On the Irreconcilable Dualism in Brave New World

Abstract

Utopia has long been a controversial subject in literature. According to Rothstein, Utopia "[represents] an ideal towards which the mundane world must reach" (3). It provides us with a blueprint showing "what this world could be and what should be worked for" (Rothstein 3). Nonetheless, there exists another kind of Utopia that is more complex in the sense that instead of being a potential paradise to be pursued elsewhere, it in fact represents a world where the blueprint has already been realised but without desirable effects. As a "transformation of this-place", Utopia of the kind bears far more ambivalence in nature than does the former one (Rothstein 3). Brave New World written by Aldous Huxley is a perfect example. Unlike the society in 1984, which is certainly a dystopia undesirable to the majority, the fictitious society in Brave New World, of which the World State enjoys the absolute governance, has undeniable stability and economic prosperity, the sacrifice of passions and individuality notwithstanding. Admittedly, one can easily draw a long list as to the drawbacks of the World State, such as the tyranny of the perfect system over individuals, the futile lifestyle and false happiness. Quite peculiar is the fact that all the criticism would eventually counteract one another on closer examination.

In the following sections, six controversial aspects involved in the practice of the World State will be discussed respectively for the purpose of illustrating that those antitheses cannot be easily and distinctly settled, whereby the ambivalent nature of this community can be unveiled.