The Pillars of Utopia

As I read the first part of Brave New World, I was struck by its industrial, that's-just-how-it-is mood and setting. I was immediately reminded of Soylent Green and its controlled environment where people may not choose their livelihood. Rather, they are provided it and must fall in line. This text follows that same idea as it introduces the world in an almost detached, lecture-style. The imbalance of power between people are obvious, and a specific quote made me pause and think on broad terms about Utopias and Dystopias alike.

(For context, here's the quote: "They'll grow up with what the psychologists used to call an 'instinctive' hatred of books and flowers...they'll be safe from books and botany all their lives" (Huxley 30)).

Why is it that, whether the Utopia is presented in either a positive or negative light, the first aspects of it to be addressed, enforced (in a foundational way to how the society runs), or controlled is education/entertainment/communication and agriculture? What reasons do the Director and D.H.C. have for choosing these specific things - innocent flowers and books - to frighten babies for besides revealing to readers that limiting the people from prose/poetry and plants of the earth, which can be sown and cultivated, is an effective tactic for dominance? In short, why are these two symbols always addressed in some way in Utopias?

p.s. How have these two symbols already been mentioned or oppressed in the text? How will it continue to be?

https://bdn-data.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs.dir/364/files/2015/10/ST2685h-Books-and-flowers.jpg

The Hollow Men

"The Hollow Men"
T.S. Eliot

Part I

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when 
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar

Shape without form, shade without colour, 
Paralyzed force, gesture without motion;

Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other kingdom 
Remember us - if at all - not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men 
The stuffed men. 

More Predestination!

As we look at our first dystopia, I cannot help but think of some of the reoccurring themes, such as social castes, within Brave New World and how they are still similar to the utopias that we have read. It shows how even when coming from a logical place intended to fix a problem, a different problem is created. I'm talking about the need for some utopias, and now dystopias, I suppose, to create classes forced under predestination.

My question is: how does the society of Brave New World benefit from having children in different intellectual castes? As it is so contradictory to the modern educational concept that those lowest below the curve need the most help, how could a society that broadened intellectual divides use that practice to its advantage? Is the Alpha Beta system even more harmful than the Gold Silver system held by the Utopians?

Ignorance is Bliss

"No wonder these poor pre-moderns were mad and wicked and miserable. Their world didn't allow them to take things easily, didn't allow them to be sane, virtuous, happy. What with mothers and lovers, what with the prohibitions they were not conditioned to obey, what with the temptations and the lonely remorses, what with all the diseases and the endless isolating pain, what with the uncertainties and the poverty- they were forced to feel strongly. And feeling strongly, (and strongly, what was more, in solitude, in hopelessly individual isolation), how could they be stable?" (47)

I personally thought this quote held a lot of contradictions to what was actually happening in this world. Especially the part about how the old world didn't allow the pre-moderns to be sane, virtuous, and happy, when that really is ironic considering that the people of this new world require soma in order to feel happy or relaxed or whatever.
If they have truly abolished disease in this new world, that's great, but they still very much have temptations and prohibitions. I also think that they are much more isolated in this world, because they can't think for themselves and, everything they will ever be, or ever do, has pretty much been decided for them.
They are isolated in that they don't have free will, and are forced to conform to a different set of rules that masks itself as "fun" and "pleasurable," but there is still jealousy, pain, and those in the lowest castes probably are miserable, contrary to what those at the top are made to believe.
Even those who are in charge are just going off the guidelines they learned since birth, which were created by someone who came way before them, so who is really running the show here?

Mustapha Mond

"'Suffer little children,' said the Controller" (Huxley 56). This quote seemed like foreshadowing to me because the people who are created in the cultures are on the same level, mentally, as children so one of the highest ranking people in this society saying "suffer" seemed ominous (56). It's also strange because isn't the whole point to get rid of suffering altogether, which is why they selectively breed people, then condition them, and then also give them drugs that dull their negative emotions.

Stability Stability

“That is the secret of happiness and virtue—liking what you’ve got to do. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their inescapable social destiny” (16).

Seems like a different answer to the discussion on who/what creates utopia, the rules of society or the people who live in it. If the people are conditioned to live this way, is it really utopia?

A Different Species?!

From the beginning of Chapter 10:
"It took me a long time, as a man, a foreigner, and a species of Christian--I was that as much as anything--to get any clear understanding of the religion of Herland."

This speaks to the many flawed facets of the viewpoints of the three boys, as I feel like it culturally does distort our lens a little bit. In a smaller context, patriarchal Christianity would seem totally unfit to the form and function of Herland. The women are disturbed at the seemingly-undeserving eternal punishment damning babies for eternity following the Fall of Man, and rightly so. On a greater scale, the "species" of Christianity has me wondering if the women seem mystical or alien enough to feel entirely inhuman or if there is a closer connection than we think and the factors of man and Christianity would aim to distort actualization of those similarities.

Hope for the future

“With these women the most salient quality in all their institutions was reasonableness. When I dig into the records to follow out any line of development, that was the most astonishing thing- the conscious effort to make it better” (Gilman 65).
This quote really resonated with me because I feel like the desire of the women to better their community is a large reason they live in a Utopia. I wish that we practiced that ideal more often in present day society because it could lead to more change and equality. I know this is very idealistic, but maybe making a conscious effort to better society for all people could eventually help us to create a more utopic country.

A New Hope

As soon as the People of Herland mentioned possibly rejoining the rest of the world, I was really worried they would actually go through with it. I just feel like, as soon as they revealed themselves to the rest of the world, they would be attacked by men just like Jeff, Vandyck, and especially Terry. Not only that, but I imagine their peaceful oasis would begin to be infected with disease as more and more people came there.
The world that Gilman lived in certainly would not accept or understand a society made entirely of women who are not only able to do every kind of work imaginable by themselves and are able to reproduce on their own, but they're able to do it well. Maybe even better than those in the outside world.
I thought it was very interesting when Vandyck explained everything they had previously assumed about a society of women, that they would have been consumed by "feminine vanity." They expected a "dull submissive monotony," pettiness, jealousy, and hysteria. Instead, they found superior clothing, developments in science and mechanics that rivaled their own, as well as a high quality of health and, of course, a community that shared a great motherly and sisterly love.
I don't think the world could ever have respect for that kind of society, not even today. Personally, I feel like it would be better for Herland to stay secluded and continue in prosperity.

Pls discuss

I think we all are on the same page (or same chapter at least) when it comes to appreciating Herland. So with that in mind, a question to flex our minds a bit:

How does Gilman create a utopia that reads so positively? How do her choices as an author make it such an optimistic exploration?

For context, I'm sure that an Orwell would find a way to write about Herland in a far different light...

And finally: a collection of the guys' actual reactions to Herland

Terry

Jeff

Van

The Essential Opposition of Good and Evil

The seclusion of a culture and a society plays an important role throughout Gilman's Herland. It is only through seclusion that certain aspects of Herland can exist, like the virgin reproduction or the religious and ethical mindset of the women of Herland. "They ha[ve] no theory of the essential opposition of good and evil" focusing mostly on "growth" (Gilman 102). Gilman's main focus throughout the text is to change the readers perspective. This realization by the character, Van, on the way in which the perspective of an isolated people's has changed their perspective on how life is like is an in text example of what the reader should be experiencing, what the kids nowadays call being 'mindblown.' Just like how Plato focused on perspective and how the education of the next generation affects the future, Gilman is making a point that if the focus shifts from opposition to community and from past to the future then a positive future awaits us. Of course, it's easy to not focus on opposition when the community itself is isolated, as most Utopia's are. Gilman acknowledges this counterpoint inadvertently when she says that "shortcomings and misdeeds in childhood never were presented to them as sins" which provides a small scale example of what may happen if two societies were to clash (102). Also, Gilman could be saying that societies that do clash are still immature and can only improve which is a very positive outlook. Seclusion and isolation create absurd moments throughout the text that can only happen in fiction and yet, at the same time, creates important argumentative points like how perspective can change the perception of morality and how that perspective bleeds into other aspects of life which goes to show that the small things in life have big impacts.