Brave New World - Aldous Huxley (1931)

WTF

------spoiler alert------

Reading this book was just like watching one episode of "Black Mirror": I could hear the crack of my skull ... man, so disturbing! But do you know what? I love disturbing books, movies, and series!

I would say "Brave new world" is disturbing because it disrupts concepts that are so deep inside that one might not even be aware of its existence. In order to exemplify what I mean, I will highlight four "what-the-fuck" moments of the book:

1) Capitalism in its maximum expression in a communist framework. Yes, it is possible! How? The government controls literally everything even the production of humans that, in this case, is entirely in vitro. It controls the casts of humans, their duties and how many individuals per cast should be produced. During infancy, the individuals are under strong conditioning of behavior and one thing all of them are conditioned for is consumption! Brilliant isn't it?! The individuals are prepared to live in a community without individuality: no parents, no relatives, no partners, that means, no monogamy or exclusive and possessive relationships. Then love is for the community and solitude is bad, but the lack of individualism does not necessarily imply in common goods, everybody consumes and everybody consumes a lot! Crazy, no!?

2) Ubiquitous happiness tames freedom. The book breaks the romantic view of happiness. Happiness is nothing but conformity. Conformity is nothing but satisfaction. Satisfaction is reachable by conditioning and conditioning tames the freedom. Easy peasy! There was a memorable quote from Mustapha Mond (one of the world controllers) about freedom in their society before the changes that resemble our western society:

"Freedom to be a round peg in a square hole." (page 3).

I think this is so true! In our society freedom and happiness hardly walk together. If so, not for everybody. Right?! Be free to make choices is nice but how far can we really make choices depending on the circumstances in which we are born? Really often we make unrealistic goals end up wanting what we can not have or what we cannot be and consequently unhappy. Like he said at another time:

"And being contented has none of the glamour of a good fight against misfortune, none of the picturesqueness of a struggle with temptation, or a fatal overthrow by passion or doubt. Happiness is never grand." (page 181).

3) Fair social stability undissociated from equality. Different casts with different duties but everybody conditioned to be happy with what they are. It is a paradoxical status in which there is not equality but it seems fair. Isn't it?

4) Science for a life without scientific education. Science has a contradictory status. Science is important for human production provides healthy life and good death for everyone. By the way, in the book, people are no longer afraid of death. However, scientific education is inexistent because people do not explore further than what they are conditioned for. Social stability was reached in a way that not only basic science but high art, music, religion and its variant have no reason for existence anymore. See the quote from Mustapha Mond:

"...you can't make tragedies without social instability." (page 180)

Pure true!  Social stability might be fair but it is boring.

The book has two extreme characters: John, the savage, that was born far from the "civilization" and Lenina the extremely conditioned civilized woman. I could not help myself of transporting me to the brave new world and when I did it I found myself in between: not like Lenina, neither like John. I recognized several advantages from social stability, but they have a heavy collateral effect. Would I live without science and art in order to leave a "perfect" social stability? Would you? Well, at least we would have some soma (a drug to get high without consequences)!

I watched the movie...bullshit! It changed the order of the things from the book to make it chronological and easier but destroyed the surprise effect. Super boring!

Brave New World - movie

The circle - Dave Eggers (2013)

A slow story with easy characters

------spoiler alert------

The circle is a book about an extreme future when privacy will no longer exist. The topic per si is interesting, but the venue where the story drives on is far too long. In the beginning, one can find several analogies with the Circle and Google on how they can create tools to provide a totally personalized virtual world. So far the thing is somehow worth to read. At a certain point, the chiefs of the company (Bailey and Stenton) turn into such evil that I had the impression that I was reading some sort of superhero bullshit (that I particularly hate) which the villain plans to dominate the world. Sorry for the spoiling, but they do complete their evil plan thanks to the easy thinking Mae (the most boring main character ever) that cannot question anything in any moment acting just like a pirate's parrot. The ongoing of the history is easily predictable with a what the fuck non-surprising end. The way it ends gives the impression that Eggers is planning a continuity, if so, please, not with Mae. If the 504 pages could be shorted into 54, then the book would have a chance of being truly exciting. The highlight of the book for me was learning the world jeopardized. I would watch the movie just to hear how to spell this word. Nevertheless, it was nice to read.

"jeopardize"

put (someone or something) into a situation in which there is a danger of loss, harm, or failure.

i.e. "This book jeopardized my day!"

I watched the movie. First, it is worse than the book. Second, Emma Watson did not spell the word "jeopardize". Disappointing!

The Circle - movie