third of 40 pages and I am caught up in a fit of laughter at the ideas these philosophers are throwing around about making a city. 

First, they started out with the conclusion that to have a foundation for a city, one only needs four or five men: one a farmer, one a builder, one a weaver, one a cobbler and one a doctor. Hah! What a boring city that would be. 

Image courtesy of rootsweb.ancestry.com

Imagine living in a city with only five people. There would be no laws. There would be no entertainment, even! Us Americans just love celebrities, and in this contrived society, there would be....no. Justin. Bieber. Chaos ensues. 

Quickly, though, my laughter returns when the philosophers realize that four or five men is simply not enough for a sufficient city. Of course no one will want to spend all their time making enough of the staples of life for themselves and everyone else. Why should one man have to grow enough wheat for five? It's simply unfair. 

Cue the next realization: there needs to be imports! Imagine if Americans had to be completely self-sufficient without the aid of any foreign countries. When would there be time for an afternoon siesta? There may be some benefits, though. I imagine that obesity would greatly decrease if the majority of the population had to work to sustain the whole country. More and more people would be involved in physical labor, eliminating what I like to call the "desk-job love handles." Also, I imagine that technology would vastly improve. People would naturally get hurt on the job, so why not build a machine that would do it for you? Technology may evolve into something helpful rather than mindless. But, I guess iPads have already done their damage...

And the pièce de resistance: dessert. One of the philosophers somehow forgot the obvious need for food items like salt, olives and cheese. Thinking on this track, he came to the conclusion that they would "give them desserts, too, of course, consisting of figs, chickpeas, and beans, and they'll roast myrtle and acorns before the fire, drinking moderately. And so they'll live in peace and good health" (Plato, 47). 

Image courtesy of chiwulff.com

What took him so long to realize that the key to an appeased population is desserts and the moderate drink?? If only the problems of modern-day life could be solved with a slice of apple pie and a glass of Chardonnay. 

I have so far found this reading quite entertaining, especially since the city the philosophers have been planning seems to have come to ground in 3 pages. Who knows what treasures lie ahead for me?