qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
English Literature 6
Modern and Contemporary Literature
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
SAIDA SKENDERI
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
 1. Meaning of Darkness - Heart of Darkness

Darkness is important enough conceptually to be part of the books title. However, it is difficult to discern exactly
what it might mean, given that absolutely everything in the book is cloaked in darkness. Africa, England, and
Brussels are all described as gloomy and somehow dark, even if the sun is shining brightly. Darkness thus seems to
operate metaphorically and existentially rather than specifically. Darkness is the inability to see: this may sound
simple, but as a description of the human condition it has profound implications. Failing to see another human
being means failing to understand that individual and failing to establish any sort of sympathetic communion with
him or her.

In Conrad's novel, Heart of Darkness, the theme is the discovery of darkness, not only physical, more pronouncedly
moral and spiritual. The word 'heart' signifies the innermost core, and the word 'darkness' refers to the moral-
spiritual vacuum that the ivory trader Kutz got himself trapped in.

Conrad weaves a complex narrative in which Marlow tells the story of his visit to the deep dark heart of Congo to
see and rescue Kutz from the 'Inner Station'. When after a long and arduous journey from the 'Central Station',
Marlow reaches the darkest part of Congo, Kutz is found among the black Africans who attack Marlow's vessel, for
they wouldn't allow their god-like Kutz to be taken away. Infirm, indisposed and crawling through the forests, Kutz
is rescued. But he succumbs on the way back, uttering the words-'horror! horror!' Perhaps, Kutz could see into the
deep darkness of his own mind.

There are a number of ways to consider the meaning of the title on its own or as it relates to the story. You may or
may not be aware that Africa was frequently referred to as the "Dark Continent," and Conrad was almost certainly
aware of that. The darkness of the continent could refer to its unknown quality or the darkness of the people who
resided there. (Remember that the book takes place during a period of colonialism and great racism, and
"darkness" in this context might very well have racist overtones today.)

Another interpretation of the title that you might want to consider is the darkness of men's souls, which could refer
to their lack of morality, the darkness of insanity, or the cruelty of colonialism. Remember also that this is a trip
upriver, and the source of a river might be considered its "heart," hence the destination might be the source or
heart of the darkness of Africa or the men who colonized it.

Darkness might refer to the darkness of the insanity that the narrator finds at his destination, the darkness of the
treatment that he observes on his way upriver, or the despair of the Africans who are so horribly mistreated. When
you consider the plot of the entire book, there is little that could not be reasonably called dark.

The theme of darkness is present throughout the novel, appearing in Marlow's first words: "And this also has been
one of the dark places of the earth." He refers to the terrible things he has witnessed in his life, and to the darkness
that he believes hides in the inner heart of every man, waiting for release. The first in-text example comes when
Marlow overhears a conversation between the Manager and his uncle:

I saw him extend his short flipper of an arm for a gesture that took in the forest, the creek, the mud, the river
seemed to beckon with a dishonoring flourish before the sunlit face of the land a treacherous appeal to the lurking
death, to the hidden evil, to the profound darkness of its heart.
(Conrad, Heart of Darkness, eNotes eText)

The uncle doesn't seem to care about the atrocities that men perform when released from the bonds of civilization
as long as his nephew is doing well. Throughout the novel, the imagery of a "heart of darkness" recurs, showing
how Marlow comes to believe that every man has the potential for evil inside their hearts, and how it is bound only
by civilization and convention. Kurtz is Marlow's prime example, being a person who lost his morality early and
now has had his heart and soul all-but consumed by the overpowering darkness of the jungle.

Significance of the Title Heart of Darkness

Joseph Conrad's most read novella Heart of Darkness has double meaning in its title. One dictionary meaning is
that the title refers to the interior of the Africa called Congo. Another hidden meaning is, the title stands for the
darkness or the primitiveness that every person possesses in his or her mind and heart.

Joseph Conrad (1857-1924)

The etymological meaning of the phrase Heart of Darkness is the innermost region of the territory which is yet to
be explored, where people led the nomadic and primitive way of living. The setting time of the novel Heart of
Darkness dates back to those periods when the continent of Africa was not fully explored. So the continent was
called the heart of darkness. The major and significant events of the novel take place in the Dark Continent, though
the first and the end of the story takes place outside the continent. The central character, Kurtz, comes under the
influence of the savages and becomes one of them in the same dark place called Congo. The savages and Kurtz, in
fact, belong to the heart of darkness.

The description of the scenery by Marlow adds something vital meaning to the title of the novel. The wild scene,
thick and impenetrable jungle, the pictures of the natives hiding in the dense jungle, the silence and the dangerous
stillness of the river Congo, the thick fog, all these features are suggestive to the title Heart of Darkness. The outer
physical setting intensifies the horror and the fear among the readers. The reading about the description of the
natives and their way of appearing in the novel bring the terrific effect in the mind of the reader.

On one occasion, Marlow is attacked by the natives in his steamer. In that attack the helmsman is killed. The
natives attack the steamer of Marlow not knowing why he is there, but in the ignorance. The ignorance and
backwardness of the savages, the purposeless attack creates the feeling like being in the midst of the heart of
darkness. The attack to the steamer is planned by Kurtz, who has become one savage living with the natives. He
becomes more barbaric than the inhabitants. The essence of savagery, brutality and cruelty sums up in the
existence of Kurtz. Kurtz's mission was to civilize the natives, to educate them, to improve their way of living and
the important one is to bring the light into their lives and into that dark territory. But he ends in converting himself
into the savages, and the most striking thing is that he has set himself like a god in that Dark Continent. He starts
following their unspeakable rites. He does any brutal raids for the sake of collection of ivory. According to Marlow,
Kurtz has become a devil being failure to control his moral restraint. He lets his inner self, the primitive self, dance
freely in the lap of darkness and becomes the representatives of the darkness. His superstition and evil has become
the embodiment of darkness. Psychologically, Kurtz is the symbol of everyman's darkness which is veiled under
the curtain of civilization. Kurtz is the heart of darkness.

The term heart of darkness stands for another meaning too. The journey of Kurtz and Marlow to explore the
interior of the Dark Continent called Congo is not only the physical search of some the territory, but it is an
exploration of the innermost part of the human mind and the human heart. The geographical search is
comparatively easier than the search of one's self, one's Dark Continent. Both Kurtz and Marlow are in an implied
sense in the journey to find their dark region of mind and heart. In case of Kurtz, he cannot hold the mystical and
attractive power of his savagery self, his suppressed primitive self and gives in. He fails to control his moral
restraint. He submits to the dark side of his personality and becomes one savage. He reaches to the heart of
darkness, but cannot resist its power upon him and he cannot come back from his subconscious state of mind. But
in the case of Marlow, he too travels to the heart of darkness, the subconscious. He reaches there and witnesses the
heavy influence of primitive self on Kurtz. He notices that he has become totally a devil, deviating from his main
aim to civilize the savages. Marlow, despite the truth that Kurtz has been transformed into the barbaric self, praises
him and is attracted towards him. He has fallen a near prey to the primitiveness. But, amazingly, he does not
submit himself to the savagery self of his subconscious. He reaches to the heart of darkness, witnesses the
transformation of Kurtz, and gets to know the irresistible power of barbaric hidden self, praises it and again comes
back to the light of civilization. He is so able to control his morality and spirituality. His journey to Africa is,
symbolically, exploration of the dark side of human life, either psychologically, or morally and or spiritually.

A critic commenting upon the title of the novel, Heart of Darkness, states that the darkness here is many things: it is
the unknown, it is the subconscious, it is the moral darkness, it is the evil which swallows up Kurtz, and it is the
spiritual emptiness, which he sees at the center of the existence, but above all it is a mystery itself, the
mysteriousness of man's spiritual life.

Joseph Conrads Heart of Darkness (1899) is an early and important example of modernist experimentation in
English fiction. In the voice of his frame narrator, Conrad provides a crucial image for understanding the
symbolism of modern literature when he explains that the stories of Marlow, the narrator of most of the novella,
differ from those of other sailors: The yarns of seamen have a direct simplicity, the whole meaning of which lies
within the shell of a cracked nut [But to Marlow,] the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but
outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze. Heart of Darkness does not
reveal its meaning in digestible morsels, like the kernel of a nut. Rather, its meanings evade the interpreter; they
are larger than the story itself.
Conrad, a Pole who had worked as a sailor and then captain on French and British ships before becoming a
naturalized British subject, admired Flaubert and knew French literature well. While not aligning himself
specifically with French symbolism, he wrote that a work of art is very seldom limited to one exclusive meaning
and not necessarily tending to a definite conclusion. And this for the reason that the nearer it approaches art, the
more it acquires a symbolic character.[1] One reason for the centrality of Heart of Darkness to the history of
modernism is its openness to interpretation: Marlows journey to central Africa to confront the power-mad Kurtz
can be interpreted as a political statement about imperialism and race, a critique of bureaucracy, a journey to the
center of the self, a descent into Hell, or a voyage up the birth canal. No single interpretation exhausts its meaning.

Conrads use of polyvalent symbols like the knitters of black wool, the grove of death, or Kurtz himself, suggests his
connection to symbolist tendencies, but his famously hazy literary technique owed more to impressionism. As
Conrads interpreter, Ian Watt, has observed, the abstract geometry of the [nut] metaphor is symbolist because
the meaning of the story, represented by the shell of a nut or the haze around the glow, is larger than its narrative
vehicle, the kernel or the glow; but the sensory quality of the metaphor, the mist and haze, is essentially
impressionist.[2] Most of the story is told from the perspective of Marlow, and much of the time he seems unsure
what is happening to him. Through the narrative device that Watt has defined as delayed decoding, Conrad
records first the impressions that an event makes on Marlow and only later Marlows arrival at an explanation of
the event. Thus, when his boat is suddenly attacked by natives loyal to Kurtz, Marlow is unable to explain why his
helmsman suddenly falls down:

the end of what appeared a long cane clattered round and knocked over a little camp-stool. my feet felt so
warm and wet that I had to look down. The man had rolled on his back and stared straight up at me; both his hands
clutched that cane. It was the shaft of a spear my shoes were full; a pool of blood lay very still gleaming dark-red
under the wheel.

The reader realizes only gradually what has happened and thus shares in the experience of Marlows perplexity. A
similar structure dominates the narrative on a larger scale, as Marlow continually jumps around in the telling of his
story, layering impressions from various times in his attempt to make sense of his experience. This resulted in
breaking up the temporal continuity associated with the nineteenth-century novel. His use of multiple narrators
undermines the nineteenth-century convention of narrative omniscience. The literary critic F. R. Leavis complained
that Conrad frequently seemed intent on making a virtue out of not knowing what he means. Yet, this technique
for forcing the reader to share the impressions of the characters became central to modernist fiction.

Darkness is used as an indication of evil in this work, yet the target of this judgment remains unclear. On the one
hand, the word darkness clearly reflects the Congo environment, with both its darker people and its darker
surroundings The environment can be described as evil in the sense that the people are depicted as mysterious
savages in need of the civilization of the European colonizers. However, this is only in reference to darkness as an
outward quality. Another point of consideration is the use of darkness to describe something innate, something of
the soul. In this sense, the word darkness and the meaning of evilness that it carries can be applied to the
Europeans, who watch as villages are torn apart by the quest for ivory. They lie, they trick, they manipulate - all for
 the greed of wealth and hunger for power. All this goes to show the word darkness and the trait of evil in a
separate light.

Symbols:

1. Kurtz

a. Kurtz represents the dark side of mankind, and what it transforms you into if it encases you completely. His
constant and prolonged exposures to the untamed regions of the Congo cause him to lose grip with civilization, and
the morals associated with it. His complete decline is finalized through his last words, the horror, the horror!

2. Kurtzs Painting

a. The painting Marlow encounters early in his journey depicts a blindfolded woman cast in a black background, who
holds a torch casting a gloomy light on her face. The painting brings forth a feeling of lady-justice, despite the
obvious lack of her presence in Africa. The woman represents the Europeans who have come forth to bring the
light of the torch to the misguided African natives, despite the fact that they are blind to the evil caused by this
venture.

3. The Accountant

a. The accountant represents the faade of the company; the image they wish to project while undergoing their
colonization of Africa. He is an ironic stark contrast to his surroundings, as he appears elegant and sophisticated in
his pure white garments, regardless of the fact he is surrounded by death and destruction.

4. The Knitting Women

a. These two women are a metaphorical and physical embodiment of theMoirae (The Three Fate of the underworld),
who weave and measure the thread of life. Their purpose in front of the doctors office is to foreshadow Marlows
less than optimistic journey into Africa.

5. Flies

a. Throughout Heart of Darkness, flies symbolize The Lord of the Flies; a title synonymous with death. They appear
following the death of the slave in Chapter 1, and more notably after the death of Kurtz in Chapter 3.The flies also
suggest inferno and hell imagery.

6. Heads on Sticks

a. These barbaric displays emphasize Kurtzs excessive brutality, and as they are direct in their message, they are a
contrast to the Pilgrims who shroud their motives through facades of hypocrisy and lies.
Motifs:

1. Darkness

a. Darkness is evident throughout the entire novel, and is important enough to even garner a part in the title. It is
difficult to discern the exact meaning of darkness as it shrouds everything in the novel, including those things
generally considered bright. The metaphorical nature of the darkness evolves into a representation of the darkness
hidden in the heart of every human, especially men.

2. Ivory

a. Ivory accentuates the greed and destruction apparent in the pursuit of financial expansion. The object ivory
becomes almost synonymous with savagery, as those who pursue it the most become corrupt by its influence. The
most prominent example is Kurtz, who possesses the most ivory, and is the most brutal.

3. Fog

a. The fog that engulfs Marlows steamer is both physically and literally white; though in this case rather than white
being the opposite of the darkness evident throughout the novel, it merely compounds it, and develops uncertainty
in those aboard. It thus emphasizes the motif of blindness.

4. Rivets

a. The rivets symbolize a lack of progress on the companys part. Marlow has a difficult time acquiring them from the
company in order to repair his steamer and advance in his journey to find Kurtz. The company seems lack to
provide them despite the fact that Marlow requires them in order to pursue the companys interests. The rivets,
along with the other machinery, symbolize deterioration and lack of efficiency.

2. Picture of European Colonialism

Conrad's Heart of Darkness is both a dramatic tale of an arduous trek into the Belgian Congo (the heart of

darkest Africa) at the turn of the twentieth century and a symbolic journey into the deepest recesses of human

nature. On a literal level, through Marlow's narration, Conrad provides a searing indictment of European

colonial exploitation inflicted upon African natives. Before he turns to an account of his experience in Africa,

Marlow provides his companions aboard the Nellie a brief history lesson about the ancient Roman invasion

and occupation of Britain. He claims that the Romans were "no colonists" for "they grabbed what they could

get for the sake of what was to be got. It was for robbery and violence, aggravated murder on a great scale"

(p.8). The reader is initially encouraged to consider that enlightened European colonists of Marlow's day were
motivated by objectives far loftier than those of the Romans. Thus, Marlow's aunt who arranged his

commission with the Company proclaims that the white man's purpose in Africa is to wean the continent's

ignorant savages from their "horrid ways." Marlow himself says that modern efficiency and the "unselfish

idea" of conquering the earth, rather than some "sentimental pretense," is what "redeems" the colonial

enterprise in which he has been enlisted (p.8).

But when Marlow arrives at the mouth of the Congo River, it becomes immediately apparent that uplifting the

natives from their savagery is not the driving force behind the European mission. At the Company's Outer

Station, Marlow sees six black men yoked together and realizes that these pathetic figures "could not be called

enemies, nor were they criminals" (p.25). They are, in fact, brutalized victims "brought from all the recesses

of the coast in all the legality of time contracts, lost in uncongenial surroundings, fed on unfamiliar food, they

sickened, became inefficient and were them allowed to crawl away and rest" (p.28). In its actual practice, the

controlling value of efficient colonial administration consists primarily of working the natives until they die

and then replacing them with still more victims. The European pilgrims that Marlow encounters are equipped

with modern weaponry for the ostensible purpose of defending themselves against feral savages. In fact, the

natives pose very little threat to the white conquerors. As Marlow's craft steams up the Congo River toward

the Inner Station, they are attacked from the shore by a group of natives who shoot arrows and hurl spears at

the craft. Yet as the narrator recalls this assault, "the action was far from being aggressive---it was not even

defensive: it was undertaken under the stress of desperation, and in its essence was purely protective" (p.79).

We later learn that the purpose of this attack was merely to prevent the party aboard from taking the tribe's

"god," Mr. Kurtz, away from them. With the exception of a few "improved specimens" who are transformed

into cogs in the machinery of exploitation, the European colonists are engaged in their own form of "murder

on a great scale," showing no interest at all in bettering the lot of the Congo's inhabitants.

Hypocrisy is a salient theme in Heart of Darkness. Marlow's account repeatedly highlights the utter lack of

congruence between the Company's rhetoric about "enlightening" the natives with its actual aims of extracting

ivory, minerals and other valued commodities. As one of the fevered pilgrims whom he meets on his overland

trek tells Marlow, it is not a virtuous idea or even efficiency per se that moves the colonists to treat the natives

as members of an inferior species: it is, instead "`to make money, of course'" (p.34).

The colonial enterprise extends beyond the Company to an International Society for the Suppression of

Savage Customs. Marlow is told that this organization entrusted Kurtz to prepare a report for its future

guidance. In it, Kurtz's dutifully acknowledges the importance of attaining maximum efficiency in the

prosecution of the ivory trade, and he advocates creating the illusion that whites are supernatural beings in the
minds of the child-like natives. As Marlow tells his listeners, while reading through Kurtz's proposal he found

"at the end of that moving appeal to every altruistic sentiment it blazed at you, luminous and terrifying, life a

flash of light in a serene sky: `Exterminate all the brutes!'" (p.92). From Kurtz's perspective, the most efficient

way of suppressing savage customs among the natives is to simply annihilate them. Upon his return to

Europe, Marlow presents the deceased Kurtz's report to the Company's manager. The latter seems to be

disturbed by the sheer brutality of its conclusion, saying that "`this is not what we had a right to expect'"

(p.135). It is not, however, that the Company manager takes issue with Kurtz's opinion that the natives are

entirely expendable; it is that he disagrees with and is offended by the candid expression of this view. The

time is not yet ripe for the Company to disclose its true colors and the Company objections to Kurtz's

barbarous methods are based on the damage that they might inflict upon its carefully crafted propaganda

campaign about bringing Christian civilization to people who live in darkness. The Company and, indeed, all

Europe, is engaged in a fundamentally hypocritical endeavor, rationalizing their savagery on the pretext of

alleviating the natives of their amoral primitivism.

The Central Station manager says to Marlow, "you are of the new gang---the gang of virtue" (p.44). By doing

so, he directly implicates Conrad's narrator into the broader hypocrisies of European colonialism. Although it

is through his private account aboard the Nellie that the abominations being perpetrated against the Africans

are detailed, Marlow is by no means virtuous in the active sense of that term. He is, at bottom, a paid

employee of the Company. While he attempts to distance himself from the other pilgrims invading Africa

through a muted, retrospective indignation, at no point in his story does Marlow make any effort to intervene

in the crimes that he witnesses. Even upon his return to Europe, he consciously refrains publicizing what is

actually occurring in Colonial Africa. He even goes so far as to safeguard Mr. Kurtz's reputation. Thus,

Marlow lies to Kurtz's fiance, reporting that Kurtz's "`endwas in every way worthy of his life'" (p.144), and

then adding that Kurtz's final words were her name.

Kurtz's dying words were, of course, "The horror! The horror!" (p.130), and The Heart of Darkness is

centrally preoccupied with the problem of horror, of unmitigated evil. Marked by successive stages from the

outer to the central to the inner stations, Marlow's journey closely resembles the descent into hell that Dante

undertook in his epic poem the Inferno, finding the beast Satan at the center of Hell. The manager of the

Central Station apprises Marlow that Mr. Kurtz is "is an emissary of pity, and science, and progress, and the

devil knows what else" (p.44). It is this last association that has some truth to it. Kurtz is a diabolical figure, a

surrogate of the devil himself. When Marlow finally reaches the Inner Station where Kurtz presides, he finds

that the "various rumors" of Kurtz's evil reign are, if anything, understatements. He sees a row of severed
heads impaled on sticks and learns that they were taken from natives who rebelled against Kurtz's absolute

dominion. Not only does Kurtz brook no dissent to his reign, the natives that have gathered around him

worship Kurtz as if he were a god. Kurtz does not limit the scope of his monstrous actions to the natives. The

misplaced Russian who has attached himself to Kurtz recounts that after Kurtz stole his ivory, his idol then

declared that he would shoot him "because he could do so, and had a fancy for it, and there was nothing on

earth to prevent him killing whom he jolly well pleased" (p.104). Kurtz is a megalomaniac; he exerts

life-and-death power for its own sake, he engages in evil simply because it is possible for him to do so.

Marlow concludes that Kurtz is insane, but Kurtz himself insists on two separate occasions that he is perfectly

conscience of his actions.

Whether Kurtz can be equated with Satan is, however, another matter altogether. He is both fiendish and

childish and, as Marlow comes to suspect, he may be "hollow at the core." In the words of the Company's

chief accountant, Mr. Kurtz is "a very remarkable person" (p.31), yet, even before he meets Kurtz, Marlow

observes that "I am not prepared to affirm the fellow was exactly worth the life we lost in getting to him"

(p.93). When he finally comes face to face with Kurtz, Marlow finds an unnaturally elongated sickly figure

stretched as "an image of death carved out of old ivory" (p.111). Not only is Kurtz a physically unimpressive

being, he is not a genius nor was he ever an especially noble individual even when he had all of his mental

faculties. Kurtz is both grand and pathetic.

The disparity between the epic scale of Kurtz's evil and his seeming hollowness is but one example of the

discordant notes that arise throughout Marlow's story. Ambiguity and contradiction abound in the Heart of

Darkness. There are numerous instances in which seemingly inexplicable events occur. Before departing for

Africa, Marlow undergoes a physical examination that has no real purpose. He then witnesses a European

warship firing its guns into the bush along the African coast for no apparent reason and the pilgrims who

accompany him on the overland segment of his journey routinely discharge their rifles along the way without

aiming. The colonists are engaged in massive projects that alter the natural landscape for no rhyme or reason,

digging a huge pit that seems to have no purpose. There is absolutely no explanation for the admiration that

the Russian sailor extends towards Kurtz. The figure of the native woman (or queen) who appears along the

riverbank as Kurtz is taken from his people is a complete enigma. Conrad's story is filled with unexplained

details, and the reader gains the suspicion that they are may be meaningless and that this journey into the

Heart of Darkness is, in fact, devoid of any lessons.

Reinforcing this motif of ambiguity, doubt, and the meaningless, Conrad's text appears to challenge the very

premise that human experience can be related in words. In a sense, Heart of Darkness is about the act of
story-telling itself. The framing of the tale, with an external narrator describing Marlow sitting aboard the

Nellie, highlights the status of his story as an act of narration. Although Marlow as narrator is competent to

perform the task at hand, holding his audience in rapture, at several points in his story, he falters and appears

to be at a loss for words, telling his listeners, for example, that it is "impossible" to convey the feelings that he

experienced. Marlow says that Kurtz presided over "unspeakable rituals" (that he does not describe) and that

in the Congo the "earth seems unearthly." At each of these junctures, Conrad suggests that words are

inadequate, that normal communication is somehow futile, and that, at bottom, human experience itself is

without meaning and, like Kurtz, hollow at its core. Like Marlow's listeners, at the conclusion of his story, the

reader is apt to sit in silence, pondering what, if anything, has been revealed.

Historical and Philosophical Exploration of Heart of Darkness

In the following essay, Kevin Attell explores how Heart of Darkness has been viewed as both a commentary

on the evils of colonialism and a philosophical exploration of the human psyche. Attell argues that critics who

argue that the novel is either historical or philosophical "misses Conrad's insight that the two are in fact

inseparable."

The original publication of Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness was a three-part serialization in London's

Blackwood's Magazine in 1899. It was subsequently published in a collection of three stories by Conrad in

1902. The date of Heart of Darkness should be noted, for it provides a historical context which illuminates the

story's relation to both the contemporary turn-of-the-century world to which Conrad responds in the tale, and

also the influential role Conrad plays in the subsequent progress of twentieth-century literary history.

Traditionally there have been two main ways of approaching the interpretation of Heart of Darkness. Critics

and readers have tended to focus on either the implications of Conrad's intense fascination with European

colonialism in Africa and around the world, or they have centered on his exploration of seemingly more

abstract philosophical issues regarding, among other things, the human condition, the nature of Good and

Evil, and the power of language. The former interpretive choice would concentrate on the ways Conrad

presents European colonialism (of which he had much firsthand experience, being a sailor himself), while the

latter would primarily investigate Conrad's exposition of philosophical questions. Even a cursory reading of

the tale makes it clear that there is ample evidence for both of these interpretive concerns. What is perhaps

less obvious, but equally important, is the way the historical reality which Conrad takes as his subject matter

and the philosophical meditation to which Kurtz's story gives rise are intrinsically connected to one another.

The turn of the twentieth century was a period of intense colonial activity for most of the countries of Europe.
Conrad refers to European colonialism countless times in Heart of Darkness, but perhaps the most vivid

instance is when Marlow, while waiting in the office of the Belgian Company, sees "a large shining map [of

colonial Africa], marked with all the colours of the rainbow. There was," he says, "a vast amount of redgood

to see at any time, because one knows that some real work is done there, a deuce of a lot of blue, a little green,

smears of orange, and, on the East Coast, a purple patch. . . . However, I wasn't going into any of these. I was

going into the yellow." These colors, of course, correspond to the territorial claims made on African land by

the various nations of Europe: red is British, blue French, green Italian, orange Portuguese, purple German,

and yellow Belgian. The map bears noting. On the one hand it establishes the massive geographical scale of

Europe's colonial presence in Africa, but it also symbolically sets this presence up in relation to another

central thematic concern of the novella: the popular conception of colonialism in Europe.

Conrad links the colored maps to the childlike ignorance and apathy of the European public as to what really

goes on in the colonies. Just a few moments before describing the map in the office in Brussels Marlow had

recalled his childhood, saying: "Now when I was a little chap I had a passion for maps. I would look for hours

at South America, or Africa, or Australia, and lose myself in the glories of exploration. At that time there were

many blank spaces on the earth, and when I saw one that looked particularly inviting (but they all look that) I

would put my finger on it and say, When I grow up I will go there." Much of Heart of Darkness is then a grim

and detailed exposition of the real "glories of exploration" which Marlow observes firsthand, but in these

opening moments before Marlow has left for Africa Conrad has given his assessment of the perspective on the

colonies from the point of view of the common European: on public display in the waiting-room of the

Company office in Brussels, and in the imagination of the European public, the representation of European

activity in Africa is as abstract and pleasant as a multicolored map.

Another example of the distance between the popular conception of the colonies and their reality can be found

in the frequent reference made to the purportedly civilizing aspect of colonial conquest. Marlow's aunt speaks

of "weaning those ignorant millions from their horrid ways" and Kurtz's early pamphlet ominously claims that

"by the simple exercise of [the colonists'] will [they] can exert a power for good practically unbounded."

Marlow's direct experience of the trading stations in the Congo, and Kurtz's scrawled note "Exterminate all

the brutes" at the end of the pamphlet put the lie to these European pretensions to civilizing charity. And to

Conrad's British readers of 1900 these revelations may have been shocking. There was, it should be noted, a

growing anticolonial campaign being waged by dissidents throughout Europe at the time, and Conrad's

novella can be considered a part of that campaign.

But in addition to the aggressive presentation of the grim conditions which existed in Europe's
colonieswhich Conrad succeeds in making very vividHeart of Darkness also creates a theme from certain

philosophical problems which become central to the dawning literary movement called Modernism. Conrad

shows the way the European public is profoundly ignorant (perhaps willfully) of what goes on in their

colonies, but he also suggests that that very separation reveals a problematic relation between belief and

reality, between representation and truth, which can also be investigated as a philosophical question. Keeping

in mind the way this problem has been introduced in the novella (ie. the specific relation between Europe and

its colonies), let us briefly sketch out the philosophical and literary attempts to address the problem of

representation in Modernism.

Roughly speaking, Modernism had its peak in the years between World War I and World War II. The great

canonical Modernists include such writers as James Joyce, Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein, Virginia Woolf,

William Faulkner, and others. In most accounts of the period what links the Modernist writers loosely

together is their intensive formal experimentation with literary and linguistic techniques; that is to say, their

experimentation with the actual modes of literary representation. Stein's experiments with syntax, Joyce's

melding of languages and myths, Faulkner's endless sentences, can all be seen as various ways of working

through difficult questions raised about the very nature of language and how it works. Language in Modernist

literature is no longer seen as a stable vehicle for the communication of meaning, but rather it is put up for

radical questioning in itself Modernist experimentation, one might say, arises out of the doubt that language

(at least language as it has been used in the past) is able to communicate or sufficient to represent meaning or

truth. And the seeds of this very doubt, to bring us back to Conrad, can be seen in Heart of Darkness. Some of

the most illustrative examples of how Conrad introduces these Modernistic concerns can be seen at the points

of Marlow's narration where the actual question of meaning explicitly arises.

Clearly Marlow has no trouble narrating events; he is indeed quite a storyteller. Yet, at various times in the

narration the flow of his speech is interrupted and he seems at a loss for words. If we pick one of these

moments we can see the way Conrad is creating a theme from the very instability and inadequacy of language

itself ("words," "names," the "story") to contain and convey what one might call "truth," "meaning," or

"essence" (Marlow calls it all three). At a point well into his tale Marlow says:

"At the time I did not see [Kurtz]you understand. He was just a word for me. I did not see

the man in the name any more than you do. Do you see him? Do you see the story? Do you

see anything? It seems to me I am trying to tell you a dreammaking a vain attempt, because

no relation of a dream can convey the dream-sensation, that commingling of absurdity,

surprise, and bewilderment in a tremor of struggling revolt, that notion of being captured by
 the incredible which is the very essence of dreams. . . . "

He sat silent for a while.

No, it is impossible; it is impossible to convey the life-sensation of any given epoch of one's

existencethat which makes its truth, its meaningits subtle and penetrating essence. It is

impossible. We live, as we dreamalone."

Conrad has set up a clear opposition in Marlow's speech here: the opposition is between language on the one

hand and truth or meaning on the other. In the quoted passage Marlow is exasperated because when faced

with the task of communicating something deeper than just the narrative of events he is at a loss for wordsor

more precisely, the words themselves fail him. His pronouncement that it is "impossible" for language to do

certain thingsfor language to hold the essence of things as they existforeshadows the dilemma at the center

of Modernist and indeed much of twentieth-century philosophical thought. But what he is trying to tell is not

just "the Truth" in the abstract, but rather the truth about Kurtz, the truth of his experience of the European

colonies. This suggests the way that the philosophical themes of the tale are intertwined with if not identical to

the colonial themes. Conrad has the two coexisting in such close proximity that they in fact appear to be two

sides of the same coin.

The debate, then, over whether Heart of Darkness should be interpreted in terms of either colonial and

historical or philosophical questions misses Conrad's insight that the two are in fact inseparable. As the

complex textual fusion of the two in Heart of Darkness implies, the seemingly abstract philosophical

problems concerning language and truth arise only out of concrete problems (such as colonialism) which exist

in the social world, while at the same time the concrete problems of colonial domination at the turn of the

twentieth century have extensive philosophical implications.

The idea of Imperialism was to spread European civilization to far and exotic places; this would allow outposts and
military camps for strategic intelligence, as well as allowing the import of expensive goods without the trouble of
dealing with native peoples. Kurtz represents the worst of that thinking, allowing his ability to influence and
control the natives to give him delusions of grandeur; he is unable to separate his job from his need to control, and
so even as he exerts his influence on the jungle, it destroys him from the inside. The ethical certainty of Imperialism
that native peoples needed to be "saved" or remade in European image fails because of Kurtz's selfishness and his
madness.

Marlow has a similar epiphany, but is saved by his fundamental decency; he views the natives with disdain, as all
Europeans did at the time, but also allows them their humanity. For instance, when he views a line of prisoners, he
thinks:
They passed me within six inches, without a glance, with that complete, deathlike indifference of unhappy savages.
Behind this raw matter one of the reclaimed, the product of the new forces at work, strolled despondently, carrying
a rifle by its middle.
(Conrad, Heart of Darkness, eNotes eText)

His view is typical of the time, as native people were seen as child-like, able to be "reclaimed" and formed into
almost a parody of accepted, civilized norms. However, through this patina of indred racism, he tries to make his
small piece of the world better, not worse, and so he represents the best ideals of Imperialism; his survival
contrasts with Kurtz's death because while the missions slowly failed and withdrew, the ideals remained alive for
years after.

Conrad's novel takes place during the European Age of Imperialism. European countries were expanding into all
areas of the globe, claiming territories that were inhabited by undeveloped, "savage" populations. One of the
justifications of this quest for more land and resources was touted to be the betterment of the native populations in
the area. Poems like Rudyard Kipling's "The White Man's Burden" reflect a belief among civilized Europeans of the
time that they were bound by a mission to help mankind -- a mission to "civilize" the indigenous natives of these
remote, newly conquered lands.

In "Heart of Darkness," Joseph Conrad reveals, through Marlowe's eyes, the true purposes of the Company, as he
calls it. Purposes of stripping the land of valuable ivory, subduing and enslaving the native population for selfish
gain, and leaving the land and its peoples in a state of devastation and disarray. Marlowe's recounting of his
experience reveals the false idea of the European as, "Something like an emissary of light, something like a lower
sort of apostle." Marlowe's aunt expresses these popular notions among her civilized friends, telling them that her
nephew is going to, "[wean] those ignorant millions from their horrid ways."

No doubt Marlowe's aunt reflects the moral swag that dominated European mindsets of the time. They believed
they were bettering less fortunate and less intelligible beings by developing their lands and teaching them how to
be civilized. However, this notion comes into sharp contrast with what Marlowe actually observes when he arrives
at the Outer Station in the Congo. What he relates is a virtual demolition zone, with destruction, death and decay on
every side. He watches groups of the abused natives crawling into shadowed groves to die from
their mistreatment. The further he goes inland, the more damage and loss he observes. Finally after reaching
Kurtz's inner station, he finds the completed corruption of that European mindset. Kurtz abused his power over
the natives in order to ravage the land of ivory. This is epitomized by the native heads posted on spikes about
Kurtz's hut. Kurtz, the European "savior", the Company's pride, is in reality a delusional, deranged, greedy,
and violent murderer - a true savage. The natives, in contrast, are portrayed as merely pawns in a European
money game.
It is significant to note that Conrad specifically portrays the Belgian holdings in the Congo by King Leopold II.
Conrad focuses his perspectives on the false notions of the incoming Europeans, not on racial inequality, though
Marlowe's horror at what he observes would indicate a valid concern.

In Conrad's Heart of Darkness Marlow, the main character, symbolizes the positiveness of Imperialism. Marlow, as
a character realizes the evil that negative Imperialism has caused and decides it is truly unnecessary. When
Marlow states, "I had got a heavenly mission to civilize you," he expresses his good intentions to help the Africans
progress and advance. Furthermore, when he says, "I was an impostor," Marlow recognizes the fact that he is an
invader into a foreign land, yet he sticks to his moral values.

Marlow observes many kinds of abuse of power by other whites, simply because they have better weapons of war.
When the manager severely battered a young black boy for the burnt shed Marlow disapproves. However, when he
sees abuses and unjust treatment he does not physically try to stop it. Instead, he just turns away and accepts that
it is happening. That is one of Marlow's flaws, he does not support his convictions.
Marlow also symbolizes the uncorrupted men that traveled to foreign lands to help the 'uncivilized' become
cultured, but unlike the others Marlow does not become indoctrinated by an alternative motive. He is able to see
through the materialistic ideals that had plagued the men before him. Marlow has the open-mindedness and
sensitivity that was absent during Imperialism, but doesn't have the courage or power to stop the abuses that
where ongoing. Marlow is proof that when confronted a man's evil side can be both informative and perilous.
The manager is the epitome of the negative effects of the institution of Imperialism. He is corrupt, uncaring,
arrogant and self-centered. He symbolizes the arrogance of Europeans as they encountered native Africans.
Hisgood health symbolizes the everlastingness of Europeans who invaded Africa and their ability to continually
come to Africa and rape it of its natural resources. He is the true symbol of the evil and cold-heartiness of
imperialists.
The manager was an illustration of an established imperialist power. He was well settled in, as demonstrated by
the fact he controls all the stations. An example of his power over others was when he had the black boy thrashed
for the burning of a shed. In addition, he is expansionist and wishes to destroy Kurtz and gain a monopoly on the
ivory trade. The manager's discussion with his uncle is yet another example of his ruthlessness and amoralness.

Marlow realizes the manager is evil and has a certain dislike for him, as do all of the natives. Through this,
symbolizes the overall detestment of imperialized countries toward the aggressor. By assigning all the blame for
the terrible conditions on the manager, Conrad stresses the feeling that Europeans were not bringers of
technology, but distributors of immoral corruption.

Kurtz is one of the more interesting and enigmatic characters in the book. Kurtz was once what Marlow is,
however, he became increasingly corrupt as he was isolated from the civilization of Europe. He exploited the
Africans for their ivory. Kurtz truly symbolizes Europe, in that his mother and father were half-French and half-
Europe. He is also a "renaissance man" and very talented. He stands by his virtues and also symbolizes the good
intentions of Europeans. Under the influence of the manager, though, his sinister and harmful side is exposed.

Kurtz has gained the respect of Marlow as well as the natives and that symbolizes the minor amount of respect
given to the imperialists by natives due to their advanced degree of technology. His terminal illness represents the
eventually death of imperialism due to its inability to adapt and respect the culture and peoples of the invaded
country. Kurtz's oil painting of a blindfolded woman carrying a lighted torch has a distinct significance. It
symbolizes the blind and foolish ivory company forging its way into the jungle and enlightening the savage natives.
However, they do not really realize the detrimental effect they have on Africa. Most importantly the painting shows
Kurtz's understanding of his role and position in the continent.

Overall Kurtz symbolizes Europe towards the end of Imperialism when they began to recognize and realize their
actions as harmful and evil. Kurtz's relationship to the mistress represents Europe's love for their imperialized
country, however, the passion is only temporary. When Marlow tells Kurtz's girlfriend that the last words on his
lips were her that symbolizes the nobleness of imperialists and desire to 'explore for the mother country' and do
things in her honor.

In Heart of Darkness, Conrad successfully manipulates color, the imitation of color and descriptions of color to
conceal his symbolic messages to the reader. When Marlow is starring at the map on the wall of the Brussels office
he observes large sections of red, which he remarks as "always good signs of civilizations." The red denotes English
territories abroad. He also recognizes yellow areas that represent his homeland's, Belgium's, sphere's of influence.
Furthermore Conrad uses black and white repeatedly to describe good and evil. Although the "invaders" are white,
Marlow describes them as having black souls, while the oppressed blacks are described as having pure and white
souls. Marlow's predecessor is also killed over two black hens. In the Brussels office, Marlow sees white women
weaving black cotton, while in Africa he sees black women with white cotton. One of the more distinctive examples
of color symbolism occurs when Marlow noticed a starving, young black boy with a rope of white cotton around his
neck. This symbolizes the white men choking the people of Africa.

Throughout Heart of Darkness Conrad is attempting to convey to his readers that Imperialism is immoral and
degrading. Using various forms of symbolism, through Marlow, Conrad expresses his views. Perhaps Conrad is not
opposed to Imperialism completely but he does indicate that the white man is too materialistic and does not
understand how spiritually advanced the natives are. He believes that in Imperialism, the oppressor, Europeans,
are too arrogant and evil in dealing with the "uncivilized natives." However, he also believes that Africa is too large
to have any momentous impact by European invasion, as shown when the French ship is unaffectedly shelling the
African coast. Conrad's main message that he tries to reveal to the reader is that man's greatest sin is his atrocities
to man.
Post-Colonial Theory and Heart of Darkness
"Heart of Darkness" begins and ends in London; on the Nellie on the Thames. The most part, however, takes place
in the Congo (now known as the Republic of the Congo). The Kongo, as it was originally known, was inhabited first
by pygmy tribes and migratory 'Bantus' and was 'discovered' by the Portuguese in the 14th Century. The
Portuguese brought with them Catholocism; European missionaries. The Congo was ruled by King Alfonso I from
1506 - 1540 and Shamba Bolongongo from 1600 - 1620. The slave trade was rife in the Congo, from about 1500
until 1830. King Leopold of Belgium ruled, between 1878 and 1908, and would have been King at the time "Heart
of Darkness" was set. Conrad himself actually arrived in the Congo on 12 June 1890, and it would be safe to say that
he would have used his experience in the Congo when writing "Heart of Darkness".

At its time of writing for Blackwood's Magazine (December 1898), Britain was in its last years of Victorian rule.
Queen Victoria was actually the niece of King Leopold of Belgium. Britain was the most powerful and influential
nation on Earth; its Empire spread throughout Europe, Asia and Africa. Joseph Conrad, born in the Ukraine in 1857,
as Jozef Teodor Konrad Korzeniowski, as the author, was an outsider looking out. Neither British nor African, he
seemed to be the perfect candidate for writing about two countries he had knowledge of - England and the Congo.

African exploration was quite popular; in Conrad's day, Livingstone died in 1873, in Ilala, Africa, and Stanley
returned from his final African expedition in 1890. As exploration was popular, so was the adventure story - tales
of African exploration were available in abundance. Imperialism was also a popular theme at this point in the late
nineteenth Century. Conrad's novella, whilst to contemporary critics (Achebe, for example) may appear racist; at
the time was accepted as another piece of work from a very much published genre. The novella is literally filled
with literal and metaphoric opposites; the Congo and the Thames, black and white, Europe and Africa, good and
evil, purity and corruption, civilisation and 'triumphant bestiality', light and the very 'heart of darkness'.

Conrad portrays British imperialism in the perhaps naive character of Marlow, who is glad to see the "vast amount
of red" on the Company's map; signifying the British territory. He is glad that "real work is done there"; meaning
salvation, religion, culture and commerce. The reality of the colonialism is portrayed by Conrad in the form of the
District Manager; a real imperialist, taking full advantage of his position and that of the colony. Marlow sees the
Manager's only positive quality as the fact that he was never ill. From what Marlow knows of Kurtz, it is apparent
that Marlow sets Kurtz on a mental pedestal; as the man who is bringing civilisation, through Imperialism, to the
savages, and yet still managed to reap more reward, in the shape of ivory.

Marlow's opinion of Imperialism is dented time and again by his witnessing the lengths the Imperialists would go
for profit. This opinion is destroyed, totally; when Marlow actually meets Kurtz, and realises that; far from
conquering the darkness, Kurtz himself has been conquered by the darkness. The roles of Kurtz's 'Intended' and
the African woman who appeared to be his mistress are often noted to be of great importance. The European's
pure faith in Kurtz's good nature contrasts with Marlow's knowledge of his corruption.
Conrad sets the Intended up to symbolise the removedness of the British from the events in Africa. She is grief-
stricken and full of the dreams of what might have been, had Kurtz not died. Kurtz's 'mistress' shows not grief at
Kurtz's departure, but a definite defiance; she being the only native still standing after Marlow sounded the
steamer's whistle. The Intended's knowledge of Kurtz, whilst she claimed to have known 'him best' was
incomplete, even illusory. The memory she is left with is itself a lie; provided by Marlow.
The women have two sets of characteristics; seemingly the accepted Victorian values and the post-colonial values.
The Victorian reading would show the Intended as feminine, beautiful and saintly, rightly in a state of mourning,
even a year after Kurtz's death. Her innocence would suggest her purity. The Intended would have symbolised
civilisation. The mistress would show as masculine, savage, careless of the fact that her loved one was leaving. The
African woman would have symbolised the savage unknown that was Africa. The post-colonial reading would
show the Intended as foolish, mourning a man she barely knew. Her innocence would suggest her naivety; her faith
based upon a lie. The mistress would show as erotic, living on in independence without Kurtz. The African woman
here would have symbolised the fact that Africa did not need Britain's 'salvation', contrary to the British belief,
based upon a lie, propaganda symbolised by the Intended's faith.

3. Three aspects of love in SONS AND LOVERS

Sons and Lovers by D.H. Lawrence was published a hundred years ago, in 1913. All of Lawrence's novels are
written in a lyrical, sensuous, often rhapsodic prose style. He had an extraordinary ability to convey a sense of
specific time and place, and his writings often reflected his complex personality. Lawrence's works include
volumes of stories, poems, and essays. Lawrence was a very distinct author, his works were a bit explicit and not
everyone agreed with his style of writing.

Sons and Lovers, an early 20th century novel, is a book of substance rather than plot. It is a novel most of the heart
and psyche. The story works its way outside the realm of normal activities, and creeps deep into the minds of the
characters. Even when the narrator is telling the truth, there is a lie hidden underneath. Each character tangled in
the web that is Sons and Lovers is a lover, and yet on a subconscious level, a fighter as well. These lovers fight with
themselves about their own emotions, which leads them to fight with each other. At one moment a character can
feel complete love, and at another moment, only absolute hatred. Lawrence uses raw sentences and individually
symbolic images for each character in order to convey the contradictions and the pain that makes true love so
mysterious.

In Sons and Lovers Lawrence explores various sides of human love relationships, particularly in the social setting
of the backward rural-industrial proletariat. While apparently Mrs Morel hold her husband, who works as a collier
in the mines, in contempt, their bonds of love are at least as strong as their bond of marriage, and the view that Mrs
Morel might not love her husband, are the result of the way Paul Morel views that relation.
Sons and Lovers is a kind of autobiographical and modeled on the life of young Lawrence. It is set in a coal-minging
district. The hero, Paul Morel, who resembles Lawrence in family situation, was born in a coal miners family. His
father, Walter Morel, is a miner, easy-gong pleasant-seeking and irresponsible. His mother, Mrs Gertrude Morel, is
a refined, puritanical and strong-willed woman from the middle class, who has no satisfaction in the roughness and
illiteracy of her uneducated husband. Mentally isolated, she pins her hopes on her children. After the premature
death of her elder son, she invests in Paul, her younger son, all her hopes and passions. But her all-possessive
affection for her son becomes a hinderance(smetnja) to his independent development as a man. She opposes his
love for Miriam, a farmers daughter. Meantime, Paul, feeling Miriams love egocentric and intolerable, turns from
her to Clara, a woman estranged from her husband and potentially sensual. But finding her passion
stifling(zagusljiv), he also left her. In the end, Mrs. Morel dies of cancer. Paul, costing off three forms of unreal love,
stands free and intends to seek for a more valid mode of life.

Love Between Paul and Mrs. Morel

The central character of the novel Paul is a keen, wiry, expressive and aloof young man. From childhood on Paul is
especially sensitive, artistic, and imaginative, yet he becomes extraordinarily dependent on his mother, who is a
refined, highly intelligent, ambitious, and thrifty woman with an unusually strong and vivid personality. She
devotes herself passionately to her sons, yet her special love also spoils her son. We can understand the love
between Mrs. Morel and Paul in this way: Pauls love to his mother is still a womans natural love for a son. It is
only that when Mrs. Morel, the proud willful woman who cannot satisfy her own ambitious nature directly, is
disappointed by her brutish, hard-drinking coal-miner husband through whom she cannot indirectly reach her
high goal, she turns her love to her sons who are more like herself and more like what a man in a given society is
expected to be. She makes her sons into miniature husband-figures from their earliest childhood. Thus, when Paul
gets older and begins to have important relationships with girls, his attachment to her prevents him from loving
them as fully as he feel he should. Paul has grown up physically, but his mind is still immature. He is unable to love
Miriam as she is prepared to love him, this is because of his unresolved fixation upon his mother (Lawrence,
1994, p. 98). And the dependence on his mother makes it easy for Paul to give up and seek for comfort from his
mother when he meets some troubles. And when Mrs. Morel shoes her rejection to Miriam, he feels tortured and
dares not admit his love. As we know, Lawrence was roughly acquainted with Freuds theories, so it is not
surprising that his characterization of Paul, in Sons and Lovers, should have been one of the first Freudian case
studies (Gilbert, 1997, p. 73). The relationship between Paul and his mother grows frankly Oedipal as Mrs. Morels
hostility to Miriam becomes more and more irrepressible. It seems as though Paul is pouring all of the passion and
devotion which he might have had for Miriam into his care for his mother. And his mother, for her part, honestly
admits that Paul must take the place of the husband she feels she never really had. Besides being a son, and a
lover, Paul is also very importantly artist. Thus we see Paul being simulated and encouraged both by his mother
and Miriam. His mother urges him toward success for her sakeso that she can live through him, while Miriam
eagerly, flattering, encourages his talent for his own sake because she is self-sacrificing in love with his genius and
quickness. Yet whatever the respective motivations of the two women, it is clear from Pauls character and from his
relationships with them that without their help he might not achieve the artistic success that we feel he destined to
achieve. Mrs. Morel partially created yet partially destroyed Pauls talents and hopes. Even when Mrs. Morel seems
to love Paul most, we sense that she is somehow corrupting him with her unusual love.

Love Between Paul and Miriam

Miriam is a beautiful girl with black curls fine and free and the attraction of a shy, wild, quiveringly sensitive
thing (Gilbert, 1997, p. 75), who loves poetry and resents being kept at home to do housework, While Paul is a
young literature and art lover. Their similarities lay the foundation of their love. Paul is flattered and fascinated by
her mind, and by her interest in his mind, for as Mrs. Morels observes, Miriam seems to want to absorb all of him
in her almost fanatic enthusiasm from his genius. Miriams intensity reveals itself not only in this, however, but also
in her physical fear and awkwardness, a sense of strain and stiffness in the way she stands and walks. Later, when
she and Paul grow up more and are confronted with issue of sex, Miriams religious and spiritual proclivities
prevent her from being able to relax sexually. She is always frigid, rigidly against Paul. It is finally this stiffness, this
woodenness, this inability to relax and give herself to ordinary life, physical, and social, that turns Paul against
Miriam, for though he is plainly under his mothers influence in breaking off the relationship, it is rather clear, too,
that Paul could never find any kind of ultimate happiness in a marriage to someone as purely spiritual as Miriam.
Though Miriam has become increasingly important in Pauls life, Mrs. Morel is still her sons chief confidante,
counselor, and his first and greatest love. Finally, he even writes a rather cruel letter to Miriam: You see, I can give
you a spirit love, I have given it you this long, long time; but not embodied passion. See, you are a nun. I have given
you what I would give a holy nunas mystic monk to a mystic nun. Surely you esteem it best. (Lawrence, 1994, p.
156) Paul has come back to his mother. Hers is the strongest tie in his life. It is the one place in the world that
stands solid and does not melt onto unreality.

Love Between Paul and Clara

Compared with the former two love affairs, Paul and Claras love seems to be the craziest, yet the most short-lived.
Clara Dawes is characterized as a maturely sexual, ripely responsive woman, an opposite of Miriam. She comes to
replace Miriam and satisfy Paul for what Miriam, the reserved girl, could not offer. Things are imbued with sex
when Paul is with Clara. Sex is the foundation of their love; which evokes their passion. It is with Clara that Paul
feels the greatness of the cosmos and finds his self as a man of nature, who exists in the most primitive way and
satisfies his desire. Besides the sexuality, what lights their passion is Claras courage. Clara is depicted as a new
20th-century woman who advocates womens rights. Determined to be independent, she leaves her husband, earns
her own living, and has an extramarital affair with Paul, which requires courage in her time. Clara can be viewed as
a representative of the many post-Victorian women who rebelled against the traditional image of woman as the
weaker sex. After Paul and Clara have experienced the carnal sexuality, they begin to ask for more about the
spiritual communication. However, neither of them is satisfied. Paul attaches great importance to cultural life. He
loves literature and art, which ties Miriam and him closely in the spiritual world. But Clara cannot replace Miriam
in the spiritual world. She is not a romantic girl like Miriam: she will not be so fond of talking about literature; she
will not stimulate Pauls work as an artist. They do not have any bond in the spiritual communication. Paul ever
tells his mother, Sometimes, when I see her just as the woman, I love her, mother; but then, when she talks and
criticizes, I often dont listen to her (Lawrence, 1994, p. 350). Sexual life without spiritual support cannot last for
long. They soon feel their passion exhausted. Finally Clara goes back to her husband.

Conclusion

Pauls relationship with his mother is a perversion of a womans natural love for her child, but as Paul is growing
older, especially when he fell in love with Miriam, the mothers grows frankly Oedipal. Although we are warm to
the mothers intelligence, her wit, her brave struggle against poverty, and her passionately devoted to her sons, we
often feel that there is something sinister about Pauls mother. We sense that she is somehow corrupting him with
her love. Paul and Miriam are spiritual lovers. They have several bonds of love such as love of literature and art.
But because of Miriams defects, they cannot feel the joy of sexual love since they sense no passion, and Paul feels
he was bound. Thus they have to part with each other. Pauls relationship with Miriam collapsed because it was
spiritual and immature. Paul and Clara only have the carnal sexuality. But they cannot communicate with each
other. Paul keeps his fixation on Miriam in the spiritual word and Clara feels he did not belong to her. Their sexual
love becomes tiring and boring for lack of spiritual communication. Pauls relationship with Clara collapsed
because it has become all physical. Though his body adores Clara, Pauls mind is not very fully attuned to hers. His
intense attachment to his mother keeps him from properly loving any other woman.

Walter and Gertrude - Already married at twenty-three, Mrs. Morel loves her husband. At first, anyway. That's
because he's so different from the men she's used to meeting at her parents' parties. As time goes on, Walter
becomes very abusive to Gertrude, and she steels herself against him. She used to be so deep. But now she only
cares about frivolous things and being way, super over-invested in her children's lives; she lost her sense of self by
marrying a man who wants nothing to do with challenging ideas.

D.H. Lawrence even shows us how deeply she loses her identity in her marriage by the way he never calls her by
her first name after she marries Walter. From that point, she's only Mrs. Morel. Get it? Her defining characteristic
has become her bad marriage to Walter.

Mrs. Morel hasn't forgotten about all the ambitions she had before marrying Walter. She wants to use her children
as a sort of reset button for her own life.

Oedipus complex_ child's desire to have sexual relations with the parent of the opposite sex

4. Struggle for female emancipation

The beginning of the century was a time of confusion and growing tension, of unease with social order and of
uproar and revolution which eventually led to World War I. Gender issues have always been a topic in society as
well as in literature, so naturally gender became a major focus of the modernist movement. Women had been seen
and treated more as complements to the men in their lives than as individuals or spiritual entities; they were
depicted in literature as womanly, weak, dutiful, and stupid. Most authors continued to write with the misguided
perception that women were always inferior to men. For centuries, women were defined by men; the world was
male-centered and male-dominated. Critics have different views regarding the womens status in society. Marsden
suggests that the perceived inferiority of women exists because some women instinctively see themselves as
inferior and have accepted this inferiority without question. These women seek comfort and protection, they long
to be at the side of a man, and it is for that reason that women in male dominated cultures have been willing to
sacrifice their image and identity for centuries.The turn of the century and its many changes, industrialization in
particular, gave a number of women the chance to work outside of the home. According to Coolidge, not a few of
these women were able to use their inherent intelligence and started to question and defy the traditional place of
woman in western society (85). As time progressed a gradual change took place and the new woman emerged
between the two world wars. One of the major aims of this modern woman was economic and financial
independence. This type of freedom brought with it other rights: to choose whether to marry or remain single, to
obtain work positions, the right of sexual expression and so much more. What was most important for the new
woman was intellectual freedom; women were looking for self-realization, for the ability to use their intellectual
abilities and talents to find themselves and their true identity. Needless to say this new woman became not only a
threat to male-dominated societies but also a great source of material for the writers of the time. As a result of the
new feminist movement, literature of the modernist period often depicts the female as an individual who insists on
her right to have a career or a family, or both, depending on her individual choices and desires. The new woman
in literature is depicted as one who emphasizes the identity of interests that all human beings have. While she
recognizes the diversity involved in true equality, she sees that the diversity isnt necessarily on the sex-lines but
on the lines of what each individual has to contribute to society (West 14). The new woman was far from perfect
and some of her aspirations and behavioral patterns were far from admirable, but much of this, according to June
West, was simply a result of womans not being accustomed yet to freedom of choice.
After the turn of the century, the suffragette movement demanding womens right to vote- made itself felt, and
women became much more active in the political arena, organizing themselves, launching protests and trying to
make their voice heard in general. Women were finally given the right to vote in1918 with the Representation of
the People Act.
As for Lawrence's own ideas and experience of women, which can be assumed to have had some influence on his
writing and his women character, his mother was a great influence on him in his early life, like Mrs. Morel is on
Paul. She was a woman aware of the inequality between men and women, and frustrated with the existing situation
of women in society. Lawrence himself describes her and her contemporaries as shaping the characters of their
children:
My mothers generation was the first generation of working-class mothers to become really self-conscious, the
woman freed herself at least mentally and spiritually from the husbands dominations, and then she became that
great institution, the character-forming power, the mother of my generation. J am sure the character of nine-tenths
of the men of my generation was formed by the mother: the character of the daughters too. He clearly understood
that women were mostly impotent in many areas of social life, such as the business world or politics, and that they
needed to express their aggravation at being hindered in this way. This is probably due to the fact that, in addition
to his mother's influence, he also met and became friends with intellectual women who were members of the
suffragette movement, Louie Burrows and Alice Dax. This gave him the opportunity to see things from politically
active women's perspective. So far as his ideas about the relationship between man and woman are concerned, he
did not see man as the superior party and the woman as always deferring to him. He rather saw it as a partnership
of equals, and acknowledged their differences.
The mother, Gertrude Morel, is well known as the thwarted, frustrated young woman, of middle-class origin, who
fell for a miner because he danced well, married him and lived to regret her marriage and life, and the poverty-
stricken, argumentative family life that became her lot.
Mrs. Morel comes from a middle class family and is well-educated herself whereas her husband is an uneducated
miner; this difference in family background is enough to make her feel life with the miner unbearable. What is
more, pride in her background also acts as a stiff barrier between her and the community: The women, her
neighbors, were rather foreign to her and Morels mother and sisters were apt to sneer at her ladylike ways.
unbearable relationship with and dependence on her husband, she has her own way out, that is, through the moral
vitality of the chapel and the feminist emancipation of the Womens Guild, but these are only comforting. The little
boy William is proud to be seen with his mother because no other woman looks such a lady as his mother and
when he grows up, He was accustomed to having all his thoughts sifted through his mothers mind. Mrs. Morel
exploits her conservative education and her marital state in her treatment of her husband. Descending from a
conservative educated family, she despises her husband. She remains detached and alien to her surrounding quite
unable to see the values of the working-class environment. As a matter of fact, for Mr. Morel, a miner married to a
woman with higher social standing, home is not the place where he can freely rest and dictate as a master of the
house as the patriarchal idea of home usually presumes. On the contrary, he is the most isolated figure in the
house. She sees herself intellectually superior to him. She was friends with a congregational clergyman, Mr. Heaton,
who shared the same intellectuality. Mrs. Morel's cool feeling to her husband makes him weak in spirit and
deprives him of manhood. Mrs. Morel used to spend hours when she talked to Mr. Heaton.
The norms of the society Clara Dawes lives in are somewhat different than the norms we got used to in previous
novels. The beginning of the twentieth century in England is a time when women had organized themselves
politically to demand the right to vote, and this organization the suffragette movement and the demonstrations
they held on the streets in major cities had become a fact of life. Thus, society put members of this movement in a
different category, and judged them by another set of standards, which did not necessarily make going against
existing norms acceptable, but can be considered an adaptation to the existence of views diametrically opposed to
it. Paul's conversation with Mrs. Morel after he goes for a walk with Clara indicates this phenomenon. Mrs. Morel is
concerned about Clara's reputation, and Paul says there is no reason for her to be:
But wont people talk? she said.
Why? They know shes a suffragette, and so on. And what if
they do talk!
Of course, there may be nothing wrong in it, said his
mother. But you know what folks are, and if once she gets
talked about-'
As Clara is known to be a suffragette, it is apparently within the norm of behaviour expected from her to 'walk
about' with another man, not with her husband. As she tells Paul, she does not regret what she has done and has
already shown herself defiant of the existing social standards that would cause people to talk, which is what Paul
points out to his mother:
Well, my dear, she lives separate from her husband, and talks
on platforms; so shes already singled out from the sheep,
and, as far as I can see, hasnt much to lose. No; her lifes
nothing to her, so whats the worth of nothing? She goes with
meit becomes something. Then she must paywe both
must pay! Folk are so frightened of paying; theyd rather
starve and die.
Clara also has a style of dress an outward expression of her radical ideas - that goes against the expectations of
society: She wore a large, dowdy hat of black beaver, and a sort of slightly affected simple dress that made her
look rather sack-like. She was evidently poor, and had not much taste. (223) She is not well-groomed and perfectly
dressed as considered appropriate for women. Her lifestyle in itself can be seen as an affront to the social norms
she is actively protesting: she lives separately from her husband, with her mother, works in a factory and for a
while at Jordan's; she is the breadwinner in the
house, is politically active and speaks on platforms for women's rights, and later she also goes to live with another
man, Paul, while still married. All of these are unacceptable notions for the society she is living in.
Something else that would be considered completely inappropriate by the general public is that shevoices her own
desires in her relationship with Paul, as Carol Dix alludes to:

So despite his protestations to Miriam, Paul was not simply attracted to the sensuous woman ... but to the type of
woman who had worked out her own place in the world, and was able to express her own sexuality. He needed
that, as would any man.
As a member of a movement that fights against unjust or false perceptions about women, especially men's, Clara is
well educated about what those perceptions are and opposes them almost militantly at every turn when they are
expressed even when they are not voiced seriously, as is the case with some statements Paul makes to her in the
early days of their acquaintance. She fiercely defends a fellow-suffragette, for example, when Paul voices his
opinion about her:

I think shes a lovable little woman, said Paul. Margaret Bonford! exclaimed Clara. Shes a great deal cleverer
than most men. Well, I didnt say she wasnt, he said, deprecating.Shes lovable for all that. And, of course, that is
all that matters, said Clara witheringly. He rubbed his head, rather perplexed,rather annoyed. I suppose it matters
more than her cleverness, he said; -which, after all, would never get her to heaven. Its not heaven she wants to
getits her fair share on earth, retorted Clara. She spoke as if he were responsible for some deprivation which
Miss Bonford suffered. Well, he said, I thought she was warm, and awfully niceonly too frail. I wished she was
sitting comfortably in peace- Darning her husbands stockings, said Clara scathingly.
Clara clearly thinks that all men share the same false ideas about women, such as that they should stay at home
doing 'womanly' work like darning stockings, and blames all men for the opportunities women are deprived of. She
articulates her opposition to such unjust perceptions in more public settings as well,such as in a gathering of family
and friends at Willey Farm. During a discussion there she objects to the notion that women should not be equal
with men in the labour market and that their work is deserving of less payment because they do not support a
family. This passage was cut out of the first publication of the novel by the editor:
The conversation turned again on the point whether women's wages should be equal with those of men. Mrs.
Leivers upheld that men had families to keep, Clara said, so much work should have so much pay, man or woman.
Mr. Leivers was inclined to agree with her. Whatever Mrs. Dawes had said, Paul would have taken sides against her.
He argued that a woman was only an accessory in the labour market, andthat, in the majority of cases she was a
transitory thing, supporting herself alone for a year or two. Clara quoted the number of women who supported
father, mother, sisters etc.
Clara's actions also indicate that she has her own sense of right and wrong, and that she does not give much weight
to society's notions of morality. When her husband treats her brutally and is unfaithful to her and she feels
trapped, she thinks herself justified in leaving him although she does not divorce him. Later, when she falls for
Paul, she tells him that she does not feel as if she has done something morally wrong in being with him: ' You don't
feel criminal, do you? She looked at him with startled gray eyes. Criminal! she said. No. (357-358). When he
also asks if she feels they have been sinful, she gives the same answer: ' Not sinners, are we? he said, with an
uneasy little frown. No, she replied.' Neither does she voice regret and say her actions were wrong later on in
their relationship. In terms of society's moral values, the case is just the opposite. Considered from that point of
view, and judging by the fact that her simply going for a walk with Paul can cause concern about what people will
say, her behaviour is completely immoral and sinful, as she is having sex with another man while married, and
committing adultery. Clara's whole character is in many ways influenced by her beliefs about women's rights and
her activism. Signs of her defiant character, probably an effect of her being a feminist, can even be seen in the way
she carries herself, as the first description of her shows: She had scornful grey eyes, a skin like white honey, and a
full mouth, with a slightly lifted upper lip that did not know whether it was raised in scorn of all men or out of
eagerness to be kissed, but which believed the former. She carried her head back, as if she had drawn away in
contempt, perhaps from men also.
She likes to be independent and do as she pleases, as it is evidenced by her earning her own money, leaving her
husband when he cheats on her, and choosing to be with Paul. In doing these things, she does not feel anxiety about
what people will say or how they will judge her, and is guided only by her own judgement. She has a sense of self-
worth as well, that makes her demand to be treated with respect, which is what she says Paul did not do, when
they are breaking up. there are no women characters in Sons and Lovers who fall into the same category as Clara.
Mrs. Morel is the only one who comes close, but her activity is limited to joining the Women's Guild, where women
discuss the benefits to be derived from cooperation, and other social questions (69), and reading papers there.
She is not involved in any political movement; neither can she do anything other than try to resist her husband's
violence, even by offering violence herself, and hope to be fulfilled through her children's success, as she has been
disappointed in her marriage.
Miriam Leivers, compared with Clara, also falls into the second category, like Mrs. Morel. At the farm, all she does is
housework clean,cook, sew etc. - and farm work. What is more, she is scolded harshly by her mother if she does
not come up to standard on that. She wants to have a real education and actually do something, other than
housework. She knows she has little opportunity to do so because she is a woman, and expresses her frustration to
Paul: I want to do something. I want a chance like anybody else. Why should 1, because Im a girl, be kept at home
and not allowed to be anything? What chance have I? Chance of what?Of knowing anythingof learning, of doing
anything. Its not fair, because Im a woman. She is contrasted with her elder sister Agatha, who has become a
school-teacher. She is also somewhat envious of her: Agatha, who was fair and small and determined, had rebelled
against the home atmosphere, against the doctrine of the other cheek'. She was out in the world now, in a fair way
to be independent. (207). At the end of the novel, she does manage to make some change in her situation and be
like Agatha by going to a farming college, where she has a chance of becoming a teacher. Scott Sanders compares
Clara with both Mrs. Morel and Miriam, and states what differentiates her from them:
Like Mrs. Morel, she is unhappily married to a man whom industrial work and scanty education have brutalized.
Like Miriam, she has sought to escape her position through education, with the result that she finds factory labor
more confining and demeaning than before. Unlike the other two women, however, she is a militant feminist,
seeking to achieve the collective advancement of women and to regain a sense of her own dignity through the
feminist movement.
Annie can also be seen as one of the women who are aware of women's position in society as she also becomes a
teacher and starts to earn her own living.Of the characters analyzed in this study, it can be said that Clara is the
most radical. She breaks with conventional morality, takes up political activism and vigorously defends women's
rights.
D. H. Lawrence, for his part, reflects a type of woman that one could easily encounter in real life in the second
decade of the twentieth century in England. Due to the fact that he writes at a later period than the other authors,
he is able to portray an even more emancipated woman. As a male writer, he records the phenomenon of
suffragettism and feminism in the character of Clara Dawes, who lives independently, defends women's rights in
public settings and conducts her love-life as she chooses. In a way, he portrays in her the culmination of what the
earlier women authors were wishing their heroines to achieve and chronologically is able to reap the benefits of
both the earlier women writers' works and the efforts of early or proto-feminists.

5. and 6.Development of Stephen's artistic sensibility - Portrait of The Artist as a Young Man/Artistic
Theory
Stephen's earliest memories intensely vivid and fragmented are proof that from the first, he always viewed
his world from an artist's perspective. Later, as a young man, Stephen retains his childlike curiosity about people
and things. He continues to make keen observations and displays an acute sensitivity which eventually causes him
to realize that his destiny is to create to become an artist and to define his artistic soul. Thus, he leaves for the
Continent, severing himself from his family, his faith, and his country.

Stephen's journey through life, prior to his leaving for the Continent, is not easy. He is a troubled little boy, and it is
little wonder. From his mother, Mary Joyce, while he is learning about piety, he takes on her deeply guilt-ridden
sense of duty. In contrast, Stephen's father, Simon, teaches him only the most superficial code of social conduct,
advocating irresponsibility as a means of finding personal freedom. Thus, Stephen's earliest morality consists of a
combination of his mother's admonition, "Apologise," and his father's advice, "Never . . . peach on a fellow." One
parent tells him to confess and feel guilty; the other tells him to lie and feel no guilt. This paradoxical legacy is
indeed heavy emotional baggage for Stephen, who, at six years old, is sent out to face the world at Clongowes Wood
College.

At this Jesuit boarding school, Stephen is quickly initiated into a life of cruelty, isolation, and injustice; he learns
that escape is possible only through short-lived personal victories. Understandably, Stephen is overcome by
homesickness, feelings of inadequacy, and actual physical illness, all of which alienate him from his fellow students.
Most of Stephen's efforts to adapt to Clongowes result in humiliation; for example, he is mocked when he confesses
that Yes, his mother kisses him. Floundering in guilt and confusion, his soul cries out: "Yes, his mother kisses him.
Was that right?" If so, why is he teased?

Other things also confuse Stephen: should he spy on his fellow classmates and report their sacrilegious behavior?
He could do so easily and with good conscience, and he could certainly "peach" on the boy who pushed him in the
"square ditch." These and other confusing issues cause Stephen to constantly be on the defensive and to yearn for
the comfortable security of home. Ironically, when Stephen is able to return home for the Christmas holidays, he
realizes that home is not the harmonious haven that it once seemed to be.

After the Christmas Day battle royal, Stephen views his family differently. He sees the tyranny of religious zeal
(embodied in Dante, his governess), and he also sees the cost of anti-clerical, political activism (embodied in Mr.
Casey, his father's friend). The argument between Dante and Mr. Casey proves to Stephen that the adult world is as
flawed and as cruel as his own small world. He is further disillusioned when he learns that the clerical community
contains its own form of hypocritical cruelty. He realizes that if he is to obtain justice at Clongowes (regarding the
pandying incident), he must relinquish personal weakness, fly in the face of both custom and tradition, and be
willing to stand alone and confront the dark, unknown forces of the world.

Stephen's later experiences at Belvedere College initiate him into the turbulent world of adolescence. At Belvedere,
Stephen feels confused and ashamed of his family's poverty, yet he overcompensates for his feelings of inadequacy
by excelling in both drama and writing. Furthermore, he finds an artistic outlet for his adolescent moodiness in his
love for Romantic literature.

In spite of his attempts to adjust to the school and to the Church, Stephen exhibits the restlessness and
unpredictable mood swings of the typical adolescent, compounded by feelings of inferiority and, most of all, by
persistent feelings of sexual urgency. Eventually, these longings for sex are satisfied in the arms of a Dublin
prostitute. This experience marks the end of Stephen's innocence and the beginning of his search for life's deeper
meanings.
At this point, Stephen's struggles with his sex drive seem all the more painful because he serves as prefect of the
Sodality of the Blessed Virgin, and, therefore, he has an obligation to provide a good example for the younger boys
at the school. Stephen's period of lust and frustration, however, is short-lived. After listening to Father Arnall's
Judgment Day sermons, delivered during a three-day religious retreat, Stephen is so consumed with guilt and fear
that he seeks out a kindly Capuchin monk to hear his confession. Afterward, he vows to purify his life.

Accordingly, he becomes a model saint of a young lad; but this phase is also short-lived. Stephen finally
acknowledges his feelings of sexuality, and he also acknowledges his own moral imperfections, as well as the moral
imperfections of people around him. He becomes cynical about those who profess to have a flawless faith and
begins to use his intellect and logic in order to dissect spiritual matters.

The question of whether or not Stephen should pursue a life of spirituality is resolved once and for all after his
meeting with the Jesuit director, who unwittingly reveals that a religious life would deny Stephen all pleasures of
the natural world a fate Stephen cannot imagine. His decision to turn from a religious vocation makes him
realize that he is now free free to pursue the pleasures of life through art.

To Stephen, artistic expression involves more than a casual appreciation of style or form; it involves a complete
communion of body, mind, and spirit. Stephen experiences this "esthetic harmony" as he gazes at a girl wading in
the sea; she epitomizes his expectations of life in the form of art, freedom, and sexuality. From this moment,
Stephen dedicates himself to the pursuit of such a life.

Stephen chooses to forge his future by first testing his new philosophy against the established customs, mores, and
restrictions of Dublin society. Almost systematically, he interacts with his family and his friends, and one by one, he
dissociates himself from them, as well as from the values that they represent.

Although we might not agree that it is necessary for Stephen to break free of all the bonds which tie him to his
disappointing and unfulfilled past, we acknowledge that he alone must make the decision about leaving Ireland.
Note that as Stephen departs from his homeland, in search of himself, he seems to possess the confidence, the
egocentrism, and a tentative hope for the future common to everyone who leaves home for the first time. Although
it is clear that his life's lessons have only begun, we wish him well and hope that his future will hold him "forever in
good stead."

In Stephens incarnation as a budding artist, we see some of the traits that have been developing all along
(attention to language, feeling of specialness, love of beauty) finally emerge full-fledged. However, this isnt to say
that everythings peachy keen. Some of these things contribute to what an uncharitable critic might call an eensy-
weensy Messiah complex (after all, he seems pretty darn confident in his ability to sum up the soul of the entire
Irish people the words "delusions of grandeur" come to mind). Now that Stephen knows that its his "destiny" to
create art, he takes it extremely seriously. Like, painfully, infuriatingly seriously. However, irritating bits and all, we
still cheer for Stephen as he goes forth on his journey of artistic discovery, and we hope that he gets wherever he
wants to go.

Examining James Joyce/Stephen Dedalus' Esthetic Philosophy (part 1)

James Joyce cannot be described as simply a novelist. He was a poet before he had even attempted to write prose.
In fact, he composed a poem at the age of 9 that was so incredible his father mailed it to the Vatican. Calling him a
writer simply doesnt do the trick either, its best to describe him as an artist and Joyce himself made the
distinction clear in the title of his first novel, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, which details Joyces own life
from childhood through young adulthood in a prose style that grows more complex and intelligent as the character
does.

He is also a philosopher, at times outlining his own philosophies and theories through his characters (mainly, his
alter ego Stephen Dedalus) and this is especially so in Portrait. In the final chapter of the book, Stephen is a student
in the first years of college and hes already gained a reputation for being an aspiring poet. Weve heard him
describe his goal to escape the nets of nationality, language, and religion which are flung at souls to hold them back
from flight. And, in a conversation with the schools dean, we learn that Stephen has been working on an esthetic
theory using ideas from Aristotle and Aquinas. A few pages later, in conversation with his friend Lynch who
jokingly acts disinterested, Stephen outlines in detail his esthetic philosophy.

Proper vs Improper Art

Joyce first distinguishes between proper and improper art.

The feelings excited by improper art are kinetic, desire or loathing. Desire urges us to posses, to go to something;
loathing urges us to abandon, to go from something. These are kinetic emotions. The arts which excite them,
pornographical or didactic, are therefore improper arts. The esthetic emotion (I use the general term) is therefore
static. The mind is arrested and raised above desire and loathing.

Proper art = static

Improper art = kinetic

Proper art is art in the service of what is properly the function of art and that function is to elicit a state of esthetic
arrest. Arrest = static (from the Greek statikos, causing to stand). You apprehend a proper piece of art and you
can only stand there in sensational (esthetic) contemplation and enjoyment. Youre in awe, raised above desire and
loathing. Whereas a picture of a pretty girl or even of a plate of delicious food draws you physically to desire it.
Joyce calls this pornographic art and, in this sense, all advertising art is improper art. Derogatory satire, art with
social criticism that causes you to loathe or dislike something: thats improper art---its didactic, instructing you
what to do.

The desire and loathing excited by improper esthetic means are really unesthetic emotions not only because they
are kinetic in character but also because they are not more than physical. Our flesh shrinks from what it dreads and
responds to the stimulus of what it desires by a purely reflex action of the nervous system.

What is art?
We then get into what exactly art is and there is a quote which I think perfectly describes James Joyce or Stephen
Dedalus (or, perhaps, any artist) at this point in his life:

To speak of these things and to try to understand their nature and, having understood it, to try slowly and humbly
and constantly to express, to press out again, from the gross earth or what it brings forth, from sound and shape
and colour which are the prison gates of our soul, an image of the beauty we have come to understand---that is art.

Once art and its proper function (esthetic arrest) are understood, the artist crafts an image of beauty using things
like sound, shape, and color which open the gates of the soul.

Art, said Stephen, is the human disposition of sensible or intelligible matter for an esthetic end.

Beauty
In response to his friends question What is beauty? Stephen (Joyce) gets even deeper. Thomas Aquinas simple
definition (that is beautiful the apprehension of which pleases) does not suffice because, using woman as
example, he notes how the many different cultures around the world admire a different type of female beauty.
The popular hypothesis explaining the phenomenon is that the physical qualities admired by men are in direct
connection with the manifold functions of women for the propagation of the species. Stephen dislikes that dreary
hypothesis (It leads to eugenics rather than to esthetic) and describes his own:

This hypothesis is the other way out: that, though the same object may not seem beautiful to all people, all people
who admire a beautiful object find in it certain relations which satisfy and coincide with the stages themselves of
all esthetic apprehension. These relations of the sensible, visible to you through one form and to me through
another, must be therefore the necessary qualities of beauty.
And a few pages later he continues:

The most satisfying relations of the sensible must therefore correspond to the necessary phases of artistic
apprehension. Find these and you find the qualities of universal beauty[Now quoting Aquinas again] Three things
are needed for beauty: wholeness, harmony and radiance.

Looking at each one now:

1. Wholeness: [He points to a basket someone is carrying on their head] In order to see that basket, said Stephen,
your mind first of all separates the basket from the rest of the visible universe which is not the basket. The first
phase of apprehension is a bounding line drawn about the object to be apprehended. An esthetic image is
presented to us either in space or in time. What is audible is presented in time, what is visible is presented in space.
But, temporal or spatial, the esthetic image is first luminously apprehended as selfbounded and selfcontained upon
the immeasurable background of space or time which is not it. You apprehend as one thing. You see it as one
whole. You apprehend its wholeness.

2. Harmony: Then you pass from point to point, led by its formal lines; you apprehend it as balanced part against
part within its limits; you feel the rhythm of its structure. In other words the synthesis of immediate perception is
followed by the analysis of apprehension. Having first felt that it is one thing you feel now that it is a thing. You
apprehend it as complex, multiple, divisible, separable, made up of its parts, the result of its parts and their sum,
harmonious.

3. Radiance: When you have apprehended that object as one thing and have then analysed it according to its form
and apprehended it as a thing you make the only synthesis which is logically and esthetically permissible. You see
that it is that thing which it is and no other thing. The radiance of which he speaks is the scholastic quidditas, the
whatness of a thing. This supreme quality is felt by the artist when the esthetic image is first conceived in his
imagination. The mind in that mysterious instant Shelley likened beautifully to a fading coal. The instant wherein
that supreme quality of beauty, the clear radiance of the esthetic image, is apprehended luminously by the mind
which has been arrested by its wholeness and fascinated by its harmony is the luminous silent stasis of esthetic
pleasure, a spiritual state very like to that cardiac condition which the Italian physiologist Luigi Galvani, using a
phrase almost as beautiful as Shelleys, called the enchantment of the heart.

Joyce alludes to this kind of esthetic apprehension in Ulysses: Any object intensely regarded may be a gate of
access to the incorruptible eon of the gods. And Joseph Campbell elaborates the experience for us in his
book Mythic Worlds, Modern Words:

This is a breakthrough. You have gone through the object and felt the transcendence that manifests through it, the
transcendence of which you are yourself a manifestation. Pure object turns you into pure subject. You are simply
the eye, the world eye, regarding beyond desire and loathing
Forms of Art
Having explained what (proper) art is and how we apprehend beauty, Stephen now goes on to describe what he
sees as the three forms of art, in all of which the image must be set between the mind or senses of the artist
himself and the mind or senses of others. The three forms, each progressing from one to the next, are:

1. the Lyrical form: the form wherein the artist presents his image in immediate relation to himself
2. the Epical form: the artist presents his image in mediate relation to himself and to others
3. the Dramatic Form: the artist presents his image in immediate relation to others

He elaborates each one:

The lyrical form is in fact the simplest verbal vesture of an instant of emotion, a rhythmical cry such as ages ago
cheered on the man who pulled the oar or dragged stones up a slope. He who utters it is more conscious of the
instant of emotion than of himself as feeling emotion.

The simplest epical form is seen emerging out of lyrical literature when the artist prolongs and broods upon
himself as the centre of an epical event and this form progresses till the centre of emotional gravity is equidistant
from the artist himself and from others. The narrative is no longer purely personal. The personality of the artist
passes into the narrative itself, flowing round and round the persons and the action like a vital sea.

The dramatic form is reached when the vitality which has flowed and eddied round each person fills every person
with such vital force that he or she assumes a proper and intangible esthetic life. The personality of the artist, at
first a cry or a cadence or a mood and then a fluid and lambent narrative, finally refines itself out of existence,
impersonalizes itself so to speak. The esthetic image in the dramatic form is life purified in and reprojected from
the human imagination. The mystery of esthetic like that of material creation is accomplished. The artist, like the
God of the creation, remains within or behind or beyond or above his handiwork, invisible, refined out of existence,
indifferent, paring his fingernails.

The lyrical form seems quite easy to understand from his explanation, its as simple as a poem written by someone
in love. The poet is presenting his image (the poem) in immediate relation to himself while everybody else reads
the poets feelings expressed in lyrics. In the epic, the artist presents his work in mediate relation to others, I
find Ulysses to be a perfect example as Joyce (through Stephen) is directly involved in the action but the story is
presented with a full, detailed backdrop of the city, its inhabitants and especially the other main characters. One
could perhaps make an argument that, in his three books, Joyce displayed the progress from one form to the other:
the self-centered autobiographicalPortrait (lyrical) leading into Ulysses (epical) and then the intricately crafted
dream world ofFinnegans Wake (dramatic). But, more likely, both Portrait and Ulysses should be considered epics
and Finnegans Wake the absolute epitome and farthest extreme of the dramatic form.

"Aristotle has not defined pity and terror. I have."

Thus Stephen Dedalus boldly begins his discussion on esthetics. He is referring to Aristotle'sPoetics in which the
Greek philosopher says that tragedy evokes pity and terror to achieve catharsis. But since Aristotle did not define
pity and terror, scholars have misinterpreted him for the last 2,300 years, interpreting catharsis as a purging of
these emotions, getting rid of them by a large dose of the same. Friedrich Nietzsche, in his study of Greek
drama The Birth of Tragedy, has written of this misinterpretation:

Now the serious events are supposed to prompt pity and terror to discharge themselves in a way that relieves us;
now we are supposed to feel elevated and inspired by the triumph of good and noble principles, at the sacrifice of
the hero in the interest of a moral vision of the universe. I am sure that for countless men precisely this, and only
this, is the effect of tragedy, but it plainly follows that all these men, together with their interpreting aestheticians,
have had no experience of tragedy as a supreme art.
The emphasis is Nietzsche's, not mine.

Lets look at the usage of this word catharsis, a term which has led to some confusion among scholars unsure
whether Aristotle had in mind a medical (his father was a physician) or moral significance. The word catharsis
comes from the Greek katharsis derived fromkatharein, to cleanse. As Joseph Campbell tells us in Mythic Worlds,
Modern Words, in Greek religious vocabulary the term referred to a spiritual transformation brought about by
participation in a rite. The mind, cleansed of attachment to merely secular aims, desires and fears, is released to a
spiritual rapture. Campbell also notes that the Greek theater was associated with the shrines and festivals of
Dionysus, in fact the tragedies were performed during the Great Dionysia at Athens, a yearly festival. Dionysus was
the god of wine and ecstasy but also, more fundamentally, of the generative power of all life, the will in nature."

In Nietzsches aforementioned book, he analyzes what he believes to be the main factors at work in Greek tragedy
and calls these the Dionysian and the Apollonian. The Dionysian is essentially the ego-shattering, sublime
experience of one-ness with all things.

Under the charm of the Dionysian not only is the union between man and man reaffirmed, but nature which has
become alienated, hostile, or subjugated, celebrates once more her reconciliation with her lost son,
manTransform Beethovens Hymn to Joy into a painting; let your imagination conceive the multitudes bowing to
the dust, awestruck--then you will approach the DionysianNow, with the gospel of universal harmony, each one
feels himself not only united, reconciled, and fused with his neighbor, but as one with him, as if the veil of maya had
been torn aside and were now merely fluttering in tatters before the mysterious primordial unity.
Now, let us go back for a moment to Stephens definitions of pity and terror. He says:

Pity is the feeling which arrests the mind in the presence of whatsoever is grave and constant in human sufferings
and unites it with the sufferer. Terror is the feeling which arrests the mind in the presence of whatsoever is grave
and constant in human sufferings and unites it with the secret cause.
He uses the word arrest, that static emotion of complete rapture that we looked at in Part 1 of this post. The mind
perceiving the grave and constant in the sufferings of man, the inevitability of death and pain, is risen beyond
individuality to compassion and a recognition of shared humanity. The feeling of terror (something different than
fear, mind you) shatters us in awe at the workings of the life-giving and life-consuming universe.

Suppose a human being has thus put his ear, as it were, to the heart chamber of the world will and felt the roaring
desire for existence pouring from there into all the veins of the world, as a thundering current or as the gentlest
brook, dissolving into a mist---how could he fail to break suddenly? How could he endure to perceive the echo of
innumerable shouts of pleasure and woe in the wide space of the world night, enclosed in the wretched glass
capsule of the human individual, without inexorably fleeing toward his primordial home, as he hears this
shepherds dance of metaphysics?
Thats Nietzsche describing the feeling of Dionysian rapture again. But, as Ive said, theres also the Apollonian
factor in Greek tragedy. The Apollonian is the dream illusion, the veil placed in front of infinity to make us feel as
though were individuals confined in bodies within space with its separate objects. While the Greek tragedy is
eliciting that feeling of Dionysian one-ness, the Apollonian illusion brings us back to realize that this is all being
enacted by characters in one single image of the world, a stage. (This is also, in Stephens view, the wholeness,
harmony, and radiance of a beautiful self-contained image.) In The Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche wrote:

Thus the Apollonian tears us out of the Dionysian universality and lets us find delight in individuals; it attaches our
pity to them, and by means of them it satisfies our sense of beauty which longs for great and sublime forms; it
presents images of life to us, and incites us to comprehend in thought the core of life they contain. With the
immense impact of the image, the concept, the ethical teaching, and the sympathetic emotion, the Apollonian tears
man form his orgiastic self-annihilation and blinds him to the universality of the Dionysian process
And so Aristotle either had it wrong or was misinterpreted. The tragic emotions, pity and terror, are evoked so that
the audience can come to a deep realization. Ive already made such heavy usage of Nietzsches work that Ill let
him have the final word on the matter (this one from Twilight of the Idols):

Affirmation of life even in its strangest and sternest problems, the will to life rejoicing in its own
inexhaustibility...that is what I called Dionysian, that is what I recognized as the bridge to the psychology of
the tragic poet. Not in order to get rid of terror and pity, not in order to purge oneself of a dangerous emotion
through its vehement dischargeAristotle misunderstood it that waybut, beyond pity and terror, to realize in
oneself the eternal joy of becoming.

The Aesthetics of Stephen Dedalus

Stephen's Classical and Scholastic Roots

Stephen Dedalus, the aspiring poet, amateur philosopher, and protagonist of James Joyce's A Portrait of the Artist as
a Young Man, while speaking to his dean about philosophy, tells him, For my purpose I can work on at present by
the light of one or two ideas of Aristotle and Aquinas . . . I need them only for my own use and guidance until I have
done something for myself by their light (164). Here, Joyce is invoking an attitude, common to modernist
literature, of blending traditional and classical perspectives to create new ideas. Although Joyce's work is
renowned for its deviations from narrative convention, he was also learned in ancient and scholastic thought.
Joyce's notebooks have shown scholars that the author was familiar with the writing of Aquinas and that he
studied Aristotle's Poetics. (Eco 332) One cannot break from the past, after all, without knowing well what it is
one's breaking from. The skeletal structure of Portrait is itself taken from a classical myth, that of Daedalus and
Icarus. Stephen's growth as a artistic inventor is paralleled by the industriousness of his eponym, the legendary
artificer Daedalus.

The epitaph that opens the book is a quote from the Daedalus section of Ovid's The Metamorphoses , which
translated means, "He turned his mind toward unknown arts." Like Daedalus, who used his cunning to create
unprecedented devices, such as a set of wax wings used to escape from the prison of King Minos, Stephen uses his
cunning to create art and a new identity deracinated from his Irish heritage. If the classical model for Stephen's
identity is Daedalus, however, then his philosophical thoughts, as he admits to the dean, come from Aristotle and
Aquinas. Later in the same chapter, Stephen muses with his friend Lynch on pity, tragedy, and the beautiful: the
basic tenets of aesthetic studies. The precocious Stephen occupies himself outside the classroom by criticizing and
formulating an aesthetic theory based on his classical and medieval readings. Another classmate, Donovan, lets it
slip that Stephen is even writing an essay on the topic, though Stephen seems to deny it ( I hear you are writing
some essay about esthetics. Stephen made a vague gesture of denial" [186]). From the conversation with Lynch, we
can discern that aesthetics is a subject that greatly engrosses Stephen, the burgeoning artist, and one in which he
far surpasses his peer.

From his expatiation in this chapter, it is possible to construct, in general terms, Stephens beliefs on the nature of
art. Such conjecture, however, can be perilous. First, there are only a few pages of conversation we can use to
extrapolate the entire system of thought of an individual. The conversation on art holds a relatively small claim on
the chapter, lasting about seven pages, let alone on the entire book. Rather than a formal, elaborate discourse, it is a
picture of an ambitious student sharing his philosophic realizations with a sympathetic friend. Second, the fact that
these are spoken words, not a formal, written argument Stephen would intend for publication, should make us
skeptical of how invested he is in what he is saying. If we do assume that Stephen is telling us what he actually
believes, we must still keep in mind that Stephen himself is a work-in-progress. As Umberto Eco puts it, ". . . Joyce's
works might be understood as a continuous discussion of their own artistic procedures. A Portrait is the story of a
young artist who wants to write A Portrait" (329). Joyce's novel is aKnstlerroman, a novel about the development
of an artist. Stephens immaturity is the whole point. He is an artist creating an artist. It is also important to note
that the Portrait is semi-autobiographical. That does not mean, however, that we can freely ascribe Stephens
aesthetic beliefs to Joyce. As observed by David Jones, there is much debate among Joycean scholars concerning
degree of influence and by Aristotle and Aquinas in the section (291). This article, therefore, will not try to
interpret the fidelity of Stephen's polemic to ancient and Medieval philosophy; rather, it will evaluate the relevance
of Stephens thoughts to the novel and determine the dramatic function of Stephens philosophizing.

The Aesthetic Context of Portrait

While Stephen informs us that he draws his aesthetic theory from his own ruminations and readings in ancient and
medieval philosophy, his creative personality is in harmony with the artistic ethos of Joyce's own time. Stephen
defines art as, the human disposition of sensible or intelligible matter for an esthetic end" (182). The implications
of this statement will be fully examined in the next section, but, for now, the latter part of this definition is
especially significant: the esthetic end. For a pagan such as Aristotle, art mimetically reproduced nature and
divinity. If executed properly, it could praise the gods by accurately and deferentially telling, and thereby
venerating, their stories. It could also, however, slip into blasphemy if the gods were inappropriately depicted. For
a medieval theologian such as Aquinas, art was a vehicle for celebrating God (perhaps through liturgical music). Art
based on the Bible could teach the illiterate lay Christian parables through stories or poems. As with the ancients,
art served a definite spiritual purpose.

But for the artists of the Fin de Sicle, art existed only for its own existence: lart pour lart; art for arts sake.
While the Aesthetic Movement can be said to have originated in France with the Symbolist poets in the late 1800s,
two of its most luminous proponents, Oscar Wilde and Walter Pater, were Dubliners, like Joyce. Pater, an influential
art critic and essayist, was well regarded in literary circles for his writings that helped fuel the Aesthetic
Movement. In the conclusion of his most famous work, Studies in the History of the Renaissance(1873), Pater writes
of the richness of a life steeped in artistic appreciation and the usefulness of philosophic thought in the
understanding of art. "The service of philosophy, of speculative culture," he writes, "towards the human spirit is to
rouse, to startle it into sharp and eager observation" (299 Pater). If the full life is full of aesthetic experience,
philosophy is a tool to articulate and understand the beauty one's experiences. He concludes the chapter saying,
"Of this wisdom, the poetic passion, the desire of beauty, the love of art for art's sake, has most; for art comes to
you professing frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those
moments' sake" (301). Pater transforms the artistic appreciation into the quasi-religious experience that gives
meaning to the otherwise inane moments of life. Like Pater, Wilde enumerated his own aesthetic doctrine in
the preface to his novel //The Picture of Dorian Gray// (whose title bears a resemblance to Joyce's novel). Wilde
defines the artist as "the creator of beautiful things." Art's purpose is not to instruct or worship, in contrast to
Aristotle and Aquinas, but to be enjoyed for being beautiful. Didactic or mimetic qualities may contribute to beauty,
but they shouldn't be ends in their own right. He goes on to write, "Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful
things are the cultivated. For these there is hope." This is Pater but with intellectual snobbery. Those who are
capable of appreciating beauty are somehow better off, according to Wilde. What we read here is quintessentially
Stephen. He shares Pater's reverence for the exquisite moments in life that come from total submersion in the
artistic world and Wilde's cultivated elitism. From Portrait's lengthy title, we read that Stephen is still a puerile
artist, but he is certainly following Pater's instruction in reaching the most exalted state of consciousness through
rigorous contemplation of art.

Beauty and Genre

Stephen makes many points on the purpose of art, but two in particular, his definitions of beauty and genre, are
interesting because they are in conversation with the form ofPortrait. Stephen defines art as a disposition, that is to
say, a natural tendency, recognizing the human propensity for creation. This impetus for creation is two-fold: first,
it is an act of physical creation akin to childbirth, as the artist puts labor, effort, and love into a subject of her own
creation; second, part of this human disposition is for the viewing of that which is beautiful. Stephen quotes
Aquinas, saying, that is beautiful the apprehension of which pleases (181). Artistic production is as fundamental
as any other human drive. Perhaps the most important distinction about art that Stephen makes is of its sensible
and intelligible aspects. In one interpretation, sensible could dictate the dual effect art has on the viewer. Art is
both sensible, since we use our five senses to observe it, and intelligible, because we can ponder, criticize, argue
and engage in other cerebral contemplation directed towards art. Shortly after in the conversation, Stephen says,
Though we may not like a statue, we can recognize that theres something in it to admire. Our senses discern
something from it. (181). The conscious mind, Stephen realizes, may not care for a statue, but senses can still be
stirred by it. The sensible and intelligible may be the routes through which the esthetic end travels into us, first
through the senses and next to the brain. The senses are a mode of apprehension used by our higher faculties to
absorb and understand beauty. It is his acute understanding of art and beauty that makes Stephen the budding
artist. It is because of his ability to absorb the sensible and intelligible aspects of beauty that, as Wilde says, "there
is hope."

Once beauty is defined, Stephen categorizes it into three forms: the lyrical form, the form wherein the artist
presents his image in immediate relation to himself; the epical form, the form wherein he presents his image in
mediate relation to himself and to others; the dramatic form, the form wherein he presents his image in immediate
relation to others (188). These three forms are really three traditional forms of narrative in literature. The lyrical
represents the subjective, such as a poets mind poured out directly onto paper in a sonnet. The dramatic
represents the objective portrayal of the works action, such as in a play where the audiences sees rather than is
told what is happening. Finally, epical refers to a mix of subjective and object, in which the narrator describes to a
reader what is happening, such as a novel. This passage is appropriately included in the text because Portrait is a
novel that experiments with narrative form. It is more than epical but less than purely lyrical. The reason for this is
Joyce's use of the Modernist convention of stream-of-consciousness. The novel eschews a traditional first or third-
person narrator and instead often leads us from one of Stephen's thoughts to the next: "Eleven! Then he was late
for that lecture too. What day of the week was it? He stopped at a newsagent's to read the headline of a placard.
Thursday. Ten to eleven; English: eleven to twelve; French: twelve to one; physics" (155). An everyday mental
conversation ("Eleven!" and "What day of the week was it?") is inserted into typical third-person narration (such
as, "He stopped at a newsagent's to read the headline of a placard"). Although Stephen discriminates narrative
form into categories, one of Joyce's most famous achievements is writing outside this three-pronged mold.

The Aesthetic Speech and Stephen's Development

Philosophy aside, the inclusion of Stephens aesthetic theory is indicative of both his artistic acumen and social
alienation. We know from the opening of the book that Stephen stands aloof from his fellow Irishmen. His last
name itself, Dedalus, is obtrusively non-Irish. As Hugh Kenner puts it: "Why, a name like a huge smudged
fingerprint: the most implausible name that could conceivably be devised for an inhabitant of lower-class Catholic
Dublin: a name that no accident of immigration, no freak of etymology, no canon of naturalism however stretched,
can justify: the name of Stephen Dedalus." (Kenner 351) Stephen is horribly chided by his classmates in Clongowes
Woods and fails to assimilate into his pre-adolescent social environment. Upon hearing Stephens last name, a
school bully virulently inquires, What kind of a name is that? (6). His name--the word that gives him identity--and
his shyness make his first years in Clongowes a nightmare. Later in chapter five, preceding his conversation with
Lynch, there is an encounter between Stephen and the dean of his school, in which the two dabble in aesthetic
theory. This heady tte-- tte displays how distant Stephen feels from the dean and contrasts his energized later
conversation with this tepid one. The interactions between the Stephen and the dean are somewhat perfunctory.
Each character responds briefly to each other and merely make a few general comments about

aesthetics. It begins with some avuncular questioning on the definition of beauty, but the dean soon loses interest
and Stephen even catches him not paying attention: The use of the word in the marketplace is quite different. I
hope I am not detaining you. Not in the least, said the dean politely. No, no, said Stephen smiling, I mean (164-
165) The dean, an adult figure who should have the utmost interest in stimulating Stephens intellect, is seen only
as passing the time with him. We know, however, from the conversation with Lynch, that Stephen is capable of
elaborate philosophic discourse. The conversation would more accurately be called pontification, as Lynch does
little more than humor Stephen by listening to his theories. Lynch even professes that he has no interest in the
subject and is probably only there to take cigarettes from Stephen. What we see is a lone aesthete, completely
devoted mentally and spiritually to his craft but alienated from his peers and teachers by his own abilities. Earlier,
Stephen dolefully muses:
 but yet it wounded him to think that he would never be but a shy guest at the feast of the worlds culture and that
the monkish learning, in terms of which he was striving to forge out an esthetic philosophy, was held no higher by
the age he lived in that the subtle and curious jargons of heraldry and falconry. (157)

Stephen despairs that not only at the interminable store of human knowledge but that his own contributions to the
feast of the worlds culture will be thought esoteric or irrelevant by his community. The realization that his
passion is but a specialized curiosity, such as heraldry and falconry, to the world is undoubtedly a painful one.

Portrait as a Knstlerroman

Stephen is a character in development. The trajectory of the novel takes him from his early fascination with sounds
as a youth to an adolescent aesthete. His artistic theories are a phase in his development and thus they should be
approached with incredulity, knowing his growth is not yet complete. Cordell Yee observes that there is a lack of
sophistication to Stephen's aesthetics: Stephens lack of this understanding shows that by the end of A Portrait he
is not an artist in a fundamental way. He is immature: the would-be artist is also a would be theorist. (68) Joyce,
he argues, deliberately misapplies Aquinas's teachings when he places them in Stephen's mouth. (69) This suggests
that this section of chapter five, rather than a coherent philosophic treatise, is indicative of character building by
Joyce. Aesthetic theorizing is a milestone in Stephen's artistic growth. His conversation and thoughts, reminiscent
of Pater's Renaissance, are inevitable parts of artistic life he is leading so there should be no surprise in that
Stephen, the young aesthete, will grow up into someone who thinks seriously about the nature of art. Yee further
notes the early evidence of Stephens interest in the beautiful: "As a child, Stephen has a questioning mind: he
wonders about the world and shows a philosophic bent. He does not take things for granted and seems to
recognize a distinction between nature and convention. He often thinks about language, asking why certain words
are used, why they mean what they mean." (77) A young Stephen is hypnotized by the pick, pock, puck (52) of the
balls striking cricket bats in the school yard. His childhood fears manifest themselves in his consciousness as verse
as he hides under a table: Pull out his eyes,/Apologise,/ Apologise,/ Pull out his eyes (6). Indeed, his whole life
seems to resonate with artistic and intellectual preoccupation. Joyce, here, has traced the path of an artist from his
rawest form to the more (but not completely) refined. The novel begins with a story read to infant Stephen by his
father and ends with a diary entry, "Old father, old artificer, stand me now and ever in good stead" (224).
Significantly, the novel ends with the invocation of Daedalus, Stephen's assumed artistic father and, implicitly, the
casting off of Stephen's old parentage and his entrance into his own self-fashioned heritage. The classical world
provides both Stephen's new identity and the roots of his understanding of aesthetics.
 7. Epiphany in the novel
Today, Joyce is celebrated as one of the great literary pioneers of the twentieth century. He was one of the first
writers to make extensive and convincing use of stream of consciousness, a stylistic form in which written prose
seeks to represent the characters' stream of inner thoughts and perceptions rather than render these characters
from an objective, external perspective. This technique, used in A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man mostly
during the opening sections and in Chapter 5, sometimes makes for difficult reading. With effort, however, the
seemingly jumbled perceptions of stream of consciousness can crystallize into a coherent and sophisticated
portrayal of a character's experience.

Another stylistic technique for which Joyce is noted is the epiphany, a moment in which a character makes a
sudden, profound realizationwhether prompted by an external object or a voice from withinthat creates a
change in his or her perception of the world. Joyce uses epiphany most notably inDubliners, but A Portrait of the
Artist as a Young Man is full of these sudden moments of spiritual revelation as well. Most notable is a scene in
which Stephen sees a young girl wading at the beach, which strikes him with the sudden realization that an
appreciation for beauty can be truly good. This moment is a classic example of Joyce's belief that an epiphany can
dramatically alter the human spirit in a matter of just a few seconds.

The concept of self awareness through revelation, or epiphany, occupies a central importance in Joyce's work. The
notion of self and emergence of consciousness that Stephen undergoes in this bildungsroman only happens
through epiphanies, moments where truth is revealed and understanding is truly forged. These moments, whether
they concern Stephen's own sense of self his relationship to the world, help Stephen advance his own identity as
well as allowing him to forge his "non- serviam credo." Epiphanies permit Stephen to advance both his own
consciousness as well the narrative structure of the text, as greater understanding is revealed to us in terms of
voice as a result of the epiphanies. Through Joyce's use, Stephen's epiphanies help Stephen better understand
himself and help the reader better understand Stephen.

In A Portrait of The Artist as A Young Man, James Joyce uses moments of clarity and a recognition of another
perspective as "epiphanies." The reader becomes aware of the change in Stephen's character, however momentary,
and this drives the plot of the novel. In Stephen Hero, an earlier version of A Portrait of The Artist as a Young Man,
Stephen is referring to the clock at the Ballast Office, a seemingly insignificant building and clock but capable of
making Stephen think because, "all at once I see it and I know at once what it is: epiphany."

Stephen will face many challenges and his self-development and sense of awareness will reflect the impact of life
and the economic hardships that he and his family must confront. This ensures that "epiphany' is a very personal
experience. Having felt "small and weak" throughout the first chapter due to his own shortcomings, Stephen, at the
conclusion of chapter one, comes to a realization that he is in a position to embarrass Father Dolan but, in a
schoolboy version of humility, despite being justified in bringing Father Dolan to account, he vows that he will not.

After his sexual encounter and his epiphany at the end of chapter two; "surrendering himself;" he becomes
weighed down by his own sinful acts which "kill(s) the body and (it) kill(s) the soul." By the end of chapter three,
he revels in the life-changing potential that he now faces and the power and potential of "Another life! A life of
grace and virtue and happiness!" As Stephen takes Communion, he feels the real power of the act of Holy
Communion as he accepts that "Past is past." His feelings are very real and immediate, even if by the end of chapter
four he chooses one path and then a different path. Life and experience goes "on and on and on and on."

By the end of the novel, Stephen has realized the power of his own contribution, not only to his self-development,
but in promoting "the uncreated conscience of my race." James Joyce ensures continuity through the use of
epiphany because all of the revelations and realizations provide Stephen with guidance and acknowledge the
contribution of each and every experience in developing Stephen's character and his ability to make a difference.

Stephen Dedalus' epiphanies in James Joyce's A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man illustrate and emphasize the
dynamic transformation of a youth in a bildungsroman. Continuing education serves as a basis for all people; it
establishes the way they think, describe, and view life. This education helps individuals overcome the tumult of
life's many problems, as it helped Stephen to understand his place in the world and his capabilities. Religion works
as a supplement to education, teaching individuals morals and providing reasons for living. However, religion also
tends to constrain the individual, as it bound Stephen's creativity with guilt and fear. In the true nature of survival
and in embracing the true nature of his hawk-like name, Stephen Dedalus flew from his cage of ignorance,
confusion, and trepidation into the open skies of his own creation.

In order to highlight the importance of Stephen's aesthetic experiences, Joyce borrowed a word from the Catholic
faith in order to create a literary term of his own. When Stephen suddenly understands "the essential nature of a
thing" whether it is the understanding of a person, an idea, a word, or a situation he has a moment of
profound revelation. Joyce called these moments epiphanies.

Some of Stephen's earliest epiphanies come from his acute sensory awareness and are recorded through Joyce's
masterful use of imagery. In the novel, repeated patterns of sounds and remembrances of tastes, touches, and
smells are all emphasized. Stephen's eyesight (like Joyce's) is weak; therefore, Joyce emphasizes other senses, and
in doing so, he employs the valuable motif method of narration, wherein he records recurrent images of hot/cold,
wet/dry, and light/dark images, as well as recurring symbols. He also uses dramatic irony to identify Stephen's
basic conflicts and emphasize significant events in his life.

After you get through the tedium of the sermons in James Joyce's "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man," you come
to a beautiful section of the novel: Stephen Dedalus goes back to his room (he's in a boarding school, called a
college but would be at today's h.s level; he's 16, we later learn) and shudders in the fear of sin and damnation,
becomes ill, decides to reform his life and go to confession, and wanders through the streets of Dublin
(foreshadowing of Ulysses) and finds a church, gives confession, the priest is very thoughtful and kind, Dedalus
feels he's on a new course in life. Then, the next section of the novel, he's a bit older, and a priest comes to him in
his room and suggests that Dedalus might have a "vocation," so he wrestles with that idea - gos home to his family,
now living in difficult poverty but with a certain spirit - they all sing together, for example - and we see him (I'm
not totally sure of the sequence here) deciding he cannot shut his life up as a Jesuit priest - he wants to live in the
world, struggle with ideas, make something, create - the beginnings of his thinking of himself as an artist. He looks
down from a bridge, sees some boys diving from the rocks, then sees a beautiful girl standing in the water and he
follows her - this is the first of Joyce's great "epiphanies," a moment or an episode that has an emotional meaning
far beyond the bare facts of the event - the kind of moment we all have in our lives but that's very elusive, difficult
to capture even in the mind much less to memorialize it in language and art.

The term epiphany looms large in Joyces earlier work, providing a helpful point of entry into both Dubliners and
Portrait. The terms roots are Greek; it means, literally, a showing forth. In the Christian calendar, the feast of the
Epiphany, celebrated on January 6, the Twelfth Night of Christmas, commemorates the arrival of the Magi in
Bethlehem to worship the newborn Christ-the epiphany is the showing forth of Christ to the three kings. Joyce
adopted the term and broadened its sense to describe a series of very short prose pieces he wrote between 1900
and 1903, some of which later found their way into Portrait. In Stephen Hero (an earlier draft of Portrait, the
surviving parts of which were published a few years after Joyces death), Stephen, who is planning a book of his
epiphanies, offers this definition: By an epiphany he meant a sudden spiritual manifestation, whether in the
vulgarity of speech or of gesture or in a memorable phase of the mind itself. He believed that it was for the man of
letters to record these epiphanies with extreme care, seeing that they themselves are the most delicate and
evanescent of moments. An epiphany, in other words, is a moment of revelation, when the very truth or essence of
something is suddenly glimpsed. Art, as Stephen understands it, attempts to capture and preserve such fleeting
moments. The planned collection of brief epiphanies in Stephen Hero is very similar to the approximately 40 early
epiphanies written by Joyce that have survived. While neither of these collections looks like Portrait, something of
Joyces own earlier epiphanies does remain in the novel. We might see the completed novel, with its fragmented
structure, as an assemblage of Stephens important moments of insight, which, taken together, constitute the whole
portrait.
Closely related to the novels fragmented structure is its distinctive narrative technique. Although the novel begins
with the most familiar of all openings, Once upon a time, it quickly veers into less familiar territory, and that
formulaic phrase serves to highlight the unconventional nature of Joyces narrative. He might well have begun the
novel Once upon a time there was a little boy named Stephen Dedalus, and gone on to tell us about his mother
and father, the city and circumstances of his birth, and so on. Many novels had begun this way, and many still do,
but Joyces does not. We do learn some of the details of Stephens life-we hear his name, for instance, and what is
apparently a nickname, baby tuckoo; we see something of his mother and father and other friends and relations;
and we see something of the world outside, where a moocow comes down the road and Betty Byrne lives.
However, we do not know where we are, or when. Readers who know something of Irish history will likely
recognize the names of Michael Davitt and Charles Stuart Parnell, but there is no sign here that these names might
be more important than that of Betty Byrne or even than the cachous Stephen is given whenever he brings Dante a
piece of tissue paper. With its short, simple sentences, its loose associations and its non sequiturs, the narrative
mimics the fragmentary, disjointed and egocentric manner in which the mind of the infant Stephen encounters and
interprets a constant flow of sensory data, a stream of consciousness. Influenced by the then-emerging discipline
of psychology-particularly the work of William James, who coined the phrase-Joyce and many of his
contemporaries, including Dorothy Richardson, Katherine Mansfield, and Virginia Woolf, explored ways of
expressing the complex inner worlds of human minds. In his later work (some of the episodes of Ulysses, for
instance) Joyce would take such experimentation much further, all but eliminating external description in favor of
interior monologue.
In Portrait, though, while Joyce omits many of the conventional signs of the authors presence, such as indications
of who is speaking (He said), we are still aware of an external authorial presence who describes to us the world
of Stephens experience. However, our view is sharply limited to that particular experience. Only characters or
events important to Stephen will emerge in the narrative, and some characters, especially E.C., are only vaguely
realized in the book. In addition to determining what we will see, Stephens mind also determines the style of
language at each point in the novel, which moves from the childish simplicity of the opening paragraphs to the
complex aesthetic theorizing of the later chapters. Again, though, Stephens thoughts and perceptions do not limit
those of the novels readers absolutely. As he examines and judges those around him, Joyce also invites us to
distance ourselves from Stephen, to examine him as he examines others.

8. Conflict between spiritual and religious

Marx famously wrote that religion is a kind of drug constructed to keep the masses bovine (cow-like) and
contented, chewing their cud comfortably and not confronting the true nature of life. Joyce delivers a similarly
cynical and unflinchingly critical picture of religion in Portrait of the Artist; our hero, albeit in a markedly un-cow-
like and intensely cerebral fashion, also latches on to religion as a system of definite explanation. However, religion
is rejected as a solution to lifes unanswerable questions, both by Joyce and by Stephen, who realizes that life is not
that simple, and that the strict rules and regulations of the Church cant explain everything. The book implies that
no religious doctrine, Catholic or otherwise, can provide universal solutions, and furthermore, that dogma often
limits the possibilities of human accomplishment.
One of the transformations our protagonist undergoes is a shift from zealous, super-disciplined belief in Catholic
doctrine to a more unrestricted, self-created sense of spirituality thats closely intertwined with his drive to create
art. Spirituality is not limited to the worship of any one religion, or even of any specific god rather, there is
something profoundly fulfilling and potentially redemptive in the worship of Art and Beauty.
Joyce divides A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man into five
chapters. At the end of each chapter exists somewhat of a revelation,
or a climatic moment and realization that Stephen has. These five
poetic moments in the novel mirror Stephen's artistic and spiritual
development, as he gradually shifts from being brought up in a devout
Catholic family to deciding to embrace life to the fullest, combining
both the realms of the spirit and the world- the respective realms of
Plato and Aristotle.

The events leading up the conclusion of Chapter 1 lead Stephen to

question to omniscient correctness of his religious overseers in
Clongowes, and by extension, the Catholic Church. When he is unfairly
accused and punished for breaking his glasses, Stephen responds with
confusion. Dante taught Stephen as a child that the priests were
always correct, since they represented the Church, and "God and
religion [should come] before everything" (282). Dante's philosophy is
that "The bishops and priest of Ireland have spoken and they must be
obeyed" (274). However, the situation that Stephen becomes embroiled
in when the priest unjustly "pandies" Stephen's hands seems to
completely contradict all the dogma of the infallible Church that
Dante preaches to Stephen throughout his early childhood. "The prefect
of studies was a priest but that was cruel and unfair" (297). The
situation that causes Stephen to doubt the priestly infallibility is
not abstract or unrelated to Stephen's everyday life, such as the
Parnell issue that causes Mr. Dedalus and Mr. Casey to doubt the
church. Rather, the situation is of immediate importance to Stephen,
since Father Dolan physically chastised him with a pandybat and shamed
him before his classmates, and plans to do so again. At the end of
Chapter 1, Stephen's classmates reward him for questioning the
authority of Father Dolan and complaining to rector Conmee, who
absolves Stephen from further unfair punishment for accidentally
breaking his glasses. Hence, Stephen's reward encourages him to
continue questioning the infallibility of authority and the Catholic
Church.
At the end of Chapter 2, Stephen willfully embraces a mortal sin by
consorting with a prostitute, reflecting his turn away from the
dictates of the Church. Stephen gives himself up to the prostitute,
"surrendering himself to her, body and mind" (353). Stephen also
surrenders his soul to her and to the lifestyle she represents,
forsaking all but the most formal religious devotion after his becomes
thoroughly caught up in the sin of visiting prostitutes. His
submission to the prostitute is poetic moment at the end of Chapter 2,
and mirrors religious devotion, especially devotion to the Virgin
Mary. "In her arms he felt that he had suddenly become strong and
fearless and sure of himself" (352-353). In this manner, Stephen's
turn away from the Church towards the prostitutes reflects his
complete and willful rejection of God.

However, while Stephen rejects God, he is still conscious of God, and

knows that God will punish him for his sins. However, he cannot find
the strength in himself to repent, and actually uses the depth of the
sins he has already committed as justification for continuing to live
in sin. "He had sinned mortally not once but many times and he knew
that, while he stood in danger of eternal damnation for the first sin
alone, by every succeeding sin he multiplied his sin and his
punishment" (355). However, the poetic moment at the end of Chapter 3
comes when Stephen finally decides to turn away from his sinful ways
and seek salvation with the Church and the Holy Spirit. After much
emotional consternation at hearing a vivid description of the tortures
of Hell, Stephen confesses and feels his soul purged of sin. "Another
life! A life of grace and virtue and happiness! It was true. It was
not a dream from which he would wake. The past was past" (405). In
this climactic moment, Stephen moves from one end of religious
extremism to another. He moves from completely forsaking God in all of
his behavior to honoring God in all of his behavior.

During Chapter 4 Stephen completely resigns himself to complete

devotion to God. He designates certain days of the week to different
key aspects of Catholicism, and makes every part of life echo
spirituality in worship of God. However, in doing so, he loses touch
earthly concerns and part of his humanity. In denying himself anything
not contributing to his spirituality, Stephen still does not fully
embrace the human existence. "The rosaries too which he said
constantly transformed themselves into coronals of flowers of such
vague un-earthly texture that they seemed to him as hueless and
odourless as they were nameless" (407). Stephen associates the rosary,
which represents the Church, as the adjectives 'hueless,' 'odourless,'
and 'nameless,' emphasizing the one-dimensional and flat nature of the
Church. As a near-fanatic with ascetic tendencies, Stephen cannot
experience all that life has to offer him, no more than he could while
living his life of complete debauchery. At the end of Chapter 4,
however, Stephen sees the 'bird girl,' which serves as the poetic
moment at the end of the chapter. Stephen sees the 'bird girl' as the
perfect union of the physical and the spirit; Joyce uses language
relating to birds to describe her. "She seemed like one whom magic had
changed into the likeness of a strange and beautiful seabird. Her long
slender bare legs were delicate as a crane's the white fringes of her
drawers were the featherings of soft white down. Her bosom was as a
bird's soft and light" (433). In seeing her, Stephen perhaps realizes
his role as an artist. He, like Daedalus, must create that perfect
union between physical and spiritual. To Daedulus, creating that union
meant constructing bird-wings to escape from his prison with his son,
Icharus. To Stephen, creating that union means embracing his role as
an artist, and pursuing it by creating beauty.

At the end of Chapter 5, Stephen realizes he must leave Ireland if he

is to truly realize his role as an artist. He has realized the
harmfulness of the two religious extremes he has vacillated between as
a teenager. Both the completely sinful and completely devout
lifestyles are false and harmful to Stephen, as both prevent him from
experiencing the entirety of the human experience. He does not want to
lead a completely debauched life, but neither does he want to live
within the iron dictates of the Catholic Church. Ultimately, Stephen
reached the decision to embrace life and celebrate humanity, uniting
both the concern with spirituality of Plato's philosophy and the
concern with worldly existence of Aristotle's philosophy.
 9. Stephen's attitude towards love
A central theme in James Joyces works is that of love: what is it, and how can we discuss it? Joyce could not bring
himself to use the word love; when Nora asked him if he loved her he could only say that he "was very fond of her,
desired her, admired and honored her, and wished to secure her happiness in every way; and if these elements
were what is called love then perhaps his affection for her was a kind of love" (Ellmann 6). One can read Molly
Blooms "Oh, rocks. Tell us in plain words" as Noras answer to Joyces intellectual, complicated answer (Joyce,
Ulysses 64). Perhaps as a result of Joyces own concern and questions about love, many of his characters are also
confused and looking for a definition of love. There are many kinds of love discussed in Joyces works, including
love for ideals, family, friends, God, and most importantly, husband and wife.

1. Themes Many themes are woven into the fabric of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. Readers often
differ in their views of the text. Some readers believe that the book is chiefly about Stephens struggle to
free himself form his surroundings. These readers focus on Stephens rejection of authority. Other readers
believe the novel is primarily about Stephens discovery of his artistic vocation. Still other readers perceive
mainly the mocking study of a pompous, self-important young egotist. Following is a list of suggested
themes of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man:1. Rejection of Authority Stephens ultimate rebellion is a
classic example of a young persons struggle against the conformity demanded of him by society. The young
Stephen possesses a childish faith in (a) his family, (b) his religion, and (c) his country. As he matures, he
comes to feel these institutions are attempting to destroy his independent spirit. He must escape them to
find himself2. The Development of the Artist Many readers feel that Stephens discovery of his artists
calling provides the major framework for the novel. Certainly, from the opening pages of the novel to its
end, Joyce emphasizes the boys sensitive responses to language and to the sights and sounds of the world
around him. Words define life: as a schoolboy, he tries to arrange them to see where he fits in the scheme of
the universe. He turns to writing poetry to express the emotions he cannot express in speech. In time he
writes prize essays and even shapes his own theories of beauty. Stephen relates three separatebut
closely relatedaspects of his, and perhaps Joyces, attitudes toward art: (a) art as a vocation or calling; (b)
art as flight; and (c) art as religion. Theme of Transformation One might argue that the only things that
actually happen in Portrait of the Artist are a series of transformations. One might then argue that this
demonstrates that growing up is simply a series of transformations. Either way, transformation in this text
is associated with two things. First, its related to the slow shift from childhood to adulthood. Stephen has
to pass through distinct phases before he is an independent adult. Secondly, transformation is likened to
the process of artistic development; his intellectual transformations help forge his identity as an artist and
shape his future writing. The proof of this is Joyce himself after all, this story partially stems from his own
experiences.3. Portrait of a Proud Egotist Some readers feel that the central theme is the character study of
an arrogant, unhappy egotist, an intensely self-absorbed young man. An egotist is interested only in the self
and is intensely critical of other people and the world. In this instance, Stephen often feels superior to
others and finds caring for others to be difficult, even for his own family. Accepting affection or love from
others is
2. equally as difficult. Moreover, many readers point to Stephens pride as a cause of his isolation. Feeling
superior to his family, peers, and country, Stephen attempts to improve these respective groups. In the end,
pride drives him to exile.4. Sin as a Liberating Force According to some readers, Stephens acceptance of his
sinfulness sets him free. Guilt and fear of punishment keep him in a sterile, pale world of virtue where he is
hounded by the pressure to confess, admit, or apologize. By committing a mortal sin of impurity (of the
flesh) and falling from grace like Adam from Paradise, or Prometheus from Olympus, or Icarus from the
sky, he is thrust back into the earthly world of the senses, a world that releases his creative powers. Instead
of confession, Stephen writes. Theme of Sin Sin and temptation play central roles in this novel. Our
protagonist goes through a period of indulging fully in his bodily lusts, which then leads to a swing in the
opposite direction, an attempt at total piety. Joyce highlights the harshly binary nature (people either give
in to all sins or no sins at all) of the Catholic-dominated Irish culture. In the end, the hero comes to the
necessary conclusion that sin is a fundamental and unavoidable part of human nature, rather than
something that can simply be eliminatedt hrough religious practice. One suspects that Joyce hoped that the
reading public of the time would come to the same conclusion.5. Life as a Maze Like his namesake Daedalus
and like most young people, Stephen is caught in a maze. The schools are a maze of corridors; Dublin is a
maze of streets; the mind, itself, is a convoluted maze filled with circular reasoning. Posed with riddles at
 every turn, Stephen roams the labyrinth searching his mind for answers. Stephens only escape is to soar
above the narrow confines of his prison. Theme of Identity Portrait of the Artist is ultimately the story of a
search for true identity. We know from the title that the protagonists fate is to become an artist, but we still
follow the emotional suspense of his periods of uncertainty and confusion. Our hero struggles with the
sense that there is some great destiny waiting for him, but he has difficulty perceiving what it is. His
consistent feeling of difference and increasing alienation show that he sees himself as someone marked by
fate to stand outside society. Speaking of society, Joyce also questions the value of Irish national identity in
a country on the brink of revolution. Theme of Youth One might guess from the title that Portrait of the
Artist as a Young Man has something to do with Youth. This book is a classic coming-of-age story that
allows us to follow the
3. development of the main characters consciousness from childhood to adulthood. Included in this is a
heightened awareness of what old people wistfully like to call "thefolly of youth." We at Shmoop arent even
that old, and we are already fond of sighing over said folly. Since this is a very loosely veiled autobiography,
Joyce was obviously also very aware of the folly of his own youth, which he demonstrates through this
novel. The book as a whole is a meditation on the process of growing up; one of its truly great
accomplishments is the almost scientific precision with which it depicts the protagonists hanging mind and
body. Theme of Dissatisfaction Many of the events of this novel are seen through a haze of murky
discontent. Joyce poses dissatisfaction as a necessity of the developing artist. Our protagonists
unhappiness with his setting, his family, and most of all, himself, are fundamental to his eventual
transformation from observant child to blooming writer. Until he realizes that his vocation is to become a
writer, he feels aimless, alone, and uncertain. However, we get the feeling that he could never arrive at this
conclusion without undergoing his period of profound dissatisfaction. It is this lingering sense of
malcontent that forces Joyces Character to confront his personal anxieties and uncertainties in order to get
past them. Theme of Language and Communication Stephens fixation on language is what alerts us to his
artistic inclinations from the very beginning of the novel. Both Joyce and his protagonist demonstrate a
deep fascination with the purely aesthetic elements of language. Sometimes elements like repetition,
rhythm, and rhyme take over the narrative completely. This demonstrates the novels stance on
Communication: it highlights the arbitrary and sometimes meaningless ways in which language works
and doesnt work. While the goal of language is to clarify and enlighten, it doesnt always succeed and is
often misused. Joyce and many of his Modernist colleagues (especially T.S. Eliot) were very concerned with
the failure of language to successfully communicate ideas. Theme of Religion Marx famously wrote that
religion is a kind of drug constructed to keep the masses bovine (cow-like) and contented, chewing their
cud comfortably and not confronting the true nature of life. Joyce delivers a similarly cynical and
unflinchingly critical picture of religion in Portrait of the Artist; our hero, albeit in a markedly un-cow-like
and intensely cerebral fashion, also latches on to religion as a system of definite explanation. However,
religion is rejected as a solution to lifes unanswerable questions, both by Joyce and by Stephen, who
realizes that life is not that simple, and that the strict rules and regulations of the Church cant explain
everything. The book implies that no religious doctrine, Catholic or otherwise, can provide universal
solutions, and furthermore, that dogma often limits the possibilities of human accomplishment. Theme of
Spirituality
4. This choice might raise some eyebrows. You wouldnt be alone if you wanted to nervously avoid our gaze
and say, "Hey, um, Shmoop, I know youre trying to be thorough and everything, but isnt Spirituality kind
of uncomfortably similar to the last theme you discussed, Religion?" And thats our cue to stare you down
and say "Yeah right! Stop being so darn reductive. GEEZ." One of the transformations our protagonist
undergoes is a shift from zealous, super-disciplined belief in Catholic doctrine to a more unrestricted, self-
created sense of spirituality thats closely intertwined with his drive to create art. Spirituality is not limited
to the worship of any one religion, or even of any specific god rather, there is something profoundly
fulfilling and potentially redemptive in the worship of Art and Beauty. Theme of The Home This concept of
home is massively important on two levels. First of all, the familial home is a constant source of instability
and unhappiness throughout the book. The Dedalus family loses wealth and status throughout the novel,
and they have to move around Secondly, the uncomfortable idea of Ireland as home influenced both our
protagonist and his real-life contemporary, Joyce. The novel asks us to examine how connected one should
be to a homeland, especially when that homeland is trying to clarify its own political and cultural identity.
That said, Stephen continues to reassert his Irishness in subtle ways, and he feels connected to his people
even as he leaves perhaps shes even more connected to his people because he leaves. Chew on that for a
 while. Theme of Literature and Writing Literature and Writing provide the underlying backbone of
meaning that draws this whole text together. This theme plays a fundamental role in the lives of both the
fictional Stephen and the real Joyce, even beyond the obvious fact that both of them are writers. The idea of
Art as a calling becomes central to the eventual understanding of spirituality in the text, since observing
and creating objects of beauty is a fundamental part of experiencing the life that Joyce describes. The role of
the writer, as it appears here, is to shape language the way a craftsman might shape wood or clay. This
alignment of literature to fine art is extremely important; through his work, Joyce attempts to demonstrate
that the novel, a relatively young literary form, is as important and valid as any other form of art.
Emma is really not a "character" in the traditional sense of the word. Shes actually more of a concept she is the
subject of Stephens adoration, but we have no real sense of her as a person. She is the inspiration for some of
Stephens first experiments in verse; as a child, he writes a super-romanticized poem to her, and ten years later,
still infatuated, he writes her a villanelle (a complicated, super-style-conscious poetic form). Neither of these
poems focuses on her specific characteristics. Instead, they vaguely evoke Stephens feelings of love, desire, and
confusion.

Like a lot of cases of puppy love, Stephen seems to be more enamored by the idea of capital-L-Love than with
Emma herself; he is devoted to the poetic ideal of a "beloved" to dedicate his poems to. Inspired by the ideal
women he encounters in the poems of Byron and in The Count of Monte Cristo, Stephen creates an image of Emma
that he idolizes (for ten years!). This interest in following a certain poetic model is yet another indication of
Stephens gradual but inevitable transformation into an artist.

At the end of the novel, we finally start to see Emma as a flesh-and-blood creature; her encounters with Stephen
reveal her to be nothing more than a normal Irish girl, rather than a divine and unattainable creature. All the same,
Stephen cannot bring himself to start a relationship with her. After their last meeting, Stephen seems shocked to
note that he "likes" her all along, he has idolized her image, but we get the feeling that he knows almost as little
about her as we do. When Stephen, on the brink of his departure from Ireland, mentions that hes seeking a certain
"reality of experience" out in the world, its an indication that some of the past experiences weve witnessed have
lacked reality like his relationship with Emma.

10. Stephen's attitude towards church and religion

Religion is an important and reccuring theme in James Joyces A portarait of the Artist as a young man . Religion
is also central to the life of Stephen Dedalus,whowas reared in a strict, if not harmonious, Catholic family. Through
his experience, Stephen both matures and progressively becomes more individualistic as he grows. Threared in
Catholic school, several key events lead Stephen to throw off the yoke of conformity and chose his own life, the life
of an artist. The church is perhaps the greates constraint on Stephen, and merits its own wntry. The teachings of
the Church run contrary to Stephens independent spirit and intellect. His sensitivity to beauty and the human
body are not at all suitable to the rigid Catholicism in which he was raised. But the Church continues to exert some
small hold on him.

From an early age, Stephen develops as an artist through his fascination with color and visual art, but he never
recognizes that this could lead to a connection with God. Stephen longs to understand the concept of God even
before he realizes that this art could help him in his endeavor. For instancem when studying a geography lesson
Stephen asks himself : What is after the Universe He can only conclude Nothing Soon after,he concedes that
Only God could do that Initially, Stephen is confused by the Roman Catholic Church and the influence it has on
him,

From early in the novel, his perception of the Church , not the Church itself , is what prevents him from truly
knowing God. Stephen feels distant from and even alienated by some aspects of his religion, At the end of the
Chapter 2 , Strephen willfully embraces a mortal sin by consorting with a prostitute reflecting his turn away from
the dictates of the Church. Stephens submissiom to the prostitute is poetic moment and mirrors religious devotion.
In this manner, he turns away from the Church towards the prostitutes reflects his complete and willful rejection of
God. However, while he rejects God, he is still conscious of God and knows that God will punish him for sins. He
cannot find strength in himself to repend, and actually uses the depth of the sins he has already commited as
justification for continuing to live in sin. ( He had sinned mortally not once but many time . )

However, the poetic moment at the end of the Chapter 3 comes when Stephen finally decided to turn away from his
sinful ways and seek salvation with the Church and Holy Spirit. After much emotional consternation at hearin a
vivid description of the tortures of Hell. Stephen confesses and feels his soul purged of sin. ( Another life! A life of
grace and virtue and happiness ) In this moment , Stephen moves from one end of religious extremism to
another. He moves from completely forsaking God in all of his behaviour to honoring God. As a near- fanatic with
ascetic tendences, Stephen cannot experience all that life has offer him no more that he could while livig his life of
complete debauchery.

In seeing bird girl, he realizes he must leave Ireland if he is to truly realize his role as an artist. Both the completely
sinful and completely devout lifestyle are false and harmful to Stephen. He does not want to lead a completely
dabauches life, but neither does he want to live within the iron dictates of the Catholic Church.

Although he eventually becomes an unbeliever, he continues to have some fear that the Catholic Church might be
correct. Despite his fears, he eventually chooses to live indeendetly and without constraint, even if that decision
send him to hell.

20. Stream of consciousness in Mrs. Dalloway

Stream of Consciousness

Modernism is a literary movement in the 20 century which has so many characteristics include the use of a new
style of writing stream of consciousness The stream of consciousness is a most important style of writing ,it is
used by great writers such as James Joyce, William James, and William Faulkner...,etc .Those writers were
developed this technique from the earliest of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century
and giving some quotes .As Virginia Woolf was most of them, she was very famous and well known by the use of
the stream of consciousness narrative technique within her works especially Mrs. Dalloway.

Feminism can be defined as a movement that seeks to enhance the quality of women's lives by defying the norms
of society based on male dominance and subsequent female which implies the emancipation of women from the
shackles, restrictions, norms and customs of society. It demands that women should be treated as autonomous
subjects, and not as passive objects. Also, It seeks to achieve equality between men and women in moral, social,
economic and political fields. According to them, society was divided into two worlds: private and public world.
The private world implied that women should stay at home. They were not allowed to work or learn. Moreover,
they were educated only in a way that suited their claimed weak nature such as sewing, nursing and painting. So,
women couldnt revolt because of fear, shame and rejection by society. The public world implied that men are
strong mentally and physically. They were allowed to work, and were given proper education such as mathematics
and science, etc.

There are other three techniques that related to each other of the modern style of writing : the first is the open or
the ambiguous ending ,the second one is that the aversion of the chronological ordering of material and the
absence of reliable ,omniscient narrator (Bradbury and McFarlane, 481). Mrs. Dalloway novel has undecided
ending at the end of Virginias novel.
Virginia Woolf uses the narrative technique stream of consciousness in her novel Mrs. Dalloway .The fictional
style of writing is a narrative technique which deals with the flow of ideas, thoughts, feelings, and sensation. Woolf
tried to move deeply into the characters consciousness. Moreover, the study of stream of consciousness is so
interesting for us because it deals with the analysis of the characters thought, ideas, and feeling in a continuous
way from one character to another at a particular moment means the focus more on the inner life rather than on
the outer side in which she presents a satirical view of society. Also, it is a narrative technique which is a great
reaction of modernism that is against the value of realism in the Victorian period.

The stream of consciousness is a new style of writing which has two technique interior monologue and free
indirect speech in order to be represented Interior monologue is a narrative technique that records thoughts,
feelings, and emotions of the human mind with the use of the pronoun I.

Interior monologue, or quoted stream of consciousness, presents characters thought stream of verbalized
thoughts. Being thus restricted, interior monologue cannot be said fully present the stream of characters
consciousness. Interior monologue represents characters speaking silently to themselves and quotes their inner
speech, often without making this with speech marks.

The free indirect speech or style is another technique in which the stream of consciousness represented; this
narrative technique refers to the ideas or utterances of the fictional characters. 13 Free indirect style rends
thoughts as reported speech (in the third person, past tense) but keeps to the kind of vocabulary that is
appropriate to the character and deletes some of the tags, like she thought, she wondered, she asked
herselfetc. Furthermore, the free indirect style is different from the interior monologue because it
represents the thoughts of the characters without using the first personal pronoun I, but by using the third
personal pronoun.

Third Person Omniscient

Strictly defined, the point of view in Mrs Dalloway is third person omniscient; that means theres an overarching
narrator who knows everything and who has access to everyones thoughts. The point of view changes many times
during the course of the novel, as we weave in and out of the minds of Clarissa, Septimus, Lucrezia, Peter, Richard,
Elizabeth, and Miss Kilman. We have access to their thoughts and memories, which among the literary set is called
"free indirect discourse." The omniscient narrator, on the other hand, remains anonymous At times the
omniscient narrator can be quite prominent and critical as in discussions of Sir William Bradshaw and even Miss
Kilman but other times will simply relate the thoughts of the characters themselves. Suffice it to say we have a lot
of opinions coming our way in this story.

This narrative technique is perfect for Mrs Dalloway. It allows us to focus on the little things that people think
about, things that might seem silly for a narrator to comment on (like the major people-watching that all the
characters do). At the same time, it can get a little confusing. Sometimes the shift between characters and
between the present and the past are so subtle that we dont even notice. So be warned: read carefully!

Mrs Dalloway Writing Style

Complex, Psychological

In Mrs Dalloway, style works closely with both tone and genre. The style ofMrs Dalloway is complex, psychological,
intricate, and dense. Even in one sentence, we can encounter multiple ideas and multiple tones: this is all thanks to
the style. And of course, the style changes throughout the story. First of all, we're in the minds of several different
characters, so we hear various styles of speaking and thinking. Woolf was very concerned with subjective reality,
that is, what reality looks like from any one persons point of view; so what (and how) each character thinks is very
different. And of course, we also have present-day observations and stream of consciousness mixed in with
memories and visions. All of this makes for one big style mash-up.

Additionally, Woolf wanted to convey what people said and what they didnt say. For this reason, she includes a
few different types of speech for us. First, we have direct speech, in which people actually talk to each other, as in
Clarissas exchange with Hugh, asking about Evelyn. This is also known as dialogue or, you know, talking. Second,
we get indirect speech, in which the narrator lets us know that a character is thinking of something.

Finally, and most notably, Woolf gives us free indirect speech (a.k.a. free indirect discourse). In this style, the
narrator doesnt set up that the person is thinking something, but instead just puts it out there. Here's an example:
"But Lucrezia herself could not help looking at the motor car and the tree pattern on the blinds. Was it the Queen in
there the Queen going shopping?" (1.35). Instead of saying "She wondered if the queen was in there shopping,"
Woolf just makes the announcement and shows that she has special access to the characters minds. Fancy.

So, from the beginning the stream of consciousness is used in the novel by Woolf through the use of time from the
past to the present till the near future, this time is a psychological time that deals with the internal and the external
subjectivity of each characters thought and emotions in order to represent the flow of consciousness also that is
interrupted by the clock. Woolf in her novel Mrs. Dalloway uses the stream of consciousness technique by the use
of free indirect style at the first points of this novel when she wanted to describe Clarissas her party to all her
friends. This indirect speech allows no important to mention who is Clarissa Dalloway and why is want to buy the
flowers .When we read the following sentence, we understands that each reader goes into the middle of the coming
life in which the presentation of the stream of consciousness as a stream of thought, as the following quotes when
Virginia said:

Mrs. Dalloway said she would buy the flowers herself. For Lucy had her work cut out for her. The doors would be
taken off their hinges; Rumpelmayer's men were coming. And then, thought Clarissa Dalloway, what a morning -
fresh as if issued to children on a beach
"."
What a lark! What a plunge! For so it had always seemed to her when, with a little squeak of the hinges, which she
could hear now, she had burst open the French windows and plunged at Burton into the open air. How fresh, how
calm, stiller than this of course, the air was- in the early morning; like the flap of a wave; the kiss of a wave; chill
and sharp and yet (for a girl of eighteen as she then was) solemn, feeling as she did, standing there at the open
window, that something awful was about to happen; looking at the flowers, at the trees with the smoke winding off
them and the rooks rising, falling, standing and looking until Peter Walsh said, "Musing among the vegetables?" -
was that it? - "I prefer men to cauliflowers" - was that it? He must have said it at breakfast one morning when she
had gone out on to the terrace - Peter Walsh. He would be back from India one of these days, June or July, she
forgot which, for his letters were awfully dull; it was his sayings one remembered; his eyes, his pocket-knife, his
smile, his grumpiness and, when millions of things had utterly vanished -how strange it west - a few sayings like
this about cabbages

21. Double -like relationship between Clarissa Dalloway and Septimus Warren Smith
BACKGROUND
The story of Mrs. Dalloway was written by Virginia Woolf in 1925, and closely relates to her own life.
There are several parallels between Woolf and Dalloway in regards to sexuality and female independence.
Finally, the parallels between mental illness as it is presented in the book and Virginia Woolfs own disease are
undeniably present. The similarities between Septimus character and Virginia Woolf herself are represented when
Woolf describes Septimus hallucinations of birds, which is a hallucination she was know to have as well. The most
obvious similarity between Virginia Woolf and Septimus, however, is they both ended their own lives due to the
mental illnesses they shared.
Clarissa Dalloway
Clarissa Dalloway, the heroine of the novel, struggles constantly to balance her internal life with the external world.
Her world consists of glittering surfaces, such as fine fashion, parties, and high society, but as she moves through
that world she probes beneath those surfaces in search of deeper meaning. Yearning for privacy, Clarissa has a
tendency toward introspection that gives her a profound capacity for emotion, which many other characters lack.
However, she is always concerned with appearances and keeps herself tightly composed, seldom sharing her
feelings with anyone. She uses a constant stream of convivial chatter and activity to keep her soul locked safely
away, which can make her seem shallow even to those who know her well.
Constantly overlaying the past and the present, Clarissa strives to reconcile herself to life despite her potent
memories. For most of the novel she considers aging and death with trepidation, even as she performs life-
affirming actions, such as buying flowers. Though content, Clarissa never lets go of the doubt she feels about the
decisions that have shaped her life, particularly her decision to marry Richard instead of Peter Walsh. She
understands that life with Peter would have been difficult, but at the same time she is uneasily aware that she
sacrificed passion for the security and tranquility of an upper-class life. At times she wishes for a chance to live life
over again. She experiences a moment of clarity and peace when she watches her old neighbor through her
window, and by the end of the day she has come to terms with the possibility of death. Like Septimus, Clarissa feels
keenly the oppressive forces in life, and she accepts that the life she has is all shell get. Her will to endure,
however, prevails.
Septimus Warren Smith
Septimus, a veteran of World War I, suffers from shell shock and is lost within his own mind. He feels guilty even as
he despises himself for being made numb by the war. His doctor has ordered Lucrezia, Septimuss wife, to make
Septimus notice things outside himself, but Septimus has removed himself from the physical world. Instead, he
lives in an internal world, wherein he sees and hears things that arent really there and he talks to his dead friend
Evans. He is sometimes overcome with the beauty in the world, but he also fears that the people in it have no
capacity for honesty or kindness. Woolf intended for Clarissa to speak the sane truth and Septimus the insane
truth, and indeed Septimuss detachment enables him to judge other people more harshly than Clarissa is capable
of. The world outside of Septimus is threatening, and the way Septimus sees that world offers little hope.
On the surface, Septimus seems quite dissimilar to Clarissa, but he embodies many characteristics that Clarissa
shares and thinks in much the same way she does. He could almost be her double in the novel. Septimus and
Clarissa both have beak-noses, love Shakespeare, and fear oppression. More important, as Clarissas double,
Septimus offers a contrast between the conscious struggle of a working-class veteran and the blind opulence of the
upper class. His troubles call into question the legitimacy of the English society he fought to preserve during the
war. Because his thoughts often run parallel to Clarissas and echo hers in many ways, the thin line between what is
considered sanity and insanity gets thinner and thinner. Septimus chooses to escape his problems by killing
himself, a dramatic and tragic gesture that ultimately helps Clarissa to accept her own choices, as well as the
society in which she lives.
Themes

Communication vs. Privacy

-EXCERPT "Communication is health; communication is happiness, communication " he muttered. (One of

Septimus' most important messages is about communication. He believes birds are talking to him in Greek, and he
just wishes he could find the right words to express how he feels. Finally his death becomes the only available form
of communication and Clarissa senses that. She sees Septimuss death as a desperate, but legitimate, act of
communication.

The Threat of Oppression

EXCERPT She had once thrown a shilling into the Serpentine, never anything more. But he had flung it away.
(Clarissa had never been forced to give anything up and had never taken any real risks. She compares throwing a
coin into a lake to Septimus throwing himself out the window. Both she and Septimus have been repressing
emotions, they just deal with it differently.)
Oppression is a constant threat for Clarissa and Septimus in Mrs. Dalloway, and Septimus dies in order to escape
what he perceives to be an oppressive social pressure to conform. Miss Kilman and Sir William Bradshaw are two
of the major oppressors in the novel: Miss Kilman dreams of felling Clarissa in the name of religion, and Sir William
would like to subdue all those who challenge his conception of the world. Both wish to convert the world to their
belief systems in order to gain power and dominate others.
Septimus fears oppression by the world while Clarissa fears oppression by her lifestyle and past. Though Clarissa
herself lives under the weight of that system and often feels oppressed by it, her acceptance of patriarchal English
society makes her, in part, responsible for Septimuss death. Thus she too is an oppressor of sorts. At the end of the
novel, she reflects on his suicide: EXCERPTSomehow it was her disasterher disgrace. She accepts
responsibility, though other characters are equally or more fully to blame, which suggests that everyone is in some
way complicit in the oppression of others.
Clarissas moment of clarity results from her knowledge of Septimuss death, which she calls my disgrace. She
admires Septimus for his act because she realizes he saved his soul by killing himself before anyone could really
oppress him. But she continues to live her life with hidden regrets, and puts on an air of true happiness. She is what
Septimus would have become had he allowed Bradshaw to control him, and that is why she feels disgraced. She
compromised things that could have brought her complete happiness, in order to have and maintain an esteemed
reputation as an upper class woman.
So far in our reading of Mrs. Dalloway, the characters have been very well established, and it is easy to distinguish
one from the other. In particular, Septimus and Clarissa are actually quite similar, both in action and in thought.

EXCERPT-She felt somehow very like himthe young man who had killed himself. She felt glad that he had done
it; thrown it away. The clock was striking. The leaden circles dissolved in the air. He made her feel the beauty;
made her feel the fun. But she must go back. She must assemble.

Woolf created Septimus as Clarissas double, and throughout the book he has echoed her thoughts
and feelings. Finally, Clarissa realizes how much she has in comm on with this working-class young
man, who on the surface seems so unlike her. Clarissa manages to appreciate that Septimus has
preserved his soul through death.

The two characters Clarissa and Septimus never meet in the novel, yet they are linked to o ne
another through various characters and because of the value they both give to that "leaf -
encumbered forest, the soul."

Both Mrs. Dalloway and Septimus Smith are intense and sensitive especially about the privacy of
their souls that collection of qualities which make up a personality's essence and individuality.

22. Symbols in the novel Mrs. Dalloway

1.Virginia Woolf is a famous female modernist and remains among the best and most analyzed authors even today.
Her characteristic important for our topic today is the fact that she wanted to give as a true picture of the world as
possible and thus she experimented with narrative techniques and devices such as stream of consciousness,
fragmentation and symbolism, which meant a break with more traditional writing.

Virginia Woolf's symbolism in Mrs. Dalloway is a primary tool for grasping the interest of the reader. Without
symbolism in this novel it would be impossible for us to understand anything, nor would Woolf manage to
communicate to the readers her views and ideas
Today we are to analyse different categories of symbolism. Symbolism in Mrs. Dalloway is used to portray the
despicableness of life, sanity and insanity and the relationship between life and death.

2.Virginia Woolfs novel Mrs. Dalloway (1925) was published during a time when British society was still
recovering from World War One. Many people still suffered from loss and mourning and post-war trauma. In spite
of having won the war, British society was, of course, very much affected and struggled to find a way back to some
sort of normality. People tried to rebuild their lives as best they could but the effects of the war were to be felt for a
long time to come. People had not experienced suffering on this scale before and society did not know how to best
deal with it. So throughout the novel there are many hidden images and allusions made towards the events near
the period. Post-war experience is presented through various symbols which we are to discuss.

3.CAR AND AIRPLANE

The car and the airplane that Mrs Dalloway sees toward the beginning of the novel seem to be really essential. Why
is that? Well, in a country so obsessed with tradition and the past, machines still seem like a major object of
interest.

These days, airplanes aren't anything exciting, but back then, they were a total spectacle. To the many bystanders,
the plane (and especially the skywriting) is an exciting piece of technology and a wonderful sight. Woolf suggests
its associations with modern travel and the rise of the advertising age the plane is advertising a product.

The car and plane also serve as a reference to the recently ended war. The backfiring of the car sounds like a pistol
being fired and frightens everyone around. The plane is also a reminder of the war: World War I was the first time
that planes played a big role in modern warfare. Basically, in Mrs Dalloway, the war is always around even in the
form of a car driving down the street.

4.The Prime Minister

In the novel the Prime Minister acts as a symbol of Englands traditional values and social hierarchy, which
have begun to decline as a result of World War I.

When Peter Walsh wanted to insult Clarissa and suggest she would give up her ideals to become a perfect
hostess, he said that she will marry a prime minister. Lady Bruton, on the other hand, uses Prime Minister as a
compliment to Hugh Whitbread, another figure of English tradition. The car that is possibly bearing the prime
minister is a spectacle in the street, but then people turn away from it to look at the airplane advertisement. At
Clarissas party the Prime Ministers arrival is greatly anticipated, but when he actually shows up he is a
disappointment. Throughout the novel people cling to their ideas of greatness in English society, while the reality
becomes more and more sobering and pathetic. Ironically when the car eventually enters the palace yard, the
nameless person of state remains unidentified as the passers-by are preoccupied by the equally mysterious sign-
writing airplane.

5.BIG BEN

Big Ben is a famous clock tower and London monument, but it also serves as an interesting symbol of time and
tradition in the book. The clock tower is part of the Palace of Westminster, and so in one way it acts as a symbol of
English tradition and conservatism, the attempt to pretend that the War and modern life havent changed
anything. But by its very nature Big Ben is also a clock, and so it dispassionately marks the endless progression of
time, which waits for no one. The striking of the clock is the main divider in the narrative of Mrs. Dalloway, and
interrupts characters thoughts and actions with leaden circles dissolving in the air.
Time is an important theme of the novel (Woolfs original title for the book was The Hours), as
Clarissa and Septimus both feel the danger of living even one day, and all the characters experience vibrant
memories of the past. The striking of Big Ben is then a continuous reminder of ever-present time.

Big Ben is almost like a character with a personality: "The sound of Big Ben striking the half-hour struck out between
them with extraordinary vigour, as if a young man, strong, indifferent, inconsiderate, were swinging dumb-bells this
way and that" - And like a character, Big Ben seems almost to interrupt the people of London intentionally.

6.It is time, Rezia says to Septimus as they sit in the park waiting for the doctor's appointment on Harley Street.
The ancient woman at the Regents Park Tube station suggests that the human condition knows no boundaries of
time, since she continues to sing the same song for what seems like eternity.

She had the perpetual sense, as she watched the taxi cabs, of being out, out, far out to sea and alone; she always had
the feeling that it was very, very, dangerous to live even one day.
Virginia Woolf, Mrs. Dalloway

7.SHAKESPEARE

The many appearances of Shakespeare specifically and poetry in general suggest hopefulness, the possibility of
finding comfort in art, and the survival of the soul in Mrs. Dalloway.

Clarissa quotes Shakespeares plays many times throughout the day. When she shops for flowers at the beginning
of the novel, she reads a few lines from a Shakespeare play, Cymbeline, in a book displayed in a shop window. The
lines come from a funeral hymn in the play that suggests death should be embraced as a release from the
constraints of life. Since Clarissa fears death for much of the novel, these lines suggest that an alternative, hopeful
way of addressing the prospect of death exists.

Clarissa also identifies with the title character in Othello, who loves his wife but kills her out of jealousy, then kills
himself when he learns his jealousy was unwarranted. Clarissa shares with Othello the sense of having lost a love,
especially when she thinks about Sally Seton. Before the war, Septimus appreciated Shakespeare as well, going so
far as aspiring to be a poet. He no longer finds comfort in poetry after he returns.

Richard finds Shakespeares sonnets indecent, and he compares reading them to listening in at a keyhole. Not
surprisingly, Richard himself has a difficult time voicing his emotions. Lady Bruton never reads poetry either, and
her demeanor is so rigid and impersonal that she has a reputation of caring more for politics than for people.
Traditional English society promotes a suppression of visible emotion, and since Shakespeare and poetry promote
a discussion of feeling and emotion, they belong to sensitive people like Clarissa, who are in many ways
antiestablishment.

8.FLOWERS

Clarissas first action in the story is to buy flowers; as she enters the flower shop. After this moment, flowers
continue to appear throughout the entire novel. Most importantly, they are an enormous source of joy for Clarissa,
who cherishes the beauty of everyday life.

Flowers are also important as symbols of love :Clarissa's daughter, Elizabeth, is often compared to a flower and
Richard brings roses to Clarissa, a gesture that replaces saying "I love you." Flowers are also a crucial aspect of
Clarissa's memories:
Woolf was surely aware of the feminine association with flowers: flowers, women, and beauty have long gone
together. According to the older generation (Aunt Helena), treating flowers in the way that Sally does implies some
corruption of femininity. Perhaps this is a comment on the conservative views toward female homosexuality.

9.Sally went out, picked hollyhocks, dahlias all sorts of flowers that had never been seen together cut their
heads off, and made them swim on the top of water in bowls. The effect was extraordinary coming in to dinner in
the sunset. (Of course Aunt Helena thought it wicked to treat flowers like that).

10.WATER IMAGERY

Virginia Woolf sadly committed suicide by drowning herself.

Woolf seems to purposely leave the water imagery ambiguous. At times, water suggests a lack of boundaries or
control; throughout the story, Woolf uses language of diving and plunging, as though shes bravely entering water.
And Septimus once discussed committing suicide as he stood near a river.

At the other times, water seems to indicate clarity and serenity. Clarissas party dress is like a mermaids, which
suggests a certain attraction to water, or the idea that she feels natural in it.

Waves can also be like memories coming and going, never staying completely still, and impossible to contain.
Sometimes memories wash over Clarissa like water, like in the opening scene:

How fresh, how calm, stiller than this of course, the air was in the early morning; like the flap of a wave; the kiss of
a wave; chill and sharp and yet (for a girl of eighteen as she then was) solemn, feeling as she did, standing there at
the open window, that something awful was about to happen.

Clarissa, be it as a diver or as a mermaid, has to find the balance between water and land, her inner life and the
external world, in order to continue with her life and keep her head above the water. Septimus has lost this balance
and eventually goes overboard. Water is traditionally an image of life and death.

11.Peter Walshs Pocketknife and Other Weapons

Peter Walsh plays constantly with his pocketknife, and the opening, closing, and it suggests his flightiness and
inability to make decisions. He cannot decide what he feels and doesnt know whether he abhors English tradition
and wants to fight it, or whether he accepts English civilization just as it is. The pocketknife reveals Peters
defensiveness. He is armed with the knife, in a sense, when he pays an unexpected visit to Clarissa, while she
herself is armed with her sewing scissors. Their weapons make them equal competitors.

Knives and weapons are also hinting at sexuality and power. Peter cannot define his own identity, and his constant
fidgeting with the knife suggests how uncomfortable he is with his masculinity. Characters fall into two groups:
those who are armed and those who are not. Septimus, psychologically crippled by the literal weapons of war,
commits suicide by impaling himself on a metal fence, showing the danger lurking behind man-made boundaries.

12.Birds

Throughout the novel there is sufficient evidence of Virginia Woolf referring to birds in her prose. She often
describes characters and even herself with bird-like qualities. Her thoughts weave in and out of her mind as well
similar to the way birds fly over and under the wind in the sky. Virginia Woolf included the presence of birds to
create images of freedom and the ability to fly and escape, which seemed to be something that she was unable to
do. Birds also play very well into the idea of the coming and going of time.
13.CHARACTERS:

I. Hugh Whitbreadsymbolic of mental servility to plumed authority and of unnatural loyalties

II. Miss Kilmanpossessive love and corrupt religiosity

III. Dr. Holmes and Sir William Bradshawsymbols of compensatory neatness, proportion, and order.

IV. Peter, Sally, Septimusthe adventurous, the unconventional, and the visionary in society.

V. Clarissa - privacy of soul

VI. Elizabeth - continuity of life

14.WHAT ABOUT NAMES? WHY IS NOVEL NAMED MRS DALLOWAY AND NOT SIMPLY CLARISSA?

transition of names Sally Seaton - to Lady Rosseter..class distinction

The symbolism is indeed a vital part of this novel, without which communicating central views and ideas to the
reader would not have been possible. Although having multiple symbols, even maybe some which we didn't
mention, we can also say that Virginia Woolf herself is a symbol of her time. A symbol of constant struggle to pass a
day, a symbol of misunderstood femininity as well as the proof that women can too be great authors as well.

The Symbolic Aspect of Virginia Woolf's 'Mrs. Dalloway'

Virginia Woolf is an innovative novelist of the modern age. She is known for using stream of consciousness or
interior monologue in her novels. To make the stream of consciousness technique more effective, she uses symbols
and images. In that way, the writer takes help of physical objects, characters or figures, to represent an abstract
idea and make its sense clear. In her novel, Mrs. Dalloway, Virginia Wolf uses a lot of symbols and motifs to talk
on different themes in one specific way, without talking openly about some things.

One of the first,and maybe the most frequently mentioned symbol in this novel is Peter Walshs Pocketknife, which
makes it one of the most characteristic and most remembered symbols. While reading the book, we can notice that
Peter Walsh plays constantly with his pocketknife. The opening, closing, and fiddling with the knife suggest his
flightiness and inability to make decisions. He cannot decide what he feels and doesnt know whether he abhors
English tradition and wants to fight it, or whether he accepts English civilization just as it is. Knives and weapons
generally are symbols which are hinting at sexuality and power. Peter cannot define his own identity, and his
constant playing with the knife suggests how uncomfortable he is with his masculinity. It symbolizes that he needs
to reassure himself that he is still young and free. Peter's knife is an important symbol for hidden sexual desires of
union with Clarissa who has been his love since he was young. Clarissa too remembers Peter's pocket-knife. It is
Virginia Woolf's skill that Peter's sexual desire is exposed through one such an ordinary object like this.

The next symbols, and certainly equally interesting and important, is the old woman who is singing an ancient song
about love. Her song actually celebrates life, endurance, and continuity. She is oblivious to everyone around her as
she sings, beyond caring what the world thinks. The narrator explains that no matter what happens in the world,
the old woman will still be there, even in ten million years, and that the song has soaked through the knotted
roots of infinite ages. Roots, intertwined and hidden beneath the earth, suggest the deepest parts of peoples souls,
and this womans song touches everyone who hears it in some way. Peter hears the song first and compares the old
woman to a rusty pump. He doesnt catch her triumphant message and feels only pity for her, giving her a coin
before stepping into a taxi. On the other hand, Reziafinds strength in the old womans words, and the song makes
her feel as though all will be fine in her life. Women in the novel, who have to view patriarchal English society from
the outside, are generally more turned to nature and the messages that are coming from it. Thats why Reziais able
to see the old woman for the life force she is, instead of simply one tragic figure to be dealt with, ignored, or pitied.

But, there is another old woman in this novel that represents another symbol that Virginia Wolf uses to emphasizes
the main messages of the novel and that is the old woman in the window across from Clarissas house. She
represents the privacy of the soul, which is one of the main themes of the book, and the loneliness that goes with it,
both of which will increase as Clarissa grows older. Clarissa sees her own future in the old woman. She knows that
she will also grow old and become more and more alone, since that is the nature of life. As Clarissa grows older, she
reflects more but communicates less. Instead, she keeps her feelings locked inside the private rooms of her own
soul, just as the old woman rattles alone around the rooms of her house. Yet, the old woman also represents
serenity and the purity of the soul. Clarissa respects the womans private reflections and thinks beauty lies in this
act of preserving ones interior life and independence. We also have a parallel figure to the old woman and that is
the old man descending the staircase outside whomSeptimussee before he jumps out the window. Although
Clarissa and Septimuschoose different and opposite ways to preserve their view of loneliness, privacy, and
communication, they still can be presented within these similar images.

Having in mind how important impact society has on peoples life, its understandable that this theme is
unavoidable in a novel like this. Like one of the main representatives of English society at that time is the prime
minister who appears at the Clarissas party like one of the main guests. Although normally this should be one
highly appreciated person, the prime minister in Mrs. Dallowayisnt really like that. He embodies Englands old
values and hierarchical social system, which are in decline. When Peter Walsh wants to insult Clarissa and suggest
she will sell out and become a perfect society hostess, he says she will marry a prime minister. The prime minister
is a figure from the old establishment, which Clarissa and Septimus are struggling against.Mrs. Dalloway takes place
after World War I, a time when the English looked desperately for meaning in the old symbols but found the
symbols hollow. When the conservative prime minister finally arrives at Clarissas party, his appearance is
unimpressive. The old pyramidal social system that benefited the very rich before the war is now decaying, and the
symbols of its greatness have become pathetic.

All the characters in the novel are symbols for some of the life and social features. Yet, some of them are more
specific than others, like for example Septimus.In this novel, Septimus is a living symbol, representing
consequences of War and side effects of violence, as we havepresented a picture of life with the great war in the
background in the novel. The war is just over, but the news of the dead and the wounded is still being received. The
English society is passing through nervous breakdowns and all these consequences can be seen on Septimus.
Another symbolic figure is one of the main charaters of the novel, and thats Peter Welsh. Peter who visits foreign
lands become a representative of adventurers. The Adventurous people love truth and knowledge. They prefer
experience to wealth. They hate pomp and show, pride and vanity. They support new waves or new ideals and are
an antithesis of the orthodox and the conservative. He criticizes all aristocratic guests at the party.

One more thing that is also worth praising is Virginia Woolf's use of nature symbols and images. She presents the
calm, fresh morning air, like the flap of a wave, the kiss of a wave, chill as symbols of the morning. Tree and flower
images are also very present in Mrs. Dalloway. The color, variety, and beauty of flowers suggest feeling and
emotion. The young age of Clarissa's life passed at Bourton full of beautiful flowers, and green fields in the novel
symbolize peace and contentment. The flower of rose is a symbol of love and fulfillment and Richard Dalloway
expresses his love for Clarissa by giving her roses. As a part of naturalistic symbols we also have water, where its
fluidity represents the cycle of life and death.

We could actually say that almost every single thing in this novel is a symbol for something. For example, streets
are the symbols of namelessness and mystery of all the lives. Houses and roomssymbolize protection and
unification of a person with his family. Than we have fountain to illustrate lack of fluid communication while the
image of the sea represents loneliness, separation between Clarissa and Peter, and the broken pump that stood
between himself and Clarissa at Burton and ends the second full cycle between them. One also very interesting
symbol is a black car with its loud noise.Although its just a noise it has unusual effects to the mass of people who
happen to be together on a London Street. The noise catches their attention, and the important-looking car
fascinates them and makes them like hypnotized. The car does not, for certain, contain anyone important, but
everyone has deep respect for it. We can clearly notice here that Virginia Woolf points out on the crowd's need to
be associated with Greatness, and that the car is just a car, and even the Queen, if she was inside, is only a woman.

All the symbols, themes and motives overlap in a way. We have motif of Big Ben and motif of passing time that are
obviously connected as Big Ben is not just a symbol of London but also shows the time and draws attention of the
characters its passing so to the passing of life. The fear of death is one of the main themes in the novel, so its clear
why the characters which are afraid of death the most always hear the Big Ben ticking time away.

Considering that Virginia Woolf actually makes a psychological study of her characters in 'Mrs. Dalloway' it is
obvious how helpful the use of symbols is, and how successful that study turned to be.

23. Recapturing of past in Mrs. Dalloway

Clarissas party stirs up memories for many of the characters, and memories are constantly woven into the
present-day thoughts of the characters. The past affects each character differently in Mrs Dalloway. Certain
memories are very keen (and much happier) for Clarissa, such as getting a kiss from Sally Seton. She cherishes
these moments as the best of her life. For Peter, the past is mostly just painful: he still cant get over his love for
Clarissa and so he constantly returns to the summers at Bourton in order to make sense of what happened. For
Septimus, memories are haunting and painful. He continues to hallucinate that hes seeing Evans get killed, and
memories of the war dominate his mind. Though he struggles to see beauty, the present is constantly interrupted
by gruesome visions of the past.

We live in a consumer society consuming time. We use time to function smoothly but also to channel the direction
of our lives. As a college student, I am constantly aware of time. I have a time frame for finishing my college career,
as well as constant deadlines to meet. Daily, I divide my hours between my job, my studies, and my friends. In the
midst of following external time, I strive for a balance with my internal time. My personal sense of time allows me
to live in the present moment. However, I struggle to not be pressured by external time. I resent the tension it
creates. The notion of time in Virginia Woolfs Mrs. Dalloway particularly interests me. Her original title, The Hours,
indicates the importance of time as one of the novels themes (Lee 92). By looking at Woolfs writing style,
critiquing her use of clocks, and analyzing Clarissas thoughts, the reader finds a philosophical message about time,
powerfully expressed.
The lyrical, flowing pattern of Woolfs writing easily slides in and out of different characters thoughts. Her
ability to show the random yet patterned working of our minds gives us a realistic sense of mental time. Woolfs
sentences quickly cross the boundaries of the past, present, and future. She saw the writers task as being able to
go beyond the `formal railway line of sentences and to show how people feel or think or dream all over the place
(Lee 93). She wanted to express a point of view, not a plot. Her stream-of-consciousness writing allows us insight
into a variety of characters. For example, within the first moments that we meet Clarissa, we rapidly travel
between her present, her past, and her thoughts about the future. In the process, we understand pieces of her life
which create the woman we come to know in a single day. We see the lifetime culmination of beautiful moments
and painful moments embodied in Woolfs characters.
 Woolfs style impresses upon the reader the time which exists in our minds. Mental time does not progress
steadily forward, like the clock time we follow. This point is illustrated by Clarissas arrival at the flower shop in
the morning; her senses are effortlessly taken to evening time as she thinks, And it was the moment between six
and seven when every flowerroses, carnations, irises, lilacglows; white, violet, red, deep orange; every flower
seems to burn by itself, softly, purely in the misty beds; and how she loved the grey-white moths spinning in and
out, over the cherry pie, over the evening primroses! (Woolf 13) This passage flows easily from her seeing the
flowers in the present to being drawn back to memories and sensations from her past. If Woolf wrote in any other
way, her layered message about time would not be as successfully or beautifully expressed. Critic Bernard
Blackstone wrote that Mrs. Dalloway is an experiment with time. It is a mingling of present experience and
memory (71). Essentially, Woolfs style adds emphasis to her idea of time as a constant flowtime that is the
present but also the past; linear but sporadic; eternal but vanishing.
Big Ben and St. Margarets represent different rates of time: one marching straight ahead without looking back,
the other gently making its presence known. Woolfs use of Big Ben serves two purposes. First, its concise tolling
indicates the time that we lose each day. It shows the constant forward movement of the hours. Second, the fame of
Big Ben suggests that the mark we leave on the world be something grand, something renowned. The bell of Big
Ben agitates Clarissa: The sound of Big Ben flooded Clarissas drawing-room where she sat, ever so annoyed, at
her writing table; worried; annoyed (Woolf 117). The clock tells her she is running out of time and reminds her of
her middle-age. Its toll reminds her that she has done nothing civilization would consider impressive. She feels a
suspense before Big Ben strikes. There! Out it boomed. First a warning, musical; then the hour, irrevocable. The
leaden circles dissolved in the air (Woolf 4). Woolfs description of the bell as a warning and the hour as
irrevocable (used more than once) clearly states a negative idea of Big Ben time. The strike of the clock cautions
that another hour has passedtime that we will never have to live again.
While Big Ben reminds Clarissa of her mortality, St. Margarets serves another purpose. With St. Margarets,
Woolf presents a time that appeals to the human spirit. It chimes in a little late, gliding into the recesses of the
heart and buries itself, to be, with a tremor of delight, at rest (Woolf 50). Although not a famous bell tower, St.
Margarets attracts the attention of those who hear it. Therefore, it contradicts the message of Big Bento leave
behind something famous to be remembered by when we die. Instead, St. Margarets suggests that we not be overly
consumed with losing time and that we be aware of it in our own way. In comparison with Big Ben, St. Margarets
suggests that time meanders and passes subtly. The towers bell represents an approach to life that accepts the
moment. It makes the listener aware of time to appreciate it, not to fear it.
Woolf draws a clear parallel between Clarissa and St. Margarets. In fact, the ringing of the bells makes Peter
think of Clarissa: Ah, said St. Margarets, like a hostess who comes into her drawing room on the very stroke of the
hour and finds her guests there already. I am not late. No, it is precisely half-past eleven, she says. Yet, though she is
perfectly right, her voice, being the voice of the hostess, is reluctant to inflict its individuality. Some grief for the
past holds it back; some concern for the present. (Woolf 49) The bell tower and Clarissa differ from Big Ben. They
are not bold in their individuality. They prefer to make an impression on the world in a different manneras
hostesses. Clarissa feels her only gift was knowing people almost by instinct (Woolf 9). The hostess in Clarissa
represents her gift, her art. She values the influence she has on peoples lives. She feels that both Peter and Richard
criticized her very unfairly, laughed at her very unjustly, for her parties (Woolf 121). Clarissa feels the presence
of people, separated from one another. She felt quite continuously a sense of their existence; and she felt what a
waste;...and she felt if only she could bring them together; so she did it. And it was an offering (Woolf 122). Her
parties and her affinity for people give her a feeling of timelessness.
Through the character of Clarissa, Woolf aptly expresses her perspective on time. Clarissa pays attention to the
details of the moment: What she loved was this, here, now, in front of her (Woolf 9). Her appreciation of the
moment leads her to a consideration of death: Did it matter then, she asked herself...did it matter that she must
inevitably cease completely; all this must go on without her; did she resent it; or did it become consoling to believe
that death ended absolutely. (Woolf 9) Despite her attachment to the present, another part of Clarissa wants her
spirit to outlast her time on earth. She wants to remain. Her eternal connection is two-fold. First, she feels like an
eternal piece of the ebb and flow of things, here, there, she survived, Peter survived, lived in each other, she being
part, she was positive, of the trees at home; of the house there; part of people she had never met; being laid out
like a mist between the people she knew best. (Woolf 9) She also hopes to survive time in her offering to the
worldbringing people together at parties by briefly obliterating the boundaries that create alienation among
them. For an evening, she pulls together fragmented lives and creates communion.
In short, Woolf suggests that time exists in different forms. It exists in the external world, but alsoand perhaps
more importantlyin our internal world. Her description of the loud and rushing civilization suggests that we
push ahead in the name of progress, without fully appreciating the moment. Through the character of Clarissa,
Woolf challenges the usual definition of success. Perhaps we need not leave some magnificent gift behind in the
form of a building or a concrete art piece. Instead, maybe it is how we live our lives and our appreciation for the
present that are truly more powerful and eternal. The small gifts we offer others, like bringing people together
through a party, can touch people differently than a monument.
Virginia Woolfs message about time should be heeded. Our rush to leave a dramatic mark in the world leads to
further destruction. Tension abounds in our modern world as we create technology to increase our efficiency. Our
civilization tends to see scientific and monumental achievements as the most valid measures of an individuals
success. However, in the process, our communities disintegrate. More and more people complain of feeling
alienated. The evidence surrounds us. The internal time that allows us to slow down and be involved with people
finds itself dominated by external societal time. Some might find Clarissa Dalloways gift to the world to be trivial.
However, we need individuals with the ability to pull people togetherpeople with the ability to create
community where it no longer exists.

24. Characteristics of Brave New World

THE NOVEL

THE PLOT

Brave New World is partly a statement of ideas (expressed by characters with no more depth than cartoon
characters) and only partly a story with a plot.

The first three chapters present most of the important ideas or themes of the novel. The Director of Hatcheries and
Conditioning explains that this Utopia breeds people to order, artificially fertilizing a mother's eggs to create babies
that grow in bottles. They are not born, but decanted. Everyone belongs to one of five classes, from the Alphas, the
most intelligent, to the Epsilons, morons bred to do the dirty jobs that nobody else wants to do. The lower classes
are multiplied by a budding process that can create up to 96 identical clones and produce over 15,000 brothers and
sisters from a single ovary.

All the babies are conditioned, physically and chemically in the bottle, and psychologically after birth, to make
them happy citizens of the society with both a liking and an aptitude for the work they will do. One psychological
conditioning technique is hypnopaedia, or teaching people while they sleep- not teaching facts or analysis, but
planting suggestions that will make people behave in certain ways. The Director also makes plain that sex is a
source of happiness, a game people play with anyone who pleases them.

The Controller, one of the ten men who run the world, explains some of the more profound principles on which the
Utopia is based. One is that "history is bunk"; the society limits people's knowledge of the past so they will not be
able to compare the present with anything that might make them want to change the present. Another principle is
that people should have no emotions, particularly no painful emotions; blind happiness is necessary for stability.
One of the things that guarantees happiness is a drug called soma, which calms you down and gets you high but
never gives you a hangover. Another is the "feelies," movies that reach your sense of touch as well as your sight and
hearing.
After Huxley presents these themes in the first three chapters, the story begins. Bernard Marx, an Alpha of the top
class, is on the verge of falling in love with Lenina Crowne, a woman who works in the Embryo Room of the
Hatchery. Lenina has been dating Henry Foster, a Hatchery scientist; her friend Fanny nags her because she hasn't
seen any other man for four months. Lenina likes Bernard but doesn't fall in love with him. Falling in love is a sin in
this world in which one has sex with everyone else, and she is a happy, conforming citizen of the Utopia.

Bernard is neither happy nor conforming. He's a bit odd; for one thing, he's small for an Alpha, in a world where
every member of the same caste is alike. He likes to treasure his differences from his fellows, but he lacks the
courage to fight for his right to be an individual. In contrast is his friend Helmholtz Watson, successful in sports,
sex, and community activities, but openly dissatisfied because instead of writing something beautiful and powerful,
his job is to turn out propaganda.

Bernard attends a solidarity service of the Fordian religion, a parody of Christianity as practiced in England in the
1920s. It culminates in a sexual orgy, but he doesn't feel the true rapture experienced by the other 11 members of
his group.

Bernard then takes Lenina to visit a Savage Reservation in North America. While signing his permit to go, the
Director tells Bernard how he visited the same Reservation as a young man, taking a young woman from London
who disappeared and was presumed dead. He then threatens Bernard with exile to Iceland because Bernard is a
nonconformist: he doesn't gobble up pleasure in his leisure time like an infant.

At the Reservation, Bernard and Lenina meet John, a handsome young Savage who, Bernard soon realizes, is the
son of the Director. Clearly, the woman the Director had taken to the Reservation long ago had become pregnant as
the result of an accident that the citizens of Utopia would consider obscene. John has a fantasy picture of the Utopia
from his mother's tales and a knowledge of Shakespeare that he mistakes for a guide to reality.

Bernard gets permission from the Controller to bring John and Linda, his mother, back to London. The Director had
called a public meeting to announce Bernard's exile, but by greeting the Director as lover and father, respectively,
Linda and John turn him into an obscene joke. Bernard stays and becomes the center of attention of all London
because he is, in effect, John's guardian, and everybody wants to meet the Savage. Linda goes into a permanent
soma trance after her years of exile on the Reservation. John is taken to see all the attractions of new world society
and doesn't like them. But he enjoys arguing with Helmholtz about them, and about Shakespeare.

Lenina has become popular because she is thought to be sleeping with the Savage. Everyone envies her and wants
to know what it's like. But, in fact, while she wants to sleep with John, he refuses because he, too, has fallen in love
with her- and he has taken from Shakespeare the old-fashioned idea that lovers should be pure. Not understanding
this, she finally comes to his apartment and takes her clothes off. He throws her out, calling her a prostitute
because he thinks she's immoral, even though he wants her desperately.

John then learns that his mother is dying. The hospital illustrates the Utopia's approach to death, which includes
trying to completely eliminate grief and pain. When John goes to visit Linda he is devastated; his display of grief
frightens children being taught that death is a pleasant and natural process. John grows so angry that he tries to
bring the Utopia back to what he considers sanity and morality by disrupting the daily distribution of soma to
lower-caste Delta workers. That leads to a riot; John, Bernard, and Helmholtz are arrested.

The three then confront the Controller, who explains more of the Utopia's principles. Their conversation reveals
that the Utopia achieves its happiness by giving up science, art, religion, and other things that we prize in the real
world. The Controller sends Bernard to Iceland, after all, and Helmholtz to the Falkland Islands. He keeps John in
England, but John finds a place where he can lead a hermit's life, complete with suffering. His solitude is invaded by
Utopians who want to see him suffer, as though it were a sideshow spectacle; when Lenina joins the mob, he kills
himself.
 THE CHARACTERS

Because this is a Utopian novel of ideas, few of the characters are three-dimensional people who come alive on the
page. Most exist to voice ideas in words or to embody them in their behavior. John, Bernard, Helmholtz, and the
Controller express ideas through real personalities, but you will enjoy most of the others more if you see them as
cartoon characters rather than as full portraits that may seem so poorly drawn that they will disappoint you.

THE DIRECTOR OF HATCHERIES AND CONDITIONING

The Director opens the novel by explaining the reproductive system of the brave new world, with genetically
engineered babies growing in bottles. He loves to throw "scientific data" at his listeners so quickly that they can't
understand them; he is a know-it-all impressed with his own importance. In fact, he knows less and is less
important than the Controller, as you see when he is surprised that the Controller dares to talk about two
forbidden topics- history and biological parents.

The Director comes alive only when he confesses to Bernard Marx that as a young man he went to a Savage
Reservation, taking along a woman who disappeared there. She was pregnant with his baby, as a result of what the
Utopia considers an obscene accident. The baby grows up to be John; his return to London leads to the total
humiliation of the Director.

The Director's name is Thomas, but you learn this only because Linda, his onetime lover and John's mother, keeps
referring to him as Tomakin.

HENRY FOSTER

Henry is a scientist in the London Hatchery, an ideal citizen of the world state: efficient and intelligent at work,
filling his leisure time with sports and casual sex. He is not an important character but helps Huxley explain the
workings of the Hatchery, show Lenina's passionless sex life, and explore the gulf between Bernard and the
"normal" citizens of Utopia.

LENINA CROWNE

Lenina is young and pretty despite having lupus, an illness that causes reddish-brown blotches to appear on her
skin. She is, like Henry Foster, a happy, shallow citizen, her one idiosyncrasy is the fact that she sometimes spends
more time than society approves dating one man exclusively.

Like all well-conditioned citizens of the World State, Lenina believes in having sex when she wants it. She can't
understand that John avoids sex with her because he loves her and does not want to do something that he thinks-
in his old-fashioned, part-Indian, part-Christian, part-Shakespearean way- will dishonor her. She embodies the
conflict he feels between body and spirit, between love and lust.

Lenina is more a cartoon character than a real person, but she triggers John's emotional violence and provides the
occasion for his suicide when she comes to see him whip himself.

THE CONTROLLER, MUSTAPHA MOND

Mond is one of the ten people who control the World State. He is good-natured and dedicated to his work, and
extremely intelligent; he understands people and ideas that are different, which most Utopians cannot do. He has
read such forbidden books as the works of Shakespeare and the Bible, and knows history and philosophy. Indeed,
he resembles the Oxford professors that Huxley knew, and his discussion of happiness with the Savage resembles a
tutorial between an Oxford don and his most challenging student.
Once a gifted scientist, the Controller made a conscious choice as a young man to become one of the rulers instead
of a troublesome dissident. He is one of the few Utopians who can choose, who has free will, and this makes him
more rounded and more attractive than most of the characters you'll meet in the book. It also makes him
concerned with morality, but he uses his moral force and his sanity for the immoral and insane goals of the Utopia.
You may decide that he is the most dangerous person in Brave New World.

BERNARD MARX

A specialist in sleep-teaching, Bernard does not fit the uniformity that usually characterizes all members of the
same caste. He is an Alpha of high intelligence and therefore a member of the elite, but he is small and therefore
regarded as deformed. Other people speculate that too much alcohol was put into his bottle when he was still an
embryo. He dislikes sports and likes to be alone, two very unusual traits among Utopians. When he first appears, he
seems to dislike casual sex, another departure from the norm. He is unhappy in a world where everyone else is
happy.

At first Bernard seems to take pleasure in his differentness, to like being a nonconformist and a rebel. Later, he
reveals that his rebellion is less a matter of belief than of his own failure to be accepted. When he returns from the
Savage Reservation with John, he is suddenly popular with important people and successful with women, and he
loves it. Underneath, he has always wanted to be a happy member of the ruling class. In the end, he is exiled to
Iceland and protests bitterly.

HELMHOLTZ WATSON

Helmholtz, like Bernard, is different from the average Alpha-plus intellectual. A mental giant who is also successful
in sports and sex, he's almost too good to be true. But he is a nonconformist who knows that the world is capable of
greater literature than the propaganda he writes so well- and that he is capable of producing it. When John the
Savage introduces him to Shakespeare, Helmholtz only appreciates half of it; despite his genius, he's still limited by
his Utopian upbringing. He remains willing to challenge society even if he can't change it, and accepts exile to the
bleak Falkland Islands in the hope that physical discomfort and the company of other dissidents will stimulate his
writing.

JOHN THE SAVAGE

John is the son of two members of Utopia, but has grown up on a Savage Reservation. He is the only character who
can really compare the two different worlds, and it is through him that Huxley shows that his Utopia is a bad one.

John's mother, Linda, became pregnant accidentally, a very unusual event in the brave new world. While she was
pregnant, she visited a Savage Reservation, hurt herself in a fall, and got lost, missing her return trip to London.
The Indians of the Reservation saved her life and she gave birth to John. The boy grew up absorbing three cultures:
the Utopia he heard about from his mother; the Indian culture in which he lived, but which rejected him as an
outsider; and the plays of Shakespeare, which he read in a book that survived from pre-Utopian days.

John, in short, is different from the other Savages and from the Utopians. He is tall and handsome, but much more
of an alien in either world than Bernard is. John looks at both worlds through the lenses of the religion he acquired
on the Reservation- a mixture of Christianity and American Indian beliefs- and the old-fashioned morality he
learned from reading Shakespeare. His beliefs contradict those of the brave new world, as he shows in his struggle
over sex with Lenina and his fight with the system after his mother dies. Eventually, the conflict is too much for him
and he kills himself.

LINDA
Linda is John's mother, a Beta minus who sleeps with the Director and becomes pregnant accidentally, 20 years
before the action of the book begins. She falls while visiting a Savage Reservation, becomes unconscious, and
remains lost until the Director has to leave. She is then rescued by Indians, gives birth to John, and lives for 20
years in the squalor of the Reservation, where she grows old, sick, and fat without the medical care that keeps
people physically young in the Utopia. Behaving according to Utopian principles, she sleeps with many of the
Indians on the Reservation and never understands why the women despise her or why the community makes John
an outcast. When she returns to London, she takes ever-increasing doses of soma and stays perpetually high- until
the drug kills her.

OTHER ELEMENTS

SETTING

Setting plays a particularly important role in Brave New World. Huxley's novel is a novel of Utopia, and a science-
fiction novel. In both kinds of books the portrayal of individual characters tends to take a back seat to the portrayal
of the society they live in. In some ways, the brave new world itself becomes the book's main character.

The story opens in London some 600 years in the future- 632 A. F. (After Ford) in the calendar of the era. Centuries
before, civilization as we know it was destroyed in the Nine Years' War. Out of the ruins grew the World State, an
all-powerful government headed by ten World Controllers. Faith in Christ has been replaced by Faith in Ford, a
mythologized version of Henry Ford, the auto pioneer who developed the mass production methods that have
reached their zenith in the World State. Almost all traces of the past have been erased, for, as Henry Ford said,
"History is bunk." Changing names show the changed society. Charing Cross, the London railroad station, is now
Charing T Rocket Station: the cross has been supplanted by the T, from Henry Ford's Model T. Big Ben is now Big
Henry. Westminster Abbey, one of England's most hallowed shrines, is now merely the site of a nightclub, the
Westminster Abbey Cabaret.

The people of this world, born from test tubes and divided into five castes, are docile and happy, kept occupied by
elaborate games like obstacle golf, entertainments like the "feelies," and sexual promiscuity. Disease is nonexistent,
old age and death made as pleasant as possible so they can be ignored.

Some parts of the earth, however, are allowed to remain as they were before the World State came to power. With
Bernard and Lenina, you visit one of these Savage Reservations, the New Mexican home of the Zuni Indians. It is a
world away from civilized London: the Zunis are impoverished, dirty, ravaged by disease and old age, and still cling
to their ancient religion.

The settings in Brave New World, then, seem to offer only the choice between civilized servitude and primitive
ignorance and squalor. Are these the only choices available? One other is mentioned, the islands of exile- Iceland
and the Falkland Islands- where malcontents like Bernard Marx and Helmholtz Watson are sent. But Huxley does
not discuss these places in enough detail to let us know whether or not they provide any kind of alternative to the
grim life he has presented in the rest of the book.

THEMES

This novel is about a Utopia, an ideal state- a bad ideal state. It is therefore a novel about ideas, and its themes are
as important as its plot. They will be studied in depth in the chapter-by-chapter discussion of the book. Most are
expressed as fundamental principles of the Utopia, the brave new world. Some come to light when one character, a
Savage raised on an Indian reservation, confronts that world. As you find the themes, try to think not only about
what they say about Huxley's Utopia, but also about Huxley's real world- and your own.
1. COMMUNITY, IDENTITY, STABILITY- VERSUS INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM

Community, Identity, Stability is the motto of the World State. It lists the Utopia's prime goals. Community is in part
a result of identity and stability. It is also achieved through a religion that satirizes Christianity- a religion that
encourages people to reach solidarity through sexual orgy. And it is achieved by organizing life so that a person is
almost never alone.

Identity is in large part the result of genetic engineering. Society is divided into five classes or castes, hereditary
social groups. In the lower three classes, people are cloned in order to produce up to 96 identical "twins." Identity
is also achieved by teaching everyone to conform, so that someone who has or feels more than a minimum of
individuality is made to feel different, odd, almost an outcast.

Stability is the third of the three goals, but it is the one the characters mention most often- the reason for designing
society this way. The desire for stability, for instance, requires the production of large numbers of genetically
identical "individuals," because people who are exactly the same are less likely to come into conflict. Stability
means minimizing conflict, risk, and change.

2. SCIENCE AS A MEANS OF CONTROL

Brave New World is not only a Utopian book, it is also a science-fiction novel. But it does not predict much about
science in general. Its theme "is the advancement of science as it affects human individuals," Huxley said in
the Foreword he wrote in 1946, 15 years after he wrote the book. He did not focus on physical sciences like nuclear
physics, though even in 1931 he knew that the production of nuclear energy (and weapons) was probable. He was
more worried about dangers that appeared more obvious at that time- the possible misuse of biology, physiology,
and psychology to achieve community, identity, and stability. Ironically, it becomes clear at the end of the book that
the World State's complete control over human activity destroys even the scientific progress that gained it such
control.

3. THE THREAT OF GENETIC ENGINEERING

Genetic engineering is a term that has come into use in recent years as scientists have learned to manipulate RNA
and DNA, the proteins in every cell that determine the basic inherited characteristics of life. Huxley didn't use the
phrase but he describes genetic engineering when he explains how his new world breeds prescribed numbers of
humans artificially for specified qualities.

4. THE MISUSE OF PSYCHOLOGICAL CONDITIONING

Every human being in the new world is conditioned to fit society's needs- to like the work he will have to do.
Human embryos do not grow inside their mothers' wombs but in bottles. Biological or physiological conditioning
consists of adding chemicals or spinning the bottles to prepare the embryos for the levels of strength, intelligence,
and aptitude required for given jobs. After they are "decanted" from the bottles, people are psychologically
conditioned, mainly by hypnopaedia or sleep-teaching. You might say that at every stage the society brainwashes
its citizens.

5. THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS CARRIED TO AN EXTREME

A society can achieve stability only when everyone is happy, and the brave new world tries hard to ensure that
every person is happy. It does its best to eliminate any painful emotion, which means every deep feeling, every
passion. It uses genetic engineering and conditioning to ensure that everyone is happy with his or her work.
6. THE CHEAPENING OF SEXUAL PLEASURE

Sex is a primary source of happiness. The brave new world makes promiscuity a virtue: you have sex with any
partner you want, who wants you- and sooner or later every partner will want you. (As a child, you learn in your
sleep that "everyone belongs to everyone else.") In this Utopia, what we think of as true love for one person would
lead to neurotic passions and the establishment of family life, both of which would interfere with community and
stability. Nobody is allowed to become pregnant because nobody is born, only decanted from a bottle. Many
females are born sterile by design; those who are not are trained by "Malthusian drill" to use contraceptives
properly.

7. THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS THROUGH DRUGS

Soma is a drug used by everyone in the brave new world. It calms people and gets them high at the same time, but
without hangovers or nasty side effects. The rulers of the brave new world had put 2000 pharmacologists and
biochemists to work long before the action of the novel begins; in six years they had perfected the drug. Huxley
believed in the possibility of a drug that would enable people to escape from themselves and help them achieve
knowledge of God, but he made soma a parody and degradation of that possibility.

8. THE THREAT OF MINDLESS CONSUMPTION AND MINDLESS DIVERSIONS

This society offers its members distractions that they must enjoy in common- never alone- because solitude breeds
instability. Huxley mentions but never explains sports that use complex equipment whose manufacture keeps the
economy rolling- sports called Obstacle Golf and Centrifugal Bumble-puppy. But the chief emblem of Brave New
World is the Feelies- movies that feature not only sight and sound but also the sensation of touch, so that when
people watch a couple making love on a bearskin rug, they can feel every hair of the bear on their own bodies.

9. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE FAMILY

The combination of genetic engineering, bottle-birth, and sexual promiscuity means there is no monogamy,
marriage, or family. "Mother" and "father" are obscene words that may be used scientifically on rare, carefully
chosen occasions to label ancient sources of psychological problems.

10. THE DENIAL OF DEATH

The brave new world insists that death is a natural and not unpleasant process. There is no old age or visible
senility. Children are conditioned at hospitals for the dying and given sweets to eat when they hear of death
occurring. This conditioning does not- as it might- prepare people to cope with the death of a loved one or with
their own mortality. It eliminates the painful emotions of grief and loss, and the spiritual significance of death,
which Huxley made increasingly important in his later novels.

11. THE OPPRESSION OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

Some characters in Brave New World differ from the norm. Bernard is small for an Alpha and fond of solitude;
Helmholtz, though seemingly "every centimetre an Alpha-Plus," knows he is too intelligent for the work he
performs; John the Savage, genetically a member of the World State, has never been properly conditioned to
become a citizen of it. Even the Controller, Mustapha Mond, stands apart because of his leadership abilities. Yet in
each case these differences are crushed: Bernard and Helmholtz are exiled; John commits suicide; and the Mond
stifles his own individuality in exchange for the power he wields as Controller. What does this say about Huxley's
Utopia?

12. WHAT DOES SUCH A SYSTEM COST?

This Utopia has a good side: there is no war or poverty, little disease or social unrest. But Huxley keeps asking,
what does society have to pay for these benefits? The price, he makes clear, is high. The first clue is in the epigraph,
the quotation at the front of the book. It is in French, but written by a Russian, Nicolas Berdiaeff. It says, "Utopias
appear to be much easier to realize than one formerly believed. We currently face a question that would otherwise
fill us with anguish: How to avoid their becoming definitively real?"

By the time you hear the conversation between the Controller, one of the men who runs the new world, and John,
the Savage, you've learned that citizens of this Utopia must give up love, family, science, art, religion, and history. At
the end of the book, John commits suicide and you see that the price of this brave new world is fatally high.

STYLE

Although Huxley's writing style makes him easy to read, his complex ideas make readers think. Even if you're not
familiar with his vocabulary or philosophy, you can see that, as the critic Laurence Brander says, "The prose was
witty and ran clearly and nimbly."

Huxley's witty, clear, nimble prose is very much an upper-class tradition. Brave New World- like all of Huxley's
novels- is a novel of ideas, which means that the characters must have ideas and must be able to express them
eloquently and cleverly. This demands that the author have considerable knowledge. In pre-World War II England
such novels were more likely to have been written by members of the upper class, simply because they had much
greater access to good education. Huxley, we remember, attended Eton and Oxford.

Huxley, like other upper-class Englishmen, was familiar with history and literature. He expected his readers to
know the plays of Shakespeare, to recognize names like Malthus and Marx, to be comfortable with a word like
"predestination." (Literally "predestine" means only "to determine in advance," but it is most importantly a word
from Christian theology- describing, in one version, the doctrine that God knows in advance everything that will
ever happen, and thereby decides who will be saved and who will be damned.)

Although Huxley was very serious about ideas, he never stopped seeing their humorous possibilities. His
biographer, Sybille Bedford, says that in 1946 he gave the commencement speech at a progressive school in
California, where he urged the students not to imitate "the young man of that ancient limerick... who

....said "Damn,
It is borne in on me that I am
A creature that moves
In predestinate grooves;
I'm not even a bus, I'm a tram!"

To appreciate this joke, you have to remember how a tram or trolley car moves on its tracks. It's a reminder that
you'll have much more fun with Brave New World and get much more out of it if you don't let the language scare or
bore you. Use the glossary in this guide and your dictionary as tools. See how many of the words you know. See if
you can guess what some words mean from their spelling and the context in which you find them. Look them up
and see how close you are. Look up the ones whose meaning you can't guess. If you put even a few of the words you
meet for the first time in Brave New World into your vocabulary, you'll be winning a great game.
Games were an important part of an upper-class English education in Huxley's day. Many elite students developed
a readiness to make jokes with words and ideas. You may find some of Huxley's jokes funny, while you may think
the humor has vanished from others. But you'll have more fun with the book if you try to spot the humor. You'll
find big jokes like the Feelies, movies that you can feel, as well as see and hear. You'll also find little jokes like plays
on words- as in calling the process for getting a baby out of its bottle "decanting," a word ordinarily used only for
fine wine. There is humor in "orgy-porgy," a combination of religious ritual and group sex, a parody of a child's
nursery rhyme.

In Brave New World Huxley plays many games with his characters' names. He turns Our Lord into Our Ford, for
Henry Ford, the inventor of the modern assembly line and the cheap cars that embodied the machine age for the
average man. He names one of his main characters for Karl Marx, the father of the ideas of Communism. His
heroine is called Lenina, after the man who led the Russian Revolution. Benito Hoover, a minor character, has the
first name of the dictator of fascist Italy and the last name of the President of the United States who led the nation
into the Great Depression, but he is "notoriously good-natured." Look up any names you don't recognize.

POINT OF VIEW

Huxley's point of view in Brave New World is third person, omniscient (all-knowing). The narrator is not one of the
characters and therefore has the ability to tell us what is going on within any of the characters' minds. This ability
is particularly useful in showing us a cross section of this strange society of the future. We're able to be with the
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning in the Central London Conditioning and Hatchery Centre, with Lenina
Crowne at the Westminster Abbey Cabaret, with Bernard Marx at the Fordson Community Singery. The technique
reaches an extreme in Chapter Three, when we hear a babble of unidentified voices- Lenina's, Fanny Crowne's,
Mustapha Mond's- that at first sound chaotic but soon give us a vivid understanding of this brave new world.

FORM AND STRUCTURE

Brave New World fits into a long tradition of books about Utopia, an ideal state where everything is done for the
good of humanity as a whole, and evils like war and poverty cannot exist.

The word "Utopia" means "no place" in Greek. Sir Thomas More first used it in 1516 as the title of a book about
such an ideal state. But the idea of a Utopia goes much further back. Many critics consider Plato's Republic, written
in the fourth century B. C., a Utopian book.

"Utopia" came to have a second meaning soon after Sir Thomas More used it- "an impractical scheme for social
improvement." The idea that Utopias are silly and impractical helped make them a subject for satire, a kind of
literature that makes fun of something, exposing wickedness and foolishness through wit and irony. (Irony is the
use of words to express an idea that is the direct opposite of the stated meaning, or an outcome of events contrary
to what was expected.)

In this way two Utopian traditions developed in English literature. One was optimistic and idealistic- like More's, or
Edward Bellamy's Looking Backward (1888), which foresaw a mildly socialist, perfect state. H. G. Wells, an
important English writer, believed in progress through science and wrote both novels and nonfiction about social
and scientific changes that could produce a Utopia.

The second tradition was satiric, like Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels (1726), in which both tiny and gigantic
residents of distant lands were used to satirize the England of Swift's day. Another satiric Utopia was Samuel
Butler's Erewhon (1872; the title is an anagram of "nowhere"), which made crime a disease to be cured and disease
a crime to be punished.
In Brave New World, Huxley clearly belongs in the satiric group. (Though toward the end of his career he wrote a
nonsatiric novel of a good Utopia, Island.) He told a friend that he started to write Brave New World as a satire on
the works of H. G. Wells. Soon he increased his targets, making fun not only of science but also of religion, using his
idea of the future to attack the present.

As in most works about Utopia, Brave New World lacks the complexity of characterization that marks other kinds of
great novels. The people tend to represent ideas the author likes or dislikes. Few are three-dimensional or true to
life; most resemble cartoon characters. As do many writers of Utopian works, Huxley brings in an outsider (John
the Savage) who can see the flaws of the society that are invisible to those who have grown up within it.

As Huxley worked on his book, his satire darkened. The book became a serious warning that if we use science as an
instrument of power, we will probably apply it to human beings in the wrong way, producing a horrible
society. Brave New World belongs firmly in the tradition of Utopian writing, but the Utopia it portrays is a bleak
one, indeed.

The Use of Technology to Control Society

Brave New World warns of the dangers of giving the state control over new and powerful technologies. One
illustration of this theme is the rigid control of reproduction through technological and medical intervention,
including the surgical removal of ovaries, the Bokanovsky Process, and hypnopaedic conditioning. Another is the
creation of complicated entertainment machines that generate both harmless leisure and the high levels of
consumption and production that are the basis of the World States stability. Soma is a third example of the kind of
medical, biological, and psychological technologies that Brave New Worldcriticizes most sharply.

It is important to recognize the distinction between science and technology. Whereas the State talks about
progress and science, what it really means is the bettering of technology, not increased scientific exploration and
experimentation. The state uses science as a means to build technology that can create a seamless, happy,
superficial world through things such as the feelies. The state censors and limits science, however, since it sees
the fundamental basis behind science, the search for truth, as threatening to the States control. The States focus
on happiness and stability means that it uses the results of scientific research, inasmuch as they contribute to
technologies of control, but does not support science itself.

The Consumer Society

It is important to understand that Brave New World is not simply a warning about what could happen to society if
things go wrong, it is also a satire of the society in which Huxley existed, and which still exists today. While the
attitudes and behaviors of World State citizens at first appear bizarre, cruel, or scandalous, many clues point to the
conclusion that the World State is simply an extremebut logically developedversion of our societys economic
values, in which individual happiness is defined as the ability to satisfy needs, and success as a society is equated
with economic growth and prosperity.

The Incompatibility of Happiness and Truth

Brave New World is full of characters who do everything they can to avoid facing the truth about their own
situations. The almost universal use of the drug soma is probably the most pervasive example of such willful self-
delusion. Soma clouds the realities of the present and replaces them with happy hallucinations, and is thus a tool
for promoting social stability. But even Shakespeare can be used to avoid facing the truth, as John demonstrates by
his insistence on viewing Lenina through the lens of Shakespeares world, first as a Juliet and later as an impudent
strumpet. According to Mustapha Mond, the World State prioritizes happiness at the expense of truth by design:
he believes that people are better off with happiness than with truth.

What are these two abstract entities that Mond juxtaposes? It seems clear enough from Monds argument that
happiness refers to the immediate gratification of every citizens desire for food, sex, drugs, nice clothes, and other
consumer items. It is less clear what Mond means by truth, or specifically what truths he sees the World State
society as covering up. From Monds discussion with John, it is possible to identify two main types of truth that the
World State seeks to eliminate. First, as Monds own past indicates, the World State controls and muffles all efforts
by citizens to gain any sort of scientific, or empirical truth. Second, the government attempts to destroy all kinds of
human truths, such as love, friendship, and personal connection. These two types of truth are quite different from
each other: objective truth involves coming to a definitive conclusion of fact, while a human truth can only be
explored, not defined. Yet both kinds of truth are united in the passion that an individual might feel for them. As a
young man, Mustapha Mond became enraptured with the delight of making discoveries, just as John loves the
language and intensity of Shakespeare. The search for truth then, also seems to involve a great deal of individual
effort, of striving and fighting against odds. The very will to search for truth is an individual desire that the
communal society ofBrave New World, based as it is on anonymity and lack of thought, cannot allow to exist. Truth
and individuality thus become entwined in the novels thematic structure.

The Dangers of an All-Powerful State

Like George Orwells 1984, this novel depicts a dystopia in which an all-powerful state controls the behaviors and
actions of its people in order to preserve its own stability and power. But a major difference between the two is
that, whereas in 1984control is maintained by constant government surveillance, secret police, and torture, power
in Brave New World is maintained through technological interventions that start before birth and last until death,
and that actually change what people want. The government of 1984 maintains power through force and
intimidation. The government of Brave New World retains control by making its citizens so happy and superficially
fulfilled that they dont care about their personal freedom. In Brave New World the consequences of state control
are a loss of dignity, morals, values, and emotionsin short, a loss of humanity.

Motifs

Motifs are recurring structures, contrasts, and literary devices that can help to develop and inform the texts major
themes.

Pneumatic

The word pneumatic is used with remarkable frequency to describe two things: Leninas body and
chairs. Pneumatic is an adjective that usually means that something has air pockets or works by means of
compressed air. In the case of the chairs (in the feely theater and in Monds office), it probably means that the
chairs cushions are inflated with air. In Leninas case, the word is used by both Henry Foster and Benito Hoover to
describe what shes like to have sex with. She herself remarks that her lovers usually find her pneumatic, patting
her legs as she does so. In reference to Lenina it means well-rounded, balloon-like, or bouncy, in reference to her
flesh, and in particular her bosom. Huxley is not the only writer to use the word pneumatic in this sense, although it
is an unusual usage. The use of this odd word to describe the physical characteristics of both a woman and a piece
of furniture underscores the novels theme that human sexuality has been degraded to the level of a commodity.

Ford, My Ford, Year of Our Ford, etc.

Throughout Brave New World, the citizens of the World State substitute the name of Henry Ford, the early
twentieth-century industrialist and founder of the Ford Motor Company, wherever people in our own world would
say Lord (i.e., Christ). This demonstrates that even at the level of casual conversation and habit, religion has been
replaced by reverence for technologyspecifically the efficient, mechanized factory production of goods that
Henry Ford pioneered.

Alienation

The motif of alienation provides a counterpoint to the motif of total conformity that pervades the World State.
Bernard Marx, Helmholtz Watson, and John are alienated from the World State, each for his own reasons. Bernard
is alienated because he is a misfit, too small and powerless for the position he has been conditioned to enjoy.
Helmholtz is alienated for the opposite reason: he is too intelligent even to play the role of an Alpha Plus. John is
alienated on multiple levels and at multiple sites: not only does the Indian community reject him, but he is both
unwilling and unable to become part of the World State. The motif of alienation is one of the driving forces of the
narrative: it provides the main characters with their primary motivations.

Sex

Brave New World abounds with references to sex. At the heart of the World States control of its population is its
rigid control over sexual mores and reproductive rights. Reproductive rights are controlled through an
authoritarian system that sterilizes about two-thirds of women, requires the rest to use contraceptives, and
surgically removes ovaries when it needs to produce new humans. The act of sex is controlled by a system of social
rewards for promiscuity and lack of commitment. John, an outsider, is tortured by his desire for Lenina and her
inability to return his love as such. The conflict between Johns desire for love and Leninas desire for sex illustrates
the profound difference in values between the World State and the humanity represented by Shakespeares works.

Shakespeare

Shakespeare provides the language through which John understands the world. Through Johns use of
Shakespeare, the novel makes contact with the rich themes explored in plays like The Tempest. It also creates a
stark contrast between the utilitarian simplicity and inane babble of the World States propaganda and the
nuanced, elegant verse of a time before Ford. Shakespeares plays provide many examples of precisely the kind of
human relationspassionate, intense, and often tragicthat the World State is committed to eliminating.
Symbols

Symbols are objects, characters, figures, and colors used to represent abstract ideas or concepts.

Soma

The drug soma is a symbol of the use of instant gratification to control the World States populace. It is also a
symbol of the powerful influence of science and technology on society. As a kind of sacrament, it also represents
the use of religion to control society.

Dystopian Elements and Characteristics - Basic Building Blocks of Dystopia

The dystopian stories are often stories about survival, their main theme is oppression and rebellion. The
environment plays important role in dystopian depiction. Dystopian stories take place in the large cities devastated
by pollution. In every dystopian story, there is back story of war, revolutions, overpopulation and other disasters.

Dystopian depiction is imaginary. Dystopian fiction borrows features from reality and discusses them but it doesn't
depict contemporary society in general. Dystopian stories take place in the future but they are about today and
sometimes about yesterday.

All dystopias are keen on strict division of the citizens by intellect, ability and class. In Brave New World, people
are divided in Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons. In Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984), there are capitalist and
proles, Party and non-Party. In a typical dystopia, there is no social group except the State, or such social groups
are under government control. Independent religions do not exist among social groups, instead of that, there is a
personality cult (usually of a head of state) created by the State, such as Big Brother in Nineteen Eighty-Four
(1984) and The Benefactor of We.

The institution of family has been eradicated in some dystopian societies, as in Brave New World, where children
are reproduced artificially. If the family exists in dystopian stories, it is usually in the service of the State as in
Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984), where children are thought to spy on their parents.

Dystopian tales emphasis sense of the powerlessness of the individuals in the face of the oppressive and brutal
government run by totalitarian dictatorship, or organized into huge bureaucratic institutions (as in Nineteen
Eighty-Four (1984), the Ministry of Information). Paranoia is very evident among the citizens of dystopian
societies who live in fear and who are being monitored, betrayed or manipulated. The Thought Police and the
Thought crime in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984) are the most extreme examples of paranoia. Dystopian
fiction features technology more advanced than we have today and it is controlled by the group in power.

The standard of living among the classes is generally lower than in contemporary societies. In Nineteen Eighty-
Four (1984), the upper class of society, The Inner Party, has a standard of living poorer than the upper class in real
word. But in Brave New World and Equilibrium, people have higher standard of living in exchange for loss of
independent thought and emotions.

Hero in dystopian literature always questions society although he is usually in high-standing within the social
system. He often sees what's wrong and tries to change the system. He puts his hope in a group of people who
aren't under the complete control of the state, in Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984) , they are "proles", in Brave New
World, they are people on the reservation and in We, they are people outside the walls of the One State. His goal is
either to escape or destruction of the society's principals, but usually he fails in his intention to change anything
and sometimes they themselves end up changed to conform to the society's rules.
Dystopia is subgenre of science fiction, because it depicts fictive future societies, and many of them use other
elements of science fiction like time travel, space flight, amazing and advanced technologies, etc.

There is also thematic relationship between dystopian fiction and film noir, such as disturbing contrasts, symbolic
shadow and the action that takes place during night.

25. Parallels between Brave New World and reservoir

26.Love in Brave New World

Aldous Leonard Huxley - was an English writer and a prominent member of the Huxley family.

Huxley was a humanist, pacifist, and satirist. He became deeply concerned that human beings might become
subjugated through the sophisticated use of the mass media or mood-altering drugs, or tragically impacted by
misunderstanding or the misapplication of increasingly sophisticated technology.

Huxley later became interested in spiritual subjects such as parapsychology and philosophical mysticism, in
particular, Universalism. He is also well known for his use of psychedelic drugs. By the end of his life Huxley was
widely acknowledged as one of the pre-eminent intellectuals of his time. Huxley died aged 69, on 22 November
1963.

BRAVE NEW WORLD

Published in 1932 by Aldous Huxley, Brave New World portrays a futuristic society in which the individual is
sacrificed for the state, science is used to control and subjugate, and all forms of art and history are outlawed. In
short, the book fits into the classic mold of dystopian literature. (Dystopia is the opposite of utopia. In a
dystopian society, everything is bad, and its generally the fault of government.)

The novel is frequently compared to a much later novel, Orwells 1984, because the novels treat the same subject
matter but in different light. In 1958, Huxley published an essay called Brave New World Revisited, in which he
basically says, I was right and predicts that his horrifying vision of the future will come to fruition sooner rather
than later.

Brave New World takes place in a controlled environment where technology has essentially eliminated suffering,
and where a widely-used narcotic dulls whatever momentary pains may arise. It soon becomes clear, however, that
suffering is a part of the human experience. Without it, the citizens are somehow less-than-human. Self-inflicted
pain becomes, for one character, a way to regain his humanity as well as a spiritual cleansing. God, he explains, is a
reason for self-denial. This is of course tied to the notion of an afterlife: denying the body in this life will be good for
the soul in the afterlife.

Huxley wrote that the focus of Brave New World isn't science itself, but science as it affects people. The vision he
paints of a technological, futuristic society is both horrifying and fascinating. In a world where people are
controlled down to their very impulses, emotions, and thoughts, science has the ability both to imprison (by
conditioning, for example) and to set free (the frontiers of scientific discovery often lead to change). Because of
this, "science" is somewhat bastardized by those who seek to control; use what's useful, but limit what's
"dangerous." Dystopian novels such as Brave New World are critiques of modern institutions. Such works take an
instance of injustice or perceived ill in a society and take those situations to what would be their logical ends. In
Brave New World, Huxley critiques modern governmental institutions whose power has slowly crept into the lives
of ordinary people. This process often occurs in the name of security or peace, yet such actions inevitably lead to
the destruction of everything that is good in a society such as freedom or creativity.

LOVE IN BRAVE NEW WORLD

The society in Brave New World can only survive because it has destroyed any remnants of human relationships
and bonds. The relationships of father and mother no longer exist because all human beings are born in a scientific
lab. The relationship between husband and wife is no longer necessary because society shuns monogamy, and all
men and women learn to share each other equally.

The cost of such actions is that human beings cannot truly experience the emotions of love. Both John and Lenina
begin to feel these strong emotions over the course of the novel, but they cannot act on these emotions in a
constructive way because neither can comprehend how to have such a relationship in their society:

A utilitarian society aims to produce the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people. In Huxley's
society, this particular good is happiness, and government, industry, and all other social apparatuses exist in order
to maximize the happiness of all members of society.

John the Savage rebels against this notion of utilitarian happiness. He argues that humanity must also know how to
be unhappy in order to create and appreciate beauty. The use of soma is an example of the opposite. People take
the drug in order to go on a "holiday" from any kind of unhappiness. Because they refuse to experience
unhappiness, the drug keeps them from wonder and the appreciation of beauty, as in the scene when Lenina and
Bernard fly over the tossing English Channel. He sees a beautiful display of nature's power; she sees a horribly
frightening scene that she wants to avoid.

Among the foremost themes addressed in Brave New World is the question of freedom. Most of the characters in
the world of the novel are neither mentally nor emotionally free to experience anything other than officially
sanctioned ideas and values. There is no room for social or intellectual difference or rebellion, and those who do
differ are either rehabilitated through mind and psychologically altering drugs, or if they appear too intransigent,
they are shipped off to quarantine areas away from the general population in order to avoid any spread of their
intellectual contamination.

Along with freedom, the inhabitants of the brave new world have also lost love, except in the most debased,
physical way. The idea of emotional involvement is totally foreign to the controlled peoples who inhabit this book.
The Savage, who is brought in from the outside and who is a member of a more primitive society and still feels
emotional involvement, is soon also defeated. Along with love, feelings in general have been reduced to a minimal
level, which with a general fear of new ideas, or any ideas, make the brave new worldians the perfect people for the
new mass society. Huxley's examples here are a bit heavy-handed but make their point. This society is sterile in all
senses of that word.

The main element of what makes a person human and unique are the emotions that inhabit their mind. Emotions
are the fuel that drives man to act on a belief or a dream, to become a better person, to grow and learn and to love.
Emotions are such a personal, intimate feeling of such overwhelming individual influence it is to no amazement
that the government in Brave New World discourages these intense human characteristics, which they can control
to some degree.

Emotions are thus controlled in Brave New World. Control and stability can best be achieved when everyone is
happy. The government does its best to eliminate any painful emotion, which means every deep feeling, every
passion, is gone. Huxley shows that the government recognizes the dangers of negative emotions when the
controller states, "Actual happiness always looks
pretty squalid in comparison with the over-compensations for misery".

With all of the controlling of the citizens in Brave New World, a wide variety of means are implemented to control
individuality and emotion and to ensure stability. Loss of identity is in large part the result of genetic engineering.
Tampering with Mother Nature and the miracle of life ensures that early off in life there are few, if any emotional
ties. The people of Brave New World are not born to a mother or father. Instead a single fertilized egg is cloned
repeatedly until ninety-six separate embryos are present. From the cloning process the identical embryos are put
in tubes and then grow until they are ready to be born. The implications of this engineering are
tremendous. With the destruction of the family, the government has single handedly prevented the largest source
of human emotion: family love. There are no mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, cousins, or
grandparents. Everyone seemingly melts into a giant generic mass, all in the name of stability and progress. To
further stabilize the society, "sexual freedom is legalized"

Free sexual relations are encouraged for all, especially for the young, to discourage any sense of love. With sexual
relations starting so early, the citizens can never fully appreciate the act of love and the feelings that go with it.
Although everyone can have sexual relationships with just about everyone else, no emotional feelings can be
involved". This emotional engineering shows the clever ways in which the reigning government body can sugar
coat a loss of basic human feelings. In this Utopia, what would be considered true love for one person in today's
world would lead to neurotic passions and the establishment of family life, both of which would interfere with the
community and stability. Every human being in Brave New World is conditioned to fit society's needs, to like the
work he will have to do. The government uses hypnopaedia, or sleep teaching, and also shock therapy as the main
means of education for they see that, "the vulnerability of the human mind can be put to some practical purpose."

In addition to the entertainment created by the government, there is a powerful drug called soma. Soma use is
encouraged by the government to be consumed by the citizens. The main reason for this is that soma puts the
person into a deep numbness, void of all feeling. In the novel, a character that is feeling too emotional takes a dose
of soma to rid herself of those odd sensations. Huxley shows that when the citizens were either alone or had a
moment of free time, creative forces tended to creep out. This is when it was most opportune to take soma tablets,
when the individual is conscience of being an individual. The society in Brave New World does have a good side:
there is no war or suffering, little disease or social conflict. But for those few highlights, the society pays a very high
price. There is no love, family, science, art,
religion, and history.

According to the leaders in Brave New World, emotions caused all negativity in the world. Unhappiness because of
a broken heart, grief over a lost family member, jealousy, anxiety, guilt, etcetera. To create a happy world, they
thought that all emotions should be banned. And so, the people of the Brave New World no longer experienced
unhappiness, grief, jealousy, anxiety, guilt or any of those other weird emotions. They were conditioned so that
they wouldnt fear death, would enjoy their duties, and if they felt unpleasant, they were conditioned to take soma.
Soma, a form of drug, would ban all emotions. Instantly rewarding, it removed all unpleasant emotions without any
side-effects.

There was never war in the Brave New World, or civil unrest, or unhappiness. But at the same time, they could not
experience love, either, and were repulsed by the idea of parents (as they were conditioned to be repulsed by it).
They were conditioned to be socially promiscuous, and if you didnt have more than one person a week, you were
considered an oddity.

But some people, particularly a few of the alpha group (those that were bred to be smart and to do the important
jobs) felt there was something missing. Despite of their years of being conditioned, they were aware that there
should be more.

In Brave New World the word mother brings shivers to the ear, in fact the two greatest obscenities are birth and
mother. The overwhelming color throughout Brave New World is grey. Everything and everyone seems dull to the
reader, except perhaps the Savage, who is the only bright color in the novel. This grey happiness is the ultimate
goal of the World Controllers like Mond.

Only the Savage knows that true happiness comes from the knowledge that one has value. He alludes to this when
he describes his childhood in the Reservation where the only time he was happy was after he had completed a
project with his own two hands. This, not soma, gave him the self-confidence to find happiness. The Savage knows
his own value is as an individual, not a member of a collective.

Other characters in Brave New World, however, have no concept of self-worth. This results in their inability to find
the happiness known to the Savage and the rest of the pre-Ford world which lives in the Reservation. True
happiness is a consequence of freedom, not slavery. No slave can experience happiness until he is free. Yes, any
slave can experience the contentment of a full belly, but not freedom. Bernard suffers throughout the book, being
caught between both worlds. Although he has been conditioned to accept his servitude, he is constantly longing for
freedom. He sees this freedom in the Savage, and envies him for possessing the inner happiness genuine
happiness which Bernards society outlaws. Huxley uses Bernard to exemplify this struggle between freedom
and slavery. Huxley argues that a genuine, free life requires suffering and pain. Men without anguish are men
without souls. Huxleys future describes a world without pain and a world without soul, supply of instant
gratification, but this doesnt lead to happiness.

We also have some hints of maternal love towards son, that is some kind of love Linda has for John the Savage.
Linda does overcome her conditioning in one important way: she gives in to her maternal instinct. A little bit,
anyway. In John's reminiscence, Linda becomes upset with him, mostly because his existence means she's broken a
fundamental rule of society. But as she's about to hit him, she's overcome withmaternaljoy, and ends up
hugging and kissing him all over. And for all her sleeping around and name-calling, Linda has loving mothering
qualities. She teaches John to read and tells him lullaby-esque stories about the "Other World."

We're pretty sure Linda's intense soma addiction, rather than her veiled maternal actions, takes the cake in
defining her character in Brave New World. Twenty years in a world of harsh reality did nothing at all to teach
Linda the value of suffering, family, or long-term human relationships. Apparently, you can take the woman out of
the dystopia, but you can't take the dystopia out of the woman.

CONCLUSION

Throughout Brave New World, Huxley makes many references to the works of Shakespeare. The most obvious, the
title, comes from a line from Shakespeares The Tempest. Even beyond the title, Brave New World has many
references to Shakespeare. Johns knowledge of the English language and views of reality are based on his readings
of Shakespeare. The Savage alludes to different plays throughout the novel. Specifically, when he is learning the
ways of this new world, John uses the quote of Miranda from The Tempest from which the novel gets its name: O
Brave New World . . . By some malice of his memory the Savage found himself repeating Mirandas words. O Brave
New World that has such people in it. The use of Shakespeare throughout the story also gives the reader a great
contrast between the romantic and passionate relationships of Shakespeares plays and the completely physical,
meaningless ones of the new world.

Huxley had John commit suicide in order to show the hopelessness of life in the Brave New World. Not only was
John unable to accept a life founded on conformity and the pleasure principle ("no leisure from pleasure") but
there was also a conflict within himself because of his ambivalent feelings towards Lenina - he found her desirable
but considered such feelings sinful. Because the World Controller would not allow John to return to the
Reservation, he tried to duplicate his "old" life, to be self-sufficient, to avoid being contaminated by life in this Other
Place, to forget Lenina. But his hiding place was discovered; he became a curiosity; people came and laughed at his
curious ways. One day Lenina came by with Henry; the Savage cursed her and himself. He struck out at her with a
whip and then beat himself in an attempt to dispel his lustful feelings. The crowd took up a chant - "Orgy-Porgy."
The Savage joined the others in the orgy. In the morning he realized what had happened and committed suicide.

"But I dont want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I
want sin.": The Savage in chapter 17. Here the Savage explains the old world reasoning. He asserts that true life
requires exposure to all things, good and evil.

27. Religion and Technology

Repeat after me, I am free, I have a free mind, and I can do whatever I want , oh , do you?
People in the World state are conditioned to love three things: Henry Ford, soma, and sex, religion is excluded and
thought of as being unnecessary. The novel Brave New World shows that in order for a utopian society to
achieve a state of stability, a loss of individuality, and the undoing of
Mother Nature must occur. The key ingredient to stability that the novel implies is that individuality
must be absent. The government in Brave New World understands that fact and
"[there is] no civilization without social stability. Stability, in effect, demands robots, not
people. The citizens are not concerned with themselves as individuals; they have been conditioned to see the world
as a collective and technologically oriented. The mentality of the society is that progress, through invention, is the
key goal of mankind. erism and productivism are the purpose of life in Huxleys industrial utopia. Excerpt 1 All the
citizens of The World State in the novel are conditioned since birth to maintain that buying new is proper and
repairing is immoral. the engine of technological progress worked most efficiently when people are conceived of
not as children of God or even as citizens but as consumers The people are no longer oriented to believe in god,
but instead only believe in the principles of consumption. Excerpt 2
In the novel all religion has faded away and been forgotten by the citizens of the World State. The only deity-like or
religious principles that people follow are that of Henry Ford, inventor of the Model T. Societys closest
acknowledgement of a god is Ford. Excerpt 3

In our world today society is controlled by the government and religion. The World State doesn't believe in religion
but they use soma to control society. Soma is a replacement for religion. Mustapha Mond believes that Soma is
"Christianity without tears" ( Huxley 244). People will feel guilty if they do something that Christianity forbids. It
makes people feel happy and they don't feel guilty about what they are doing. Soma maintains the social stability.
Soma prevents rebellions and suppresses emotions. The World State does not want rebels or for emotions to be
aroused in people, because this would affect the stability of society. The World State would not be perfect if it
wasn't for Soma.

The World State doesn't bother with religion, they care about solidarity. They wish to unite everyone in the World
State. This is achieved with promiscuity and Solidarity Services and the frequent use of Soma and conditioning.

He thinks that in a prosperous, youthful society, there are no losses and therefore no need for religion. This seems
to be true considering they are doing fine without religion. Religion would confuse and arise opinions and create
rebels and interfere with the solidarity of society. As in our world today, religion is a problem it seems, ironically
causing hate and violence, things that religions don't condone. Religion is thought of as bad in the World State and I
think its just another way to separate people, something the World State tries to avoid.

The mass production of human life is key to the economic structure of this society, but there is another factor that
goes along with the workers. Not only are the workers created for the purpose of a simple life of servitude, they are
also conditioned to enjoy such a meager life. They are content with this lifestyle in every sense, and therefore, they
are stable. Like biological machinery, constantly working, working, working; satisfied with every minute of their
day. 4 exc

In a world where you have Community, Identity and Stability price

it becomes clear that Huxleys work is a prediction for the future that hits all-too close to the bone. The transition
from the Technocracies of today, to the Technopoly in Brave New World is one that seems to be growing nearer,
dauntingly. When do our advances in technology begin to do more harm than help? No one can predict when good-
natured intentions can bring about unfortunate ends, yet Huxley provides a profound guess. How long before the
ever-sharpening claws of technology latch around our own society, and grip us away from the morals we hold to be
valuable? Should we fear this threat? Or embrace its benefits? Progress is lovely, isnt it?

Religion in Brave New World

What follows? Evidently, that we can be independent of God. 'The religious sentiment will compensate us for all our
losses.' But there aren't any losses for us to compensate; religious sentiment is superfluous.
(Huxley, Brave New World)
In the novel Brave New World, a utopian society lives in a world where any kind of religion as we know it (even
Christian and Islamic) was abolished by a World State Government. Religious rituals and values have been
exchanged, and God reveals himself in absence, as though he weren't there at all (Huxley, Brave New World).
Thanks to the ten World Controllers, not even one of the normal inhabitants of the 'utopia' knows about God or any
religion of the past. The question now is whether Mustafa Mond was right in saying:
God isn't compatible with machinery and scientific medicine and universal happiness.
Let us first of all take a look at the changes made by the ten absolute World Controllers.
First of all, God and the Ten Commandments were replaced by Ford, a pioneer of technology and mind-altering
drugs called soma (Christianity without tears - Huxley, Brave New World). Even the typical Christian trademark,
the cross, became a deformed T, which represents the T-Model invented by the praised Lord Ford.
Secondly, instead of visiting church, the whole community is told to attend solidarity services, where twelve
members have a soma orgy. The twelve participants are waiting for the greater being to reveal himself. Instead of
waiting for the appearance of an almighty god, however, they are waiting for the soma to create an illusion of
boundless fortune, which culminates in group sex. This orgy is nothing more than an odd replacement of the
communal feeling people experience in church. Even the number of the participants isn't randomly chosen: Jesus,
Gods son, had twelve apostles surrounding him as well. Furthermore, prayers have been transfigured into sayings
that are used in Hypnopaedia (Sleep-Teaching). Also, sex is an important aspect of the lifestyle in the utopian
world. While old-fashioned religions disregard sex without the goal of creating new life, sex based on pure fun is a
basic element of the World State.
According to Mustapha Mond, one of the World Controllers, religion causes wars, pain, suffering and tears. It was
used to explain the matters of the old world when science wasnt able to, and to grant absolution. Furthermore, to
compensate us for all our losses. People turned towards religion, when they were stressed or had to deal with
problems. But in a time when technological progress is at its peak, and all problems are solved by soma and sex,
religion is an unnecessary curse. Aging people, who cannot accept that their lifetime is limited, seek absolution and
the eternal life in paradise. In a society where no one is afraid of dying, however, religion makes no sense.
It is not right to say, however, that the system of the World Controllers is working without problems. The best
proof of this are the islands, to which free thinkers are sent. If the system worked perfectly, there wouldnt be any
people marching to a different beat, and there would be no need for the islands. Secondly, they did not solve the
problem properly, because to intoxicate and to dope humans is not right either. Religion doesn't only heal
wounded souls, it also gives the people hope and power to overcome all obstacles. So the World Controllers took
away freedom and art in order to create stability. There is no person who is allowed to take away the
unimpeachable dignity of men!
In my opinion Mustafa Mond is partly right. Our society only clings to religion, because most of us are conditioned
to by our parents and our environment. Human kind invented an Almighty Being in order to explain thunder and
lightning thousands of years ago. In a time when all these mysteries are solved, we do not implicitly need to cling to
these old-fashioned traditions. It is true that many people find help in God, but even more people suffer through
wars in Gods name. The human race is slowly losing the ability to have faith in itself and rather trusts in God or
destiny. The biggest problem of the religion nowadays is the menace of religious fanatics, who are able to kill
masses of people in seconds. They easily get manipulated by their leaders and are willing to give their lives for the
illusion of paradise. However, I think that the way chosen by the World Controllers is too extreme, and also takes
away the liberty of the people. Even if they wouldn't miss a thing, no one is allowed to take away the right to
choose. The healthiest option would be to try to combine technology and religion, or just to let them exist side by
side.
In the end, I want to quote Albert Einstein in order to support my opinion, who said, that:
All religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. All these aspirations are directed toward ennobling
man's life, lifting it from the sphere of mere physical existence and leading the individual towards freedom.

Aldous Huxleys Brave New World (1932) is commonly seen as an indictment of both tyranny and technology.
Huxley himself described its theme as the advancement of science as it affects human individuals.[1]Brave New
World Revisited (1958) deplored its vision of the over orderly dystopia where perfect efficiency left no room for
freedom or personal initiative.[2] Yet Brave New World has a deeper meaning: a warning, by way of a grim
portrait, of life in a world which has fled from God and lost all awareness of the transcendent. Reading the signs of
his times, Huxley saw awaiting us a soulless utilitarian existence, incompatible with our nature and purpose.
Subsequent history has vindicated his pessimism.

Brave New Worlds significations flow from Huxleys vision of reality and human nature and its implications for
proper living. As Milton Birnbaum points out, by the early thirties, Huxley was in transition from cynicism to a
mystical religion,[3] which held that a transcendent God exists, and that ones proper final end, as the foreword to
the 1946 edition of Brave New World notes, is attaining unitive knowledge of the immanent Tao or Logos, the
transcendent Godhead or Brahman.[4] (Indeed, with its religious theme, Brave New World emerges as a milestone
in Huxleys odyssey.)

Man, Huxley maintained, is an embodied spirit.[5] As such, he is governed by belief:

It is in the light of our beliefs about the ultimate nature of reality that we formulate our conceptions of right and
wrong; and it is in the light of our conceptions of right and wrong that we frame our conduct, not only in the
relations of private life, but also in the sphere of politics and economics. So far from being irrelevant, our
metaphysical beliefs are the finally determining factor in all our actions.[6]
Moreover, people possess not only a will to self-assertion but also a will to self-transcendence. In a word, they
long to get out of themselves, to pass beyond the limits of that tiny island universe, within which every individual
finds himself confined.[7] This longing arises because, in some obscure way and in spite of our conscious
ignorance, we know who we are. We know that the ground of our individual knowing is identical with the
Ground of all knowing and being.[8] Our mission in life, then, is upward self-transcendence, metaphysically
upward affiliation culminating in union with the Divinity. Unfortunately, much self-transcendence is horizontal
(toward some cause wider than their own immediate interests, but not metaphysically higher, from hobbies and
family to science or politics) or even downward (toward drugs, loveless sex, etc).[9]

Huxley saw self-restraint as essential to human dignity and proper living. His 1931 essay Obstacle Race,
published while Brave New World was in progress, depicted nineteenth-century life as a kind of obstacle race,
with conventions and taboos restricting behavior being the obstacles. While psychologically painful, it was worth
the cost, because the dignity of man consists precisely in his ability to restrain himself from dashing away along
the flat, in his capacity to raise obstacles in his own path. Turning back from those obstacles is often the most
nobly and dignifiedly human thing a man can do.[10] This resembles Irving Babbitts view that what is
specifically human in man and ultimately divine is a certain quality of will, a will that is felt in its relation to his
ordinary self as a will to refrain.[11] For both men, this self-mortification was an act of loyalty to standards, and
indispensable for upward self-transcendence.

The struggle against adversity which this entails is essential for fulfilling emotional life. The pleasurable
excitements from surmounting (even sometimes not surmounting) psychological obstacles surpass those of life
without such restraints.[12] Huxley did not explain why, but we may speculate: Striving toward God entails
surmounting obstacles, overcoming adversity. Hence we exult in meeting challenges; it is a microcosm of the
victorious metaphysically-upward striving which our fulfillment requires.

II

Even before Brave New World, Huxley realized that the main tendency in the West was away from upward self-
transcendence.

The fundamental beliefs shaping thought and conduct were shifting. Music at Night (1931) observed that Christian
beliefs are now only lukewarmly believed in or even rejected outright. Likewise the once inspiring tenets of
classical liberalism. Instead, The modern emphasis is on personality. We justify our feelings and moods by an
appeal to the right to happiness, the right to self-expression.[13] Western man was also, Huxley pointed out in
1927, embracing substitute religions, from democracy and egalitarianism to the cult of business efficiency.[14] All
these, of course, embody horizontal self-transcendence.

Moreover, science, technology, and mass production had seemingly removed many external constraints and
disciplines, e.g., economic scarcity and the consequences of sexual license. Religions decline and applied sciences
advance were, Huxley believed, working synergistically to undermine self-restraint by making moral taboos seem
absurd (e.g., contraception)[15] and self-indulgence seem good (overconsumption to absorb overproduction).[16]

On causality Huxley was undecided. In 1927 he averred that material circumstances are driving all nations to
emulate Americas machine civilization. Fate acts within and without; there is no resisting.[17] But Ideals and
the Machine Tool (1931) rejected economic determinism. Huxley acknowledged certain definite correlations
between mens world views and the economic situation. Hence a correlation exists between the present
popularity of the ideal of happiness [identified with comfort] and the rise of mass production. Unlike goodness,
truth, and beauty, pursuit of happiness sustains production. Yet ideals truth, beauty, goodness, happiness arise
apart from economics. Economics only determine which ideals shall be prevalent.[18] Brave New World reverted to
determinism. Huxleys wavering is unimportant. What matters is his realization that Western awareness of
transcendent Reality was withering.

Huxley divined too that machine civilization, and liberation from religion and religious morality, were exacting
terrible forfeits. It was axiomatic to Huxley that getting something for nothing is impossible.[19] Even before Brave
New World he warned that success demands nothing short of spiritual self-mutilation.[20] Machinery was
inflicting similar mutilations. As Richard M. Weaver put it, What had been created in response to the human spirit
and had referential justification began to be autotelic and to make its own demands.[21] Thus, as Huxley
concluded,
Fordism, or the philosophy of industrialism, demands that we should sacrifice the animal man (and large
portions of the thinking, spiritual man) to the Machine. There is no place in the factory, or in that larger factory
which is the modern industrialized world, for animals on the one hand, or for artists, mystics, or even, finally,
individuals on the other. Of all the ascetic religions Fordism is that which demands the cruelest mutilations of the
human psyche and offers the smallest spiritual returns. Rigorously practiced for a few generations, this dreadful
religion will end by destroying the human race.[22]
One mutilation he observed was a spreading mediocrity of aspiration. Demanding goals -pleasing God, living
morally, partaking of high culture were being replaced by lesser ones: fun, comfort, conformity.[23]
Unfortunately, multitudes are not interested in having their souls stretched by either a demanding religion and
morality or an inspiring high culture hence the great danger that the majority would cheerfully make a Faustian
bargain, selling their souls for bread, baubles, comfort and amusement.[24]

In particular, American modernity was pressuring higher and more intelligent independent souls to conform to
mediocrity.[25] Beyond the evils of value inversion and intelligence emulating stupidity, those most likely to heed
calls from the divine Ground were being drawn away from the upward path.

With technology, secularization, and affluence flattening the obstacle course, people, having neither inclination
nor need for self-restraint, were forfeiting their dignity too.[26] And, Huxley warned, life bereft of exaltations and
agonies would be boring.[27] The worst forfeit, and the true and ultimate peril, of modern historys main tendency
is not political, abhorrent though tyranny and regimentation were to Huxley, but religious. Loss of awareness of the
transcendent is cumulative and ultimately total. Living in a secularized world, immersed in the powerful
distractions of horizontal and downward self-transcendence presented by a consumption-and-fun economy, with
the path of upward self-transcendence increasingly forgotten, people have nowhere to go except into ways of life
unworthy of beings with souls, utterly incapable of fulfilling a higher purpose: attaining knowledge of God.

In Grey Eminence (1941), his biography of Father Joseph, Cardinal Richelieus adviser, Huxley observed that the
West had been increasingly forsaking such knowledge for centuries:

The acquisition of one-pointedness and the cultivation of genuine mysticism were tasks no easier in the fourteenth
century, or the seventeenth, than under Queen Victoria; they merely seemed more reasonable, more worthy of
consideration by men of culture and intelligence[28]
[W]here there is no vision, the people perish; and if those who are the salt of the earth lose their savour, there is
nothing to keep that earth disinfected, nothing to prevent it from falling into complete decay. The mystics are
channels through which a little knowledge of reality filters down into our human universe of ignorance and
illusion. A totally unmystical world would be a world totally blind and insane. From the beginnings of the
eighteenth century onwards, the sources of mystical knowledge have been steadily diminishing in number, all over
the planet. We are dangerously far advanced into the darkness.[29]
In Those Barren Leaves (1925), Francis Chelifers brooding, culminating in a cynical catechism, shows that, long
before Brave New World, Huxley had spotted this danger:

Why am I doing this? What is it all for? Did I come into the world, supplied with a soul which may very likely be
immortal, for the sole purpose of sitting every day at this desk? .
Q. On what condition can I live a life of contentment?
A. On the condition that you do not think.
Q. What is the function of newspapers, cinemas, radios, motor-bikes, jazz bands, etc.?
A. The function of these things is the prevention of thought and the killing of time. They are the most powerful
instruments of human happiness.
Q. What did Buddha consider the most deadly of the deadly sins?
A. Unawareness, stupidity. (italics added)[30]
III

Seen in this light, Brave New World is a warning that modern life threatens to inflict the most deadly of the deadly
sins: to annihilate awareness of the transcendent God and divert us from our true purpose.

Dystopias people live in a continuous state of unawareness, stupidity. Incomprehension, indeed, is one of the
novels themes. People are kept unaware of old age, strong feeling, death; they flee anything unpleasant into the
drug soma. Underlying all this unawareness is deliberately-fostered unawareness of God. Abundant evidence in the
novel proves that this, not runaway science or totalitarianism, was Huxleys actual chief concern.

In Chapter 3, World Controller Mustapha Monds enumeration of the former worlds discarded features focuses on
elements of transcendent religion: God, heaven, soul, immortality. The Henry Ford cult replaced religion, with
crosses decapitated into Ts, and Fords Day celebrations, Community Sings, and orgiastic Solidarity Services as
religious rites.

Just a few pages later, a moronic elevator operator is overwhelmed by reaching his buildings roof and
encountering the warm glory of afternoon sunlight: Oh, roof! he repeated in a voice of rapture. He was as
though suddenly and joyfully awakened from a dark annihilating stupor. Roof! To Peter Firchow, this shows that
people can achieve fleeting awareness of a different reality despite conditioning.[31] True; but, more profoundly, it
is a metaphor for attaining the Beatific Vision. And the elevator operators prompt return, duty-called, to darkness
and habitual stupor warns that our enslavement to machine civilization keeps awareness of God fleeting at best.

Religious books are smut, accessible only to World Controllers. The only self-transcendence permitted is
horizontal: social solidarity and service. And it is Gods existence and its implications for conduct, not science,
economics, or politics, which dominates the dialogue between Mond and the Savage, where the novels central
argument appears.

Preventing awareness of God motivates Monds suppression of A New Theory of Biology, which addresses the
conception of purpose, as heretical and dangerous and potentially disruptive. Why? Because, Mond muses,

once you began admitting explanations in terms of purpose well, you didnt know what the result might be. It
might make [intelligent people] lose their faith in happiness as the Sovereign Good and take to believing, instead,
that the goal was somewhere beyond, somewhere outside the present human sphere; that the purpose of life was
not the maintenance of well-being, but some intensification and refining of consciousness, some enlargement of
knowledge.
This dread alternative purpose is none other than attaining unitive knowledge of God. That this is lifes purpose
Mond deems quite possibly true. But not, in the present circumstance, admissible.

Blocking awareness of God arguably underlies more mundane awareness-blocks. As Lenina Crowne and Henry
Foster embark on a date, advertising-bearing electric sky-signs keep them fortunately unaware of the
depressing fact of a starry night. Afterward, though the sky-signs separating screen had largely dissolved, soma,
which had raised a quite impenetrable wall between the actual universe and their minds, enables them to retain
happy ignorance of the depressing stars (italics added). Why depressing? Because a starry night is one of
Creations classic witnesses for its Creator, before which mundane concerns pale into insignificance bordering on
ridiculousness.

As Huxley knew, unitive knowledge of God requires silence; distractions are its mortal enemy;[32] and by the
twenties life was already distraction-ridden.[33] In his dystopia distraction via synthetic music and television is
continuous, a favorite escape from anything disquieting for people sharing Leninas determination to preserve her
incomprehension intact. The careful insulation of civilizations inmates from awareness of frustration, intense
feeling, and death is partly to ensure the individual stability on which social stability and civilization depend:
When the individual feels, the community reels. But beyond that, beauty, love, heroism, pain, suffering and death
are windows and channels to a transcendent reality, to God. Ecstasy and suffering are the whetstones of the soul,
sharpening it to a keen edge of awareness. Beauty is a directly perceptible experience of, and witness for, Gods
perfection and goodness, and the natural response to it is joyful appreciation; and, beyond this, awe, reverence, and
thanksgiving for its Creator. Romantic love inspires, and finds expression in, tenderness, devotion, and reverence
for the beloved-self-transcendent sentiments all.

Unlike fun and comfort, which make no spiritual demands on us, suffering ones own or others -compels a
response; it seldom leaves us where we were. It provokes an anguished Why? demanding an answer. It prompts
reflection on lifes purpose and meaning, its fairness or unfairness in short, upon the ultimate nature of reality.
This leads ineluctably to the religious question. All this is especially true of death, the most poignant pain of all,
irreversible and irrevocable, the unanswerable proof that reality is not malleable, that earthly existence is in at
least some measure tragic, that its fleeting pleasures are not adequate recompense for its hurts.

That Huxley knew this is revealed by Monds reading to the Savage from Cardinal Newman and Maine de Biran on
how only the young and prosperous can be independent of God, and how aging, afflicted, death-conscious people
turn to God for compensation. Mond assures the Savage that the moderns have preserved youth and prosperity,
hence allowing this independence, and abolished loss, rendering religion superfluous. The Savage knows better,
having felt the reality of loss at his mothers death in Park Lane Hospital: Oh, God, God, God the Savage kept
repeating to himself. In the chaos of grief and remorse that filled his mind it was the one articulate word. God! he
whispered it aloud. God (italics added). To which a visiting child, unawareness personified, responds:
Whatever is he saying?

Suffering and death, rightly considered, give the lie to the cult of comfort. As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn divined:

If, as claimed by humanism, man were born only to be happy, he would not be born to die. Since his body is
doomed to death, his task on earth evidently must be more spiritual: not a total engrossment in everyday life, not
the search for the best ways to obtain material goods and then their carefree consumption. It has to be the
fulfillment of a permanent, earnest duty so that ones life journey may become above all an experience of moral
growth: to leave life a better human being than one started it.[34]
Once aware of God and ones proper task on earth, this implies, one will forsake carefree consumption. But a
poor consumer is a threat to prosperity. Hence not only religion but also awareness of anything that could prompt
dangerous sentiments of ecstasy and suffering, which could draw one Godward, must be stifled. Hence the war
against awareness.

Solzhenitsyns words neatly express the Savages view. His intense religiosity, and Huxleys handling of it, proves
further that religion is Brave New Worlds true concern. At the Reservation the flashbacks about his upbringing
culminate in his breakthrough to discovering Time and Death and God, his mystical, ascetic quest for God in the
mountains, and his emulation of Jesus on the Cross. This religiosity is in counterpoint to civilizations relentless
secularism. To unawareness, stupidity, he opposes an almost visionarily keen awareness of the Deity; to
engrossment in material existence, his focus, as Bernard Marx complains, on what he calls the soul, which he
persists in regarding as an entity independent of the physical environment; to self-indulgence and acedie, a
ferocious penitential asceticism of purification and flagellation, and a rigorous sense of sin. His last words are a
remorseful Oh, my God, my God! - his last act an atonement-by-suicide, on which, fittingly, the novel ends.

If you had a God, youd have a reason for self-denial, he observes. But industrial civilization is only possible
when theres no self-denial, Mond retorts. Self-indulgence up to the very limits imposed by hygiene and
economics. Otherwise the wheels stop turning. Machinery, Huxley contends, had forced a choice: stability or
death. It had permitted vast population growth, but should the wheels stop turning, famine would ensue. And
wheels require attendants,

men as steady as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, men stable in contentment.
Crying: My baby, my mother, my only, only love; groaning: My sin, my terrible God; screaming with pain, muttering
with fever, bemoaning old age and poverty how can they tend the wheels? And if they cannot tend the wheels .
Riding a tiger, daring not dismount, humanity warped itself to fit the machine, forsaking truth and beauty for
comfort and happiness. Mass production demanded the shift. Universal happiness keeps the wheels steadily
turning; truth and beauty cant. But this entailed sacrificing the divine source of truth and beauty. God isnt
compatible with machinery and scientific medicine and universal happiness. You must make your choice. Our
civilization has chosen machinery and medicine and happiness.

Indeed. You pays your money and you takes your choice, as the 1946 editions gloomy foreword noted. But One
cant have something for nothing. Happiness has got to be paid for. Forsaking God and enslaving itself to its own
creation to avoid physical ruin, humanity inflicts on itself spiritual ruin.

For, as the Savage knows, awareness of God precludes allowing oneself to be degraded by pleasant vices. Youd
have a reason for bearing things patiently and with courage . Gods the reason for everything noble and fine and
heroic. All virtue, all righteous conduct, is loyalty to standards of excellence. Excellence, in turn, presupposes a
conception of perfection. And perfection requires a transcendent metaphysic; a secular, materialist metaphysic will
not support it; the imperfection of earthly existence, with its impermanence, its frequently realized potentials of
ugliness, evil, suffering and death, is clear to any awareness above the sensual.

The great choice in life as Brave New World makes clear-is between self-transcendence and self-indulgence.
Virtue flows from the former, sin from the latter. And without a transcendent God to stretch our souls upward, to
demand that we become more than we were, no truly compelling motive to self-transcending virtue exists. As
history abundantly demonstrates, the entities inspiring horizontal self-transcendence can inspire sin at least as
readily as virtue. And in a reductive, materialist world unaware of God, the prevailing ethic will be pragmatic,
utilitarian, self-indulgent, pleasure-seeking, pain-shunning-because that is the only ethic supportable by such a
metaphysic. Virtue atrophies for want of compelling or even plausible reason.

All that makes for truly human existence atrophies too. Human dignity disappears. If we are not embodied spirits,
then we are mere matter, and there is nothing awe-inspiring or reverential about us. Corpses reduce to utilitarian
objects. The Brave New World cremates its dead and recovers their constituent chemicals. Flying with Lenina past a
crematorium, Henry Foster sums up rnaterialist reductionism and its radical egalitarianism in one phrase: All men
are physicochemically equal. Live people fare no better. Being mere matter, Lenina, Bernard notes, thinks of
herself that way. She doesnt mind being meat. She worries at his seeming indifference, is relieved when he
emotionlessly fondles her breasts, and frets constantly about her appearance.

A religious outlook with its emotions of faith, trust, devotion, reverence for the other, and self-transcendence
orients one toward love as unbelief does not. As the Hound of Heaven warned, Thou dravest love from thee, who
dravest Me. Only soulless fun and sex remain. In the meeting between the Savage and Lenina, the taut, upwardly
stretched, self-transcending, vividly aware soul collides with the slack, horizontal, self-indulgent, unaware one in
perfect counterpoint. He kneels reverently before Lenina and kisses her hand; she leans forward lustfully. He
proclaims his desire to perform some service to prove his love and worthiness of her; she listens in
incomprehension and rising annoyance:

At Malpais, the Savage was incoherently mumbling, you had to bring her the skin of a mountain lion I mean,
when you wanted to marry some one. Or else a wolf.
There arent any lions in England, Lenina almost snapped.
And even if there were, the Savage added, with sudden contemptuous resentment, people would kill them out of
helicopters, I suppose . Ill do anything, he went on, more and more incoherently. Anything you tell me . I
mean Id sweep the floor if you wanted.
But weve got vacuum cleaners here, said Lenina in bewilderment. It isnt necessary.
No, of course it isnt necessary. But some kinds of baseness are nobly undergone. Id like to undergo something
nobly. Dont you see?
She doesnt see. She recoils in horror at his mention of marriage and greets his profession of love with asexual
advance.

Without struggle, without a demanding moral call to self-transcendence, without pain and ecstasy, all vivid interior
life disappears. Indeed a corollary theme of Brave New World is that suffering and mortification are the price of
transcendence, of fulfillment, of anything worthwhile, and that when life is purged of all occasion for paying this
price, attaining these things becomes impossible. Note that Dystopias rebels, seeking more intense, meaningful
life, choose mortification. Helmholtz Watson adopts asceticism and experiences a kind of mental excess; Bernard
wants to try the effect of arresting my impulses i.e., resurrect Babbitts inner check. The Savages discovery of
Time and Death and God comes after being driven from the manhood initiation rite, despised divine mysteries
follows a five-day fast. The tears are necessary, he tells Mond, and recounts the tale of the Girl of Mataski, whose
troth could be won only by a mornings hoeing in her garden, enduring magic flies and mosquitoes. What you
need, he concludes, is something with tears for a change. Nothing costs enough here. Slackness pervades
the Brave New World; the obstacle course is gone. Every peaceful self-indulgence is encouraged; no demands are
made on anyone. Without passion or purpose, time exists only to be frittered away.

With souls slack, high art disappears. Helmholtz Watson, Emotional Engineer, accomplished minstrel of infantile
happiness, grasps the idiocy of trying to say something about nothing. He could, he senses, write something
more important. Yes, and more intense, more violent. But nothing in his safe, easy l and rejected of men; his
initiation into existence evokes such writing. Capable of appreciating Romeo and Juliet only as regards literary
technique, he laughs when the Savage reads from it, then admits that

one needs ridiculous, mad situations like that; one cant write really well about anything else. Why was that old
fellow such a marvellous propaganda technician? Because he had so many insane, excruciating things to get excited
about. Youve got to be hurt and upset; otherwise you cant think of the really good, penetrating, X rayish phrases
. We need some other kind of madness and violence. But what? What? Where can one find it? He was silent; then,
shaking his head, I dont know, he said at last, I dont know.
Huxleys dystopia, then, merely extrapolated the flight from God which he had observed for years. But whereas
the Brave New World had deliberately chosen spiritually suicidal comfortable stupor, the West of the twenties was
so exteriorized, so engrossed in affluence and seeming freedom from God, and so unaware of their costs, that it was
drifting insensibly toward an oblivion of slack-souled unawareness, stupidity. An increasingly mystical, religious
man in an increasingly un-mystical, irreligious world, Huxley was warning mankind to turn back before it was too
late.

IV

Largely misread, the warning went unheeded. (This was partly Huxleys fault, as Brave New WorldRevisited stresses
freedom, not religion.) The flight from God into a transcendence -purged world has intensified, while
countervailing forces have withered. Just as the urban America of the Roaring Twenties was for Huxley the
prefiguration of humanitys future, so is America today an index of heedless progress toward a world totally blind
and insane. Americas secularization is already familiar. More ominously, our government is increasingly
persecuting religion an aping of the Brave New World far more sinister than the States tightening stranglehold on
our economic life.

Pursuit of secular Utopia is stronger than ever. Not even in the dictionary[35] when Weaver flayed the spoiled-
child mentality, lifestyle is now on every lip. Our staggering consumer debt, Americans increasing gluttony and
obesity, and the proliferation of superfluous costly articles (e.g., walking shoes, running tights, skating blades), all
confirm Huxleys warning of over-consumption deliberately fostered to sustain the economy and of the warping
of human nature to fit machinery.

Modern Americans typically see matter, in Simone Weils phrase, as a machine for manufacturing the good.[36]
Technology is the idolized tool for this process, and the advent of computers has only intensified our idolatry.
Liberalisms cherished welfare state and the consumer capitalism trumpeted by Conservatives share the Brave
New Worlds secularist-materialist premise: the good consists of pleasant sensations, attainable by optimally
arranging matter and services and the purchasing power needed to acquire them. They share too its corollary goal
of purging life of unpleasantness. They differ only in their methods and in who is assigned to serve these goals.

As in Huxleys dystopia, awareness of the mysterious, transcendent significations of life and death is fading.
Concerning the first, witness the utilitarian Molochs hecatomb of abortion; and concerning the second, note Henry
Fosters chirp while passing the crematorium: Fine to think we can go on being socially plants grow, informs the
chilling vogue for organ harvesting, which has gone beyond willingness to give an organ posthumously to a family
member and is , useful even after were dead. Making becoming almost a social obligation. Death is demystified
accordingly, and not even the integrity of a corpse is beyond Molochs reach. Which presupposes a broad, deep
repudiation of that hallmark of spiritual decency, respect for the dead and the dogmas of bodily resurrection and
of body as temple of the Holy Spirit.

Though death is regarded like any other physiological process, suffering increasingly terrifies Americans, as
witness the rising popularity of Dr. Kevorkian. This is merely the most lurid and ghastly symptom of the comfort
cults corollary: our national tendency to flinch from anything unpleasant, from petty inconveniences to suffering
for principles. But virtue, spiritual growth, upward self-transcendence, and unitive knowledge of God cannot be
attained by people craving an easy life.
Nor are these attainments open to the unaware, and America is increasingly rendering itself stuporous and grace-
proof. Our somas include drugs, drink, TV, and athletics. Almost throughout their waking hours, Americans are
immersed in distractions: TV, radio, tapes, CDs, computers, movies. And if a crevice of time should yawn in the
solid substance of their distractions, the Walkman tape player will fill it. With increasing frequency, one
encounters on our sidewalks dead-eyed, blank-faced or Walkman-engrossed specimens, staring mindlessly like
zombies. Virtual reality technology, uncannily like Huxleys feelies, will only worsen our stupor.

Blocking awareness further is Americans accelerating decerebration. The lack of widespread outrage over our
disastrous system of education, and of any serious attempt to undo it, indicates that our educators are giving our
slack-souled population what it wants. The popularity of no-brainer activities and the cretin-celebrating
movie Forrest Gump confirm this.

Self-transcending conduct and emotions are increasingly viewed as disruptive. Civilization, Mond tells the
Savage, has absolutely no need of nobility or heroism. These things are symptoms of political inefficiency. In a
properly organized society like ours, nobody has any opportunities for being noble or heroic. David Brooks,
writing in The Wall Street Journal, disparaged the courage, heroism, even manhood of diehard Communist
Russians and Zulus opposing Mandelas African National Congress. Today we place a higher emphasis on
compromise and reconciliation, and are not so concerned that people should have fight in them.[37] Better to be
technocratic and prosaic epicene sheep docilely turning the wheels and guzzling products, too immersed in
commercialized distractions ever to grasp that they have sold their souls for comfort.

Love is withering in an atmosphere of fear, childish self-centeredness, and carnality.[38] The fervent love lauded
for centuries in Western high culture is deprecated in self-help literature, and too often in real life, as
dysfunctional or obsessive, in favor of safe, casual companionability seeking only meaningless fun. Love is
frequently replaced by dystopias obsessive, casual sex. In this and in popular obsessions with physical appearance,
diet, and exercise (which consumes far more of a typical Americans time than religion) todays Americans see
themselves as so much meat.

Modern America, then, is primarily oriented toward soulless self-indulgence, away from upward self-
transcendence. And the two possible obstacles to this Juggernaut of unawareness, culture and religion, are today,
as in Huxleys dystopia, smoothing its path.

For centuries Western high art was inspired and informed by a transcendent metaphysic. Todays high art bleakly
confirms Huxleys prophecies. Fashionable minimalist art, music, and literature are merely Helmholtzs saying
something about nothing. Minimalism may, as Mond says, require the most enormous ingenuity, making art out
of the absolute minimum practically nothing but pure sensation, but it is also, as Helmholtz, the Savage, and our
better critics grasp, idiotic. Like Huxleys dystopian art, it imprisons its consumers in the unremitting banality
and barbarism of modernity, instead of opening a window to a higher reality.

Religion has largely betrayed its mission as the conservator of awareness of the metaphysically transcendent.
Roman Catholicism is pervaded by the insidious, seemingly innocuous but devastating heresy that worship is not
vertical but horizontal. Vertical worship seeks after upward self-transcendence, straining toward a God who is
metaphysically other. Horizontal worship, seeing the Christ in ones brothers and sisters, with the Mass as a
meal, is disturbingly near the Solidarity Service (sans orgy). It speaks volumes about the Churchs loss of
metaphysical acumen and vigilance that this heresy spreads unchecked.
Much popular religion is infantile and undemanding. Witness the angels fad, which reduces the metaphysically
other to relentlessly cute figures on calendars. Mainstream religious morality is attenuated; demanding sanctions,
especially in matters carnal, are increasingly jettisoned for fear of being judgmental. Religion often merely
exhorts us to niceness and compassion a horizontalist heresy insofar as it substitutes for and thus forestalls
love of God and upward self-transcendence.

Religions recent rehabilitation among neoconservatives is not disproof, for it seeks not after upward self-
transcendence. Rather, it has the same pragmatic motive as the suppression of religion in Huxleys dystopia: to
improve social control and stability, the better to keep the wheels turning.

In its essentials, Brave New World is dangerously near fulfilled prophecy. Americas mental and spiritual life
increasingly resembles a skyscraper whose inhabitants, having closed the blinds on the depressing starry
Heaven, with its silent calls to transcendence, are turning out the lights floor by floor, as their aspirations descend
to the mediocrity of the Brave New Worlds dark basement of unawareness and fun. A politically and culturally
marginalized reactionary remnant resists, Savage-like; but barring a massive revaluation of values, it seems likely,
as Huxley grimly forecast in 1946, that the horror may be upon us within a single century.

The world in Aldous HuxleysBrave New World has one goal: technological progress. The morals and aspirations of
the society are not those of our society today - such as family, love, and success - but instead are focused around
industry, economy, and technologic growth and improvement. The citizens are not concerned with themselves as
individuals; they have been conditioned to see the world as a collective and technologically oriented. This society is
one which Neil Postman, the author of Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, would consider a
Technopoly. But Postman also perceives cultures in the world today to be nearing this socio-technologic status.
What can be seen about Brave New World and its comments on technological advancements as well as their effects
in society, when we examine it from the perspective of Postmans Technopoly? The medical advancements in
Huxleys novel and its concepts of educational standardization carry drastic similarities to society today as well. Sir
Ken Robinsons discussions on education elucidate these congruencies. Through these scholastic perspectives it
can be seen that the novel is a dangerously accurate prophesy of technologys capacity to dominate society, and
how this domination is silently changing the goals, moralities, and values of our culture.

The most prevalent themes in Brave New World are centered around the industrial and economic systems in novel,
and how technology has brought the advancements of these themes to fruition. The mentality of the society is that
progress, through invention, is the key goal of mankind. Consumerism and productivism are the purpose of life in
Huxleys industrial utopia. The consumerist ideals of the society can be captured by one of the hypnopaedic
proverbs demonstrated in this quote from the novel: But old clothes are beastly, continued the untiring whisper.
We always throw away old clothes. Ending is better than mending, ending is better than mending, ending is better
than mending. (Huxley 54). All the citizens of The World State in the novel are conditioned since birth to maintain
that buying new is proper and repairing is immoral. They are taught to conform to the consumer-oriented
mentality of the culture. Postman provides an example for the means of how this transition in society is taking
place today and suggests how Huxley may have imagined it happening: Along with [the idea that if something
could be done, it should be done] there developed a profound belief in all the principles through which invention
succeeds: objectivity, efficiency, expertise, standardization, measurement, and progress. It also came to be believed
that the engine of technological progress worked most efficiently when people are conceived of not as children of
God or even as citizens but as consumers (Postman 42). This perspective describes with pinpoint accuracy how
Huxleys society functions. The people are no longer oriented to believe in god, but instead only believe in the
principles of consumption.

In the novel all religion has faded away and been forgotten by the citizens of the World State. The only deity-like or
religious principles that people follow are that of Henry Ford, inventor of the Model T. Societys closest
acknowledgement of a god is Ford. As Postman states, the great narrative of inductive science takes precedence
over the great narrative of Genesis, and those who do not agree must remain in intellectual backwater (Postman
50). In fact, the dating system used in the novel is based upon A.F. and B.F. which is the abbreviated form for After
Ford and Before Ford, which Huxley clearly used to parody our current dating system of B.C. (before Christ) and
A.D. (anno domini). God is not merely second to technology - as is the paradigm of society today, which Postman
calls the ideals of a Technocracy - but God has completely been stamped out and forgotten, replaced by paradigms
of God being progress, which is the ideal of a Technopoly.

Postman describes the cause of this to be that the greatest invention of the nineteenth century was the idea of
invention itself. We had learned how to invent things, and the question of why we invent things receded in
importance (Postman 42). By constantly inventing, replacing, and consuming, a society loses its ties with the
spiritual and gains new ones to technology; personal transcendence is replaced with technological transcendence.
Progress, technology, and invention become their God. This transition -as Postman puts it the transition of a
Technocracy to a Technopoly- is the transition that has taken place in Brave New World. Technocracy did not
entirely destroy the traditions of the social and symbolic worlds. Technocracy subordinated these worlds - yes
even humiliated them - but it did not render them totally ineffectual (Postman 45). However, a Technopoly,
utterly destroys the existence of these worlds, and this is the state of Huxleys utopia. Technopoly eliminates
alternatives to itself in precisely the way Aldous Huxley outlines in Brave New World. It does not make them illegal.
It does not make them immoral. It does not even make them unpopular. It makes them invincible and therefore
irrelevant (Postman 48).

Therefore, from the perspective of Postmans Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, Huxleys
society in Brave New World is a stunningly perfect example of a Technopoly. In this Technopoly, technology and
the advancements of it contain all the principles one needs to live their lives by. A Technopoly is a more radical
concept than a technocracy. The citizens of a technocracy knew that science and technology did not provide
philosophies by which to live (Postman 47) unlike the Technopoly in Brave New World. This is precisely why
Huxleys society is a Technopoly and not a Technocracy; in the novel the citizens know just the opposite, that
science and technology does provide philosophies by which to live and moreover is the very pinnacle of their lives
and their existence.

The lower castes of Huxleys society are simple workers; multitudes of drones and one-task thinkers. The mass
production of human life is key to the economic structure of this society, but there is another factor that goes along
with the workers. Not only are the workers created for the purpose of a simple life of servitude, they are also
conditioned to enjoy such a meager life. They are content with this lifestyle in every sense, and therefore, they are
stable. Like biological machinery, constantly working, working, working; satisfied with every minute of their day.
This resembles our world today as Sir Ken Robinson elucidates in his RSA Animate on education. Robinson speaks
about the culture of education and how children are conditioned to think that there are smart and dumb
individuals and that this paradigm limits children. This black-and-white standardization is similar to Huxleys caste
system. A strict organization like these contains the similarities of making society believe that society is best if it
operates on the modern principle that there is a cultural split in education: the split of high and low intelligence.
These two examples also share the similarity that they neglect how certain individuals may be better or worse at
different tasks or subjects and that in reality this kind of standardization actually limits society. This is a
postmodern idea, currently growing in popularity.

In society today there is the idea of ADHD being an epidemic in America. Sir Ken Robinson points out that there is
not really an epidemic and that children are being medicated carelessly. they are given Ritalin and Adderall so they
can be focused in school. A non-medical problem is being cared for with medication (RSA). This strongly resembles
the Soma in Brave New World. If someone isnt happy, they simple take Soma, and suddenly theyre content again.
This reliance on drugs is a parallel between Huxleys novel and Sir Robinson's video. As Huxleys proverb goes, a
gramme is better than a damn (Huxley 156).

The similarities between how our education system puts children in groups by age and has them taught to think
that there is only one answer. Robinson points out how students are taught linearly instead of divergently (RSA).
This standardization of education reflects the caste system in Brave New World and how each caste is conditioned
to be only able to do the job their caste demands. Each caste is conditioned through hypnopaedia to only think one
way, this resembles the culture of our education system and how students are taught to think only in terms of if
one score high on tests, one is intelligent and will have a good job and if one scores low, the person is unintelligent
and must have a laborious job.

Another significant parallel which can be seen through the lens of Robinsons video is the similarities between the
"production line mentality" of America's education system, and the biologically mass-produced citizens of the
World State in Brave New World. The students in America go through this process of classes organized by age, yet
as Robinson elucidates, age does not necessarily dictate a students aptitude or discipline with a certain subject
(RSA). This resembles the caste system in the novel and how everyone is conditioned from pre-birth to maturity to
only be intelligent enough for their caste's jobs.

The democracy of individual growth and personal spirituality is eliminated in Huxleys Technopoly. By analyzing
the novel from the perspectives of Postman and Robinson, it becomes clear that Huxleys work is a prediction for
the future that hits all-too close to the bone. The transition from the Technocracies of today, to the Technopoly in
Brave New World is one that seems to be growing nearer, dauntingly. When do our advances in technology begin
to do more harm than help? No one can predict when good-natured intentions can bring about unfortunate ends,
yet Huxley provides a profound guess. How long before the ever-sharpening claws of technology latch around our
own society, and grip us away from the morals we hold to be valuable? Should we fear this threat? Or embrace its
benefits? Progress is lovely, isnt it? (Huxley 98).

28. Relation between individual and collective in Brave New World

"Every one belongs to every one else," whispers the voice in the dreams of the young in Huxley's future world
the hypnopaedic suggestion discouraging exclusivity in friendship and love. In a sense in this world, every
one is every one else as well. All the fetal conditioning, hypnopaedic training, and the power of convention molds
each individual into an interchangeable part in the society, valuable only for the purpose of making the whole run
smoothly. In such a world, uniqueness is uselessness and uniformity is bliss, because social stability is everything.

In the first chapter, the D.H.C. proudly explains the biochemical technology that makes possible the production of
virtually identical human beings and, in doing so, introduces Huxley's theme of individuality under assault.
Bokanovsky's Process, which arrests normal human development while promoting the production of dozens of
identical eggs, deliberately deprives human beings of their unique, individual natures and so makes overt
processes for controlling them unnecessary.

The uniformity of the Gammas, Deltas, and Epsilons is accomplished by careful poisoning with alcohol and
produces in Huxley's word "sub-human" people, capable of work but not of independent thought. For these
lower-caste men and women, individuality is literally impossible. As a result, built on a large foundation of
identical, easily manipulated people, the society thrives. Stability lives, but individuality the desire and/or
ability to be different is dead.

"When the individual feels, society reels," Lenina piously reminds Bernard, who strives without success for a
genuine human emotion beyond his customary peevishness. This inability is a kind of tragic flaw in Bernard. Even
love acknowledging and cherishing another's unique identity represents a threat to stability founded on
uniformity. The dystopia's alternative recreational sex is deliberately designed to blur the distinctions among
lovers and between emotions and urges, finding its social and ritual expression in "Orgy-Porgy."

This organized release of sexual urges undercuts passion, the intense feeling of one person for another, as the
individuals subordinate even their own sexual pleasure to the supposed joy of their society's unity. At the
Solidarity Service, Bernard finds the exercise degrading, just as anyone clinging to any idealism about sex would be
revolted. John's sensitive feelings about love suffer even from the representation of such an orgy at the feelies.
Significantly, it is the morning after his own experience of "orgy-porgy" that John commits suicide. His most
private, cherished sense of love and of self, he feels, has been violated.

In Huxley's dystopia, the drug soma also serves to keep individuals from experiencing the stressful negative effects
of conflicts that the society cannot prevent. Pain and stress grief, humiliation, disappointment representing
uniquely individual reactions to conflict still occur sometimes in the brave new world. The people of the brave new
world "solve" their conflict problems by swallowing a few tablets or taking an extended soma-holiday, which
removes or sufficiently masks the negative feelings and emotions that other, more creative, problem-solving
techniques might have and which cuts off the possibility of action that might have socially disruptive or
revolutionary results.
The society, therefore, encourages everyone to take soma as a means of social control by eliminating the affects of
conflict. John's plea to the Deltas to throw away their soma, then, constitutes a cry for rebellion that goes
unheeded. Soma-tized people do not know their own degradation. They are not even fully conscious that they are
individuals.

Both Bernard and John struggle against the society's constant efforts to undermine their individuality, but one
character reveals a deeper understanding of the stakes than the other. Bernard rails loudly about the inhumanity of
the system. His outrage stems from the injustices he suffers personally, but he apparently is unwilling or unable to
fathom a debate or course of action against the malady because he is an Alpha Plus upon whom the process has
been at least partially successful. Once Bernard receives the sexual and social attention he believes is his due, his
complaints continue merely as a show of daring and bravado. He sees no reason and feels no moral or social
compunction to fight for the rights of others oppressed by the social system.

John, on the other hand, truly challenges the brave new world with a view of freedom that includes everyone, even
the Deltas who reject his call for rebellion. Although John, like Bernard, suffers from the oppression of the World
State, John is able to frame his objections philosophically and debate the issue face to face with World Controller
Mustapha Mond because, although John is genetically an Alpha Plus, he has not undergone the conditioning
necessary to conform. His objection is not only his own lack of comfort, but the degradation of slavery imposed by
the society. John's acceptance of a free human life with all its danger and pain represents an idealistic stand beyond
Bernard's comprehension or courage. Flawed, misguided, John nevertheless dares to claim his right to be an
individual.

By the end of the novel, all the efforts to free the individual from the grip of the World State have failed, destroyed
by the power of convention induced by hypnopaedia and mob psychology. Only Helmholtz and Bernard, bound for
banishment in the Falkland Islands, represent the possibility of a slight hope a limited freedom within the
confines of a restrictive society.

The battle for individuality and freedom ends with defeat in Brave New World a decision Huxley later came to
regret. In Brave New World Revisited, a series of essays on topics suggested by the novel, Huxley emphasizes the
necessity of resisting the power of tyranny by keeping one's mind active and free. The individual freedoms may be
limited in the modern world, Huxley admits, but they must be exercised constantly or be lost.
Brave New World explores the classic conflict between the individual and society. Remember when your
kindergarten teacher taught you about how everyone is unique? Well, forget that lesson today, because in this
story, personal identity has been sacrificed for the sake of a common good, and the results are not very pretty. A
form of biological reproduction produces certain types of humans in batches of 96 identical copies. A social "caste"
structure separates the citizens into five groups, the result being that any given individual is little more than a
faceless, color-coded member of a larger group. Certain characters in the novel grow uncomfortable with this idea,
are downright disgusted by it, or for one reason or another find that they just don't fit the mold. They seek to
understand their individuality through isolation, self-exploration, and of course, self-flagellation.

SCARCITY OF INDIVIDUALISM IN BRAVE NEW WORLD--

An individual is defined as "a single person, animal, or thing of any kind; a thing or being incapable of separation or
division, without losing its identity; especially, a human being; a person" (Lexico). In Huxley's Brave New World,
the blissful masses are led by the fundamental principle of "Community, Identity and Stability" (Huxley 3). The sad
truth is that identity itself has been sacrificed in order to preserve happiness, community, and stability. Members
of this seemingly utopian society lack identity; they cannot be individuals.

The world that Huxley has fashioned is one of castes, ubiquitous sexuality, mindless drug use, sleep hypnosis
(hypnopaedia), and conditioning. All of these combine to discourage any possible individuality.

In Brave New World, people are not born. Instead, they are created through Bokanovsky's Process, "a series of
arrests of development" by which millions of eggs bud and form a nearly endless supply of human embryos
(Huxley 6). Before a person is even contrived, workers at the Conditioning Centre determine his appearance, his
level and function in society, and even his intelligence. Incidentally, bokanovskification is "one of the major
instruments of social stability" (Huxley 7). With the very creation of humans reduced to the mere semblance of a
production assembly line, there can be no individuality; people are not even given the choice of what they want to
be. The caste system provides a stable foundation for this new society. Instead of creating a struggle between the
lower and upper classes, the lower castes (Epsilons, Deltas and Gammas) are conditioned to be so unintelligent so
as to be content with where they are and what they do. On the other hand, the upper castes (Betas and Alphas) are
intelligent enough to be able to understand, and, in theory, overthrow the whole system. Unfortunately, in the
creation of this new world, turning back has become "impossible... because there are too few people who want to"
(Hoffman 246). Hypnopaedia provides for the people a sort of moral and social education, a basis of concepts that
are repeatedly pounded into their heads through sleep hypnosis:

Till at last the child's mind is these suggestions, and the sum of the suggestions is the child's mind. And not the
child's mind only. The adult's mind too-all his life long. The mind that judges and desires and decides-made up of
these suggestions. But all these suggestions are our suggestions!...The greatest moralizing and socializing force of
all time. (Huxley 28)

Instead of ever possessing their own beliefs, people are forced to conform to the universal rules of society. By
conforming, they become nothing more than mindless sheep doing the work they have been conditioned to know
how to do, having ideas and morals they have been conditioned to have, participating in a society with a motto of
"Every one belongs to every one else" (Huxley 43), a motto that has been conditioned into their minds. There can
be no individual thought in this world, only thoughts that in some way benefit the society by keeping it stable (a
basic principle of Brave New World). In this new world, sexuality has become commonplace. There is no emotion,
no love--just sex. With the concepts of mothers, fathers, families, home, marriage and birth taken away, people are
able to have sex with whomever they wish, without possible thought of consequence. Contraception is taken care
of to ensure stability with "cartridge belt[s]...bulging...with the regulation supply of contraceptives" (Huxley 50).
Women wear belts filled with contraceptives wherever they go; to them, these belts are a daily clothing accessory.
Children are taught sex education at a young age and even engage in erotic play. Love, an individual, special
emotion, is nonexistent, replaced by the idea of someone "having" whoever he pleases. The excitement and intense
feelings of falling in love and being in love that once were unique to each and every person are no more, having
been exchanged for the dull, predictable lifestyle in which everyone belongs to everyone else.

Soma, the drug of the masses, provides an outlet for any unhappiness as well as an escape from reality. "The daily
soma ration [is] an insurance against personal maladjustment, social unrest, and the spread of subversive ideas"
(Hoffman 245). Instead of ever having to feel discontent, one can just take a gramme of soma and forget everything
for awhile:

...Or if ever by some unlucky chance such a crevice of time should yawn in the solid substance of their distractions,
there is always soma, delicious soma, half a gramme for a half-holiday, a gramme for a week-end, two grammes for
a trip to the gorgeous East, three for a dark eternity on the moon... (Huxley 55-56)
Soma offers an evasion of any unpleasant feelings that people may encounter. If they should ever become unhappy,
they need only take soma to rejuvenate themselves and feel fine once more. Still, one must acknowledge that
unhappiness, however horrible, is a part of one's self, an individual emotion that a true person experiences. In this
society, such an emotion is not encouraged; after all, "everyone's happy nowadays" (Huxley 91).

The few people who see and understand the system of Brave New Worldeventually become enveloped in its ideas,
losing their sense of individuality, or they are shipped off to an island unlike Brave New World. In some cases, both
are true.

Such is the case for Bernard Marx. Upon first glance, he appears unique. He does not take soma, vehemently rejects
the idea of men freely "having" women as 4 though they were meat, and even enjoys being alone, something the
new society desperately attempts to prevent, as being alone encourages thought. In the beginning, he wants to feel
"as though [he] were more [himself]... more on [his] own, not so completely a part of something else. Not just a cell
in the social body... not enslaved by [his] conditioning" (Huxley 90-91). Bernard knows the feeling of being alone
and rejected, as he is an outcast in his own caste for being unusually small. He enjoys being scolded for his
rebellious behavior, feeling as though he "[stands] alone embattled against the order of things; elated by the
intoxicating consciousness of his individual significance and importance" (Huxley 98). But, as time progresses,
Bernard seems to change. When he is temporarily not an outcast and has the Savage, his discovery, to show off,
Bernard betrays his original feelings: he "has" whomever he wants, and even brags about his actions to his friend
Helmholtz Watson. Such a drastic change of character can only mean Bernard was never an individual in the first
place. Later on, when the prospect of being sent to an island (an earlier threat) becomes a reality, Bernard is
terrified and even starts crying: "Send me to an island? ... You can't send me. I haven't done anything. It was the
others. I swear it was the others... Give me another chance" (Huxley 226). Bernard prefers the Brave New World,
the world in which individuality is stifled, to a world where he could be free to believe what he wanted. He has
sadly become entrenched in his society's ideas, conditioned to want happiness, however false it may be.

Lenina Crowne is another upper caste member of society who understandsthe system but does not attempt to do
anything about it. She lets other people influence her thoughts and does not seem to do things for herself--just for
society as a whole. For instance, when her friend Fanny berates her for "having" only one man and encourages her
to "play the game," Lenina agrees: "Yes, every one belongs to every one else... You're quite right, Fanny. I'll make
the effort" (Huxley 43). Also, when she is alone with Bernard, she is horrified by his blasphemy and cannot
comprehend "not wanting to be a part of the social body" (Huxley 91). She continually repeats hypnopaedic
concepts such as, "when the individual feels, the community reels," and is unable to keep herself from growing
hysterical (Huxley 94). Evidently, Lenina has become so comfortable and so encompassed in the society of Brave
New World that stepping outside of what she understands is a difficult process. She can never be an individual, as
she is too conditioned even to acknowledge Bernard's ideas about being different or alone.

John the Savage seems to be different. He is an outcast in his own society because he does not look the same, yet he
never seems to be able to fit in with the society of Brave New World. John is against the idea of "having" more than
one person, does not seem to appreciate the inventions of Brave New World, does not take soma, and enjoys art,
literature and religion. But is he not conditioned by his own society to some extent? His ideas and thoughts seem to
adhere strictly to the rules of his society, the Savage Reservation. There, the idea of "having" more than one person
is not tolerated, and John's mother (a former member of Brave New World) is whipped for doing such a thing.
Religion is a central idea in the Savage Reservation as well, and John is indignant when he learns that there is no
religion in Brave New World--just "feelies," soma, and sex. Near the end of the book, John is shipped off to an island
to enjoy the pleasure of solitude (a pleasure not granted by the society of Brave New World), then he realizes
he cannot be alone. Reporters swarm around him and chant for the whip, which John earlier used against himself
to atone for his sins. John succumbs to what society wants and begins to whip himself; as Lenina enters, he begins
to whip her as well.

Then suddenly somebody started singing 'Orgy-porgy' and, in a moment, they had all caught up the refrain and,
singing, had begun to dance. Orgy-porgy, round and round and round, beating one another in six-eight time. Orgy-
porgy... It was after midnight when the last of the helicopters took its flight. Stupefied by soma, and exhausted by a
long-drawn frenzy of sensuality, the Savage lay sleeping in the heather... He lay for a moment, blinking in owlish
incomprehension at the light; then suddenly remembered-everything. "Oh my God, my God!" He covered his eyes
with his hand. (Huxley 258-259)

The Savage went against everything he apparently believed in: he conformed to what society wanted him to do,
took soma, and even had sex with Lenina. He followed society like a mindless drone, "finally yield[ing] his
principles and himself. The only purification for that sin, he realizes on the following day, is death" (Wells 306).
Whatever individuality John had vanished as he was caught up in Brave New World's society, an event that was
most likely inevitable to occur at some point. John conformed, he did what the masses desired; he sacrificed his
individuality, the ultimate sin.

Brave New World is a society that is inescapable. All one can do is conform; there is no opportunity for
individuality. Here, "the individual is solidly integrated, is an almost indistinguishable part of the whole... The
individual is no longer isolated, but he is no longer isolated because he is no longer an individual" (Satire 266).
Relinquishing individuality for happiness is the greatest sacrifice of all--and proves to be the greatest folly.

29. Parallels between Brave New World and contemporary society

Brave New World is definitely one of the most disturbing books ever written. What is so utterly disturbing
about it? It is the fear that pervades your whole being while reading it.

At first, you are disgusted by this new world. Then, you judge the people and their living. And then, you
realize that our world is not entirely different from the world in the book. But, are they actually similar?

There are some striking parallels between our contemporary society and Huxley's utopian society.
However, this paper will reveal that there is still a hope for our world and it is not even close to becoming the
''brave new world''.

One of the most evident parallels is the use of soma. The motto of Huxley's utopian society is ''Community,
Identity, Stability''. Characters in the book use this drug in order to remain happy in every situation. They have
rhymes that encourage them to take soma, like one cubic centimeter [of soma] cures ten gloomy sentiments and
a gramme is always better than a damn. It is, of course, false happiness, but that is the price they pay for the
stability of society.

How is this similar to today's world? Today, people tend to get away from problems instead of facing them.
That is why the use of drugs has become a harsh reality. Antidepressants are widely used nowadays and, just like
in Brave New World, they create the feeling of false happiness. Use of these substances does not, unfortunately,
solve the issues people have. It just prolongs them and delays their solving. Or eventually, kills them. Just like when
Linda could not face the world without the use of soma, even though she knew it was leading her to the safe death.

Next similarity is between hypnopedia and today's media. Mental conditioning is used for physical and
mental controlling, again, all for the purposes of preserving the stability of the community. This awfully resembles
our media who are brainwashing people's minds with their content. Both, hypnopedia and media, are developing
the culture of consumerism. In Brave New World, children are taught moral lessons through hypnopedia. In our
world, we are bombed with advertisements and propaganda that are putting pressure on us to believe in certain
things in order to mask the truth. Both processes lead to brainwashing of the masses.

However, there is still more freedom in our society. In Huxley's society, the destiny of the people is
predetermined. Through the use of hypnopedia, they are taught to love their position in the world. They are not
even aware of their own existence as we are. We have the possibility to change our lives and to fight for a better
future. They are like trees compared to us. Stuck in one place, one position, without any awareness of the possible
change. 1.CITAT

In Brave New World, humans are seen as sex objects. They believe that everyone belongs to everyone else.
They do not believe in monogamy and commitment. This resembles our world in a way that moral values are very
poor nowadays and they do not seem to have a bright future. Women are frequently seen as sex objects and are
engaged in different ''professions'' in which they ruin their morals and integrity. However, our world is not so
gloomy referring to this matter. We do still place a value on personal relationships as opposed to the World State
where such relationships are seen as inappropriate. 2 CITAT
 One similarity that has not reached such extreme points in our world is the Bokanovsky process from the
book, and cloning in the modern society. Cloning is similar to the Bokanovsky process in a way that they both
produce living creatures that are a perfect copy of someone else. This process is used in the World State in order to
achieve the stability. In our world, it is still used in scientific purposes and hopefully, it will not ever cross its limits.

One of the most striking differences between the two worlds is the view on religion, i.e. the absence of it in
the World State. The belief in God and the cross have been replaced by Ford and the symbol T. Instead of having
religious masses or prayers, people gather in solidarity services where hallucinations are produced through the
use of soma. Their true religion is actually a religion of drugs and sex.

However, this is not exactly the case with our society. No matter how much the people have gone astray,
they still find the consolation and strength in God. Science and technology are simply not enough to give people
answers to all of their questions, and we will always turn to God. 3.CITAT

The idea of family does not even exist in the World State. They are disgusted by the concept of it and it is
rude to talk about the sheer existence of it. We cannot deny the fact that the institution of family has been severely
ruined in the last decades. The number of divorces can easily show the turmoil. However, it is not even close to the
complete absence of it in the World State. As with religion, our society still finds strong support in the institution of
family.4.CITAT

Besides from the absence of religion and family, another price that is paid for stability is the restraint of
history, literature and art. People of the World State are conditioned to dislike books, art and nature. Any
possibility for creativity, innovation and independent thought has been destroyed from its root. The community
cannot take that much risk in allowing people to have their own opinions and ideas. Therefore, they take away the
beauty from them and give them the false sense of happiness. Thus, the high art is sacrificed. Their education is
also sacrificed and they only have reference books at their disposal. Knowledge is considered to be the power and
ordinary people of the World State cannot be allowed to have the power. In the contemporary society, there is still
a high appreciation of history, literature and art. People are given the chance to understand the beauty of
everything that surrounds them. That makes their worlds more enjoyable.

Another startling difference between the two worlds is the view on death. People in the World State are
conditioned to believe that the only thing that matters in their lives is to be purposeful to the society. Thus, when
they die, they are still useful since their ashes are used for fertilization. They act like robots because of the
conditioning, without ever questioning the idea of death. It is completely accepted and rooted in their minds as a
normal thing from their childhood. On the contrary, someone's death is a sad and distressing event in our world. It
shows that we do have emotions and are still free to express them.

Huxley mentions some things that were only an idea in his time. Those ideas are our reality. For example,
he talks about contraception that has developed greatly since then. Also, people in the World State use helicopters
as taxis. We do not use them like that, but they have their significance in modern transport.

Huxley's world is really shocking to a man from a contemporary society, despite all the parallels. What
Huxley wanted to convey to the readers is that we should strive for happiness, but in a right way. A way of putting
individuals in the first place and not institutions. That will prevent us from becoming robot-like and give us a real
purpose in our society. We should try to learn from the mistakes of this utopian world in order to make our future
brighter.

The tyranny of happiness

The authoritarian state in Brave New World is obsessed with making people happy even if they dont want to
be. Its aim is universal happiness because if people are happy theres more likely to be social stability. People
must be made to like their unescapable social destiny, officials insist. One modern-day politician is also pretty
obsessed with boosting the masses happiness levels: David Cameron. He has pumped massive amounts of cash and
staff into something called a happiness agenda, through which he hopes to create a more content, happier
society. In Brave New World, the antihero known as the Savage rebels against the happiness agenda, telling his
smiley-faced rulers: I want freedom, I want goodness, I want sin Im claiming the right to be unhappy. We
should claim the same right against Cams happy-clappy meddling in our emotional lives.
2) Drugging the populace
The people of Brave New World are kept chilled with a drug called soma. Described as having all of the advantages
of Christianity and alcohol [and] none of their defects, its a psychoactive drug that induces feelings of calm, thus
negating any need to discover and potentially tackle the true source of ones sorrow. Soma subdues all malice and
bad tempers. Modern society uses antidepressants in a disturbingly similar way. This week a report discovered
that prescriptions for antidepressants have surged across the rich world. A British psychiatrist is worried that
antidepressants are being dished out not to combat serious depression but merely to get rid of unhappiness.
Ritalin use among children has soared in Britain, as parents and doctors take to drugging kids who seem overly
pesky. As in Brave New World, we prefer to supress malice and bad tempers with drugs rather than ask what
travails might lie behind such emotions and how they might be addressed.
3) The fashion for euthanasia
In Brave New World, death is celebrated. Most of those who reach 60, and become economically useless, are
euthanised. Hearses are gaily coloured. People are sent to die in comfortable, primrose-coloured apartment
blocks, which are alive with gay synthetic melodies and where theres a TV at the foot of every bed. Today, people
arent euthanised en masse, of course, but there is a fashion for euthanasia, or what we must now bizarrely call the
right to die, particularly in liberal-leaning circles. The bright, gay death centres of Brave New World find their
equivalent in the euthanasia clinics of modern Europe, where one can request a good death in comfortable
surroundings if one is suffering from a terminal illness or, in the case of Belgium, simply from depression. Baroness
Warnock has said elderly people should ask themselves if they have a duty to die, because if you are demented
you are wasting the resources of the NHS. A Times columnist recently said we should legalise voluntary
euthanasia in order to address societys unaffordable explosion in dementia and age-related illness. That isnt a
million miles from Brave New Worlds use of euthanasia to limit the number of resource-sucking sick people and
keep the economy healthy.
4) Malthusian miserabilism
The society depicted in Brave New World is depressingly Malthusian like ours. Officials in Huxleys dystopia carry
out Malthusian drills to remind people of the necessity of not having too many kids, and encourage women to
wear Malthusian belts packed with contraceptives, all in the name of keeping the human population limited to
two billion. Thats the optimum population, they claim, the highest number of people we can have in relation to
Mother Natures scarce resources the exact same claim made today by Population Matters, formerly the Optimum
Population Trust, whose big-name supporters include Sir David Attenborough. The idea that there are too many
people making too many demands on poor Gaias depleted larder of stuff is alarmingly commonplace today,
especially among environmentalists, who, just like the miserabilist officials in Brave New World, are obsessed
with the problem of human numbers in their relation to natural resources. Indeed, we are now so surrounded by
hectoring Greens telling us to modify our behaviour and fecundity in order to preserve natural resources that we
no longer even recognise the deeply misanthropic and authoritarian bent to such arguments.
5) Bashing the family
In Brave New World, promiscuity is encouraged and family life is frowned upon. The family is viewed as a drain on
peoples creativity. Having a family demands a narrow channelling of impulse and energy, officials insist, as they
mock the frictions of tightly packed [family] life, reeking with emotion. Today, too, the family is sneered at.
Feminists depict it as a site of abuse, especially of women and children; bookshop shelves creak with misery
memoirs about wicked mothers and violent fathers; Cameron complains of Britains thousands of chaotic
families, who apparently need state guidance. The number of people across the globe who live alone rather than
as part of a family unit has skyrocketed, rising from 153 million in 1996 to 280 million today. As in Brave New
World, today not only are we surrounded by misanthropy, authoritarianism and emotion-modifying drugs in
public life, but even that once quiet, private sphere of family life, that old heart in a heartless world, is being
thoroughly undermined.

rave New World covers a range of themes and issues that have been pertinent to moral society since it was first
published in 1932. From genetic engineering to class struggles, Brave New World examines a future where embryos
are chemically treated to ensure they fit a certain class, and then babies and children are hypnotised into believing
governmental doctrines as pure truth. The use of Soma, a narcotic used as an instant anti-depressant, casts a
worrying shadow on the chemical treatment of clinical depression to an extent, and ethical grey areas such as IVF
are easily comparable to the key themes of the book. These are ideas that have been explored before, but as society
shifts, the importance and relevance of these key themes shift alongside it.
The Western World has arguably changed a lot more quickly in the past 10 years than potentially any other time
before it. With the advent of the internet and electronic entertainment, as well as capitalism really gaining a grip on
everyday life, some parts of Brave New World that were just a scary fictional quirk are becoming more and more
real.
The enforced consumer society in Brave New World is strikingly familiar. Huxley may have written it in as a satire
of the society he was living in, but it potentially holds even more weight now. Huxleys new England took a logical
step into the future based on the continued societal focus on economic growth, both personally and as a society.
Now, nearly a century after he pondered where this step would take us, we are there in many ways. Individuals are
indoctrinated with catchy phrases that cement their belief in the capitalist and consumerist way of living enforced
by societys rulers. Ending is better than mending is one of the most repeated of these, encouraging people not to
fix something thats broken, but to buy a whole new product instead.
With this in mind, the constantly spinning wheel of fashion and the clothing world in general becomes a lot
more disquieting. High street chains are getting cheaper and cheaper, but obviously the quality of the goods gets
compromised. If you buy a top for 2 and the thread holding the hem together falls apart within a week, how likely
are you to sew it up? We dont need no hypnopaedia indoctrination when were already doing it to each other and
ourselves. Cheap clothing made from cheap materials (and lets not even get into the awful realities of cheap
outsourced labour because thats a whole different essay) ensures that consumers maintain a repetitive cycle of
buying and chucking.

This is by no means restricted to human vanity. Brave New World references the expensive games that the higher
classes have engineered in order to extract more money from consumers. One character laughs at the idea that all
people used to need for fun was a ball and a net, when theyve created much more elaborate entertainments that
require consistent consumerism. In the present, even games that used just a ball and net now need so much more
with a new shirt every season, football has become a vastly profitable business. Likewise, electronic entertainment
needs constant updates: you buy a console and each game that looks good, then theres downloadable content to
pay for, and dont forget about an online subscription on top of it all (and if you want to play something like Rock
Band, make sure you get a special super-expensive controller). Early readers of the book may have scoffed at the
idea of Obstacle Golf, but Obstacle Golf is here, and were happy to pay for it.
Who needs a ball and net?
A more abstract (and perhaps even more relevant) detail that is striking inBrave New World is the inverted
distinction between public and private. InBrave New World, relationships are out in the open. Everybody knows
everybody elses business, though not in the scurrilous neighbourhood gossip way. Its an everyday part of life it
is important that everybody knows who youre going out with (and who youre getting off with), and how many
people youve got at the same time. Its normal to discuss sexual encounters like TV shows, and people will
regularly share partners without feeling any form of jealousy or shame. Engaging sexually with multiple partners is
encouraged, and the moral norm that were used to (adultery = bad, monogamy = good) is reversed to the point
that people who stay monogamous for too long are punished by the authorities.
In the book, the desire to be alone, and the desire to talk alone with a single person, is seen as bizarre behaviour
worthy of discipline. When Bernard asks Lenina to talk with him alone she laughs, not in malice, but because the
idea of not being seen or heard by the masses is so absurd. Everybody must know everybody elses business to give
it worth. In Brave New World anything that happens privately may as well not have happened, which has a
frightening similarity to our current culture. Epitomised by the internet lad catchphrase pics or it didnt happen,
the majority of the internet generation tends to share every mundane detail of their lives (I told Twitter I was
eating cheese the other day and, incidentally, did provide a photo) so the public domain is becoming more
important than the private. If there isnt proof, if it happened behind closed doors, then it is judged to have not
happened.

In Brave New World, privacy is seen as both a crime and a punishment. Keeping ones private life private within
this new England is non-conformist and so those who transgress in this way are, ironically, sent away from society
to live their lives away from the public eye. In a broadly similar way, if a person of a certain age and privilege (Im
looking at you, young, middle-and-upper-class Westerners!) does not participate in at least one social network
then they are seen as being off the grid, and are punished for it. A large proportion of event promotions and event
invitations are created via Facebook, and a startling amount of jobs (particularly in the creative industries) will
penalise you if you do not have a successful LinkedIn and/or Twitter.
Being off the grid is so unusual that its become a known joke. In thePortlandia episode Celery we see Carrie
taking herself off all social media and declaring social bankruptcy as she is unable to keep up with them all.
Unfortunately she finds that, once off the grid, her best friend no longer recognises her and she literally fades away.
Whilst this is a skit, it does represent the real fear of social media usage: if we stop using them, will we lose contact
with (some, at least) people and events that we care about? If we dont share our information with an internet
server, will anybody pay attention when we want and/or need to share information in other ways?
Brave New Worlds main message has usually been interpreted as warning of the dangers in allowing the state
absolute control, particularly in reference to control over technologies that take priority over, and are used to
modify, human behaviour. Whilst this is still relevant, given the changing face of society its fairly fascinating that
some of the less prevalent themes are gaining new relevance when keeping in mind new ethical issues that are
attached to morally ambiguous technologies.
Ive explored consumerism and privacy in particular as they are so interconnected: online at least, privacy is now
arguably subject to consumerism. Personal privacy has become something of an enigma, in that we feel we are
asked to choose between being socially active (as online social activity increases) and keeping our private lives
private. It comes in the most unassuming of ways did you know that if you OK-ed the latest update for your
Facebook app on your phone, youve given Facebook permission to read your text messages? Everybody knows
Google has questionable privacy rules, but Gmail is a really good email provider, and most people dont tend to
make their Twitter private. As time goes on theres going to have to be a point where the benefits of an app, or any
other electronic service outweighs the desire for personal privacy or is there? A large amount of social media
(read: big business) feeds on getting strangers to follow each others random thoughts or tracking our idle page
visits to target advertising, and as a society we seem more than happy to provide.

Bernards desire in Brave New World to not have his relationship with Lenina broadcast to the whole organisation
is as relatable as someone getting tagged in a picture online, snogging the face off someone inappropriate. More
insidiously, say someone buys something sensitive that they dont want to be seen buying in a shop (lets say a sex
toy). Theres a high probability that now one of the biggest and most influential companies in the world has written
proof that this person has done this, and their address (and can now update the ads on other sites they visit to
advertise the same kind of product).
Personal privacy is quickly becoming obsolete, and is now just something else for companies to advertise with,
something else for the consumer to ingest. But is this a problem? If Huxleys Brave New World intends to criticise
the idea of diminished personal privacy, then chances are he would not approve of our new worlds tendency
towards social media and online sharing. Of course, with all these things its moderation thats the key. Sharing on
social media brings us closer to real-life people that we may previously have not been able to stay connected with,
which can only be a good thing. Huxleys fears are unfounded in the sense that personal sharing is the basis of
human connection, but they are not in that this human connection is supplied via a consumer-driven corporation
that makes millions off something so basic.
There is a definite distinction between sharing among friends and sharing with corporations that changes from
positive to negative. If Brave New World is a warning of the dangers in allowing the state absolute control, then we
personally must be aware of the control we allow the state in sharing our personal details on an individual basis.
Its easy to forget just how simple it is for this privacy to be abused, and were only reminded when it has already
happened (NSA scandal, anyone?). Brave New Worlds warning must be heeded online, for now at least, because the
lines are still blurry with what happens to our personal information. If sensitive, this can potentially have huge
ramifications for a range, and mass, of individuals.

30.Parallels between 1984 and Brave New World

If Brave New World was Aldous Huxley's technocratic purgatory,

Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-four describes a hell beyond Huxley's worst fears.
Compare and contrast the two novels as visions of a future that has gone dramatically wrong.

Brave New World and 1984 were both written by men who had experienced war on the grand scale of the
twentieth century. Disillusioned and alarmed by what they saw in society, each author produced a powerful satire
and an alarming vision of future possibilities. Although the two books are very different, they address many of the
same issues in their contrasting ways.

Huxley's novel sets out a world in which society is kept carefully balanced, with the means of reproduction just as
closely controlled as the means of production. Human beings and the goods they make are tailored to one another:
people are created in order to fulfil particular purposes, and are encouraged to consume so as to maintain the
cycle.

The society presented in 1984 is less comfortably balanced. The population is kept content with a rather meagre lot
because of the constant war, which, as is explicitly stated in the Book, is a convenient means of maintaining the
status quo, and the Party keeps a very close watch on those members of society who are deemed capable of
disrupting it.

Although set in Orwell's future, 1984 does not put great emphasis on technological advanceindeed, within the
society of Oceania, there is effectively none any more, because the methods required for proper scientific enquiry
are antithetical to the demands of the Party, and thus real science has been abolished. Orwell posits a certain level
of technological advancethe two-way television screens and the ever-present surveillance equipment, the novel-
writing machines,, but not much else. His purpose was not to imagine the details of such technologies, but to
present the use to which they are put.

Huxley goes considerably further in imagining scientific advance. In his World State, humans are engendered and
grown in artificial wombs. There are also such things as 'the feelies', an extrapolation of today's cinema (in
Huxley's case, 'the talkies' were quite a novelty). However, the idea of automation seems to have passed him by, so
that people are grown for the purposes of toiling in factories or operating elevators. Again, however, the author is
not attempting to present a detailed picture of what life would be like in the far distant future; he is showing the
effects of such things on human nature.

For both authors, a necessary action in their future societies is the abolition of the past. In Brave New World, the
people have embraced Henry Ford's misquoted dictum that 'History is bunk', and have no interest in it. Anything
from the past (with occasional exceptions like 'Our Ford') is perceived as unimportant. Thus the richness of human
history is cast aside.
The rejection of history takes a more aggressive form in 1984, where it becomes impossible to understand the past,
because the details of the past are constantly rewritten to conform with the requirements of the present. The
concept of historical truth is irrelevant: truth, and history, becomes what the Party wants it to be. Winston Smith
himself takes part in this, rewriting the news: he therefore knows that the details of the past have been tampered
with, and is unable to discern or discover what the truth might be.

Just as history is effectively abolished in both societies, so is the family. Huxley extrapolates the trend for elective
childbearing until it becomes grotesque: no-one bears children any more, and the concept of motherhood is
obscene. In Orwell's world the family is not obsolete, but it has been subverted. Children are taught from their
earliest years to give their loyalty to the Party and to Big Brother, and are encouraged to spy on and betray their
own parents. Thus the family becomes one more means of surveillance, so that everyone is surrounded by people
who cannot be trusted. The horribly inappropriate behaviour of the children in 1984 has a counterpart in Brave
New World, where children are expected to indulge in 'erotic play'. The reader can only be thankful Huxley does
not go into details.

Sigmund Freud's impact on the world shows up in both novels, which both put considerable emphasis on the
importance of sexual behaviour to human beings, but in vastly different ways.

In Brave New World, sexual intercourse is completely separate from reproduction. The females who are not
rendered sterile are obliged to wear 'Malthusian belts' and to maintain their contraception. Along with the family
unit, exclusive partnerships have been abolished. 'Everybody belongs to everybody' is the slogan, and proper
members of society are expected to couple with anyone. Lenina Crowne's behaviour in remaining faithful to one
man at a time (and her aberrant interest in Bernard Marx) dismays her friend Fanny, who encourages her back
towards a 'normal' promiscuity. Naturally, this sort of behaviour is incomprehensible to The Savage, who has been
brought up on the edges of a quite different societyand in a close relationship with his mother, to boot.

The consequence of such absolute promiscuity is that sex becomes a mindless and meaningless act of no more
significance than eating a bar of chocolate. In Oceania, sex is treated in a quite opposite manner. Sexual activity is
discouraged, and divorced from pleasure. Winston's wife's attitude was to endure it for the sake of the Party, in
order to reproduce. Winston considers sex to be a political act, an expression of freedom. Julia puts her finger on it,
explaining to Winston that sex makes people happy and relaxed, while the Party prefers that their energies be
channelled into other activities. Privation increases tension, and can be forced into such activities as 'Hate Week'
and so forth.

With familial and sexual relationships either gone or terribly distorted, it is not surprising that both worlds also
trivialise death. In Brave New World, individuals barely exist in the first place: their lives are so banal and
interchangeable that it is not surprising death is made meaningless. The members of the World State do not grow
and mature, and they never really come to terms with death. Grotesquely, young children are 'conditioned' by
visiting wards of the dying and being fed chocolate eclairs afterwards.

In 1984, people merely cease to exist. One day, Winston comes to work to find that all traces of an erstwhile
colleague have been removedSymes has ceased to exist. he may well not be physically dead as yet, but he has
goneand no-one ever dares to mention that he had existed. Yet Winston does retain a normal human dread of
actual death: incarcerated, and hoping to be delivered a razor blade, he nonetheless wonders whether he would be
able to use it to commit suicideit is a natural human impulse to keep on living.

Essentially, the Party manages to persuade its members that mere feelings are of no account. Each person is kept in
a state of persecuted fear, and distrust of those around himwho ought to be the 'nearest and dearest' but may
well turn out to be betrayers. In Huxley's World State, human interaction is simply reduced to the shallowest
possible level, so that feelings become unimportant because they are trivial.

To both authors, this lack of decent human feeling means the death of art. Mustapha Mond says:

"...you can't make tragedies without social instability"

when he is explaining to John why the World State has sacrificed high art. Winston's thoughts take much the same
direction:

"Tragedy, he perceived, belonged to the ancient time, to a time when there was still privacy, love and friendship,
and when the members of a family stood by one another without needing to know the reason."

In 1984, novels are written to formula by machines; in Brave New World, the 'feelies' aim at the audience's
immediate sensual gratification, not at their minds or their emotions.

As a result of the insistent reduction of human feelings to the least possible level, the people in both societies treat
other people as objects and do not experience decent emotions with regard to them. The Savage attempts to create
a world for himself (taking his own problems into it, of course, but escaping as far as he is able from the society
into which he cannot fit), but his privacy is invaded and a 'feelie' is made of his life. Then a crowd of sightseers
come to see him, and treat him as though he were an exhibit at the zoo, chanting at him to use the whip, and
turning his frenzied behaviour with Lenina into an orgy.

Winston himself shows this kind of insensitivity when he writes about the war film he watched, refugees being
bombed in a lifeboat. He presents the callous laughter of the audience as perfectly normal, and does not recognise
his own lack of humanity either.

Essentially, Winston has been conditioned to behave with craven selfishness. Every aspect of his life is regulated,
and he can hardly call his thoughts his own, since the concept of Thoughtcrime makes it plain to him that his
rebellious thoughts are forbidden, and the existence of the Thought Police makes him certain that he will be caught
and horribly punished. The conditioning in 1984 is less explicit than that of Brave New World, but again there are
similaritiesthe 'Two Minutes Hate' and the 'Solidarity Service' both encourage frenzied, animalistic emotions
from the participants, and enhance their obedience to the state's imposed lifestyle. In Brave New World, of course,
the conditioning is done openly and for the acknowledged purpose of fitting different people to their different roles
in life. The scene in which lower-caste babies are conditioned by terror and pain into a loathing of books and
flowers demonstrates that under the smooth surface, this society can be as ruthless as the Party.

There is an interesting difference in the way in which these novels treat the 'proles'. Both authors seem to make
the uncomfortable point that the masses are easily contented. Huxley's lower castes, the Gammas, Deltas and
Epsilons, are easily contentwork of a non-challenging nature, followed by relaxation, drugs and sex, are all they
require (although the existence of police capable of dealing with a rioting mob suggests that there can sometimes
be trouble). They are so unimportant that they are not even individuals at all, but are bred in batches called
Bokanovsky Groups, dozens of identical specimens at a time. The lower castes do not really have any influence in
Huxley's book, and are simply the background to the doings of the upper-caste characters.

The 'proles' in 1984 resemble the lower castes in their lack of aspiration and their capacity to be content with what
little they can get. They are also unimportant in the eyes of the controlling Partyalthough there must be some
surveillance of them, as we are told that any potentially subversive proles (ie those who demonstrate an ability to
think for themselves) are 'eliminated'. These ordinary people do conform to low expectationsthey enjoy the
banal songs which are manufactured for them, and the most excitement that Winston sees generated among them
is in a fight for some tin saucepans. However, the proles not as heavily controlled and conditioned as Party
membershave not lost their humanity. Winston recognises this, contrasting his own callousness with their
willingness to care even when the caring will make no actual difference. He also dreams of the proles breaking free
and overthrowing the Party, which they vastly outnumber. He is logically correct in realising that they could do so,
but at the same time it is clear that the proles are extremely unlikely to take such action. The Party does not bother
to control them because, in fact, it is unnecessary to do so. The proles are very much like those Gammas, Deltas and
Epsilons, and are content with the easy comforts of life. They do not strive. There seems to be a similarity of
attitude between Orwell and Huxley which incorporates a kind of contempt for 'ordinary people', who do not have
high aspirations or deep perception, though Orwell at least grants them potential.

Huxley's dystopia is, all the same, a less terrible place than Orwell's. Although it is the 'World State', there are tiny
pockets of escape. There are the Reservations, where primitives live and practise a quite different lifestyle; there
are also islands, to which awkward members of society can be sent if necessary. Mustapha Mond points out that
Bernard Marx is in fact privileged to be sent to such a place, although the prospect terrifies him. And although the
effect of such a society is to dehumanise human beings, removing their need to strive, and keeping them
emotionally immature all their lives, it is at least (apparently) done for a benign purpose. The difficulties of
twentieth-century life have been smoothed over in order to keep the members of society happyand by and large,
they do seem to be happy, at least in a trivial sense.

The arresting image from 1984, however, is that of a boot grinding into a human face. There is no benign intent
behind The Party, only the desire for Power, absolute and unceasing. The power is not to be used to improve the
world, but is simply to be maintained, and it is because this power must be complete that the Party goes to such
lengths to 'convert' Winston to its preferred way of thinking. Most societies are content to determine what people
do, but in this one, every thought must be controlled. Moreover, there are no islands to which nonconformists can
be sentit is clear that the two balancing powers of Eurasia and Eastasia are identical in their repressiveness to
Oceania. The remainder of the world is a permanent war zonebut in any case, Winston has no means to escape
thither even if he considered doing so.

The style and presentation of these novels varies quite considerably. 1984 is very much the experience of the
central character, Winston Smith. His thoughts and feelings and his fate are the story of the novel, although there is
also the long (and very dull) section of The Book which explains how the world functions, and the extensive
appendix on 'Newspeak'. Brave New World presents a less taut, less tense story, and the story-line moves from one
focus character to another: initially it seems as though the Director may be the main character, then the story
moves on to Lenina and to Bernard, and eventually to John, the Savage. There are some didactic passages here, too,
most pointedly when Mustapha Mond explains how the World State functions, but this is more carefully integrated
into the storyline than is The Book. However, neither novel really makes a point of presenting realistic
charactersor even particularly likeable ones. Winston's many flaws are ruthlessly exposed as he writes in his
'diary' or moves through life without doing much to make us like or admire him. Bernard Marx is an outsider and
in a situation which ought to evoke our sympathyhe is not a 'proper' Alpha, and acutely conscious of his
shortcomingsbut he is too selfish and whining to be very attractive. The Savage is in a far more pitiable situation,
but even he is not really an endearing character, and Huxley makes sure that we are distanced from him by the
elements of humour and the grotesque which are used to convey his story. There are, interestingly, some moments
of close correspondence between the books. O'Brien and Mustapha Mond have some similarity of role and
character. Bernard, at the 'religious' ceremony, is unable to feel the ecstasy along with the others and has to fake
itjust as Winston cannot entirely enter into the spirit of the 'Two Minutes Hate', even though other people are
screaming abuse at the figure of Goldstein. In addition, there is the resonance of the presence of death. Brave New
World is full of death imagery, from the grisly description of the Hatchery right through to John's suicide. And
Winston Smith regards himself as 'already dead', right from the beginning.

Both novels also present the importance of language to human thought. In Brave New World, language has been
changed in many ways. 'Mother' is an obscene term. Behaviour is trained into people and reinforced with banal
slogans like "I take a gramme and only am". The Savage is unable to understand the emotions he feels towards his
mother's lover, until he reads the works of Shakespeare and learns the words with which to express himself. His
understanding is far from complete, as he has no context for most of what he reads, but the words do give him the
chance to understand and express himself.

Orwell takes the importance of language theme much further, with the invention of 'Newspeak'. This is a conscious
and determined attempt by the Party to make it impossible for people to think 'Thoughtcrime', because the words
to formulate such things will no longer be available. Newspeak seeks to reduce language to the functional
minimum, to eliminate nuance and eradicate style. In the tenth dictionary of Newspeak, we are told, certain words
have been made obsoletethe opposite of what naturally happens to a language, for words become obsolete
because they have ceased to be used, rather than because they have been erased. Of course, by this invention
Orwell has actually augmented our own language, for 'Newspeak' and 'doublethink' are very handy words.

These novels were not written as prophecies, but as warnings. Nevertheless, they do both contain predictive
elements (which were not necessarily intended as such!). 1984 bears a strong resemblance to the state of Soviet
Russia, as far as I understand it, although the Party is even more ruthless than Stalin. Surveillance to the level
described is actually more possible, technically, these days than it was when Orwell was writingwe do have
interactive televisions, and spy satellites, and are told of various government schemes to keep an eye on our email
transactions. However, the book does tend to give an impression of being out-of-date, because now that
communism has fallen in Eastern Europe, the most obviously Orwellian state is over and done with. Though
perhaps we do not know enough about other societies to know whether they are perpetuating this kind of
environment.

Brave New World, being set much further into the future, has not been overtaken by events in the same way. In fact,
advances in reproductive science and cloning technologies have made it appear all the more prescient. In social
terms, too, Huxley seems to have emphasised many elements which have become quite normal todaysexual
freedom is not quite on the 'Everybody belongs to everybody' level, and family life is not obsolete, but there has
been a good deal of movement in these directions. Even the 'feelies' seem that much closer than Huxley could have
expected, with the improvements in 'virtual reality'.

In essence, there are a great many points of comparison between these two novels. They address many of the same
issueslanguage, control, production, sex, and so forthand simply treat them in quite different ways. Of the two,
I find Brave New World the more enjoyable read, mostly because it is not completely devoid of hope. 1984 is
relentlessly determined to portray a world in which there is no hope.

Brave New World and 1984 Have the Same Message

If you havent read Brave New World or 1984, I encourage you to take a look at both books; theyre required
reading in many school systems, and both are thought-provoking, well-written works of fiction. Also, there will be
spoilers galore. That being said, if you dont care to read either book, Ill let you know the differences between them
now. In 1984, a totalitarian regime reigns by fear, using mass surveillance and the media to impose its authority on
the populace. Those who step out of line risk having their existences erased. Rebellion is quelled by force.
In Brave New World, eugenics has created a society in which people are bred for their jobs- when workers are
needed, they are cultivated as clones. A persons rank is to determined before birth) Alpha, Beta, Gamma, etc.) and
the most intelligent are given the least alcohol as fetuses that they might develop with the most intelligence.
Unlike 1984, in Brave New World, mass surveillance is unnecessary- rather, people are controlled by their desires;
promiscuity is encouraged, people are given endless supplies of narcotics, and theres entertainment galore.
Theres no force to quell a rebellion, because one could never happen.
In most discussions of Aldous Huxleys Brave New World and George Orwells 1984, the two books are viewed as
conflicting, each host to their own opposite, incompatible ideas. While its quite true that Huxley and Orwell
imagined very different worlds, they shared a few common elements- ultimately, a careful reading of both reveals
that their message is the same, in spite of the differences in execution. In my opinion, the world as we know it more
overtly resembles that of Huxleys Brave New World just flip on your nearest television. I fear that I may be biased
in favor of Huxleys work, and Id like to apologize early; it might show in this article. Nonetheless, I feel that there
are some important, oft-overlooked parallels between 1984 and Brave New World that deserve attention.
Youre Different
Standing out is frowned upon in both Brave New World and 1984. While this is generally part of most dystopias, its
notable that this particular element is pivotal to the plots of both books. In 1984, the thought-police who hunt
people downfor violating a vague set of rules haunt Winston, who fears that theyve taken note of his unusual
behaviour- inBrave New World, the savage who clings to chastity, has self-discipline and control, unlike the world
around him.
Even the solitude that allows individuals a chance to think alone and for themselves is frowned upon in
both 1984 andBrave New World in the former, its a thing known as ownlife, when a person becomes eccentric,
different- unique. Orthodoxy is the way to avoid being singled out for destruction. In Brave New World, all activities
are group activities- this includes coming into existence. In Brave New World, people are cloned en masse for their
respective jobs. Individualism has all but been abolished.
In both books, the only activities that seem to exist as solitary ones were sleep and the drinking of Victory Gin, or
the taking of soma. The latter activities existed primarily to dull the senses- those drinking alone to drown their
sorrows, or those taking soma in solitude to forget some terrible event, like the sold-out feelies. The only time a
person in either world is alone, his or her thoughts are being put in a cage, stored away until the return of sobriety,
and the return to society.

Erasure of the Past

One prevalent theme of both books was the destruction of history- in 1984, the history Oceanias war with Eurasia,
for instance, is blurred and smeared- in the minds of the people, it has always been. Winston, of course, knows
better, and is aware that in spite of the fact that the past is concrete and unchanging, the government seems able to
reach back through time and change the knowledge of the past, thus making it seem as if the war has always been
so. His attempts to catch the past in many ways fail him, and yet he doesnt want to accept the ideas of doublethink,
that the indefatigable Party is able to alter the unchanging past he vaguely remembers.
In Brave New World, knowledge of the past is also hard to come by; few are aware of the way the world once was,
but most dont care. The knowledge of the past is more or less buried, and most people couldnt be brought to care
about it- theyre just interested in the next of the feelies, the next hit of soma, the next round of electric bumble-
puppy- their view of time is myopic and stunted. Theres no past in BNW, because nobody thinks that it matters.
No Time to Think
In both books, theres plenty of media to go around. In BNW, Huxley was more fantastical and daring in the new
mediums he invented- movies had gone from talkies to feelies, allowing audiences to experience what was going on
in the movie via some sort of connection to the nervous system. Orwell, on the other hand, was a bit more
conservative, sticking to televisions that watch and listen to you, while broadcasting empty propaganda.
At the end of each long day in 1984, Winston came home exhausted. Hed drown his sorrows in the acrid Victory
Gin, dulling his senses as mentioned before; as mentioned before, he could never be left alone with his thoughts.
The little time he had that wasnt spent working or drinking was consumed by rigorous (and rather invasive)
exercises, pointless Hate Rallies, and other activities that left him weary, stupid, and ignorant.
Actual happiness always looks pretty squalid in comparison with the overcompensations for misery. And, of
course, stability isnt nearly so spectacular as instability. 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. Aldous Huxley, Brave New World
In Brave New World, on the other hand, all the shiny distractions keep the people entertained and having fun, but
never actually happy. Theyre taught to believe that the next feelie, the next distraction or the next fun thing is all
there will ever be to life, and that anything else is unnecessary. They dont know happiness, because they dont
know how to seek it and ultimately do not care to.
No Time for Love
We have cut the links between child and parent, between man and man, and between man and woman. George
Orwell, 1984
The above quote is from 1984, and it is yet another common element between the two dystopias- in 1984, married
couples are as good as emotionally divorced from one another, children are taught to suspect and police their
parents, and nobody is to love another outside of a few token words. All loyalty is to Big Brother and the dreadful
Party. Brave New World, on the other hand, seems immediately different- the promiscuous attitude advised and
instilled certainlyappears to run against the intentionally hateful behavior in 1984. Still, interpersonal relationships
in Brave New World are little more than a formality- nobody really loves one another, or has a deep, committed
relationship.
While everybody is for everybody in Brave New World, what that ultimately means is that nobody is for anybody.
Just as the absence of war is not the presence of peace, so too a lack of hatred does not mean the existence of love.
In Brave New World, relationships are shallow and, ultimately, just as meaningless as the cold, formal things
in 1984.
Language
What is one of the simplest links between the two books is also the one with what are quite possibly the most
terrifying implications. In 1984, doublethink rules the people- FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, WAR IS PEACE,
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH- these are the chains that bind the people at their collective mind. They accept what is
black as white and what is white as black- cognitive dissonance isnt a problem, its a solution. Its facilitated by
newspeak, which is a new vocabulary that cuts words from language. The goal of newspeak is to make
unorthodox communication and thought impossible.
In Brave New World, on the other hand, psychological condutioning is heavily employed early in life. The rule
in Brave New World is not entirely without fear- but it is employed early in life. People are taught as infants to fear
and hate things that they are to stay away from- books, for instance. While newspeak eliminates words and the
meanings behind them, the conditioning in Brave New World works to preserve them, but make them wrong, in a
sense. The world in 1984 is incredibly assertive in how black is white and left is right- but in Brave New World, the
ignorance that the world of 1984so furiously pursued seems to be ultimately accomplished in BNW. People are
simply aversed to the concepts espoused by such words as mother- the language didnt need to change, but the
implications and ideas surrounding it did.
The Differences

Where do Brave New World and 1984 diverge? The former is about whats wrong with people; the latter is more
about whats wrong with government. Depending on your point of view, it could be the other way around.
Brave New World sets itself aside from 1984 in several ways, however, chief among them being that the prime tool
of oppression is pleasure. The people of Brave New World have no time to think; thinking, to them, hurts. All their
time is consumed in the pursuit of many and various pleasures. In 1984, however, pleasures are few and far
between- in one of the books earliest scenes, for instance, the tobacco falls from Wintstons cigarette to the floor.
Im no smoker, but Im going to assume there was very little to smoke in the first place. In 1984, people constantly
fear that their pleasures will be, in some capacity taken away, while in Brave New World, nobody cares to do
anything that would lead to the loss of pleasures. With the exception of a very small few, nobody really complains-
those that do do so on account of their having been able to think for more than a few minutes about their
predicament, and about their lives.
Of course, theres plenty of discussion as to how the two books are in may ways dissimilar, and approach similar
ideas from alternate angles- in spite of the differences, however, the message remains the same: the instillation of
ignorance is the most powerful weapon any oppressor can yield over the human spirit.

31. Society in 1984

In the novel "1984", by George Orwell, an interesting, thought-provoking

scenario is created for the reader to ponder. The totalitarian government
which ruled this oppressive world controlled every aspect of the citizens who
resided there. Living in a society with limited freedom of expression is not,
in any case, enjoyable. Communication, personal beliefs, and individual
loyalty to the government are all controlled by the inner Party in several
ways. Thought, speech and actions are all monitored by political officials in
one way or another.

Newspeak is a modified version of language that is enforced upon the people

in order to limit their expression. Syme and Winston, two middle-class
workers in Oceania, discuss the concept of Newspeak. Syme reveals that he
supports the system, demonstrating how he has been brainwashed by the Inner
Party who enforces the system. "It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of
words... You haven't a real appreciation for Newspeak, Winston... Don't you
see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought" (Orwell
46).

The Thought Police are a group of devout followers that spy on people, and
determine whether or not they are thinking negative thoughts or have a desire
to overthrow the Party. If so, they are accused of thought crime, and the
punishment is death, either by hanging (a public display, used to keep the
general population afraid, and in line) or parting with your life and being
in a dark, dank room while being tortured by a Thought Police official. In
either case, the outcome is not a positive one, and the Party's effectiveness
is rather surprising. Nary an individual dare to commit thought crime, and to
find someone that did (like Winston) was a true rarity.

The Party also used electronic devices to keep tabs on the inhabitants of
their kingdom. Similar to a typical television, the "telescreens", as they
were called were like cameras, watching every move made by any one at any
time. It was uncertain whether party officials could watch everyone, at every
time, but out of fright, citizens assumed they could. The aforementioned
deaths were feared and dreaded by everyone (and rightfully so), therefore,
the assumption was generally made that "yes, you were being watched". In the
end, a hidden telescreen led to the downfall of Julia and Winston. The two
lovers were "caught with their clothes off", so to speak and fell victim to
the merciless machine that ruled them.
Fortunately, a fine line exists between the free, democratic society under
which we live, and the closed-minded, totalitarian regime that fictionally
existed here. Today's people are much more intelligent, free-minded, and
aware of their surroundings to fall victim to such a terrible, controlling
trap. We like to maintain that assumption, anyway; we must believe it to
continue with our daily activities and lives. Fortunately for us, that's the
way it is, and Orwell's novel was just fiction, which we can put down at any
time, look around and feel assured that we are free and safe. Unless, we
really are being watched?

Themes

Themes are the fundamental and often universal ideas explored in a literary work.

The Dangers of Totalitarianism

1984 is a political novel written with the purpose of warning readers in the West of the dangers of totalitarian
government. Having witnessed firsthand the horrific lengths to which totalitarian governments in Spain and Russia
would go in order to sustain and increase their power, Orwell designed 1984 to sound the alarm in Western
nations still unsure about how to approach the rise of communism. In 1949, the Cold War had not yet escalated,
many American intellectuals supported communism, and the state of diplomacy between democratic and
communist nations was highly ambiguous. In the American press, the Soviet Union was often portrayed as a great
moral experiment. Orwell, however, was deeply disturbed by the widespread cruelties and oppressions he
observed in communist countries, and seems to have been particularly concerned by the role of technology in
enabling oppressive governments to monitor and control their citizens.

In 1984, Orwell portrays the perfect totalitarian society, the most extreme realization imaginable of a modern-day
government with absolute power. The title of the novel was meant to indicate to its readers in 1949 that the story
represented a real possibility for the near future: if totalitarianism were not opposed, the title suggested, some
variation of the world described in the novel could become a reality in only thirty-five years. Orwell portrays a
state in which government monitors and controls every aspect of human life to the extent that even having a
disloyal thought is against the law. As the novel progresses, the timidly rebellious Winston Smith sets out to
challenge the limits of the Partys power, only to discover that its ability to control and enslave its subjects dwarfs
even his most paranoid conceptions of its reach. As the reader comes to understand through Winstons eyes, The
Party uses a number of techniques to control its citizens, each of which is an important theme of its own in the
novel. These include:

Psychological Manipulation

The Party barrages its subjects with psychological stimuli designed to overwhelm the minds capacity for
independent thought. The giant telescreen in every citizens room blasts a constant stream of propaganda designed
to make the failures and shortcomings of the Party appear to be triumphant successes. The telescreens also
monitor behavioreverywhere they go, citizens are continuously reminded, especially by means of the
omnipresent signs reading B I G B R O T H E R IS W A T C H I N G Y OU , that the authorities are scrutinizing them.
The Party undermines family structure by inducting children into an organization called the Junior Spies, which
brainwashes and encourages them to spy on their parents and report any instance of disloyalty to the Party. The
Party also forces individuals to suppress their sexual desires, treating sex as merely a procreative duty whose end
is the creation of new Party members. The Party then channels peoples pent-up frustration and emotion into
intense, ferocious displays of hatred against the Partys political enemies. Many of these enemies have been
invented by the Party expressly for this purpose.

Physical Control

In addition to manipulating their minds, the Party also controls the bodies of its subjects. The Party constantly
watches for any sign of disloyalty, to the point that, as Winston observes, even a tiny facial twitch could lead to an
arrest. A persons own nervous system becomes his greatest enemy. The Party forces its members to undergo mass
morning exercises called the Physical Jerks, and then to work long, grueling days at government agencies, keeping
people in a general state of exhaustion. Anyone who does manage to defy the Party is punished and reeducated
through systematic and brutal torture. After being subjected to weeks of this intense treatment, Winston himself
comes to the conclusion that nothing is more powerful than physical painno emotional loyalty or moral
conviction can overcome it. By conditioning the minds of their victims with physical torture, the Party is able to
control reality, convincing its subjects that 2 + 2 = 5.

Control of Information and History

The Party controls every source of information, managing and rewriting the content of all newspapers and
histories for its own ends. The Party does not allow individuals to keep records of their past, such as photographs
or documents. As a result, memories become fuzzy and unreliable, and citizens become perfectly willing to believe
whatever the Party tells them. By controlling the present, the Party is able to manipulate the past. And in
controlling the past, the Party can justify all of its actions in the present.

Technology

By means of telescreens and hidden microphones across the city, the Party is able to monitor its members almost
all of the time. Additionally, the Party employs complicated mechanisms (1984 was written in the era before
computers) to exert large-scale control on economic production and sources of information, and fearsome
machinery to inflict torture upon those it deems enemies. 1984 reveals that technology, which is generally
perceived as working toward moral good, can also facilitate the most diabolical evil.

Language as Mind Control

One of Orwells most important messages in 1984 is that language is of central importance to human thought
because it structures and limits the ideas that individuals are capable of formulating and expressing. If control of
language were centralized in a political agency, Orwell proposes, such an agency could possibly alter the very
structure of language to make it impossible to even conceive of disobedient or rebellious thoughts, because there
would be no words with which to think them. This idea manifests itself in the language of Newspeak, which the
Party has introduced to replace English. The Party is constantly refining and perfecting Newspeak, with the
ultimate goal that no one will be capable of conceptualizing anything that might question the Partys absolute
power.

Interestingly, many of Orwells ideas about language as a controlling force have been modified by writers and
critics seeking to deal with the legacy of colonialism. During colonial times, foreign powers took political and
military control of distant regions and, as a part of their occupation, instituted their own language as the language
of government and business. Postcolonial writers often analyze or redress the damage done to local populations by
the loss of language and the attendant loss of culture and historical connection.

Doublethink

The idea of doublethink emerges as an important consequence of the Partys massive campaign of large-scale
psychological manipulation. Simply put, doublethink is the ability to hold two contradictory ideas in ones mind at
the same time. As the Partys mind-control techniques break down an individuals capacity for independent
thought, it becomes possible for that individual to believe anything that the Party tells them, even while possessing
information that runs counter to what they are being told. At the Hate Week rally, for instance, the Party shifts its
diplomatic allegiance, so the nation it has been at war with suddenly becomes its ally, and its former ally becomes
its new enemy. When the Party speaker suddenly changes the nation he refers to as an enemy in the middle of his
speech, the crowd accepts his words immediately, and is ashamed to find that it has made the wrong signs for the
event. In the same way, people are able to accept the Party ministries names, though they contradict their
functions: the Ministry of Plenty oversees economic shortages, the Ministry of Peace wages war, the Ministry of
Truth conducts propaganda and historical revisionism, and the Ministry of Love is the center of the Partys
operations of torture and punishment.

Urban Decay

Urban decay proves a pervasive motif in 1984. The London that Winston Smith calls home is a dilapidated,
rundown city in which buildings are crumbling, conveniences such as elevators never work, and necessities such as
electricity and plumbing are extremely unreliable. Though Orwell never discusses the theme openly, it is clear that
the shoddy disintegration of London, just like the widespread hunger and poverty of its inhabitants, is due to the
Partys mismanagement and incompetence. One of the themes of 1984, inspired by the history of twentieth-century
communism, is that totalitarian regimes are viciously effective at enhancing their own power and miserably
incompetent at providing for their citizens. The grimy urban decay in London is an important visual reminder of
this idea, and offers insight into the Partys priorities through its contrast to the immense technology the Party
develops to spy on its citizens.

Symbols

Symbols are objects, characters, figures, and colors used to represent abstract ideas or concepts.

Big Brother

Throughout London, Winston sees posters showing a man gazing down over the words B I G B R OT HE R I S
W A T C H I N G Y OU everywhere he goes. Big Brother is the face of the Party. The citizens are told that he is the
leader of the nation and the head of the Party, but Winston can never determine whether or not he actually exists.
In any case, the face of Big Brother symbolizes the Party in its public manifestation; he is a reassurance to most
people (the warmth of his name suggests his ability to protect), but he is also an open threat (one cannot escape his
gaze). Big Brother also symbolizes the vagueness with which the higher ranks of the Party present themselvesit
is impossible to know who really rules Oceania, what life is like for the rulers, or why they act as they do. Winston
thinks he remembers that Big Brother emerged around 1960, but the Partys official records date Big Brothers
existence back to 1930, before Winston was even born.

The Glass Paperweight and St. Clements Church

By deliberately weakening peoples memories and flooding their minds with propaganda, the Party is able to
replace individuals memories with its own version of the truth. It becomes nearly impossible for people to
question the Partys power in the present when they accept what the Party tells them about the pastthat the
Party arose to protect them from bloated, oppressive capitalists, and that the world was far uglier and harsher
before the Party came to power. Winston vaguely understands this principle. He struggles to recover his own
memories and formulate a larger picture of what has happened to the world. Winston buys a paperweight in an
antique store in the prole district that comes to symbolize his attempt to reconnect with the past. Symbolically,
when the Thought Police arrest Winston at last, the paperweight shatters on the floor.

The old picture of St. Clements Church in the room that Winston rents above Mr. Charringtons shop is another
representation of the lost past. Winston associates a song with the picture that ends with the words Here comes
the chopper to chop off your head! This is an important foreshadow, as it is the telescreen hidden behind the
picture that ultimately leads the Thought Police to Winston, symbolizing the Partys corrupt control of the past.

The Place Where There Is No Darkness

Throughout the novel Winston imagines meeting OBrien in the place where there is no darkness. The words first
come to him in a dream, and he ponders them for the rest of the novel. Eventually, Winston does meet OBrien in
the place where there is no darkness; instead of being the paradise Winston imagined, it is merely a prison cell in
which the light is never turned off. The idea of the place where there is no darkness symbolizes Winstons
approach to the future: possibly because of his intense fatalism (he believes that he is doomed no matter what he
does), he unwisely allows himself to trust OBrien, even though inwardly he senses that OBrien might be a Party
operative.

The Telescreens

The omnipresent telescreens are the books most visible symbol of the Partys constant monitoring of its subjects.
In their dual capability to blare constant propaganda and observe citizens, the telescreens also symbolize how
totalitarian government abuses technology for its own ends instead of exploiting its knowledge to improve
civilization.

The Red-Armed Prole Woman

The red-armed prole woman whom Winston hears singing through the window represents Winstons one
legitimate hope for the long-term future: the possibility that the proles will eventually come to recognize their
plight and rebel against the Party. Winston sees the prole woman as a prime example of reproductive virility; he
often imagines her giving birth to the future generations that will finally challenge the Partys authority.

Society in 1984

Imagine living in the most undesirable society, a society where the government watches and controls everything
you do, a society in which you have no individual choice. It is a society where anything you think or do against the
government can be punishable by isolation, torture, or death. There is no independence, no freedom, and no
personal thought. It is often rampant with poverty, disease, and filth. A society where you career and social status
are pre-destined and you cannot alter it. And imagine that the government of this society did everything in its
power to make you believe that this was the most ideal living situation for you. This is a dystopian society.

The inequality maintains Oceanian society as it is. The high stays high, the middle stays middle, and the low stays
low.

Inner Party

Anyways the high ups in the Inner Party are the only who actually know what's going on. They control everyone
and come up with all the propaganda. The Inner Party has all kinds of simple luxuries: clean homes, good quality
food and cigarettes and liquor, "off" switches on the telescreeens. As long as the Outer Party and Proles don't have
these things, they feel the inequality. They fight for tiny things like cooking pots and razor blades and consider
obtaining one a great victory. Hence they do not strive for greater victories. They believe that these things are in
short supply because of the war, so they are willing to do without them for the war effort. The war, of course, uses
up goods so that they do not end up in the hands of the lower classes.

Outer Party

The Outer Party represents the middle class in Oceanic society, bureaucrats who do most of the actual work in the
Party government and its four ministries. The Outer Party is slightly bigger and carries out what the Inner Party
says. For this world they have decent housing and stuff. Quite likely to be made into nonpersons if they get too
smart or un-loyal.

Ministry of Love, Peace, Truth, Plenty

The Proles

The Proles are the lowest class, they are allowed to do whatever they want as long as they don't get in the way.
They have crappy lives, but at least they would have some measure of freedom if they didn't believe all of the
propaganda that the Party comes out with.

Newspeak

Newspeak plays an extremely important role in Oceanian society and in the Party's control over its population. As
Syme says, Newspeak reduces and limits the number of words in the English language, and removes words used to
describe rebellion or independence (with the ultimate goal being to remove citizens' ability to think anti-Party
thoughts). Interestingly, the Party works to form a language around itself rather than naturally accepting and
assuming the language of the people that make up the country. In this way, language is used as yet another
mechanism of mind control.

Removing a nation's original language serves to reduce the importance of a nation's past. Languages develop over
centuries, and are deeply intertwined with culture and history. Redefining and forcing a language on a population,
as was often done in the postcolonial era, denies that society its individuality. The Party meets this goal with great
efficiency.

In 1984, Orwell presents a dystopia, or in other words, the perfect totalitarian state. In composing this novel,
Orwell gave the world a glimpse of what the embrace of communism might lead to if allowed to proceed
unchecked. The Party is unflawed in its universal control over society, as evidenced by its ability to break even an
independent thinker such as Winston, and has mastered every aspect of psychological control, largely through
utilizing technological developments (allowing for inventions such as the telescreen) to their advantage. In ending
the novel with Winston defeated in every sense of the term, Orwell clearly suggests that there is no hope for
quelling the expansion or growth of such a perfectly established regime. And, more importantly, Orwell warns that
at the time, this outcome was within the realm of possibility as long as the world supported and embraced
communism.

Propaganda

A major factor in the Party's rule over Oceania lies in its extremely well organized and effective propaganda
machine. The Ministry of Truth, which is ironically where Winston works, is responsible for disseminating all Party
publications and information. All figures and facts come from the Ministry of Truth, and all are dictated by the
Party. In other words, the Party chooses exactly what to tell the public, regardless of what is accurate. The
effectiveness of this propaganda machine, which constantly corrects old material to reflect the Party's current
position on any subject ranging from chocolate rations to the loyalty of a specific individual, allows the Party to
completely dominate the range of information disseminated to the public. Therefore, as O'Brien notes, the machine
determines what constitutes reality.

In addition to the massive amounts of doctored information the Party disseminates to the public, there are also
basic forms of propaganda, such as the Two Minutes Hate, Hate Week, posters of Big Brother, and required daily
participation in the Physical Jerks. The Party uses literally every waking opportunity to instill its ideals into its
citizens, and is strikingly successful in achieving its goal of total loyalty. In 1984 we see the vigor and loyalty such
propaganda inspires in the citizens. The citizens of Oceania are filled with hatred for the country's stated enemies,
but this hatred is easily re-directed if the enemy happens to change. This efficiency is quite disturbing. Orwell's
presentation of the power of propaganda significantly supports his warning against totalitarianism. If propaganda
rules all information, it is impossible to have any grasp on reality. The world is as the Party defines it.

Characteristics of Society in Nineteen Eighty-Four

1984 is one of Orwells best-crafted novels, and it remains one of the most powerful warnings ever issued against
the dangers of a totalitarian society. In Spain, Germany, and the Soviet Union, Orwell had witnessed the danger of
absolute political authority in an age of advanced technology. Like Aldous Huxleys Brave New World, 1984 is one of
the most famous novels of the negative utopian, or dystopian, genre. Unlike a utopian novel, in which the writer
aims to portray the perfect human society, a novel of negative utopia does the exact opposite: it shows the worst
human society imaginable, in an effort to convince readers to avoid any path that might lead toward such societal
degradation. In 1949, at the dawn of the nuclear age and before the television had become a fixture in the family
home, Orwells vision of a post-atomic dictatorship in which every individual would be monitored ceaselessly by
means of the telescreen seemed terrifyingly possible.

Society (general)
The society of Airstrip One, all of the world lives in poverty; hunger, disease and filth are the norms and ruined
cities and towns the consequence of the civil war, the atomic wars and purported enemy rockets. Social decay and
wrecked buildings surround Winston; aside from the ministerial pyramids, little of London was rebuilt. The
inhabitants of Oceania, particularly the Outer Party members, have no real privacy. Many of them live in
apartments equipped with two-way telescreens, so that they may be watched or listened to at any time. Similar
telescreens are found at workstations and in public places, along with hidden microphones. Children are
encouraged to report suspicious persons to the government, and some even denounce their parents. Surveillance
controls the citizenry and the smallest sign of rebellion, even something so small as a facial expression, can result
in immediate arrest and imprisonment.

The society contains two main things: Newspeak & Ingsoc.

Newspeak (Appendix)

Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is a controlled language created by the
totalitarian state as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as
freedom, self-expression, individuality, peace, etc. Any form of thought alternative to the partys construct is
classified as thoughtcrime.

The Thought Police (thinkpol in Newspeak) are the secret police of Oceania in George Orwell's dystopian novel
Nineteen Eighty-Four. It is the job of the Thought Police to uncover and punish thoughtcrime and thought-
criminals. They use psychology and omnipresent surveillance (such as telescreens) to search, find, monitor and
arrest members of society who could potentially challenge authority and status quo, even only by thought. They
use terror and torture to achieve their ends. It also had much to do with Orwell's own "power of facing unpleasant
facts," as he called it, and his willingness to criticize prevailing ideas which brought him into conflict with others
and their "smelly little orthodoxies."

Newspeak is explained in chapters 4 and 5 of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and in an appendix to the book. The language
follows, for the most part, the same grammatical rules as English, but has a much more limiting, and constantly
shifting vocabulary. The goal is for everyone to be speaking this language by the year 2050. In the mean time,
Oldspeak (current English) is still spoken among the Proles - the working-class citizens of Oceania. Newspeak is
engineered to remove even the possibility of rebellious thoughts - the words by which such thoughts might be
articulated have been eliminated from the language. Newspeak contains no negative terms. For example, the only
way to express the meaning of bad is through the word ungood. Something extremely bad is called doubleplus
ungood. Words with comparative and superlative meanings are also simplified, so "better" becomes "gooder", and
"best" becomes "goodest". Intensifiers can be added, so "great" became "plusgood", and "excellent" and "splendid"
become "doubleplusgood". Due to the Party's control of the English language, such limited language limits the
thoughts of the people. Free speech is limited as the dictionary slims down with each new edition and words
continue to be limited or taken out. There is not much difference between this action and reducing the population
that could actually read the word "dictionary" if the book was placed in front of them. Without the ability to read or
write, the illiterate cannot effectively know how to protect themselves from the loss of this freedom that they may
not realize they even have.

Ingsoc (English Socialism)

Ingsoc (Newspeak for English Socialism or the English Socialist Party) is the political ideology of the totalitarian
government of Oceania in George Orwell's dystopian novel. Although originating after the Socialist Party
established control, the precise origin of the English Socialist Party (Ingsoc) cannot be established as the Party
continually rewrites history. Oceania originated from a union between the Americas and the British Empire, with
Big Brother and Emmanuel Goldstein leading the Party's socialist revolution; despite this, Goldstein and Big
Brother became enemies. Throughout London, Winston sees posters showing a man gazing down over the words
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU everywhere he goes. Big Brother is the face of the Party. The citizens are told
that he is the leader of the nation and the head of the Party, but Winston can never determine whether or not he
actually exists. In any case, the face of Big Brother symbolizes the Party in its public manifestation; he is a
reassurance to most people (the warmth of his name suggests his ability to protect), but he is also an open threat
(one cannot escape his gaze). Big Brother also symbolizes the vagueness with which the higher ranks of the Party
present themselvesit is impossible to know who really rules Oceania, what life is like for the rulers, or why they
act as they do. Winston thinks he remembers that Big Brother emerged around 1960, but the Partys official
records date Big Brothers existence back to 1930, before Winston was even born. The phrase "two plus two equals
five" ("2 + 2 = 5") is a slogan used in many different forms of media, but more specifically in Nineteen Eighty-Four
as an example of an obviously false dogma. It is contrasted with the phrase "two plus two makes four", the obvious
but politically inexpedient truth. Winston Smith, uses the phrase to wonder if, the State might declare "two
plus two equals five" as a fact; he wonders whether, if everybody believes it, does that make it true?

The Inner Party members make policy, affect decisions, and govern; they are known as "The Party", and constitute
the upper class of Oceanian society. Among their upper-class privileges is the ability to shut down their telescreens
if they feel like it. They live in spacious, comfortable homes, have good food and drink, personal servants, and
speedy transportation such as personal helicopters and automobiles, and no Outer Party member or Prole may
enter an Inner Party neighborhood without a good pretext. Inner Party members make up less than 2% of the
population of Oceania.

The Outer Party members work the states administrative jobs, consisting of the educated workers who are
responsible for the direct implementation of the Party's policies, while having absolutely no voice in their
formulation. They are an artificial middle class, essential to the success of the Party, but who are tolerated only in
severely hostile conditions.

The Proles are the lower class of workers, performing the bulk of manual labour required in Oceania. They live in
the poorest conditions. They are kept uneducated and rendered incapable of gaining any sophisticated view of
their own lives or of society's, and are therefore considered harmless.

Conclusion Message

In 1984, Orwell portrays the perfect totalitarian society, the most extreme realization imaginable of a modern-day
government with absolute power. The title of the novel was meant to indicate to its readers in 1949 that the story
represented a real possibility for the near future.

Orwell portrays a state in which government monitors and controls every aspect of human life. In addition to
manipulating their minds, the Party also controls the bodies of its subjects. The Party constantly watches for any
sign of disloyalty, to the point that, as Winston observes, even a tiny facial twitch could lead to an arrest. A persons
own nervous system becomes his greatest enemy.

One of Orwells most important messages in 1984 is that language is of central importance to human thought
because it structures and limits the ideas that individuals are capable of formulating and expressing. If control of
language were centralized in a political agency, Orwell proposes, such an agency could possibly alter the very
structure of language to make it impossible to even conceive of rebellious thoughts, because there would be no
words with which to think them.
 31. Love in 1984

The Ministry of Love (or Miniluv in Newspeak) is one of the four ministries that govern Oceania in George
Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four.

The Ministry of Love serves as Oceania's interior ministry. It enforces loyalty to Big Brother through fear,
buttressed through a massive apparatus of security and repression, as well as systematic brainwashing. The
Ministry of Love building has no windows and is surrounded by barbed wire entanglements, steel doors,
hidden machine-gun nests, and guards armed with "jointed truncheons". Referred to as "the place where there is
no darkness", its interior lights are never turned off. It is arguably the most powerful ministry, controlling the will
of the population. The Thought Police is part of Miniluv.

It contains Room 101, within which is every citizen's worst fear"the worst thing in the world."

The Ministry of Love, like the other ministries, is a misnomer, since it is largely responsible for the practice and
infliction of misery, fear, suffering and torture. In a sense, however, the name is apt, since its ultimate purpose is to
instill love of Big Brotherthe only form of love permitted in Oceaniain the minds of thoughtcriminals as part of
the process of reverting them to orthodox thought. This is typical of the language of Newspeak, in which words and
names frequently contain both an idea and its opposite; the orthodox party member is nonetheless able to resolve
these contradictions through the disciplined use of doublethink.

While the term "Ministry" implies that it is headed by a minister, there is nowhere in the book any mention of a
Minister of Love nor of the ministers heading Oceania's three other Ministries. The heads of the ministries are
evidently shadowy figures with all public attention focused on the idealized figurehead Big Brother.

As Julia observes, the Party polices sexual relationships because it realizes that the hysteria caused by sexual
frustration can be harnessed into war fever and leader-worship. Because of this, when Winston and Julia make
love they think of it as a political act, "a blow struck against the Party." The sadistic fantasies Winston has about
Julia before they begin their affair indicate the strong link between sexual repression and violence. The red sash
Julia wears and her voluptuous appearance arouses feelings of hatred and resentment that only dissipate when he
learns that he can possess her physically.

Another reason that the Party restricts sexual behavior is that sexual desire competes with loyalty to the State:
after Winston makes love with Julia, he realizes that it is "the force that would tear the Party to pieces." In place of
heterosexual love, the Party substitutes leader-worship and patriotic feeling: thus, when Winston betrays Julia
under torture, he learns to revere O'Brien and worship Big Brother.

32. Relation between individual and collective in 1984

Soulless Humanity in 1984
The year 1984 has since passed but George Orwell's prophetic vision of the future could still happen. 1984
portrays a society that has lost all trace of individuality, love, and critical thought. George Orwell's "Negative
Utopia" depicts the despair of the future of humans and also serves as a warning about fascism.

Orwell's sets the mood of the book as one of hopelessness for the future of humans. He contrasts this mood with
a popular philosophy: belief in the progress of humanity and the ability of people to institute peace and justice in
the world. These contrasting views set up the premise for the life of Winston Smith, who is one man caught in a
society devoted to conformity. Orwell's warning to this is that if people cannot change the way things are going,
our society will lose their human qualities. They will become soulless machines and not have a clue as to their new
world they created. This is the world in which Winston Smith is caught in. He is different from the others and in a
civilization which does not approve of individuality, Winston is targeted by the government from the beginning.
Being different in this populace only means rebellion and that exactly is what Winston sets out to do. Winston
believes that although he must conform on the outside, that no one can take his individual thought away.
Winston's individuality is the only hope for human nature for he questions the most basic principles of the regime,
a thoughcrime. One doctrine Winston questions is the concept of freedom-

"How could you have a slogan like 'freedom is slavery' when the concept of freedom has been abolished?"

Winston goes on to say there will be an end to thought. "Orthodoxy means not thinking..." "Orthodoxy is
unconscienceness."

The belief that humanity is progressing while they are really losing their individuality is actually halting human
progress. Every aspect of life is changing for the worse while people believe humans are advancing. One example
is Newspeak. As Syme put it, "You don't grasp the beauty of the destruction of words." The destruction of words is
seen as progress while in actuality, it is another step in destroying individuals and creating a hopeless future. Once
this happens, Orwell warns, all hope is lost.

Currently, Winston lives in a world filled with the ravishes of war. A philosophy of the West is that humanity has
the ability to create peace and justice. The war greatly contributes to the hopelessness of the future and
humanity.In Winston's world, this is all impossible for the ability to create has all been eradicated. The world will
forever be at war because on one will be able to intelligent to stop it. It is as if machines run the world. And the
machines are unable to stop if its creators have lost all sense of peace and justice.

The Big Brother regime in Orwell's novel serves as a warning about fascism which could ruin humanity's
progress. World War I had supposedly been fought for peace and democracy. But the war changed a tradition of
hope in Europe to one of despair. The hope for individual and social perfectibility which had been around in the
Enlightenment and the nineteenth century was destroyed after the First World War. The moral decay was only
beginning according to Orwell. At the time 1984 was first published, World War II had only been over for four
years. Dictators like Hitler and Stalin had ruined people's hope for reform. Technology, for the first time in history,
now had the potential of annihilating civilization. Hitler had used fear and technology to increase his power and
control the people. Big Brother did the exact same thing. The regime used technology to control the people. Big
Brother had telescreeens, spies, the Thought Police to control the people. The populace, being so oppressed by this
power, were unable to do anything else but obey. Soon they lost their individuality and became mindless
automations. Like the repressive governments of Germany and Russia, anyone who rebelled or spoke out against
them were "disciplined." In Winston's world, people were never seen again. Once enemies were "vaporized" all
traces of their existence were eliminated. And the people, being machines, automatically forgot the enemy and
went on in life as if the person had never existed. Technology had destroyed all critical thought. Orwell wanted to
warn the world about fascism in hope of preserving humanity and its progress.

In a world where ideals like,

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

humanity cannot exist without turning into something else. In 1984, humanity turned into soulless machines
devoid of thought. For the few like Winston who did not conform, individual thought was all they had to cling on
to. Orwell's atmosphere of hopelessness clashed with faith in human progress. Orwell's one wish was to warn the
world of the danger that fascism can bring upon humanity.

The Loss of Individuality in Nineteen Eighty-Four

In the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four, individuality is an offence punishable by death, and the people live under

constant supervision. The main character, Winston, lives in the totalitarian state of Oceania, where a figurehead

known only as Big Brother is revered by the majority of the populace. In this state, those in positions of power are

members of the Inner Party, while the rest of the people are either members of the Outer Party or part of the

proletariat. Those who choose to rebel against the principles of the Party are not only killed, however, and instead

are tortured until not even a trace of individuality remains within them. W.H. New stated that Nineteen Eighty-

Four is very much a novel about the conflict between Mans responsibility to self and State, and this very sentence

speaks volumes regarding the situation Winston finds himself in. Among the conflicts that Winston is faced with in

the dystopian society of Nineteen Eighty-Four, he makes many efforts independent of those around him to combat

the force-fed principles of the Party with his own beliefs, but in the end fails to withstand the Ministry of Loves

methods of torture.

Throughout the novel, there are many challenges that enter Winstons life in Air Strip One, and the manner in

which Winston handles each situation gives readers insight into his ideals and views on the society he lives in. The

fact that he must modify history for the benefit of the Party as part of his job, for example, is one of the major
conflicts Winston is faced with in his life. He is forced to change newspaper articles and other things the public

might see, in order to give the people the impression that the Party is perpetually correct. In one instance, he

changes one of Big Brothers speeches so it becomes a commemoration of a hero that never existed, but was a

perfect fit for the Partys image of the ideal.

The book, 1984 by George Orwell, is about the external conflict between Winston Smith and Big Brother; and the

internal conflict between the two ideas, democracy and totalitarianism. Orwell wrote the novel to show society

what it could become if things kept getting worse: he sensed of the expansion of communism when he wrote the

novel. The conflict between democracy and totalitarianism at the year of 1945 created two characters, Winston

Smith and Big Brother, in orwell's mind. Big Brother is the embodiment of all the ideals of the totalitarian party. In

contrast to Big Brother, Winston Smith keeps the idea of democracy emphasizes freedom, he has to hide his own

thought because the Big Brother's party will punish him by death if the party finds it out. George orwell criticizes of

Big Brother's society by describing it as a dark and a gloomy place. It warns that people might believe that

everyone must become slaves to the government in order to have an orderly society, but at the expense of the

freedom of the people.

The conflict between Winston and Big Brother starts from the beginning of the novel when Winston begins to

keep his secret diary about Big Brother. Winston Smith is a third-nine years old man who is a member of the

'outer-party'--the lower of the two classes. Winston works for the government in one of the four main government

buildings called the ministry of Truth where his job is to rewrite history books in order for people not to learn

what the past used to be like. Winston's occupation is the major factor which lets him to realize that Big Brother is

restricting people's freedom. However, Winston keeps his complains about Big Brother and the party for his own

secret because the party will not allow anyone keeping a rebellious thought. The tension between them gets

serious when Big Brother becomes suspicious of Winston. Winston is therefore watched by O'Brien, an intelligent

execute at the 'Ministry of Truth', who is a member of the 'inner party'--the upper class. Without doubting Big

Brother's trap, Winston shares his ideas with O'Brien. O'Brien mentions a gentleman named Emmanuel Goldstein

whom he claims to know the leader of the rebels against the party. O'Brien also promises to help winston, and

promises him a copy of Goldstein's book. But O'Brien betrays him as Big Brother has planned.
 The conflict between Winston and Big Brother reaches its climax when Winston is caught and taken to a place

"where there is no darkness", which are brought bright underground rooms where criminals are taken to be

interrogated. Winston gets tortured mentally so badly that by the end of the novel he loves Big Brother, and cannot

think a single thought without the permission of the party. O'Brien is called 'teacher' and responsible for Winston's

reform. The torturing 'lecture' by O'Brien is long and slowly kills Winston's spirit. From then, Winston has no

liberty and freedom in his mind, and also he exists for the party, not himself: he just becomes one of Big Brother's

victorious reforms.

Orwell himself creates a conflict with totalitarianism by criticizing the ideas' of the party, and describes the

society as very dark place. In Orwell's 1984 there are three sentences which are obviously paradoxes summing up

what the party of totalitarianism stands for, and they are:

"War is Peace"

"Freedom is Slavery"

"Ignorance is Strength"

Orwell who prefers democracy criticizes these sentences as 'non-logical'. There are a evidence which proves that

the totalitarian idea makes no sense. For example, the sentence, "Ignorance is Strength", is written to keep the

party's slogan--"who controls the past, controls the future.". As stated at the second paragraph of this essay, the

party rewrites history books in order for people not to learn about the past. In other words, the party basically

removes any evidences about existence of democratic system, so common people cannot even think about liberty

and freedom. If people finds out about the true past, then Big Brother will not be able to control future because he

did not control the past. Also Orwell presented the evil minded party which tries to keep the steady power of the

upper classes including the leader. Notice the sentence, "War is Peace". The society in 1984 are consisted of three

totalitarian 'superstates' which are Eurasia, Eastasia, and Oceania. All of these states are in a constant state of war

with one another. The reason of this war is vague. However, it is their feeling that as long as a constant state of war

is prevailing, the people will be only concentrated in the war effort: people will not think about the problems of

their political system. At least each state does not have worry about troubles such as revolts within the states.

Another evidence which proves that Orwell is criticizing totalitarianism is that he describes their society as "dark,
gray drab jungle."

In 1984, George Orwell shows a political parable which is based on political warning signs he saw in the mid-

twenty century by creating conflicts between Winston and Big Brother. Big Brother's victory over Winston

represent orwell's serious concern about threats of the totalitarian power. From his work, readers who live in

prevailing democratic society can have a chance to consider about these very different political systems,

democracy and totalitarianism.

Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984) - Struggle Against Totalitarian Government

1984 by George Orwell is a story of a man's struggle against a totalitarian government that controls the ideas and

thoughts of its citizens. They use advanced mind reading techniques to discover the thoughts of the people and

punish those who show signs of rebellion against the government. The novel is supposed to be a prophetic story,

however, it was somewhat wrong in predicting the date when this government will rein. Although some of the

themes described in the book are already a reality, some are not going to happen for some time to come.

Perhaps Orwell's purpose for writing 1984 was to express his feelings of how the governments would come to

control everything and anything it wished to do. It is also possible that he wanted t tell of how mind control and

torture techniques could be used to make an individual or an entire nation do what the government wanted.

In his novel Orwell used the image of a man who stood in a shadow that covered his face. This was to make him

anonymous and unrecognizable. The figure was called "Big Brother" and this figure was placed on posters and put

all over the place with the saying, "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU." This was used to let the people know that no

matter where they go the could not escape the watching eyes of the controlling government. The government itself

was very mysterious and had several parts that were very suspicious to the main character, Winston, who worked

in one part of the government. It was divided up into four parts. The Ministry of Truth, where Winston worked,

was in charge of education and the arts. The Ministry of Peace, which was in command of war. The Ministry of

plenty, which controlled economic affairs. And finally the Ministry of Love, which concerned itself with law and

order.

Orwell also uses description of technology to show how the government controlled its citizens. He constantly
refers to telescreens that are in all areas and even in homes. They were placed there by the government in order to

see what is being said and discussed by the citizens. He also tells of an occurrence that happens everyday called,

"The Two Minutes Hate." This event happens everyday at a specified time in which people assembled in front of a

large telescreen where they were show pictures of terrible events in their history and then the face of a man who is

their equivalent to Adolph Hitler. The mans name was Emmanuel Goldstein and was considered an enemy of the

people. The assembled people go through several different reactions, some boo him, and others scream and

become violent.

George Orwell accomplished his goal of telling how he viewed the world of the future. He used excellent

description of places, events and people that I can't even attempt to repeat. He used the prospective of several

different people through Winston's interaction of them, and their discussions. He also used his imagination

extremely well to describe the technology that is used to control the people of the world. Even today we are

making things that Orwell described like the telescreens. He also used comparisons of the real world to the world

of his story. The image of Emmanual Goldstein was an excellent likness to Hitler. Along with the large numbers of

countries that join together to form an alliance for a common good, similar to the United Nations or NATO. It is in

this way that we can better understand what the author was saying and the idea that he wanted to convey.

The Struggle in Nineteen Eighty-four (1984)

In a world controlled by a higher power, constantly living in fear of

doing or saying something wrong, thoughts can be incriminating. Even worse,

any unpure thoughts may make you disappear. Constantly being watched, and

observed without knowing. A telescreen watching every facial expression and

recording any abnormal body language and movement everywhere you go. Even in

your home there is no escape. You are unable to get away or turn off the

power of the Telescreen and "Big Brother". This novel is of a man's struggle

against a totalitarian government that controls the ideas and thoughts of

its citizens.
In the novel 1984 by George Orwell the government used advanced mind reading

techniques to discover the thoughts of the people and punish those who show

signs of rebellion against the government. The novel is supposed to be a

prophetic story, however, it was somewhat wrong in predicting the date when

this government would rein. Although some themes described in the book are

now realities, some are not going to happen for some time to come and this

is why this novel continues to be overwhelming to us today.

Perhaps Orwell's purpose for writing 1984 was to express his feelings of

how the governments would come to control everything and anything they

wished to do. It is also possible that he wanted to tell of how mind control

and torture techniques could be used to make an individual or an entire

nation do what the government wanted. This story shows the danger of a world

in which the government has too much control. The novel shows how the

government controls its people, eliminating their individuality and the

essence of everything that makes a human a human.

"And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed-if all records

told the same tale-then the lie passed into history and became truth. 'Who

controls the past' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the future: who controls

the present controls the past.'" (Page 37)

Though this society is efficient, it means little since the people cannot

enjoy freedom and therefore have no rights. This quote emphasizes how if you

don't recall anything about the past you will be easily controlled by the
government and you will no longer have any concrete evidence.

In this novel, Orwell used the image of a man who stood in a shadow that

covered his face. This was to make him anonymous and unrecognizable. This

figure was called "Big Brother", and was placed on posters everywhere with

the saying "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU." This was used to let the people

know that no matter where they go, they could not escape the watching eyes

of the controlling government. "If the Party could thrust its hand into the

past and say this or that even, it never happened-that, surely, was more

terrifying than mere torture and death." (Page 37)

The government itself was very mysterious and had several parts that were

very suspicious to the main character, Winston, who worked in one part of

the government. It was divided into four parts. The ministry of Truth, where

Winston worked, where he was in charge of education and the arts. The

ministry of peace, which was in command of war. The ministry of plenty,

which was controlled by economic affairs and finally the ministry of love,

which concerned itself with law and order.

Orwell also uses detailed description of technology to show how the

government controlled its ' citizens. "Thoughtcrime does not entail death:

Thoughtcrime is death." (Page 30) He constantly refers to telescreens that

are in all areas even in homes. They were placed there by the government in

order to see what is being said and discussed by the citizens. He also tells

of an occurrence that happens everyday called, "The Two Minutes of hate."

This event happens everyday at a specified time in which people assembled in

front of a large telescreen where pictures of terrible events in their

history

would be shown with the face of a man who is their equivalent to Adolph

Hitler. The mans name was Emmanuel Goldstein and was considered an enemy of

the people. The assembled people go through several different reactions,

some boo him, and others scream and become violent.

George Orwell accomplished his goal of telling how he viewed the world of

the future. He used excellent description of places, events, and people. He

used the perspective of several individuals through Winston's interaction

with them, and their discussions. He also used his imagination extremely

well to describe the technology that is used to control the people of the

world. Even today we are manufacturing devices that Orwell described like

the telescreens. He also used comparisons of the real world to the world of

his story. The image of Emmanual Goldstein was an excellent likeness to

Hitler and Orwell did an excellent job of making this novel realistic at a

relaxed pace. It is in this way that we can better understand what the

author was trying to say and the ideas that he wanted to convey throughout

the novel.

33. 1984 and contemporary society

"Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic
Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery and torment, a world of trampling and
being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world
will be progress toward more pain."

George Orwell, someone will call him a prophet, someone will say he was a lunatic, someone will say he could see
the future, and I would agree with most of them, but I would never say that he was a lunatic or something like that.

One thing is certain, he saw the future better than anyone else, even better than we see it and we are living in
Orwells future.
He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.

We live in a time similar to Orwells book. Today we are being constantly watched, we gave our privacy for
security, and we live by the rule that all those changes are good for us. Todays governments control past, present
and the future, and we are similar to the prols because we dont do anything about that.

Through the novel, we can see that they invented a new language, so called Newspeak. We can easily compare it
with politically correct speech. Why? Well, we know that both of those languages have the same mean, dont
insult government, dont speak ill of government and think only the best things about government. So with each
similarity we are one step closer to the Orwells future.

In 1984 there are Telescreens in every room. The programming runs 24 hours a day, and the proles have no way of
turning their screens off. How is this similar to our time, well, its simple, our TVs are turned on almost 24/7 we
can turn them off, but we rarely do that, and what is worst than Orwells Telescreens is that we are being watched
almost every day, and majority of people are unaware of that.

This is the most painful similarity to the Orwells novel, in 1984 Orwell wrote that, there is always war. If peace is
made with one country, war is claimed on another nation to keep the military machine rolling. This is the same
thing as it is in our own time. America is constantly in war with someone, and they have same parole but not as
direct as in 1984, whole America believes that war is peace, they are ready to bear million of lives on their
conciseness only to be safe in their home, and the most troubling thing is that they are not in danger, the only thing
about every war is that they want to keep military machine rolling and of course to take oil.

1984 : From Goldstein's book - "The effect (of the atomic wars) was to convince the ruling groups of all countries
that a few more atomic bombs would mean the end of organized society, and hence of their own power. Thereafter,
although no formal agreement was ever made or hinted at, no more bombs were dropped. All three powers merely
continue to produce atomic bombs and store them up against the decisive opportunity which they all believe will
come sooner or later. And meanwhile the art of war has remained almost stationary for thirty or forty years.
Helicopters are more used than they were formerly, bombing planes have been largely superseded by self-
propelled projectiles, and the fragile movable battleship has given way to the almost unsinkable Floating Fortress;
but otherwise there has been little development. The tank, the submarine, the torpedo, the machine gun, even the
rifle and the hand grenade are still in use. And in spite of the endless slaughters reported in the Press and on the
telescreens, the desperate battles of earlier wars, in which hundreds of thousands or even millions of men were
often killed in a few weeks, have never been repeated."

While I was reading this part, I felt anger. I was angry, because this was in front of me whole time, and I didnt
realize that, until I read this. The way minority holds weapons for mass destructions, the way we are afraid of that,
makes me think about the world population as one big brainless population. We are the reason for all our
problems, we gave power and control to a few people, we decided to give our privacy for peace, for false peace. We
are one ignorant society, we dont differ from Orwells view of people, we destroyed ourselves.

Big Brother, the Thought Police, Room 101, newspeak.

Even if you havent read the book, chances are youve heard at least one of these phrases, because elements of the
nightmarish vision evoked in George Orwells novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, are entrenched in the fabric of our
language and culture.
It is unusual for a week to go past without some situation being described as Orwellian, while Big Brother and
Room 101 are titles of long-running TV shows.
And only last week the issue of surveillance famously explored in Nineteen Eighty-Four surfaced again as
emergency powers to allow police and security services to continue monitoring phone and internet records were
rushed through parliament.
When the novel was published in the late 1940s, the year Orwell chose for the dystopian society inhabited by
protagonist Winston Smith was still 35 years off.
But three decades on from the fictional future the writer constructed, how much of the world imagined in the book
do we see reflected today?
Privacy campaigners argue there are strong echoes of aspects of the novel in modern society. Emma Carr, acting
director of Big Brother Watch, said: Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four was supposed to be a warning, not a guidebook
on how to create a surveillance state. Yet, it is remarkable how many tools that were used to suppress in Nineteen
EightyFour are now part of the everyday surveillance regime in 2014.
The novel is commonly cited in debates about modern surveillance techniques. In the book, telescreens allow Big
Brother to keep subjects under constant watch and the concept of citizens being spied on by officialdom is a hugely
controversial issue today.
Britains CCTV network is one of the largest in the world, while leaked National Security Agency (NSA) files shone a
light on the extent of surveillance of online activity. Sales of the novel spiked in the light of the Edward Snowden
revelations last year.
Professor Richard Keeble, chairman of the Orwell Society, said the writers vision of surveillance was hugely
prescient.
He added: The disclosures by Edward Snowden suggest that surveillance is going on to an extraordinary degree
today.
American journalist and lecturer Lewis Beale, who last year wrote an article titled Were Living Nineteen Eighty-
Four Today, described the NSAs ability to monitor the publics phone calls and internet use as positively
terrifying in its scope.
Jim Edwards, of the Business Insider website, said todays technology is even more efficient for surveillance
purposes than telescreens.
Mobile phones and computers do a much better job of tracking our real interests and unspoken desires than a
fixed telescreen in a living room, which can only listen to you when youre in the same room, he said.
Other features of the novel likened to life today include:
Endless wars The action of Nineteen Eighty-Four against a backdrop of of perpetual war between the three
super-states Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. Prof Keeble said there were parallels between the Wests long-running
war on terror. He said: A constant war is what we are living in today.
Newspeak In the novel the official language of Oceania is a pared down version of English used as a mechanism
of control. The aim may not be as damaging but the use by organisations of inscrutable jargon is a feature of life
today. The Centre for Policy Studies has produced a lexicon of contemporary newspeak such as blue-sky thinking
and key performance indicators.
The Centres Lewis Brown said: Newspeak is not just limited to Orwells Oceania but frequently serves to
obfuscate details of more complex ideas in the real world. Political parties are often guilty; with slogans like too
far, too fast, cost of living crisis, and the global race, they aim to convey broad party beliefs to voters while
avoiding a nuanced debate. That might be what works in this era of soundbites and hashtags, but we risk losing an
understanding of important topics in favour of generic Ministry of Truth rhetoric.
Censorship In Orwells novel the Ministry of Truth controls the dissemination of information to the public by
doctoring photographs and rewriting public archives. Revisionism has made headlines recently in the furore over
right to be forgotten legislation that allows people to apply to have information removed from Google.
It has been likened to the memory holes used in the book to destroy documents. Mr Edwards said: The right to be
forgotten, in a way, turns everyone into Big Brother. Under this EU ruling, anyone with a desire can suddenly make
ancient history all but invisible. Its not quite the same of course it only applies to Google and the underlying
published sites dont disappear.
Torture Winston Smith is subjected to torture in Room 101. Prof Keeble said: Torture has become very much
part of western politics. I think to that extent it [the novel] is prescient.
Thought Police Some drew comparisons between the idea of thought crime explored in the novel and the
prosecution in 2007 of Samina Malik, known as the lyrical terrorist after she wrote extremist poetry. She was later
cleared on appeal.
****

There is one major element of life in 2014 that Orwell, who died in 1950, could never have foreseen, Prof Keeble
said.
He couldnt possibly have anticipated the extent to which the internet has embraced all of our lives. It was
predicted by no one.
Dr Adam Stock, an Orwell scholar at Newcastle University, said the trend of looking for evidence today of the
novels predictions was not the most significant part of its enduring appeal. He said: We do look to find
similarities between, say, CCTV and telescreens, or Snowdens revelations and the mass data collection of Oceania,
but these can never be exact matches.
The important question to ask ourselves is therefore why do we still look for these comparisons in a 65 year-old
book, set in a future thats now 30 years in our past?
The answer is partly that Nineteen Eighty-Four is a vividly written, memorable novel telling a now familiar story.
But I think its also partly because of a widely felt sense that there are important things which are wrong with our
world, and many of the things that feel wrong are important themes in the novel.

41. Symbols in Lord of the Flies

Lord of the Flies is William Goldings most popular novel, the one that brought him the most success and fame. The
novel is fictional and Golding employs relatively straightforward writing style throughout the novel. Much of the
novel is allegorical and characters are given a certain degree of symbolism. The boys as a whole can symbolize
humanity as a whole, and the island is the entire world, two tribes represent two countries and so on.

The first symbol in the novel is the island itself on which the boys strand. The island is uninhibited and represents
a chance for the boys to start a new independent life without any adults who control their life, as well as a chance
to create a new society. At the beginning everything seems idyllic and nature makes the boys feel free like on a
treasure island, but this idyllic effect is deceptive because the fruits cause stomach-ache and diarrhea while the
heat is overwhelming. So the island has both good and bad sides and they represent two different sides to every
human being. Goldings intention was probably to point out to the readers that there is evil potential in every
society. The island shows that besides mankind, the nature can also change its face, but often those changes in
nature are caused by mankind. The boys make fire in order to be rescued, but they do not notice that in that way
they destroy nature. Some may say that the island symbolizes paradise with its untouched beauty and bountiful
food. It is kind of like Garden of Eden before the boys arrive, but it becomes corrupted and destroyed after they
leave.

After the island, the next symbol we encounter is the conch shell. It is first discovered on the beach by Ralph and
Piggy and it is used in many scenes throughout the novel. The conch shell is first used to summon the boys together
after the crash separated them and later to call the boys into order. In this way the conch shell can be seen as a
powerful symbol of civilization and order in the novel. No boy can speak unless he holds the conch shell, and no
one is allowed to interrupt him that was a self-imposed rule, and when we look at it in that way the conch may
symbolize rules, politics and speech of a society. The conch becomes a very important part of their survival on
the island, but towards the end of the novel, as the island civilization erodes, it starts losing its power. Finally when
the conch shell is broken into thousand pieces by the boulder that was thrown at Piggy the power is up for grabs,
and the broken conch shell symbolizes the loss of all civilized instinct among almost all boys on the island.

Piggys glasses represent one of the most obvious symbols in the novel. Piggy can be seen as the most intelligent
and rational boy in the whole group and his glasses represent the power of science and innovation. The symbolic
significance of the glasses is evident from the very beginning when they are used as a tool to start a fire. Piggys
glasses also symbolize the ability to see and understand things clearly, and they help him interact with the world
around him. Seeing is Piggys greatest attribute, and without his glasses he feels useless. The glasses also
represent the balance between Piggys physical weakness and clumsiness and his mental strength. The stealing of
the glasses and the cracking of the first lens symbolizes the boys losing sight of what they need to do and the
smashing of glasses symbolizes the vision of boys being rescued fading away.

The signal fire is the next symbol and it is used in several ways in the novel. We can argue that the fire is a
complicated symbol, but also that it is the most important thing on the island. The signal fire symbolizes the boys
connection to civilization and at the same time the origin of mankind. First lit on the mountain and later on the
beach, the signal fire serves the purpose to help the group be spotted by passing ships and thus eventually being
rescued. In the early parts of the novel, the fact that the boys maintain the fire is a sign that they want to be rescued
and return to society. The fire is even a tool to prepare food, and gives protection and comfort at night. But there is
also something negative about the fire. It shows the intention of humans to control nature by destroying it.
Through harming the island surrounding, they destroy their own habitat and cause damage to themselves

When the fire burns low or goes out, we realize that the boys have lost sight of their desire to be rescued and have
accepted their savage lives on the island. Golding uses the signal fire to also symbolize hope of being rescued,
something which Jack destroys as the novel progresses. Ironically, at the end of the novel, a fire finally summons a
ship to the island, but not the signal fire. Instead, it is the fire of savagerythe forest fire Jacks gang starts as part
of his quest to hunt and kill Ralph.

The worst symbol of the novel is the beast. The imaginary beast represents the inner savagery and evil that exists
within the boys and all mankind. The beast personifies the fear that every human being on earth feels. The boys are
afraid of the beast, but only Simon realizes that they fear the beast because it exists within each of them. As the
boys grow more savage, their belief in the beast grows stronger. The boys become the beast when they kill
Simon.

The Lord of the Flies is the bloody, severed pigs head that Jack impales on a stake in the forest glade as an
offering to the beast. This complicated symbol becomes the most important image in the novel when Simon
confronts the sows head in the glade and it seems to speak to him, telling him that evil lies within every human
heart. In this way, the Lord of the Flies becomes both a physical manifestation of the beast, a symbol of the power
of evil, and a kind of Satan figure who evokes the beast within each human being. The head is called Lord of the
Flies which is a translation of the word Beelzebub (name of the devil in the Bible).

The boys also stand as symbols. Ralph and Piggy symbolize law, order and civilization. Jack represents savagery
and the desire for power. Roger stands for evil and brutality, while Simon represents natural human goodness. If
their society resembles a political state then the littluns can be seen as the common people while the older boys
represent ruling classes and political leaders.
We say that with this novel Golding wanted to criticize the society he grew up in. Golding wrote this adventurous
novel after the events of the Second World War and he wanted to show that there are both good and evil sides to
everyone and everything. He points out the existence of evil in all of us and that is why every symbol in Lord of the
Flies has a good and an evil side.

Themes

Themes are the fundamental and often universal ideas explored in a literary work.

Civilization vs. Savagery

The central concern of Lord of the Flies is the conflict between two competing impulses that exist within all human
beings: the instinct to live by rules, act peacefully, follow moral commands, and value the good of the group against
the instinct to gratify ones immediate desires, act violently to obtain supremacy over others, and enforce ones
will. This conflict might be expressed in a number of ways: civilization vs. savagery, order vs. chaos, reason vs.
impulse, law vs. anarchy, or the broader heading of good vs. evil. Throughout the novel, Golding associates the
instinct of civilization with good and the instinct of savagery with evil.

The conflict between the two instincts is the driving force of the novel, explored through the dissolution of the
young English boys civilized, moral, disciplined behavior as they accustom themselves to a wild, brutal, barbaric
life in the jungle. Lord of the Flies is an allegorical novel, which means that Golding conveys many of his main ideas
and themes through symbolic characters and objects. He represents the conflict between civilization and savagery
in the conflict between the novels two main characters: Ralph, the protagonist, who represents order and
leadership; and Jack, the antagonist, who represents savagery and the desire for power.

As the novel progresses, Golding shows how different people feel the influences of the instincts of civilization and
savagery to different degrees. Piggy, for instance, has no savage feelings, while Roger seems barely capable of
comprehending the rules of civilization. Generally, however, Golding implies that the instinct of savagery is far
more primal and fundamental to the human psyche than the instinct of civilization. Golding sees moral behavior, in
many cases, as something that civilization forces upon the individual rather than a natural expression of human
individuality. When left to their own devices, Golding implies, people naturally revert to cruelty, savagery, and
barbarism. This idea of innate human evil is central to Lord of the Flies, and finds expression in several important
symbols, most notably the beast and the sows head on the stake. Among all the characters, only Simon seems to
possess anything like a natural, innate goodness.

Loss of Innocence

As the boys on the island progress from well-behaved, orderly children longing for rescue to cruel, bloodthirsty
hunters who have no desire to return to civilization, they naturally lose the sense of innocence that they possessed
at the beginning of the novel. The painted savages in Chapter 12 who have hunted, tortured, and killed animals and
human beings are a far cry from the guileless children swimming in the lagoon in Chapter 3. But Golding does not
portray this loss of innocence as something that is done to the children; rather, it results naturally from their
increasing openness to the innate evil and savagery that has always existed within them. Golding implies that
civilization can mitigate but never wipe out the innate evil that exists within all human beings. The forest glade in
which Simon sits in Chapter 3 symbolizes this loss of innocence. At first, it is a place of natural beauty and peace,
but when Simon returns later in the novel, he discovers the bloody sows head impaled upon a stake in the middle
of the clearing. The bloody offering to the beast has disrupted the paradise that existed beforea powerful symbol
of innate human evil disrupting childhood innocence.

Motifs

Motifs are recurring structures, contrasts, and literary devices that can help to develop and inform the texts major
themes.

Biblical Parallels

Many critics have characterized Lord of the Flies as a retelling of episodes from the Bible. While that description
may be an oversimplification, the novel does echo certain Christian images and themes. Golding does not make any
explicit or direct connections to Christian symbolism in Lord of the Flies; instead, these biblical parallels function as
a kind of subtle motif in the novel, adding thematic resonance to the main ideas of the story. The island itself,
particularly Simons glade in the forest, recalls the Garden of Eden in its status as an originally pristine place that is
corrupted by the introduction of evil. Similarly, we may see the Lord of the Flies as a representation of the devil, for
it works to promote evil among humankind. Furthermore, many critics have drawn strong parallels between
Simon and Jesus. Among the boys, Simon is the one who arrives at the moral truth of the novel, and the other boys
kill him sacrificially as a consequence of having discovered this truth. Simons conversation with the Lord of the
Flies also parallels the confrontation between Jesus and the devil during Jesus forty days in the wilderness, as told
in the Christian Gospels.

However, it is important to remember that the parallels between Simon and Christ are not complete, and that there
are limits to reading Lord of the Flies purely as a Christian allegory. Save for Simons two uncanny predictions of the
future, he lacks the supernatural connection to God that Jesus has in Christian tradition. Although Simon is wise in
many ways, his death does not bring salvation to the island; rather, his death plunges the island deeper into
savagery and moral guilt. Moreover, Simon dies before he is able to tell the boys the truth he has discovered. Jesus,
in contrast, was killed while spreading his moral philosophy. In this way, Simonand Lord of the Flies as a whole
echoes Christian ideas and themes without developing explicit, precise parallels with them. The novels biblical
parallels enhance its moral themes but are not necessarily the primary key to interpreting the story.

Symbols

Symbols are objects, characters, figures, and colors used to represent abstract ideas or concepts.

The Conch Shell

Ralph and Piggy discover the conch shell on the beach at the start of the novel and use it to summon the boys
together after the crash separates them. Used in this capacity, the conch shell becomes a powerful symbol of
civilization and order in the novel. The shell effectively governs the boys meetings, for the boy who holds the shell
holds the right to speak. In this regard, the shell is more than a symbolit is an actual vessel of political legitimacy
and democratic power. As the island civilization erodes and the boys descend into savagery, the conch shell loses
its power and influence among them. Ralph clutches the shell desperately when he talks about his role in
murdering Simon. Later, the other boys ignore Ralph and throw stones at him when he attempts to blow the conch
in Jacks camp. The boulder that Roger rolls onto Piggy also crushes the conch shell, signifying the demise of the
civilized instinct among almost all the boys on the island.

Piggys Glasses

Piggy is the most intelligent, rational boy in the group, and his glasses represent the power of science and
intellectual endeavor in society. This symbolic significance is clear from the start of the novel, when the boys use
the lenses from Piggys glasses to focus the sunlight and start a fire. When Jacks hunters raid Ralphs camp and
steal the glasses, the savages effectively take the power to make fire, leaving Ralphs group helpless.

The Signal Fire

The signal fire burns on the mountain, and later on the beach, to attract the notice of passing ships that might be
able to rescue the boys. As a result, the signal fire becomes a barometer of the boys connection to civilization. In
the early parts of the novel, the fact that the boys maintain the fire is a sign that they want to be rescued and return
to society. When the fire burns low or goes out, we realize that the boys have lost sight of their desire to be rescued
and have accepted their savage lives on the island. The signal fire thus functions as a kind of measurement of the
strength of the civilized instinct remaining on the island. Ironically, at the end of the novel, a fire finally summons a
ship to the island, but not the signal fire. Instead, it is the fire of savagerythe forest fire Jacks gang starts as part
of his quest to hunt and kill Ralph.

The Beast

The imaginary beast that frightens all the boys stands for the primal instinct of savagery that exists within all
human beings. The boys are afraid of the beast, but only Simon reaches the realization that they fear the beast
because it exists within each of them. As the boys grow more savage, their belief in the beast grows stronger. By the
end of the novel, the boys are leaving it sacrifices and treating it as a totemic god. The boys behavior is what brings
the beast into existence, so the more savagely the boys act, the more real the beast seems to become.

The Lord of the Flies

The Lord of the Flies is the bloody, severed sows head that Jack impales on a stake in the forest glade as an offering
to the beast. This complicated symbol becomes the most important image in the novel when Simon confronts the
sows head in the glade and it seems to speak to him, telling him that evil lies within every human heart and
promising to have some fun with him. (This fun foreshadows Simons death in the following chapter.) In this
way, the Lord of the Flies becomes both a physical manifestation of the beast, a symbol of the power of evil, and a
kind of Satan figure who evokes the beast within each human being. Looking at the novel in the context of biblical
parallels, the Lord of the Flies recalls the devil, just as Simon recalls Jesus. In fact, the name Lord of the Flies is a
literal translation of the name of the biblical name Beelzebub, a powerful demon in hell sometimes thought to be
the devil himself.

Ralph, Piggy, Jack, Simon, and Roger

Lord of the Flies is an allegorical novel, and many of its characters signify important ideas or themes. Ralph
represents order, leadership, and civilization. Piggy represents the scientific and intellectual aspects of civilization.
Jack represents unbridled savagery and the desire for power. Simon represents natural human goodness. Roger
represents brutality and bloodlust at their most extreme. To the extent that the boys society resembles a political
state, the littluns might be seen as the common people, while the older boys represent the ruling classes and
political leaders. The relationships that develop between the older boys and the younger ones emphasize the older
boys connection to either the civilized or the savage instinct: civilized boys like Ralph and Simon use their power
to protect the younger boys and advance the good of the group; savage boys like Jack and Roger use their power to
gratify their own desires, treating the littler boys as objects for their own amusement.

42. Society in Lord of the Flies

Introduction To Lord Of The Flies Themes

Although published in 1954, Lord of the Flies by William Golding is still one of the most widely read and frequently
challenged books today. The novel examines controversial aspects of human nature and the implications for
society.

Comparison Of The Themes In Lord Of The Flies And The Coral Island

Lord of the Flies was written as a response to the novel The Coral Island and is in many ways the anti-thesis of that
book. In The Coral Island, a group of boys become stranded on an island in the Coral Sea and learn to happily live in
peace and harmony with each other and their environment. Thus The Coral Island attempts to demonstrate that
humans are born good at heart and that evil is an external force present in the world which tempts once innocent
people. Once free of the temptations created by adults and society the boys are able to live happily ever after in a
peaceful utopia.

Lord of the Flies takes the opposite view: that evil comes from within. Golding's message is that human nature has
a wicked side and that without punishments to keep it in check society would degenerate into a barbaric anarchy.
Lord of the Flies illustrates this theme through the story of a group of boys stranded on an island who must
overcome not only the natural difficulties presented by the island but also the difficulties presented by their own
inherent human nature. Throughout the novel we witness the gradual decline of the morals of the individual
boys and therefore the eventual decline of their constructed society as a whole.
The Theme Of Human Nature In Lord Of The Flies

Jack and the Hunters in the 1990

film adaptation of Lord Of The Flies

In Lord of the Flies, William Golding presents a Freudian view of the individual, specifically that within each person
there is a struggle between right and wrong. Initially the boys listen to their consciences and act according to the
moral code they were taught during their upbringing. They set rules, allocate jobs, and democratically elect a
leader. As time goes by, boys such as the elected leader Ralph, the rational Piggy and the kind Simon manage to
remain disciplined, but others indulge and let their morals decay little by little, particulary the proud Jack and his
group of hunters.

As the boys begin to fear a superstition they create called "the beast" it is Simon who realises that what they should
really fear is the beast within themselves. "Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill! You
knew, didnt you? Im part of you? Close, close, close!" (The Pig's Head talking to Simon). The culmination of the boys'
fall from grace comes when Piggy is murdered by Roger deliberately and in cold blood. As Piggy is killed, the conch
- a symbol of authority and order - is also destroyed symbolising the complete rejection of the moral code.

The Theme Of Society In Lord Of The Flies

From this view of human nature Golding draws deep implications for society. He believes that because of the
fundamental potential in every person to commit evil acts there will always be criminals and wrong doers in
society no matter how well intentioned a society's ideologies. Therefore a society without laws and law
enforcement will inevitably fail.

Roger's behaviour is a good illustration of this point. Early on in the story he throws rocks at the littleuns. As he is
still used to the rules and punishments of his previous society he is careful not to hit them though. By the end of the
book Roger has realised that in their new society there are no consequences for misdeeds and so he is free to drop
a huge rock onto Piggy.

William Golding: "the theme (of the book) is an attempt to trace back the defects of society to the defects of human
nature...The moral is that the shape of society must depend on the ethical nature of the individual and not on any
political system."

Conclusion To Lord Of The Flies Themes

In Lord of the Flies William Golding conducts a sociological thought experiment. He takes a group of young
boys and places them on a deserted island and asks what will the result be, a utopia or a distopia? His
answer is the latter. His reason is man himself.
William Golding uses a variety of symbols to represent ideas, or abstract notions or conceptions about people,
places, and things. A symbol, according to the Websters Dictionary, is an object that stands for something in
addition to its literal meaning. In the book, there is a continual breakdown of society and civilization on the island.
During this breakdown, Golding uses symbolism to further explain the process. Some of the things he symbolizes in
the novel are the island itself, the conch, the boys clothing, and the violence.
In The Lord of the Flies, Golding symbolizes the island in many ways. To begin, the island was pure, and clean
before they crashed. The crash left a scar on the island. The island was symbolized as the Garden of Eden, when
they got there, and at the end it was like Hell on earth. The boys made the island unpure when they landed. Their
survival altered the island forever. They killed animals, started fires, built huts, and by this they changed the
natural state of the island.
Another thing that was symbolized in the book is the conch shell. The conch is what Ralph blew into to get the boys
to come together. At first they established rules, one of them being the person holding the conch is the only person
who can speak. The conch symbolizes order among the boys. As time past the boys acted more and more uncivil,
and they didnt pay much attention to the conch. At this point, order stated to disintegrate. Towards the end of the
novel, when the conch was shattered, all civilization of the boys shattered along with it. There was complete chaos
on the island.
The clothing also represents the breakdown of the society. To begin, most of the boys were wearing school
uniforms and some were wearing choir robes. This shows they are educated, civilized young men, who are most
likely from, or around the city. As time passes, the boys do not remain fully clad. They shed their shoes and shirts.
Their hair grows longer, and they are dirtier. This resembles their civilized ways beginning to fade. They also
started using face paint for camouflage, and it eventually becomes a ritual. When Jack wore the face paint during
his hunt it was like a mask covering up the civilization. At the end, everyone that is sided with Jack must wear the
paint. It symbolizes the separation between the civil and non-civil.
Finally, violence amongst the boys shows social breakdown. At the beginning there was conflict of jack wanting to
be the leader and Ralph was elected. Then they started killing pigs for food, and Ralph and Jack continued to fight.
The tribe killed Simon because they mistook him for the beast. After the groups were parted, Jacks group stole
Piggys glasses. Ralphs group went to confront jack, and they kidnapped Samneric. Jacks group then killed Piggy
and attempted to kill Ralph. The ladder of violence continued, and they would have killed Ralph, if it werent for the
rescue. They started out with democratic discussions, and ended with destruction of life, order and civilization.
In conclusion, William Golding used symbolism to represent many things throughout the novel. He symbolizes
things such as, the island and the conch shell, to show the continual breakdown of society and civilization on the
island.

43.Wild and civilized

As humans we all have both a civilized side as well as a savagery side. It's just how things are. We live in the
civilized way by peace, morals, laws, trust, and loyalty are just some examples of being and living civil. Some things
we seem to take from savagery is to act out in violence in such situations to get and show authority to others and
show our power. Some people act out in just a civilized manner as well as just acting out in a savage way. Civilized
people are known to be great peace makers, but yet it seems like the savage people are the ones better known for
example as Hitler.

In the novel it was very obvious who had symbolized civilization and who symbolized savagery. Jack who was
the one who seemed to be thirsty for power and authority then Ralph who was the civilized one who in the
beginning was the leader. As the novel went on Jack demanded for power over the group with Ralph. Seeing that
Ralph wouldn't allow it Jack seemed to rebel and went his own way. Peer pressure came into play as Jack slowly
has the whole tribe other than Piggy on his side. The tribe members were scared to stand up for them selves and
speak out because Jack had full power over them and had gotten what he finally had wanted. Yet he seemed like he
created his own little dictatorship. When Piggy had tried to stand up for what was right he had got crushed by the
big boulder. By that time it seemed like the whole tribe had been fully brain washed by Jack, as thus it being a small
dictatorship. At least in my own opinion.

I think it is that savage leaders from Jack all the way to Hitler it was almost the same as Piggy's character. They
possibly just wanted to fit in, and feel acceptance. Because in possibly some way they had been bullied by someone
who had a higher authority and more power than them. So they just had wanted to do the very same thing to feel
good about their own self.

Jack was the first one for me to see that there was some kind of loss of innocence in the novel. When he had
wanted to hunt for the pig and had put blood on his face along with others from the tribe showed savagery, yes. But
it showed that they were losing their grip on sanity and their own innocence. Another example is after "the hunt"
of the pig they cut off the head of the pig and sticks on the spear through the ground. At the end of the book it is
completely obvious that the whole tribe had no sign of innocence. Humans were being killed instead of focusing on
what mattered like hunting or gathering food.

In Lord of the Flies, William Golding created a picturesque society that was doomed for disaster. However, not all
of the children on the island had the same savage attributes as some of the others, mostly hunters. This created a
stark difference in characteristic traits on the island. You were left with the good versus the bad, or the Civilized
versus the Savage. From this, I concluded that the main theme in Lord of the Flies is Civilization vs. Savagery.
Throughout the novel, there are many examples that support this and many quotes that exemplify this idea as well.
Ralph, the elected leader on the island leads the pack as far as the Civilized ones go. On the other hand, Jack leads
the way for the Savage children, as he was elected head of the hunters. It is safe to say that in Lord of the Flies,
William Golding intended to give readers a taste of what can happen when societies clash, as the children did on
the island. When the novel first begins all seems well with just Ralph and Piggy exploring the island, making sense
of what they could. However, things take a quick turn for the worst as everyone first meets together. After
everyone gathers together Ralph thinks it would make sense to elect a leader, and there are no real objections to
this. Seems we ought to have a chief to decide things (22). This example proves that Ralph feels the need for an
orderly way of doing things. Soon after Jack would take the lesser role of Head Hunter, and soon his true colors
would shine. Rescue? Yes, of course! All the same, Id like to catch a pig first (53). From this quote we can see that
Jack had savage intentions from the moment he was handed a leadership role on the island. For the first time, we
can now see the clash of Civilization in Ralph versus the Savagery in Jack, and how it progresses into the main
theme in the novel.

The overarching theme of Lord of the Flies is the conflict between the human impulse towards savagery and the
rules of civilization which are designed to contain and minimize it. Throughout the novel, the conflict is dramatized
by the clash between Ralph and Jack, who respectively represent civilization and savagery. The differing ideologies
are expressed by each boy's distinct attitudes towards authority. While Ralph uses his authority to establish rules,
protect the good of the group, and enforce the moral and ethical codes of the English society the boys were raised
in, Jack is interested in gaining power over the other boys to gratify his most primal impulses. When Jack assumes
leadership of his own tribe, he demands the complete subservience of the other boys, who not only serve him but
worship him as an idol. Jack's hunger for power suggests that savagery does not resemble anarchy so much as a
totalitarian system of exploitation and illicit power.
Golding's emphasis on the negative consequences of savagery can be read as an clear endorsement of civilization.
In the early chapters of the novel, he suggests that one of the important functions of civilized society is to provide
an outlet for the savage impulses that reside inside each individual. Jack's initial desire to kill pigs to demonstrate
his bravery, for example, is channeled into the hunt, which provides needed food for the entire group. As long as he
lives within the rules of civilization, Jack is not a threat to the other boys; his impulses are being re-directed into a
productive task. Rather, it is when Jack refuses to recognize the validity of society and rejects Ralph's authority that
the dangerous aspects of his character truly emerge. Golding suggests that while savagery is perhaps an
inescapable fact of human existence, civilization can mitigate its full expression.

The rift between civilization and savagery is also communicated through the novel's major symbols: the conch
shell, which is associated with Ralph, and The Lord of the Flies, which is associated with Jack. The conch shell is a
powerful marker of democratic order on the island, confirming both Ralph's leadership-determined by election-
and the power of assembly among the boys. Yet, as the conflict between Ralph and Jack deepens, the conch shell
loses symbolic importance. Jack declares that the conch is meaningless as a symbol of authority and order, and its
decline in importance signals the decline of civilization on the island. At the same time, The Lord of the Flies, which
is an offering to the mythical "beast" on the island, is increasingly invested with significance as a symbol of the
dominance of savagery on the island, and of Jack's authority over the other boys. The Lord of the Flies represents
the unification of the boys under Jack's rule as motivated by fear of "outsiders": the beast and those who refuse to
accept Jack's authority. The destruction of the conch shell at the scene of Piggy's murder signifies the complete
eradication of civilization on the island, while Ralph's demolition of The Lord of the Flies-he intends to use the stick
 as a spear-signals his own descent into savagery and violence. By the final scene, savagery has completely
displaced civilization as the prevailing system on the island.

44. Rational and irrational

Rational Piggy

2. In what way can Piggy with his eye glasses be seen as representing the rational, scientific aspects of society?

I believe that piggy is the rational, scientific one on the island that has all the ideas but no one will listen to him
because of the way he looks. His glasses signify scientific aspects of society because Jack and Ralph used his glasses
to start the fire. Also, the meaning of spectacles is to see more clearly. The glasses could be the symbol of seeing
through the bad ideas and looking at the big picture, which Piggy tries to describe to Jack and Ralph when he had
the conch on top of the mountain when the group started the fire Piggy said, I got the conch. I got a right to
speak(55). He also said, There aint nothing we can do. We ought to be more careful. Im scared(55). He get cut
off right when he could have said something helpful and rational by the antagonist in the novel, Jack. Later, when
the group is talking about the possibility of a beast on the island, Piggy states, If you get a pain in your stomach,
whether its a little one or a big one(112). He is then interrupted once again before he could have made his point
in depth about medicine. Piggy also asks Ralph to stay power instead of Jack because he was being irrational. Ralph
says, I ought to give up being chief. Hear em(125). Piggy responds with, If Jack was chief hed have all hunting
and no fire. Wed be here till we died.(125). Piggy is always the rational figure in this novel but everybody is going
against him though he has the best ideas.

I think we can better phrase this as the conflict between good and evil. This dichotomy can better be put into the
context of your question. The need for organisation and support is integral to a working society. Golding, however,
points out human natures need for chaos and personal gratification. A signal fire, shelters and a semblance of a
constructive society are what Ralph, Simon and Piggy tried to attain. The others seemed to agree, for a time, but
lust for primal pleasures (killing, screaming, playing.........) prevented rational thought. In the end rational and
irrational become good and evil. Unspeakable things are done on this island including the killing of Simon,
Golding's Christ figure.

Lord of the Flies: Piggy as the Rational Adult Figure

Summary: We explores Piggy's character and how he reperesents the rational adult figure in Lord of the FLies.
With his superior intellect and reason, he is the only one of the boys who maintains sanity.

In civilization, adults run society; they make it what it is today. With their supreme capacity of intellect, maturity
and authority, they have created and successfully run countries and empires. Children are only expected to learn
and grow to eventually replace their predecessors. In Golding's novel, Lord of the flies, the children are cut off from
authority and guidance they would receive from adults. They have to rely upon each other, they decide to mimic
what they knew of society. They are not able to maintain the mentality of who they are and what they've been
brought up to be. However one child prevails, Piggy. Piggy represents an adult figure through his intelligence,
perception and his intellectual reasoning.
Piggy demonstrates intelligence, through the need of survival. Piggy had the idea of the conch, the fire and the jobs.

The major themes of Lord of the Flies reveal the inner fight between good and evil that faces all the boys as they are
stranded on a deserted island without any guidance from "grown-ups." Their ability to distinguish rational
thoughts from irrational actions is constantly challenged. At the outset, the boys are all civilized and ironically it is
Jack who reminds them in chapter 2 that "After all, we're not savages. We're English." Jack is the first boy who will
reveal that he is susceptible to primitive and inhumane behavior when he kills the pig. Painting his face allows Jack
to be "liberated from shame and self-consciousness" (ch 4).

All the boys are innocent at the beginning as they are unaware of their subconscious desires and they are too
young to recognize their own unchecked motivations. Some are more morally pure than others and the "littluns"
represent that aspect of society that can be easily influenced. In chapter 4, the reader is told that "the mask
compelled them."

Ralph is the chosen leader of the boys and is aware that shelter and a signal fire are the basis upon which they must
found their camp. Rescue means everything but some boys are too overwhelmed by their freedom from adult
supervision to realize that they are making a choice by not helping with the shelters or fire. In organizing their
society, Ralph is no match for Jack's tempting offer of meat and fun. These boys gradually succumb to Jack's style of
leadership, especially as talk of the beast intensifies and irrational thoughts dominate the discussion.

After Simon is killed due to the boys' instinctive behavior when they mistake Simon for the beast, it is not long
before any sense of order is destroyed and the conch smashes and Piggy, the voice of reason, falls to his death. Even
Ralph, who works so hard to maintain the kind of society his Navy commander father would expect, "wept for the
end of innocence."

We can divide the soul into an irrational and a rational part. William Golding sees the main theme of his book as the
nature of man and the reflection of the human personality on society. The human will has two desires that conflict
with each other: to live by civilization and to live by savagery. The civilized impulse we have is to live peacefully,
morally, and by rules and laws. The savage characteristic we have is to act violently, using force to gain authority
and power over others. Throughout Lord of the Flies, Golding links the idea of rationality with good, and
irrationality with evil.

The book explores the inner conflicts of man in which one discovers the human nature and personality that comes
across in the book- good versus evil, rationality and logic versus irrationality, civilization versus primitive, peace
and tolerance versus war and violence. In each of these conflicts choice is in man's hand, and yet, as the book
demonstrates in such a clear manner, it seems that man's nature is to make the wrong choice.From civilization to
barbarism is only one step.In the book we can see how small that step really is.

The overarching theme of Lord of the Flies is the conflict between the human impulse towards savagery and the
rules of civilization. Throughout the novel, the conflict is dramatized by the clash between Ralph and Jack, who
respectively represent civilization and savagery. Each boy's has a distinct attitude towards authority. While Ralph
uses his authority to establish rules, protect the good of the group, and enforce the moral and ethical codes of the
English society the boys were raised in, Jack is interested in gaining power over the other boys to gratify his most
primal impulses.

At the beginning of book, despite the situation, there seems to be no evil, but only good- a paradise island with no
adults, the harmonic and almost natural friendship between Jack and Ralph and the general mood in the group. The
only hint of evil is the teasing attitude of the group towards Piggy. However, as the story continues, and the boys
become more restless and less convinced of being rescued, the once warm relationship between Jack and Ralph
becomes more tense and distant. One group, led officially by Ralph divides itself self-consciously into two minor
groups and though formally under one leader, the two groups drift further and further apart. Eventually, in a fit of
rage, Jack leaves the group, followed loyally by his hunters, to form a new tribe. Here comes the split between all
the inner conflicts. While Jack represents the evil, irrationality and wrong in man, Ralph and his group seem to
represent the good, the civilization, and the logic.

The responsibility of civilization is thrust upon the older boys, however, they slowly abandon their responsibilities,
in order to serve themselves and their leaders. The more they abandon their responsibilities, they lose their
civilization, yet gain evil and slowly reveal their own sadistic and cruel tendencies.

One representative of the conflict between good and evil is the much feared yet imaginary 'Beast'. The promise of
fun, food and mainly security from the dreaded beast draws the littlen's to Jack and his pack of hunters. The
moving of the minority from the good group to the bad group is the first examples of irrationality.

The impact of "The Beast" on their lives is so strong that the fear constantly surrounds them, and thus, so does evil.
From this point on, most of the actions of Jack's group are done in fear of the beast. The hunters, led by Jack,
constantly terrorize the other group and scare them with stories about "The Beast". They start to steal from the
other group (for example fire and the hunting knife), and sacrifice the head of a sow to "The Beast" (which
becomes the Lord of the Flies).

Eventually they start killing pigs and dancing around a fire in what seems as a religious ritual in which they act an
attack on the pig while shouting war cries towards "The Beast". At this stage the evil is so powerful, and the boys
are so deeply caught in their trance around the beast that when Simon comes running towards them, with the truth
about the beast, they mistake him for the Beast and brutally kill him. This stage is an opposite of the beginning
where there seems to be no evil but only good. Now there is no rationality only irrationality. Once again Piggy is
the exception, for he does not participate in the frenzied murder of Simon. What the boys and humanity do not see
is that the beast is themselves.

When Ralph and Piggy go out to Castle Rock to plead with Jack and his group to be fair and return Piggy's glasses,
because without them, Piggy could not see, the response from the group - Roger dropping a boulder onto Piggy's
head.This is the final confrontation of good with evil, civilization with the primitive, logic with irrationality, and
peace with war.

The rift between civilization and savagery is also communicated through the novel's major symbols: the conch
shell, which is associated with Ralph, and The Lord of the Flies, which is associated with Jack. The destruction of
the conch shell at the scene of Piggy's murder signifies the complete eradication of civilization on the island, while
Ralph's demolition of The Lord of the Flies-he intends to use the stick as a spear which signals his own descent into
savagery and violence. By the final scene, savagery has completely displaced civilization as the prevailing system
on the island.
In The Lord of the Flies, Golding suggests that humankind is a barbaric and savage species that even without the
world of the adult, cannot resist evil, which in the eyes of Golding is the true nature and human personality of man.

45. Individual and Collective

This is show frequently throughout the book, particularly with the use of symbolism and allegory.
For example- the conch is often said to be representative of society. The boys choose the conch at the beginning to
decide who can speak, and as the book goes on it becomes a clear representation of rules and order- so it is very
fitting when with "the fall through the air of the true wise friend called Piggy" the conch too shatters- society has
now been completely destroyed.

The same is very true with Simon's death...it is here the boys shun all the remains of the behavior society has
imposed upon them i.e. (Roger left the circle and became a hunter...or something along those lines). The boys are
now unable to process any conscious thoughts and revert instead to their purely animalistic selves, which allows
them to essentially murder one of their own without feeling any remorse.

I mean, in my opinion, the need for society is actually one of the key messages Golding is trying to convey
throughout the book- is a conscience something we are born with, or something society puts in us- the boys having
been taken out of society gradually progress from simple playground bullying to actual murder.

There are four types of conflict: man versus man, man versus society, man versus nature, and man versus self. Each
of these conflicts is represented in William Golding's Lord of the Flies.

The most obvious of these would likely be man versus nature, as the boys are immediately thrust into an
environmental situation which is entirely foreign to them. From their origins in prep school Britain to a deserted
jungle with no easy access to food, clothing, hygiene, or shelter, the boys must try to make their way in the wild,
against the elements of weather, wild predators, and potentially inedible foods.

Golding quickly introduces man versus society and man versus man into the equation. The boys try to build their
"government" by electing a leader, and they choose Ralph. However, it isn't long until they start to rebel against
their selected society and split into two factions, with some boys following Jack for hunting while the rest stay with
Ralph and work against the elements together.

The final conflict is one of the most subtly developed. Man versus self can be difficult to do well, and Golding
focused primarily on Simon in this instance, though we do see some struggle within Ralph and Piggy on this issue
too. Man versus self involves a person struggling internally with choices they make. Simon exemplifies this sort of
thinking when he comes back and tells what the Beast "said" to him--obviously the head didn't speak, the words
come from inside Simon himself, and show clearly that Simon believes what they have all been party to is pure evil.

All of these conflicts have multiple examples in the text. It should not be difficult to put together 1500 words on
them, so do not feel overwhelmed. I would recommend splitting the paper into three sections: man versus nature,
man versus society and man, and man versus self. Then, use quotes and examples from the text to display how
Golding develops this theme. In your conclusion, spend time discussing which is most poignant, or best developed,
or which is most significant to the story--what was his message, in other words? Obviously he was not quite as
concerned about man versus nature or man versus man in specific. These seem to be bypassed quite easily. I would
try to determine which conflict Golding seemed to be most interested in between man versus society and man
versus self.

Individualism vs. Community

One of the key concerns of Lord of the Flies is the role of the individual in society. Many of the problems on the
island-the extinguishing of the signal fire, the lack of shelters, the mass abandonment of Ralph's camp, and the
murder of Piggy-stem from the boys' implicit commitment to a principle of self-interest over the principle of
community. That is, the boys would rather fulfill their individual desires than cooperate as a coherent society,
which would require that each one act for the good of the group. Accordingly, the principles of individualism and
community are symbolized by Jack and Ralph, respectively. Jack wants to "have fun" on the island and satisfy his
bloodlust, while Ralph wants to secure the group's rescue, a goal they can achieve only by cooperating. Yet, while
Ralph's vision is the most reasonable, it requires work and sacrifice on the part of the other boys, so they quickly
shirk their societal duties in favor of fulfilling their individual desires. The shelters do not get built because the
boys would rather play; the signal fire is extinguished when Jack's hunters fail to tend to it on schedule.
The boys' self-interestedness culminates, of course, when they decide to join Jack's tribe, a society without
communal values whose appeal is that Jack will offer them total freedom. The popularity of his tribe reflects the
enormous appeal of a society based on individual freedom and self-interest, but as the reader soon learns, the
freedom Jack offers his tribe is illusory. Jack implements punitive and irrational rules and restricts his boys'
behavior far more than Ralph did. Golding thus suggests not only that some level of communal system is superior
to one based on pure self-interest, but also that pure individual freedom is an impossible value to sustain within a
group dynamic, which will always tend towards societal organization. The difficult question, of course, is what
individuals are willing to give up to gain the benefits of being in the group.
The Nature of Evil
Is evil innate within the human spirit, or is it an influence from an external source? What role do societal rules
and institutions play in the existence of human evil? Does the capacity for evil vary from person to person, or
does it depend on the circumstances each individual faces? These questions are at the heart of Lord of the
Flieswhich, through detailed depictions of the boys' different responses to their situation, presents a complex
articulation of humanity's potential for evil.
It is important to note that Golding's novel rejects supernatural or religious accounts of the origin of human evil.
While the boys fear the "beast" as an embodiment of evil similar to the Christian concept of Satan, the novel
emphasizes that this interpretation is not only mistaken but also, ironically, the motivation for the boys'
increasingly cruel and violent behavior. It is their irrational fear of the beast that informs the boys' paranoia and
leads to the fatal schism between Jack and Ralph and their respective followers, and this is what prevents them
from recognizing and addressing their responsibility for their own impulses. Rather, as The Lord of the Flies
communicates to Simon in the forest glade, the "beast" is an internal force, present in every individual, and is
thus incapable of being truly defeated. That the most ethical characters on the island-Simon and Ralph-each
come to recognize his own capacity for evil indicates the novel's emphasis on evil's universality among humans.
Even so, the novel is not entirely pessimistic about the human capacity for good. While evil impulses may lurk
in every human psyche, the intensity of these impulses-and the ability to control them-appear to vary from
individual to individual. Through the different characters, the novel presents a continuum of evil, ranging from
Jack and Roger, who are eager to engage in violence and cruelty, to Ralph and Simon, who struggle to contain
their brutal instincts. We may note that the characters who struggle most successfully against their evil instincts
do so by appealing to ethical or social codes of behavior. For example, Ralph and Piggy demand the return of
Piggy's glasses because it is the "right thing to do." Golding suggests that while evil may be present in us all, it
can be successfully suppressed by the social norms that are imposed on our behavior from without or by the
moral norms we decide are inherently "good," which we can internalize within our wills.
The ambiguous and deeply ironic conclusion of Lord of the Flies, however, calls into question society's role
in shaping human evil. The naval officer, who repeats Jack's rhetoric of nationalism and militarism, is engaged
in a bloody war that is responsible for the boys' aircraft crash on the island and that is mirrored by the civil war
among the survivors. In this sense, much of the evil on the island is a result not of the boys' distance from
society, but of their internalization of the norms and ideals of that society-norms and ideals that justify and even
thrive on war. Are the boys corrupted by the internal pressures of an essentially violent human nature, or have
they been corrupted by the environment of war they were raised in?Lord of the Flies offers no clear solution
to this question, provoking readers to contemplate the complex relationships among society, morality, and
human nature.
Man vs. Nature
Lord of the Flies introduces the question of man's ideal relationship with the natural world. Thrust into the
completely natural environment of the island, in which no humans exist or have existed, the boys express
different attitudes towards nature that reflect their distinct personalities and ideological leanings. The boys'
relationships to the natural world generally fall into one of three categories: subjugation of nature, harmony
with nature, and subservience to nature. The first category, subjugation of nature, is embodied by Jack, whose
first impulse on the island is to track, hunt, and kill pigs. He seeks to impose his human will on the natural
world, subjugating it to his desires. Jack's later actions, in particular setting the forest fire, reflect his deepening
contempt for nature and demonstrate his militaristic, violent character. The second category, harmony with
nature, is embodied by Simon, who finds beauty and peace in the natural environment as exemplified by his
initial retreat to the isolated forest glade. For Simon, nature is not man's enemy but is part of the human
experience. The third category, subservience to nature, is embodied by Ralph and is the opposite position from
Jack's. Unlike Simon, Ralph does not find peaceful harmony with the natural world; like Jack, he understands it
as an obstacle to human life on the island. But while Jack responds to this perceived conflict by acting
destructively towards animals and plant life, Ralph responds by retreating from the natural world. He does not
participate in hunting or in Simon's excursions to the deep wilderness of the forest; rather, he stays on the beach,
the most humanized part of the island. As Jack's hunting expresses his violent nature to the other boys and to the
reader, Ralph's desire to stay separate from the natural world emphasizes both his reluctance to tempt danger
and his affinity for civilization.
Dehumanization of Relationships
In Lord of the Flies, one of the effects of the boys' descent into savagery is their increasing inability to
recognize each other's humanity. Throughout the novel, Golding uses imagery to imply that the boys are no
longer able to distinguish between themselves and the pigs they are hunting and killing for food and sport. In
Chapter Four, after the first successful pig hunt, the hunters re-enact the hunt in a ritual dance,
using Maurice as a stand-in for the doomed pig. This episode is only a dramatization, but as the boys'
collective impulse towards complete savagery grows stronger, the parallels between human and animal
intensify. In Chapter Seven, as several of the boys are hunting the beast, they repeat the ritual with Robert as a
stand-in for the pig; this time, however, they get consumed by a kind of "frenzy" and come close to actually
killing him. In the same scene, Jack jokes that if they do not kill a pig next time, they can kill a littlun in its
place. The repeated substitution of boy for pig in the childrens' ritual games, and in their conversation, calls
attention to the consequences of their self-gratifying behavior: concerned only with their own base desires, the
boys have become unable to see each other as anything more than objects subject to their individual wills. The
more pigs the boys kill, the easier it becomes for them to harm and kill each other. Mistreating the pigs
facilitates this process of dehumanization.
The early episodes in which boys are substituted for pigs, either verbally or in the hunting dance, also
foreshadow the tragic events of the novel's later chapters, notably the murders of Simon and Piggy and the
attempt on Ralph's life. Simon, a character who from the outset of the novel is associated with the natural
landscape he has an affinity for, is murdered when the other children mistake him for "the beast"-a mythical
inhuman creature that serves as an outlet for the children's fear and sadness. Piggy's name links him
symbolically to the wild pigs on the island, the immediate target for Jack's violent impulses; from the outset,
when the other boys refuse to call him anything but "Piggy," Golding establishes the character as one whose
humanity is, in the eyes of the other boys, ambiguous. The murders of Simon and Piggy demonstrate the boys'
complete descent into savagery. Both literally (Simon) and symbolically (Piggy), the boys have become
indistinguishable from the animals that they stalk and kill.
The Loss of Innocence
At the end of Lord of the Flies, Ralph weeps "for the end of innocence," a lament that retroactively makes
explicit one of the novel's major concerns, namely, the loss of innocence. When the boys are first deserted on
the island, they behave like children, alternating between enjoying their freedom and expressing profound
homesickness and fear. By the end of the novel, however, they mirror the warlike behavior of the adults of the
Home Counties: they attack, torture, and even murder one another without hesitation or regret. The loss of the
boys' innocence on the island runs parallel to, and informs their descent into savagery, and it recalls the Bible's
narrative of the Fall of Man from paradise.
Accordingly, the island is coded in the early chapters as a kind of paradise, with idyllic scenery, fresh fruit, and
glorious weather. Yet, as in the Biblical Eden, the temptation toward corruption is present: the younger boys
fear a "snake-thing." The "snake-thing" is the earliest incarnation of the "beast" that, eventually, will provoke
paranoia and division among the group. It also explicitly recalls the snake from the Garden of Eden, the
embodiment of Satan who causes Adam and Eve's fall from grace. The boys' increasing belief in the beast
indicates their gradual loss of innocence, a descent that culminates in tragedy. We may also note that the
landscape of the island itself shifts from an Edenic space to a hellish one, as marked by Ralph's observation of
the ocean tide as an impenetrable wall, and by the storm that follows Simon's murder.

The forest glade that Simon retreats to in Chapter Three is another example of how the boys' loss of innocence
is registered on the natural landscape of the island. Simon first appreciates the clearing as peaceful and
beautiful, but when he returns, he finds The Lord of the Flies impaled at its center, a powerful symbol of how
the innocence of childhood has been corrupted by fear and savagery.

Even the most sympathetic boys develop along a character arc that traces a fall from innocence (or, as we might
euphemize, a journey into maturity). When Ralph is first introduced, he is acting like a child, splashing in the
water, mocking Piggy, and laughing. He tells Piggy that he is certain that his father, a naval commander, will
rescue him, a conviction that the reader understands as the wishful thinking of a little boy. Ralph repeats his
belief in their rescue throughout the novel, shifting his hope that his own father will discover them to the far
more realistic premise that a passing ship will be attracted by the signal fire on the island. By the end of the
novel, he has lost hope in the boys' rescue altogether. The progression of Ralph's character from idealism to
pessimistic realism expresses the extent to which life on the island has eradicated his childhood.
The Negative Consequences of War
In addition to its other resonances, Lord of the Flies is in part an allegory of the Cold War. Thus, it is deeply
concerned with the negative effects of war on individuals and for social relationships. Composed during the
Cold War, the novel's action unfolds from a hypothetical atomic war between England and "the Reds," which
was a clear word for communists. Golding thus presents the non-violent tensions that were unfolding during the
1950s as culminating into a fatal conflict-a narrative strategy that establishes the novel as a cautionary tale
against the dangers of ideological, or "cold," warfare, becoming hot. Moreover, we may understand the conflict
among the boys on the island as a reflection of the conflict between the democratic powers of the West and the
communist presence throughout China, Eastern Europe, and the Soviet Union. (China's cultural revolution had
not yet occurred, but its communist revolution was fresh in Western memory.) Ralph, an embodiment of
democracy, clashes tragically with Jack, a character who represents a style of military dictatorship similar to the
West's perception of communist leaders such as Joseph Stalin and Mao Zedong. Dressed in a black cape and
cap, with flaming red hair, Jack also visually evokes the "Reds" in the fictional world of the novel and the
historical U.S.S.R., whose signature colors were red and black. As the tension between the boys comes to a
bloody head, the reader sees the dangerous consequences of ideological conflict.
The arrival of the naval officer at the conclusion of the narrative underscores these allegorical points. The
officer embodies war and militaristic thinking, and as such, he is symbolically linked to the brutal Jack. The
officer is also English and thus linked to the democratic side of the Cold War, which the novel vehemently
defends. The implications of the officer's presence are provocative: Golding suggests that even a war waged in
the name of civilization can reduce humanity to a state of barbarism. The ultimate scene of the novel, in which
the boys weep with grief for the loss of their innocence, implicates contemporary readers in the boys' tragedy.
The boys are representatives, however immature and untutored, of the wartime impulses of the period.

46. Irony in Lord of the Flies

The Lord of the Flies initiates an ironic structure from its first chapters that becomes evident by the end of the book. Both
Ralph and Jacks attitude are different in the beginning of the novel to the way they turned out in the end. It is ironic how
the most optimistic or hopeful situations in the book turn out catastrophic and society only falls apart more. On the surface
the story implies that it is the boys age and inexperience that causes them to create such a corrupt society, however, on
the contrary, there is an exaggerated respect for the adult world as you consider the reason why the boys are on the
island in the first place. Sardonic events lead to an even more ironic ending where their ultimate rescue is a result of two
ironic incidences, the fire and the acceptance of the boys onto the ship by the naval officer. The author uses irony
throughout to show how such innocent boys despite their best efforts can turn savage, through the events that unfold that
lead them into anarchy.

Ralph and Jacks image of what life on the island would be like and how they would go about it was very different in the
beginning of the story to the end. Ralph begins saying This is our island. Its a good island. Until the grown ups come to
fetch us well have fun.(p:45). It is ironic how this optimism is shattered by the end of the novel and events turned out so
badly as though it were almost foolish to think theyd have fun from the start. Jack also makes a surprisingly ironic turn in
the novel where his ideas appear civilized and orderly in the beginning, Well have rules! Lots of rules!(p:44) however he
is the one who becomes the leader of the savages and provokes fear of the beast.

It is ironic how the most optimistic situations turn out terribly, in an almost mocking way. Piggy is doomed from the start,
they savagely hunt and kill pigs, torturing them and enjoying it. It is the beast within each boy that kills Piggy, as it is the
beast within that eats away at any civilized instincts. Ralph wishes, If only they could send a message to us. If only they
could send us something grown-up a sign or something(p:117). Coincidently, a casualty of war parachutes down onto
the island. This sign however, causes more tribulations as it adds to the fear of the beast thus escalating the beast within
them.

Simon and Piggys deaths are both ironic in the sense that they are the two who are most intelligent and have more
civilized views, however they are not accepted and are outcasts. The boys begin to think Simons gentle feelings and
deep topics of discussion mean hes gone crazy, even Piggy, the most rational of them all, says he was batty (p:194).
Simon is the only one who comes to the realisation that the beast is within them and it is ironic that he dies before he is
able to tell anyone. Piggy also is the most civilized and he tries persistently without hope to convince the others of their
foolish actions, which is better, law and rescue, or hunting and breaking things up? (p:222). The boys react by booing
and sniggering and it is when this distaste against Piggy builds up, Roger gains enough peer support in his own mind to
pull the lever on the rock which eventually kills Piggy, ironically, along with the conch and any chance of order they may
have had.

The novel indirectly implies that it is the boys age and their inexperience that causes them to create such a corrupt
society, while conversely, there is an exaggerated respect for the adults as in reality they are no more perfect. Grown-ups
know things. They aint afraid of the dark. Theyd meet and have tea and discuss. Then things ud be alright(p:117).
Ironically, they are not only failing because they are young. Ultimately, their circumstances of being on the island is
because grown-ups failed to have tea and discuss. If the war had been prevented by the grown-ups acting in a
completely civilized manner, there would have been no war, no evacuation, no crash and the boys would be home and at
peace.

The ending of the novel has two completely ironic twists that are never directly implied. In desperation to see Ralph killed,
Jack orders for another fire to be lit. It is the smoke of this fire from savagery, which originated from Jack, which causes a
ship to come to rescue. It was Ralph who had been obsessed with the prospect of returning to civilization through the
signal fire since the beginning of the novel ( We can help them to find us. If a ship comes near the island they may not
notice us. So we must make smoke from the top of the mountain [p:49])and the smoke that saves them, almost kills
Ralph. Disrupting the savage hunt of Ralph, the naval officer takes the boys aboard the cruiser, which hunts an enemy in
the same principle Jack and the boys were hunting Ralph. In truth, they are leaving one corrupt society to return to
another. The officer says, fun and games having a war or something? (p:246) which could not be more true. The
officer would never understand the extent of the actions of the boys on the island.

Ultimately, Golding uses irony throughout to portray in the best way possible the essence of human nature and our inner
conflict of civilization and savagery. The characters change and grow through the story, coming to realisations of their
instincts and their views of the world are tested. A great irony of the story is that the novel is a reflection of our society and
how the grown-ups society can be compared to the microcosm the boys had created.
One example of irony is that Jack says that they have to have rules.

"We've got to have rules and obey them. After all, we're not savages." (pg 42 - chapter 2)

The ironic aspect of this is that Jack becomes the leader of the savages that kill Piggy. He becomes the
head savage!!

A second example of irony is the fact that we never get to know the real name of the boy named Piggy.
Piggy is his nickname - something the school children called him to make him feel bad. We only know
him as Piggy. The boys hunt pigs for food on the island, and they end up killing Piggy too.

A third example is when there is a clash between Ralph and Jack concerning leadership on the island.
Piggy says,

"Grownups know things. They ain't afraid of the dark. They'd meet and have tea and discuss. Then
things 'ud be all right." (pg 94- chapter 5 - end of chapter) .

Ralph replies "If they could only get a message to us. If only they could send us something grownup" (pg
94)

Ironically, they receive a grownup, but he is a dead parachutist. He doesn't make things all right, he
causes more fear then he gives comfort because the children think he is a beast.

The page numbers I have given are for my edition of the book. I have tried to give chapters so that you
can find the quotes.

Simon's Death!

47. Novel structure in The French Lieutenant's Woman

Narrative Technique in The French Lieutenant's Woman
As a brilliant piece of meta-fiction, The French Lieutenant's Woman cannot use one narrative mode without
depending upon another. A writer of fiction cannot wholly and comfortably use an impersonal mode of narrative
because it is restrictive and coercive. Nor can he use the mode of omniscience because the relation between the
creator and the created has undergone a drastic change.

The foremost technique John Fowles has used in The French Lieutenants Woman is the technique of recreating the
Victorian novel with a critical and a sense of parody. He has recreated a Victorian novel with an ironic sense and
mockery. To recreate the Victorian novel John Fowles does not namely use Victorian conventions. He used
Victorian convention, but with a decent portion of parodic skepticism. He sets his novel in Victorian time. He portrays
all characters except Sarah in the light of Victorianism.

The second, equally important technique Fowles used in this novel is the technique of putting epigraph on the head
of each chapter. To make readers skeptically aware of multiplicity of Victorian voices, John Fowles has made use of
the technique of adding epigraph. Fowles makes use of the technique of epigraph to give every impression of being
devoted to recreating Victorian novel.
Since The French Lieutenants Woman is a meta-fiction, the author certainly intrudes into the narrative structure. In
chapter thirteen and elsewhere John Fowles has entered into the narrative structure. This intrusion into the narrative
structure gave him ample opportunity to comment upon the Victorian convention.

The fourth experimentally important technique is the technique of giving multiple endings to the novel. For the
traditional reader is given a happy ending resulting from Sarah's accepting Charles Smithson. For the Victorian
readers are given the successful completion of Ernestina and Charles engagement. For the modern readers the
tragic separation between Sarah and Charles is given. This multiple endings enable John Fowles to hint at his
abandonment of literary omniscience.

The last unusual techniques is the technique of the novelist becoming a character. The novelist enters into the
structure of the narrative and talks to other characters, discusses their problem and fixes a course of action for
them. The intrusive novelist seems like a character.

In The French Lieutenant's Woman, John Fowles does not merely recreate a Victorian novel; neither
does he parody one. He does a little of both, but also much more. The subject of this novel is
essentially the same as that of his other works: the relationship between life and art, the artist and
his creation, and the isolation resulting from an individual's struggle for selfhood. He works within the
tradition of the Victorian novel and consciously uses its conventions to serve his own design, all the
while carefully informing the reader exactly what he is doing. His style purposely combines a flowing
nineteenth-century prose style with an anachronistic twentieth-century perspective.

Fowles is as concerned with the details of the setting as were his Victorian counterparts. But he is
also conscious that he is setting a scene and does not hesitate to intrude into the narrative himself in
order to show the reader how he manipulates reality through his art. Like Dickens, Fowles uses
dialogue to reveal the personalities of his characters and often he will satirize them as well. For
example, Charles' attitudes toward Sarah and Ernestina are revealed in the way he talks to them. He
is forever uncomfortable with Sarah because she won't accept the way in which he categorizes the
world, including his view of her. Sarah's responses to the world around her, as seen through her
words and actions are consistent, for she is already aware of herself as an individual who cannot be
defined by conventional roles. However, Charles changes, depending upon whom he talks to,
because he really does not know who he is yet, and he sees himself as playing a series of roles. With
his fiance, he is indulgent and paternal; with his servant Sam, he is patronizing and humorous at
Sam's expense, and with Sarah, he is stiff and uncomfortable. When he attempts to respond to
Sarah's honesty, he hears the hollowness of his own conventional responses.

Fowles does not recreate his Victorian world uncritically. He focuses on those aspects of the Victorian
era that would seem most alien to a modern reader. In particular, he is concerned with Victorian
attitudes towards women, economics, science, and philosophy. In this romance, Fowles examines the
problems of two socially and economically oppressed groups in nineteenth-century England: the
poverty of the working and servant classes, and the economic and social entrapment of women.
While the plot traces a love story, or what seems to be a love story, the reader questions what sort
of love existed in a society where many marriages were based as much on economics as on love.
This story is thus not really a romance at all, for Fowles' objective is not to unite his two
protagonists, Sarah and Charles, but to show what each human being must face in life in order to be
able to grow.

While Fowles has titled his book The French Lieutenant's Woman, Sarah Woodruff is not really the
central character. She does not change greatly in the novel as it progresses, for she has already
arrived at an awareness that she must go beyond the definition of her individuality that society has
imposed upon her. Because her situation was intolerable, she was forced to see through it and
beyond it in order to find meaning and some sort of happiness in her life. In the early chapters of the
novel, she perhaps makes one last effort to establish a life within the norms of Victorian society. She
chooses the role of the outcast, the "French lieutenant's whore," and also falls in love with Charles or
causes him to fall in love with her. But even as she draws Charles away from his unquestioning
acceptance of his life, she finds that she does not want to be rescued from her plight. She has
already rescued herself.

Charles, it seems, is the actual protagonist of this novel, for he must travel from ignorance to
understanding, by following the woman whom he thinks he is helping, but who in fact is his mentor.
He must discard each layer of the false Charles: Charles the naturalist, Charles the gentleman,
Charles the rake, and perhaps even Charles the lover, in order to find Charles the human being. The
knowledge he arrives at is bitter, for he has lost all his illusions, as Sarah discarded hers sometime
before. But the result itself is not bitter. Although Charles and Sarah are not reunited, for life's
answers are never as simple and perfect as those of art, they both achieve a maturity that enables
them to control their lives as long as they remember to look for answers nowhere but in themselves.

Fowles has taken two traditional romantic characters, a young hero and a mysterious woman, and
has transformed them into human beings.

There is no French lieutenant to pine after, and Sarah's life is not a tragedy that echoes her
nickname in Lyme. Charles' gift of marriage is not a gift at all. While the novel could have ended with
the couple's reconciliation, as it might have had it been a traditional romance, Fowles does not end it
there. In the second ending, Sarah rejects the familiar security that Charles offers and both are
forced to go on alone. Fowles' novel echoes the doubts raised by such novelists as Thomas Hardy,
and by such poets as Matthew Arnold and Alfred Lord Tennyson, about the solidity of the Victorian
view of the world. The world was changing and old standards no longer applied, though they lingered
on long after many had discarded them in their hearts. This theme that was approached by writers in
the nineteenth century is picked up again by Fowles and carried to a logical conclusion. The novel is
therefore actually a psychological study of an individual rather than a romance. It is a novel of
individual growth and the awareness of one's basic isolation which accompanies that growth.

The French Lieutenant's Woman as a Postmodern Novel

If the fundamental principles and assumptions about the nature of fiction is questioned and challenged,
postmodernist elements are supposed to exist. In The French Lieutenant's Woman, John Fowles questioned the
fundamental Victorian principles and assumptions. In The French Lieutenant's Woman, John Fowles has made a
contrast between Ernestine and Sarah Woodruff. Ernestine stands for a superficial womanhood.

She had interest only in a trivial and superficial things only. She is just a pampered daughter of a rich middle class
merchant. She had none of her own independent cast of mind. For her father's craving for faded aristocracy,
Ernestine accepted an engagement with Charles Smithson. On the other hand, John Fowles has included a very,
very different sort of character, Sarah Woodruff. Sarah has an existential view. She believes in the constant
evolution of human self and personality. She prefers freedom to happiness. She appears profound and solemn in
her act and belief. Her love for Charles was intended from Charles evolution. Charles, at his mental level, puts
Ernestine and Sarah beside and Judges. In his act of judging between Ernestine and Sarah, Charles finds Ernestine
hollow and superficial. On the contrary, he finds Sarah Woodruff very, very deep and profound. It is Sarah rather
than Ernestina, who helped Charles to achieve the existential level of maturity. John Fowles himself appreciated the
mysterious nature of Sarah. By putting Sarah (as an embodiment of a postmodern cast of mind) against Ernestine
(as representative of a Victorian cast of mind) John Fowles is questioning and challenging a set of fundamental
Victorian principles and assumption.

The happy ending is the nature of Victorian text. The dominant nature of Victorian text is a happy ending and the
happy ending is the structural requirement of the Victorian text. This structural nature of Victorian novel is
questioned here. Charles Smithson, the hero of the novel, is shown condemned to live alone throughout his life.

A Victorian novelist claims to have written his/her novel from the throne of literary omniscience. No character in any
Victorian novel is unknown to the writer of that fiction. Victorian authorship claims to have known his/her character
inside out. But this omniscient authorship is questioned by John Fowles. John Fowles himself has said that my own
creation Sarah is mysterious to me. I don't know her completely. Victorian point of view is questioned. The Victorian
narrative structure is challenged. The Victorian trend of happy ending is questioned. The traditional nature of the text
is questioned. The moment traditional nature of a text is questioned, elements of postmodernism get introduced in
the novel.

Postmodernism in fiction subverts the master-narrative. Master-narrative is a narrative of emancipation. In The

French Lieutenant's Woman had Sarah accepted Charles the novel might have been a master-narrative. But Sarah
rejected Charles. Consequently, it became an existential narrative of the protagonist's evolution of personality and
progression of self. Any experimental world anxious with elements of postmodernism subverts all traditional
components of the narrative. To achieve the purpose of subverting the following devices are used: Parody, Irony,
Distortions of narrative time, Discontinuity, Anachronism, Blurring of genres and Ambivalence.

All these above-mentioned experimental devices are used by John Fowles in 'The French lieutenant's Woman'. The
clearest example of parody can be seen if we see Fowles's citation from Dr. Grogan's medical hypothesis on the
head of each chapter an epigraph is put. Each epigraph differs from the other. Some epigraphs are from Darwin,
some from Amold. Different rising Victorian voices are mingled. Several choices are mingled. This mingling of
voices, this fusions of Victorian utterances are a brilliant example of pastiche. This technique of pastiche is used by
Fowles as a device to subvert the monolithic dominion of a single dominant voice.

Irony is also a device practiced by John Fowles to subvert the traditional assumptions and values. Dr. Grogan
claims with countless instances of medical melancholia that the Sarah Woodruff is prone to melancholic situation.
But the real fact is, she alone is that sort of girl who has an independent on the evolutionary cast of mind. All other
characters are somehow or other hypocritical or immature. Sarah alone is that kind of girl who can sacrifice
everything for freedom. She sacrificed even her love for freedom. She took delight in her lover's evolutionary
progress via lifelong loneliness. Charles Smithson sympathized her. But ironically, it is she who had to show pity to
him. Through the device of irony Fowles subverts Charles Smithson's shallow and deflected interest in Darwinian
evolution. Charles Smithson appears keenly interested in Darwinian Theory of evolution. But ironically enough, he
had to be taught by Sarah in the line of existential evolution. By the agency of ironic device John Fowles happens to
achieve the experimental success of subverting Victorian elitism thinly embodied in the paleontologist Charles
Smithson.

The third important experimental device to achieve subversive goal is the distortions of narrative time. In chapter
thirteen Fowles interrupts into the line of narrative progression. He interrogates the notion of literary omniscience.
Fowles asserts he is free to give whatever twists he likes to his characters. He adds that he can freely walk in the
universe of his fiction without being constrained by the narrative conventions of the Victorian ages. Not only in
chapter thirteenth elsewhere in, The French Lieutenant's woman John Fowles enters into the narratives and broods
over the destiny of his characters. At the time of his intrusion into the narrative structure Fowles talks about the
power of authorship to change the inevitable destiny of his characters. John Fowles's intrusion (forcible entry) into
the narrative structure of The French Lieutenant's woman distorts the narrative. Since this distortion of narrative time
has added new crucial elements in the structure of The French Lieutenants woman, it is a postmodern novel.

This distortion of narrative time produces discontinuity and gaps and holes in the line of narrative progression.
These gaps and holes in narrative development are called Anachronism. Since there scatter elements of
discontinuity and anachronisms in the narrative progression of The French Lieutenants Woman, it is postmodern
meta-fiction.

Ambivalence and blurring (nearly mixing) of genres are two subversive strategy to introduce elements of
postmodernism in fiction. In The French Lieutenant's Woman, John Fowles is ambivalent. If asked whether he
completely knows who Sarah is, his answer is somewhat ambivalent. If asked why did Sarah reject the man she
thinks she loves? Fowles Says to help him to evolve. If again asked why did she intend Charles to evolve? His
answer will be because she loved him, she intended him to evolve. That much only.

Even the ending of the novel is somewhat ambivalent. If readers want Victorian mode of happy ending, Fowles ends
the novel by showing Sarah accepting Charles. If the readers want postmodern ending, Fowles certainly ends the
novel by showing Charles as a rejected lover, a jilted lover condemned to evolve existentially in the sphere of
freedom. Besides the strategy of ambivalence there is another strategy of blurring of genres.

John Fowles has added chapter-wise epigraph to make a parody of many Victorian voices. While reading The
French Lieutenants Woman it seems as if it is a document. It is an anthropological and sociological record of those
who avoided the rigorously moralistic Victorian society and came to the bay of Lyme Regis. After reading Dr.
Grogan's several examples of melancholic patients we feel as if Sarah is a poor victim of melancholia. We feel as if
we are reading a medical treatise with an element of wonder. Having seen recurrent emphasis upon the Darwinian
theory of evolution, we feel as if we are reading a geological or paleontological account. The French Lieutenant's
woman presents an account of rampant prostitution in London and the rapid rise of the middle class. It brings into
foreground several facets of the urbanized London life. Moreover The French Lieutenants woman is not a piece of
fiction, it is meta-fiction. As a meta-fiction, it questions the generic convention of fiction. If possible, it blurs several
generic conventions.

Thus, John Fowles has introduced elements of experimental postmodernism by making an experimentally
subversive use of all these devices. Hence, it would be no exaggeration to say that The French Lieutenant's
Woman is an experimentally postmodernist meta-fiction.

48. Victorian society

1) Victorian women were raised to keep their purity; in turn, Tina is afraid of intimacy and loses Charles to Sarah.

2) Charles epitomizes the Victorian gentleman. He is in control of his personal life (romantic relationships) and his
chosen field of work (scientific experimentation). The only things he fears is loss of social status, something which could
be possible due to his loss of inheritance or his dalliance with Sarah. Socially, his downfall begins with the end of his
engagement to Tina, as society would stand by her.

3) Sarah has no place in Victorian society as her upbringing has ostracized her from both worlds; she belongs nowhere.
Born into the working class, and yet raised and educated as a lady results in a form of social limbo. Her rumored affair
with a French lieutenant cements this position.

Victorian Sexuality
Since sexuality is so critical both thematically and historically to the novel The French
Lieutenants Woman, it would be worthwhile to engage in a brief reflection of the predominant
social attitudes towards sexuality in Victorian England. M. Jeanne Peterson writes about the myth
of the Victorian angela popular conception of the role and disposition of the typical woman of
an upper-class Victorian household. Whether regarded as an ideal or as evidence of blatant
oppression, the Victorian angel is relegated to the confines of the house. She is completely
submissive and obedient, deferring to her husband in all matters of significance. Her sole
occupation is to maintain her household and provide unconditional support to her husband. This
Victorian lady is the exemplification of temperance; she is expected never to deviate from her
prescribed role and to exhibit absolute forbearance from passionate and impetuous
behavior. Obviously, passionate behavior often connotes sexuality, and thus these respectable
ladies of the Victorian age are considered asexual and unsusceptible to carnal desires. This notion
of the proper Victorian lady is why Sarah provokes such widespread indignation in the town of
Lyme. Sarahs love affair with the French lieutenant and her frequent visits to the Undercliff, the
forbidden forest that is automatically associated with licentious behavior, indicate a flagrant
violation of her expected duties as a respectable female. Passion and sex are antagonistic to
forbearance and temperance, and thus Sarahs actions cannot be condoned by any self-respecting
citizen of Lyme.
Charles excursion into the seedy, immoral streets of London presents an important contrast
to his life as a proper gentleman. Judith R. Walkowitz explains that prostitution in Victorian
England was an unexplored academic topic for many years because most scholars thought the
sordid activity of Englands lesser denizens to be unworthy of study. Walkowitz counters that
prostitution actually played an essential role in preserving the values and lifestyles of the upper-
class. When Charles feels the need to release his repressed sexual energy, he goes to London and
expels his baser cravings in anonymity. This way, the proper Victorian lady can still stand as a
beacon of temperance and virtue. If Victorian gentlemen did not have these anonymous and
pardoning cities of sin, their ladies would cease representing these esteemed qualities and begin
representing sexual frustration and oppression. Since the men of Victorian England had certain
desires that absolutely had to be appeased and social mores prevented their fulfillment within
respectable society, the absence of prostitution would have caused the erosion of upper-class
Victorian values.
The views of sexuality espoused by the Victorian upper-class can probably be understood
through their relationship with Christianity. Trygve R. Tholfsen attempts to explain the pervading
values of Victorian England by examining the beliefs that Sunday school inculcated in
children. Children were taught to abstain from those desires which seemed alluring but actually
defiled their souls and threatened their chances of attaining eternal bliss. Children were led to
believe that the primary objective of this life was to ensure they had a designated spot in heaven to
receive Gods infinite grace. Therefore, any temptation which offered sensory pleasure was seen as
a test of peoples faith and of their strength of will to retain their purity and
sanctity. Consequentially, those who bridled their desires came to be exalted as ideal figures of
Christ, and those who indulged in them were condemned as heathens or agents of the devil. This is
the kind of belief that spawned people like Mrs. Poulteneythe self-righteous, sanctimonious,
hypocritical wretch who spends her sad, lonely life damning others for doing things that she lacks
the courage and independence of thought to do. Furthermore, this is why people like Ernestina
regard sex, a natural and essential act, with such revulsion and apprehension. Ernestina would love
to be the chaste, innocent, coquettish girl hanging on Charles arm for the rest of her life without
ever doing anything with him that would necessitate any privacy and true intimacy. The Victorians
took something completely natural, externalized it, and labeled it as evil. This distortion caused
people like Mrs. Poulteney to never even live life and engage in that which is truly organic and
beautiful, and young girls like Ernestina to be so disconnected with their nature as to shudder with
disgust at the mere thought of having sex with their betrothed.
M. Keith Booker writes about the importance of the infinite in regard to The French
Lieutenants Woman. Booker explains that the act of transgression is absolutely necessary in order
to attain the infinite. Furthermore, since the infinite is obviously boundless, it follows that the
boundaries that must be transgressed are entirely artificial. In The French Lieutenants Woman, this
idea of the infinite is glimpsed by Charles through his sexual liberation from the artificially
imposed boundaries of Victorian society. The notion of sexual liberation and attaining the infinite
is first vaguely apprehended by Charles when he is in the Undercliff. The Undercliffs organic
quality has not been diluted or concealed by the fallacious morality of humanity. Therefore, the
Undercliff is an ideal place for a human to confront his or her own natural inclinations which have
been muddled and obscured by society. The natural and pure environment of the Undercliff
crystallizes the artifice which is human morality. Sex is realized to be something that is as natural
as the sprouting of a plant, and can be practiced shamelessly in all its grandeur and sacredness. The
Undercliff, or pristine nature in general, represents the transcendence of the whole abominable
system of Victorian sexualitythe outward charade of piety and abstinence interspersed with
anonymous debauchery under the veil of morally lax big cities.

ABSTRACT Historical elements in novels take the readers into a realm of complete conventionality and a writer may
choose it for many reasons as a background for his story. Especially, a writer who has conceived characters that are free
from the contemporary inhibitions and with social and moral consciousness will certainly want to move away from the
known world to unknown. Some create a world of their own to let their characters play attractively with the values and
the dignity of their own, with the creation of a strong sense of possibility and probability in the minds of the readers. On
the other hand few in its place, find a suitable moment in the past, with which they need not try and toil in the work of
creating it and their job becomes very easy as they only call for the memory of their readers. Thus the novelists generally
succeed in creating a distinctive ground for their story. The present study discloses the reasons and the advantages of
the novelists for luring back the audience with the elements of the past in general and Victorian world in particular with
The French Lieutenants Woman of John Fowles as an epitome. KEYWORDS: Parody, Utilitarianism, Fallen Woman,
Serialization, Totalization INTRODUCTION John Fowles The French lieutenants woman, published in 1969, brought to
public attention a different interpretation of Victorian, sexual and literary conventions. But in the 1980s and 1990s that
many British novelists, for various and complex reasons, have unearthed and have given the kiss of life to the great
Victorian tradition. Some of the popular novels by popular novelists of that category include the siege of Krishnapur by
J.G. Farrell in 1973, The Great fire of London by Peter Ackroyd in 1982 and Nice Work by David Lodge in 1988. Later
novels like The Quincunx by Charles Palliser in 1989, Affinity by Sarah waters in 1999, Laura Blundy by Julie Myerson in
2000 and the final journey of Jane Eyre by D.M. Thomas in 2000 also possess Victorian elements. Novels such as The
Quincunx, Laura Blundy, Sweet Thames and English passengers Matthew Kneale, the underground man, bring around
the integrity of the Victorian voices (in the form of first-person narrative letters, diaries or dialogues). The interesting
thing about this trend of fiction is that many of the novels have not simply been interested in resurrecting or retreating
into the Victorian past, but have instead displayed an informed postmodern self-consciousness in their interrogation of
the relationship between fiction and history. (Shuttleworth 1998:253) Reading the French Lieutenants Woman does
make the readers to have a glimpse of the Victorian world and characteristics of the Victorian novels. However some
facts about Victorian world will make us to dig up the reasons behind the using of that world and life in the cotemporary
fictions. Victorian period marked by the rule of Queen Victoria is the longest reign beginning from the year 1837 to
1901.According to Katherine Newey, many Victorians themselves had great confidence in the almost immeasurable
capacity of the stage as an effective means of representation and communication, and its capacity to absorb and
incorporate 94 P. Muthusivam all other art forms. (2009: 5) The Evangelical and Utilitarian ideas of purity, morality,
wholesomeness and utility strengthen Victorian cultural system of sexuality. Like Evangelicals, Utilitarianism is a
powerful ethical force during Victorian period. Its doctrines are based on sexual repression: Sexual expression was
impractical because it diverted men to work, it appealed to emotion rather than to reason, and it did nothing to further
the progress of society. Procreation was meaningful; all other forms of sexuality were, practically speaking, merely a
waste of precious time. (Goldfarb 1970: 29) TREATMENT OF VICTORIAN AGE AND SPIRIT BY FOWELS Fowles indicates
that Victorian Age is a time of contradictions: an age that regards woman as sacred and spiritual, but a girl can be
purchased at low price. He also says that the sensual description of the literary productions never goes beyond a kiss
and the output of pornography has never been exceeded. Against such a period of contradiction and transition, Fowles
concern with human emancipation and the Victorian sexual hypocrisy are accentuated. He does not appreciate Victorian
Age a better one as compared to the contemporary world. What are we faced with in the nineteenth century? An age
where woman was sacred; and where you could buy a thirteen-year-old girl for a few pounds--a few shillings, if you
wanted her for only an hour or two. Where more churches were built than in the whole previous history of the country;
and where one in sixty houses in London was a brothel (the modern ratio would be nearer one in six thousand). In the
novel Fowles not only speaks about the religious wrong interpretations, he even goes to the extent of speaking about
the fate of the wrong practitioners. He describes about Mrs. Poulteney's a lady who craved for after-life in heaven has to
confront a situation that she never expected. Fowles descriptions of the religious practices and the attitude of people
towards it have its own role to play. It is not just to bring into focus certain understanding of the society but in fact they
were constructed to create pity and love towards Sarah who suffers because of such institutions along with women of
her kind. The French Lieutenants Woman has typical Victorian features like the suspension of plot or the shift in
situation which would support the form of serialization. The story revolves around the French Lieutenants Woman, and
she is the prime of the novel and all other characters get influenced in one way or the other., There is a rise and fall and
the treatment of fatalism to an extent. The characters and the scenery form an organic whole and they are found
inseparable. Hardys characters may be grouped into the following categories: Staunch, selfless, tender-hearted heroes
like Oak, Giles, Winterborne, Venn; The dashing, fickle, breaker of hearts like Sergeant Troy, Wildeve, Alec Durberville;
Patient, devoted, forgiving women like Tess, Marty, and Elizabeth Jane; Willful, capricious, but good-hearted girls like
Bathsheba, Grace, and Fancy and Passion tormented romantic enchantresses like Eustacia, Lucetta. The character Sarah
Woodruff of Fowles is mysterious and at the same time unique. Sarah seems to bear out the publics view when she
explains to Charles that she indeed became infatuated with the French Lieutenant when he was recovering from an
injury in the house, where Sarah was governess, and that she followed him when he left to return to France. She tells
Charles that she quickly realized that he had regarded her only as an amusement, but that she gave herself to him
nonetheless, doubly dishonoring herself by choice as well as by circumstances. She seems to be proud of her status as
outcast, for it differentiates her from a society which she considers unjust. She confesses that she deliberately allowed
herself to be seen by him and through which she uncovers her attraction towards him. Later, in a hotel at Exeter, he is
The Significance of Victorian Background in the French Lieutenants Woman of John Fowles: A Case Study 95 ordered to
see her in her room because she has supposedly injured her ankle, though she has purchased the bandage before the
slip occurred. Charles is overcome by passion and takes her to bed, only to discover that she is a virgin, despite what she
had told him about the French lieutenant. She confesses that she has deceived him, says that she cannot explain why
and, furthermore, cannot marry him. After the incident, Sarah goes to London having left no forwarding address. Two
years after she disappeared, Charles gets a cable from his solicitor saying that Sarah has been found. When Charles
arrives at Sarah's house, he finds her surprised to see him and not apologetic about having left him. Charles is shocked,
partly by the rather notoriously unconventional company she is keeping with and partly by her lack of repentance for
having deceived him and left him in uncertainty. He accuses her of implanting a dagger in his breast and then twisting it.
She decides not to let Charles leave without revealing that she has had a child by him, named Lalage. She is publicized to
set for a new Journey with Charles but Charles goes away even before she could tell him about the baby. But on both
occasions she is placid and contented with herself. The characterization of Sarah accentuates the theme of
emancipation in The French Lieutenants Woman. Sarah is sexually exploited and condemned for her sexual impurity by
Victorian patriarchal society.. As Fowles argues, this mysterious woman represented a reproach on the Victorian Age,
an outcast. I dont know her crime, but I wished to protect her. (Afterwords 162) The purpose to criticize Victorian
sexual inequality is accompanied with the employment of parody of Victorian literary conventions. In this parodic
writing form, Fowles expresses his belief in freedom through characterizing Sarah as a fallen woman, contrary to a
virtuous heroine in Victorian traditional novel. The miserable endings of impure heroine, such as death or insanity, are
modified. Far from being the victim of patriarchal sexual regulations and suffering of female hysteria, Sarah reappears as
a New Woman. She asserts the finding of her true happiness and the achievement of her selfhood. Moreover, Fowles
casts off the Victorian literary convention of a fixed consummate ending in a romance. It is obvious that the ideology and
structure of Victorian bourgeois sexual morality and regulations constitute the social background of the novel. The word
Victorian is not only referred to Queen Victoria or to her reign but defined as an adjective, pertaining to or
characteristics of ideals and standards of morality and taste prevalent during the reign of Queen Victoria; prudish;
conventional; narrow. (Goldfarb 20) In Victorian era, the restrained sexual attitudes and the system of sexual
regulations exclusively belong to the bourgeois and upper class. The Victorian bourgeoisie is demanded and regulated to
espouse a set of sexual moral values: sexual repression, non-premarital intercourse, and the strong social decorum
between two sexes. The purpose of sexuality in marriage is reduced to getting offspring. Any sexual transgression, such
as prostitution, adultery, or extramarital intercourse, over the procreative delimitation means the sexual impurity and
immorality. Sexual indulgence, for the bourgeois class, is considered to degrade personal morality and threaten the
social order. Sara willingly makes the folly of having an affair with Charles and which makes one to think that she has
been ill treated by the society for what she is not and at the end she resolves to live deserving their treatment. THE
SYNTHESIS OF FOWLES The Victorian novelists may miss the heights and depths of human passions, there may be no
probing of the human heart and no psycho-analysis as in the modern novel. But Fowles has certainly probed beneath
the characters and has given insight of most of the characters. It should be noticed that almost all the characters are
different from one another and Fowles has given importance to all the characters. Sarah as a social rebel, Ernestina as
an orthodox lady of the Victorian age, who is contented with her life is an interesting contrast. Charles is of course, a
man who could fit in both the 96 P. Muthusivam category and it is understood from the three endings that Fowles gives
in the novel. Fowles describes Mrs. Poulteney right in the beginning and does not let the readers to know through the
novel. Mrs. Poulteney had two obsessions: or two aspects of the same obsession. One was Dirt though she made some
sort of exception of the kitchen, since only the servants lived there and the other was immorality. In neither field did
anything untoward escape her eagle eye. (25) Unlike Victorian novels important aspects of life are not left out. There is
proper treatment of human nature. The view of life expressed in The French Lieutenants Woman is just, everyone in the
novel play their part, unlike Victorian novels which tends to be one-sided and partial. He certainly speaks about our
nature and the nature of the Victorian world.Sarah Woodruff is mysterious in nature and she essentially comes around
as a fallen woman. Characterizing Sarah as a fallen woman, contrary to a virtuous heroine in Victorian traditional novel
may sound odd in the beginning but he comes to the normal track of the Victorians after the accident in the hotel,
when Charles discovers that she is a virgin, despite what she has told him about the French lieutenant. Here the author
changes the attitude of the readers towards her and he creates an entirely new one. However the reason for her to
describe herself as a fallen woman is not very clear. It can be understood that Fowles tries to play as free as he can and
he impresses every one with the twist in the story than the logic behind the course or cause for the action. Fowles has
created a female protagonist who at the beginning looks as tough different at the end matches with the qualities of
Victorian novelists. Fowles gives greater importance to the landscape of the Victorian world. There is the suspension of
plot or the shift in situation consistently throughout the novel. The sentiments of the characters are typical to that of
their own age. The attitude of characters towards their life is typical to that of their own age except Sarahs. There are
many literary allusions and quotations, and references to poets and writers of the Victorian age. The use of co incidents
and accidents are very apparent. IMPLICATION Achievement of John Fowles is that he has used the epigraphs and
poems of the Victorian world and has created an ideological and philosophical world with the Victorian background. He
has analysed the Victorian world and has manipulated it to create a platform, re-arranging it, to tell his own story. In the
end he has created a real Victorian world than the ideal Victorian world, in order to support his story. The French
Lieutenants Woman is one of the first novels on the British fictional scene to strive for novelty not by looking for a new
way of rendering contemporary experience but by reverting to the past and revising its most potent myths. Fowles
proves that he is a Post-Modern novelist, though the background is Victorian in the French Lieutenants Woman,
through the narration of the story and the three possible endings that he gives for the novel. Above all it also gives the
hint, with the increase in the number of novels with the Victorian background, that the contemporary world is not
endowed with all the credentials for staging classical design.

49.Personality, Class and Culture in Remains of the Day

Cultural Diversity in The Remains of the Day

The Remains of the Day can be construed as a text with somewhat ambiguous contexts. Due to the author's diverse
background surrounding his cultural identity and values the text is able to represent both Japanese and British cultures
simultaneously. The Remains of the Day may be interpreted as a hybrid of either a primarily Japanese text or a primarily
British text depending on how the work is interpreted. This entry will present these varying perspectives equally to allow
you to creating your own perspective of the work.
In portraying The Remains of the Day as a primarily Japanese text, I will feature the use of the Japanese technique of
writing and narrative,Ki Sh Ten Ketsu. Ki Sh Ten Ketsu uses various techniques broken down into four respective parts.
First there is the introductory Ki, which presents an idea or subject in a passive and very subtle manner. The Remains of
the Day is introduced with a prologue, stating when, July 1959 (2) and where, Darlington Hall (2) the novel takes
place. The narrative then begins, It seems increasingly likely that I really will undertake the expedition that has been
preoccupying my imagination now for some days. (3) This introductory sentence allows the reader to be drawn in by
using information of which they have no previous knowledge.

Slowly the story begins to unfold and the reader discovers that Mr. Stevens is the speaker, and that he is an English butler
working under an American gentleman named Mr. Farraday who recently purchased Darlington Hall. These minute
details are what further develops the main events that occur throughout the novel, and these details could also be
considered the novels Sh. Sh being the aspect of developing an idea or subject after the Ki within the technique Ki Sh
Ten Ketsu.

Once the basic characters and ideas of the novel are established, the form of Ki Sh Ten Ketsu brings into play the use of
the Ten, or turn. These turns present seemingly unrelated concepts that significantly connect the work as a whole. The use
of Ten in The Remains of the Daymay be seen by analyzing the amount of seemingly arbitrary memories that Mr. Stevens
recalls erratically throughout his journey. For instance, soon after he depicts his experience of almost running over a
chicken he turns to his various memories, stating But I feel I should return just a moment to the matter of my father
(69). How the experience of almost running over a chicken leads to a reflection on his father is ambiguous, yet it
nevertheless becomes an integral part of the storyline. Stevens himself evens admits to his somewhat accidental thought
process, saying But I see I am becoming preoccupied with these memories and this is perhaps a little foolish. (67)
However, he cannot avoid the nature of his stream of consciousness and thus the significant memories of his life continue
to interrupt the present day narrative of his journey through the English countryside.

The final stage of the Japanese narrative is the Ketsu. The Ketsuultimately binds together the two or more arguments or
perspectives presented throughout the work. The subjects unite and do not contend for a prevailing point of view, they are
simply presented. It is left up to the audience to decide on one perspective or another. This can be seen in The Remains of
the Day at the conclusion of the novel when

Stevens resolves to, adopt a more positive outlook and try to make best of what remains of [his] day. (244) despite his
unfortunate circumstances. For he realizes he missed his opportunity to share his life with Miss Kenton, I can't even say I
made my own mistakes. Really one has to ask oneself what dignity is there in that? (243) Thus it is up to the reader to
determine whether or not Stevens lead a happy or at least satisfactory life serving the late Lord Darlington, and ultimately
it is the Ketsu of the novel.

Yet an argument can be made that Ki Sh Ten Ketsu does not exist within the framework of the novel. This position rests
on the basis that Ishiguro, while Japanese in origin, actually spent all his school-aged years in England. This means that
Ishiguro may have never come into contact with the writing style of Ki Sh Ten Ketsu, but was in contact with, and did
learn the Western style of building towards a climatic event or climax. In my mind the Western style of writing can be
broken down into five distinct parts: The setting of the scene or establishing the setting, use of symbolism or metaphors,
building tension towards the climax, the climax and finally the conclusion as a result of the climax.

In The Remains of the Day the important elements that set the scene and introduce the setting are similar to those used in
the Japanese ki. In fact the same sentence used on page three, It seems increasingly likely that, is also one used to
introduce the premise of the novel. However the difference is in the detail, since Western novels incorporate more
background and visual settings. In the first chapter we come to understand how the idea of a journey comes to fruition,
starting with the passage Miss Kentons letter set off a certain chain of ideas (5), and we find out how Stevens plans to
address the errors he has made lately. This tells us that Miss Kenton is an important character and puts forth the idea
that there may be more going on with her then he states. Is the journey about the errors or is it about Miss Kenton? This
idea is important for the rest of the novel. On page six we get introduced to the fact that Darlington Hall has changed
owners, highlighting the new owners different habits. Darlington, and the fact that the hall is under new ownership, are
also important to the rest of the novel. Within the first chapter alone, we are shown what is important and who to watch
out for.

Throughout the entire novel the use of symbolism and metaphors can be debated. This is an important point because,
according to Dr.Ogden, symbolism does not exist within Japanese literature. Out of The Remains of the Day I could pull
out many examples of this, so I will just highlight a few examples. One is the use of nature; it often highlights feelings
going on within the character himself. On page twenty-four he talks about leaving the hall and how he could sense the
steep drop though [he] could not see it. This suggests his feelings of letting go of his comfort and being dropped into an
entirely new place. On page twenty-eight he uses the English landscape to talk about what greatness is, and uses it to
enter into the central argument of what makes a butler great. Later, he is lost and talks about the road being a narrow
lane, hemmed in (117) and having no idea What was around [him].This can symbolize Stevens himself, often not being
able to see what is so obvious for some of the other characters more in touch with their feelings. There is also use of
metaphors on page seventy-eight where we see words like mounting and penetrating to describe a scene between
Stevens and Miss Kenton. The scene itself is not sexual, but the words purposely create allusions to sex. Stevens himself
also uses a nature metaphor to explain sex to another character.

The use of the metaphors and symbolism help to build the next element: tension building. In this novel we can easily see
the tension build towards the climax through Stevens memories and his reaction to having them. He tells us that he is
becoming preoccupied with these memories (67) and that it is a little foolish. I am becoming unduly introspective,
and in a rather morose sort of way appears on page one hundred seventy nine, followed by I am unable to prevent my
mind from continuing to wander (211-12 ). Each time his memories arise, he states that they are not under his control.
Also, the subject matter of the memories becomes more emotional as he himself revisits the same memories and thoughts
and tries to muddle through his own confusion. For example greatness is brought up more then once, becoming more
and more personal in connection to his own service and whether he was a great butler. He mentions seeing things in new
ways because of the memories, admitting that he has never in all these years thought of the matter in quite this way
(117), and saying that it leaves him unsettled. The emotional context builds until he can admit that his heart was
breaking (239) after understanding Miss Kenton will not return with him.

His heart breaking is what sets up the climax of the novel. This books climax is more subtle than some dramatic Western
novels, but when you understand Stevens controlled character, it becomes easy to see how out of the norm and dramatic
this little climax is for him. He cries in front of a stranger while sitting in public on a bench and talking about Lord
Darlington and his life, stating Ive given what I had to give. I gave it all to Lord Darlington (243). This is Stevens
coming to terms with what his life is about, whether he wasted it, and what is important to him. It is a huge moment
within the novel, and clearly a climax.

Like most novels written in Western style, everything gets tied up in a neat little bow. Stevens makes his decision to stay a
butler, seems happy with it and focuses on the happy people around him and their banter, coming back again to the idea
that it is something he needs to work on. The book ends with him settled on the bench, happily planning how to work on
his banter and be an even better butler. His past resolved and confronted, he can now move on.

The Remains of the Day can be interpreted both through Japanese writing style and Western writing style. We have
presented arguments for both, and both are equally strong in their ability to find evidence within the text to support the
ideas. This brings up the question of truth. Are both true? Can both be true? Because Ishiguro is a Japanese person raised
in England, is this novel Japanese with some Western elements in it or the opposite? The same can be said for civilization
exclusivity how much can one thing affect another and are some sensibilities so innate that they will come out in a
person without the persons knowledge? Could Ishiguro think he is writing from a European perspective but end up
writing with a Japanese? These are all questions that have no definite answer, and one must come up with what they feel is
the most likely solution.
Themes

Dignity and Greatness

The compound qualities of "dignity" and "greatness" pervade Stevens's thoughts throughout The Remains of the
Day. Early in the novel, Stevens discusses the qualities that make a butler "great," claiming that "dignity" is the
essential ingredient of greatness. He illustrates the concept with a number of examples, finally concluding that
dignity "has to do crucially with a butler's ability not to abandon the professional being he inhabits." Stevens
develops this exclusively professional mindset only too well. Because he always dons the mask of an imperturbable
butler, he necessarily deniesand therefore leaves unexpressedhis own personal feelings and beliefs. Stevens's
pursuit of dignity in his professional life completely takes over his personal life as well. By suppressing his
individuality in this manner, he never achieves true intimacy with another person. The fact that his view of dignity is
so misguided is sad; we can tell that Stevens has wanted great things, but that he has gone about attaining them
the wrong way.
Regret

Although Stevens never overtly discusses what he thinks "regret" may mean, it becomes clear, when he breaks
down and cries at the end of the novel, that he wishes he had acted differently with regard to Miss Kenton and Lord
Darlington. The tone of the novel is often wistful or nostalgic for the past; as the story goes on, the tone deepens
into one of regret as Stevens reevaluates his past actions and decisions, and finds them unwise. Miss Kenton also
openly says at the end of the novel that she often regrets the choices she has made in her own life. The
overwhelming sadness of the ending is only slightly lifted by Stevens's resolve to perfect the art of banteringit
seems a meager consolation considering the irreparable losses he has experienced in life.

Loss

Literal and figurative loss abounds for almost every character in The Remains of the Day. Stevens loses his father,
Miss Kenton, and eventually his hope of convincing Miss Kenton to return to Darlington Hall. Miss Kenton loses her
aunt, her only relative; and loses Stevens when she leaves to marry a man she does not love. Lord Darlington loses
two friends, Herr Bremann and Sir David Cardinal, and his godson, Reginald Cardinal, when they die. Furthermore,
Darlington loses his reputation and some degree of his own sanity by the end of his life. Reginald Cardinal loses his
father to death and his godfather, Lord Darlington, to Nazi brainwashing. There are both literal and figurative deaths:
deaths of loved ones, and figurative deaths of dreams and ideals.

Motifs

Bantering

Bantering provides an element of lightness and humor in the narrative, yet it is still one that ultimately demonstrates
the degree to which Stevens has become an anachronism. Stevens repeatedly tells of various failed attempts at
bantering, and muses over why Americans like his new employer, Mr. Farraday, like to speak in such a casual and
seemingly meaningless manner. By the end of the novel, Stevens cedes that perhaps bantering can be a way to
exhibit warmth, and he resolves to try again with renewed zeal. The fact that Stevens uses the word "bantering"
instead of "joking around" or "sense of humor" in itself shows how old-fashioned and formal he is.

Stevens's Rhetorical Manner

A recurrent structural motif in the novel is the rhetorical method Stevens uses to make his points. His primary
manner of discussing a new topic is to pose a question and then answer it himself, incorporating into his answers a
number of responses to anticipated counter-arguments. As rhetoric is a form of art and debate closely associated
with England, this mode of discourse lends the novel greater authority as one firmly grounded in English culture and
tradition. The rhetorical mode of discourse is intended to convince its audience; indeed, particularly in the early parts
of the narrative, Stevens often succeeds in conveying the illusion that he fully understands all sides of the issues he
discusses. As the novel progresses, however, we realize there are whole realms he has failed to consider, rendering
many of his assumptions and arguments much weaker than they initially appear.
Symbols

The English Landscape

The most notable symbols in The Remains of the Day are associated with people and events, not with objects and
colors. The English landscape that Stevens admires near the beginning of his road trip is one such significant
symbol, as we see that Stevens applies the same standards of greatness to the landscape as he does to himself.
He feels that English landscape is beautiful due to its restraint, calm, and lack of spectaclethe same qualities
Stevens successfully cultivates in his own life as a butler aspiring to "greatness." By the end of the novel, however,
Stevens is no longer certain that he has been wise to adhere to these values so rigidly, to the exclusion open-
mindedness, individuality, and love.

Stevens's Father Searching on the Steps

Stevens and Miss Kenton watch Stevens's father, after his fall on the steps, practicing going up and down the steps.
The elder Stevens searches the ground surrounding the steps "as though," Miss Kenton writes in her letter, "he
hoped to find some precious jewel he had dropped there." The action of searching for something that is irretrievably
lost is an apt symbol for Stevens's road trip, and indeed his life as a whole. Just as his father keeps his eyes trained
on the ground, Stevens keeps thinking over memories in his head as though they will give him some clue as to how
his values led him astray in life.

Giffen and Co.

The silver polish company in Mursden that is closing down is a symbol for the obsolescence of Stevens's
profession. Indeed, the butler is also almost entirely obsolete by 1956. It is significant that Stevens knows all about
the quality of the silver polish, the houses in which it was used, and so onthough he knows an incredible amount
of detail about all things related to the maintenance of a great household, his knowledge is no longer nearly as
important as it once was. There is no longer the demand that there once was in England for either silver polish or
butlers; they are a part of a bygone era.

Characterization in The Remains of the Day

The Remains of the Day is a book that believes in defining its characters to remarkable detail. Even minor characters are
brought to life, using a variety of methods; some subtle, others more overt. This essay will discuss the entire novel - just
the first eight pages. Many novels would still only be setting the scene at this point but, with The Remains of the Day,
many of the main characters have already been described in a fair amount of detail.

Creating detailed and believable characters is usually a key factor in a book's success. If a story contains rich, fleshed-out
characters, readers will be able to understand and empathise with them, so becoming more enveloped by the narrative
and, consequently, more enjoying the book. There are, of course, exceptions; in some cases characters are left
deliberately vague so as to increase the atmosphere surrounding them, for example.

However, The Remains of the Day is a book which believes in defining its characters to remarkable detail. Even minor
characters are brought to life, using a variety of methods; some subtle, others more overt. This essay title does not refer
to the whole novel, though - just the first eight pages. Many novels would still only be setting the scene at this point but,
with The Remains of the Day, many of the main characters have already been described in a fair amount of detail.

There are, generally, two methods of characterization. One involves merely stating character traits (along the lines of "the
man was arrogant and obnoxious - note that this is an example and not a quote from the text), a method which Ishiguro
does not use in great abundance. He much prefers to reveal character information in more subtle and oblique ways, often
through their actions and words. This allows readers to judge characters partly for themselves, without having them
explicitly prejudged by the writer.

The character of Stevens is unique amongst the others in the novel, as it is written from a first-person perspective and he
is the narrator. Ishiguro uses a wide variety of techniques to develop Stevens' character during the first eight pages.

The very fact that the novel has a first-person narrative is significant. This usually allows readers to know and understand
more about the narrator's character, as the text is ?written' by him. In the case of Stevens, readers are strangely alienated
from him. This is probably because of his tendency to withhold information about his personal life and feelings; these are
the things that make up the core of a human being. Whilst this could have made the novel difficult to read, it instead
allows us to understand Stevens' way of thinking.

This reluctance to divulge his inner feelings is made quite obvious on several occasions during the first few pages.
Ironically, we discover this tendency because of his frantic attempts to disguise it. On page 4, he is discussing his reasons
for accepting Farraday's offer of a holiday and mentions the arrival of Miss Kenton's letter. Whilst we would not ordinarily
have taken a great deal of notice of this inclusion, Stevens' comment when he mentions the letter's existence - "and why
should I hide it? - instantly draws our attention to the remark. In trying to appear nonchalant, Stevens does exactly what
he was trying to avoid. Subsequently, every time Miss Kenton is referred to, he swiftly follows with talk about
?professional matters' (pages 5, 9 and 10, as well as many other times throughout the novel), so attempting to change the
subject.

It is clear from this that he has strong feelings for Miss Kenton, but is unable to voice them publicly or, perhaps, even to
himself. Aside from these parts, the rest of this extract deals almost entirely with ?professional matters.' Readers can
deduce from this that Stevens has a fairly inactive life beyond work and he does not feel comfortable talking about what
little he does do in his private time.

Stevens also makes a number of na?ve assumptions, and appears somewhat arrogant in places. The first instance is on
page 4. He states "As you might expect, I did not take Mr Farraday's suggestion at all seriously... The words ?as you
might expect' indicate that he assumes we have similar values and opinions to his own. On the next page he states "It is,
of course, the responsibility of every butler to devote his utmost care in the devising of a staff plan. The ?of course'
displays possible na?vety, as he assumes all readers will be butlers, or have detailed knowledge of a butler's job; if he
wrote his diary with this intention, then it is a perfectly harmless and acceptable comment, otherwise it indicates some
ignorance on his part. These sort of sweeping assumptions are made numerous times - on page 7 he writes "Now
naturally, like many of us, I have a reluctance to change too much of the old ways. He is assuming far too much here, as
he does elsewhere in the text.

The language Stevens uses also suggests certain things about him. He is extremely verbose for example, often
digressing frequently whilst discussing something. He also pays great attention to what he writes, and attempts to cover
every single angle to an argument to stop people from being able to counter his views. This punctilious nature becomes
very annoying during the novel.

The tone of his writing is often condescending; not to the reader but to other characters, particularly Farraday. He
regularly quotes Farraday in a faintly mocking way - Stevens evidently disapproves of Farraday's American habits and
lifestyle; this is more due to Stevens reservedness rather than any shocking behaviour on the part of the American.
Stevens' writing always appears to be very deliberate, over-complex and formal; very unlike normal personal writing (in
fact, he writes his account as if it were an essay of some kind). One can imagine he is like this in conversation, too, and
this supports the theory that he has difficulty expressing his personal feelings.
Interaction between different characters is also a good way of detailing a personality in a story. Stevens' relationships are
just as cold, formal and detached as is his writing. He cannot associate himself with Farraday in any way; they have
diametrically opposing personalities, both of which stubbornly refuse to adapt to the new situation. At this point in the
novel we do not know much about Stevens' relationships with other characters; however, we can sense that he has strong
feelings for Miss Kenton, feelings which are probably not also felt by Miss Kenton. The relationship between Stevens and
his readers is more interesting. As mentioned above, his writing assumes a great many things about his readership - what
they do, what they think - and is also very formal and over-explanatory. This inevitably creates a gulf between reader and
writer (as in Stevens, not as in Ishiguro) which makes it hard for readers to sympathise with him, although he is the
narrator.

There are also allegorical references in the text. Darlington Hall represents Great Britain; Lord Darlington was old,
traditional Britain, whilst Mr Farraday is the new, changing face of the country. Stevens represents somebody who
believes in the old regime, the old traditions and values, who, therefore, will dislike changes to the country - so, to
continue the allegory logically, Stevens dislikes the changes happening at Darlington Hall.

All these different techniques could appear rather too obvious, crammed as they are into just the first eight pages. Ishiguro
avoids this potential problem by introducing a single event in which he is able to outline many of Stevens' character traits.
This event is the crisis that surrounds the faulty staff plan, a minor incident that Stevens places a great deal of importance
upon. Whilst this event is useful in displaying some of his other habits, those described above, it also highlights how
Stevens often makes unusual decisions regarding his priorities.

From all this, it may seem that readers know all they need to know about Stevens by page 10; this is definitely not the
case. All the Prologue achieves is outlining the most obvious parts of Stevens' character. It is only after reading the rest of
the novel that readers can fully appreciate all the subtle nuances of information that, when put together, create Stevens'
unique personality. And, as is often the case with characters in good novels, the whole is very much more than the sum of
its parts.

he context of the prologue is indeed important because, as you suggest, it marked the end of the Brtish
Empire with the Suez Crisis. In Stevens' mind, however, the glory days of the Empire are for him the best
days of his own life and he talks with affection about 'tradition' and times when 'the greatest ladies and
gentlemen of the land gathered'. It is not until later in the novel that we realise that some of these
gentlemen were in fact Nazi sympathisers and actually the period Stevens thinks of so fondly was a
period in which shameful things occurred.

You are right to point to Stevens' self-restraint and reluctance to talk to his new master which contrasts
sharply with his master's more casual ways such as his love of 'bantering'. Stevens even plans to wear his
old master's suits for his journey to see Miss Kenton, a clear statement of his longing for the past.

The fact that the novel is written in first person is also clear from the Prologue and we get a clear insight
into Stevens' mind although we do begin to question what really happened as we read on. He does not
seem to feel he has a voice even though he has been in charge of a large household. Clearly Mr Farraday
represents the new 'American' way of doing things and is not always familiar with what is 'commonly
done'. Stevens is signalling the beginnings of the influence of American culture on Britain which will
continue with the advent of rock and roll, and so on.

50. A Quest for Closure: Steven's Journey

The road of life twists and turns and no two directions are ever the same. Yet our lessons come from the journey, not
the destination.

The Remains of the Day is about an English butler named Stevens who embarks on a journey to find an old worker of
Darlington Hall. Stevens was a butler he can remember. It is basically all he knows and lives by. From his proper manors
to his sincere language, he is seen as the greatest butler. All throughout the novel, Stevens talks about what it takes to
be a great butler. He has never lived outside of the walls of Darlington Hall, so everything that he encounters on his
journey relates somehow back to his profession.

According to How to Read Literature Like a Professor, basically every trip is considered to be a quest. The quest
consists of five things: (a) a quester, (b) a place to go, (c) a stated reason to go there, (d) challenges and trials en route,
and (e) a real reason to go there. (Foster, 3) Thomas Foster also states that the state reason for a quest is never the real
reason. The real reason for someone to undertake a quest is always for self-knowledge. Although the real reason is
hidden, the quester makes it easy to realize it when the end of the quest is found. The reaction gives away a lot of
information about what they are really thinking.

Stevens journey has all of the qualities needed for it to be considered a quest. First off, Stevens is the quester. He took it
upon himself to embark on this journey for his own intentions, whether good or bad. His journey is to go meet with a
previous Darlington Hall employee, Miss Kenton, due to the lack of service that is there now. There used to be feelings
between Stevens and Miss Kenton when they had both worked together for Lord Darlington. One large disagreement
has made it so they havent spoken in a while. Stevens has told everyone he is going for pure business. Deep inside, he is
hoping for closure, or maybe for sparks to flare up again. Even though he will not admit it at many times, he misses Miss
Kenton and what used to be. Hope is what makes Mr. Stevens continue on this long journey.

Stevens journey did not run as smoothly as he had planned. This was his first time actually seeing the English landscape,
and noticing what the outdoors has to offer. Everything was new to him. He was often unsure of which way to go. Car
troubles occurred as well. At one point, Mr. Stevens had to sleep in a foreign town due to his car having difficulties. He
met new people, who werent as highly ranked as the people he was used to. They basically looked up to Stevens as a
hero of some sort. The journey was a long process for Stevens and he knew that giving up was not an option. He was
experiencing a whole new life that he could not see from inside the walls of Darlington Hall.

Towards the end of the novel, Stevens finally reaches his goal. He finds Miss Kenton. Although his hopes are high, it does
not go as well as he had hoped it would. He found out that Miss Kenton is already happily married and is not coming
back to Darlington Hall. Reading the context clues proved that there were once feelings between the two of them. When
they finally met with each other Miss Kenton said to Stevens, But that doesn't mean to say, of course, there aren't
occasions now and then- extremely desolate occasionswhen you think to yourself: 'What a terrible mistake I've made
with my life.' And you get to thinking about a different life, a better life you might have had. For instance, I get to
thinking about a life I may have had with you, Mr. Stevens. And I suppose that's when I get angry about some trivial little
thing and leave. But each time I do, I realize before longmy rightful place is with my husband. After all, there's no
turning back the clock now. One can't be forever dwelling on what might have been." This was a huge blow to Mr.
Stevens. For the first time he had said that he wanted to breakdown and cry. He realized that greatness wasnt
everything. He wanted to just be happy. Although Mr. Stevens did not get Miss Kenton to come back, he found a new
meaning to life and learned a lot about himself during this journey of a lifetime.

The purpose of adding a journey like the one in The Remains of the Day is to show that everyone has goals that they
want to achieve. No matter what trip is taken, there is always a desired point. It can be considered as a quest of some
sort. Although the times will get rough, it is the challenges that will make the people stronger. Mr. Stevens did not think
of it as him going on a quest, but at the end of the novel he learned that there is much more to life than what is shown
looking through the windows from the insides of Darlington Hall. The element of a quest, as shown in How to Read
Literature Like a Professor, establishes a more meaningful task of finding self-knowledge rather than just taking a trip
for a set reason. A meaningful quest often makes the ending that much more worth it. The characters grow as time goes
on, and purpose of adding it makes it that much more clear.
The Journey
The physical journey of Stevens is closely connected to the psychological journey, through imagery and symbols in the
novel. Darlington Hall is a symbol for a psycological prison and it is when Stevens actually leaves this house that he can
look upon himself and his previous life from a different perspective. Ths is accomplished throughout the encounters
with other characters outside of Darlington Hall, which give him a different view into his own life.

Examples of this is when Stevens tries to encounter the bantering with other characters on his journey. Bantering can
be seen as a symbol of being "human" in the novel, people making jokes to one another. This is extremely difficult to
Stevens as he has a very formal and professional personality by definition, he is so obsessed with his proffessional
"dignity" that he fails to be "human" in this sense.

At the end of the journey, on the last day, Stevens is on a pier with another retired butler. Here we can clearly see the
conrast from how Stevens looked upon his life in the begining and how he looks at it now. The journey has given him a
lot more insight to what is important in his life, and he can see the mistakes made by Lord Darlington. If Stevens has
dedicated his life to a man who's life led down a false path, then what has Stevens accomplished? "He chose a certain
path in life, it proved to be a misguided one, but there, he chose it, he can say that at least. As for myself, I can not
even claim that." This is how Stevens explains his view of his life at the end of the journey to the other retiered butler.
In this way the end of the novel conveys an atmosphere of emptiness as Stevens realises the lost cause of his whole
life.

Clothing
Stevens clothing make up an important symbol in the novel The Remains of the Day. In the prolouge he is concerned
about his choice of clothes for the journey he us about to undertake. He knows that he will have to represent
Darlington Hall and for this reason, he is very cautions about what clothes to bring. This can also be interpereted as a
deeper fear of letting go the 'mask' he is wearing that is his butler clothes. Stevens never changes his clothes, or rather
style of clothes - he always tries to keep his style professional:

"They wear their professionalism as a decent gentelman will wear his suit: he will not let ruffians or circumstances tear him off in the public
gaze; he will discard it when, and only when, he wills to do so, and this will invariable be when he is entirely alone. It is to say, a matter of
dignity." [44]

Here we can see that Stevens uses clothing as a symbol for both his profession and dignity that comes with it. Later in
the novel, Stevens once again describes dignity in terms of clothes when he says: "I suspect it comes down with not
removing one's clothing in public." Stevens feels exposed when he is not in his role as a dignified butler; the
professional style of clothing that he wears helps him to keep his personal side hidden.