/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2178119]

So I'm almost through this, it seems to read really fast.

I'm actually half way through the book and I'm still not really sure if there has been any true character development.

But as far as "dystopian future where the main character is an edgy outsider and thinks differently" novels go, 1984 is still about 10000000 times better.

I've also noticed Huxley has created a world where everyone gets laid really easy. Way to admit that he could never get any pussy.

Long story short this book is dildos, why is it so highly regarded again? I haven't been this dissapointed since Catcher In The Rye. Or Infinite Jest.

[Anonymous No.2178169]

sounds 2 deep 4 you.

but seriously, can't you see that it's huxley's vision we're turning into, not orwell's

[Anonymous No.2178171]

>>2178119
I feel obligated to reiterate and capitalize the point that 'Catcher in The Rye' was 214 pages of turd.

[Anonymous No.2178172]

1984 had better prose and writing on a micro level, but the premise and predictions of BNW were better.

[Anonymous No.2178173]

>>2178169
Well, for me its a equal combination of both
but maybe its just a orwellfanboy speaking

[Anonymous No.2178176]

>>2178172
well, if you look at things like newspeak and wars as a fear that controls the populations , then orwell did a pretty precise prediction

[Anonymous No.2178182]

>>2178171

when you write like that its no surprise you couldnt dig it

[Anonymous No.2178187]

I read both and read BNW a few weeks ago.

At first I thought 1984 was better, but you gotta think about BWN for a while. Also I think the most important part of it, was pretty much the last part / the ending.

1984 is written pretty good. Orwell put in a lot of focus on his main character and shaping the world around him. Describing what he sees and giving some information about this.
I got the feeling that Huxley was more of the type, who liked to put up a big scenario with information and stuff and just put some characters in it. These two used different approaches.

I also think that Huxleys overall idea about the future was closer to what we are turning into. Just take a look outside and at the people and take a look at the entertainment and all this stupid shit on tv.

[Anonymous No.2178193]

>>2178176

Are you serious? We're about as far from Newspeak as you can gan get. News peak was created to by the government to control ideas. It limited the vocabulary people could use so that they couldn't formulate ideas of dissent. In contrast, the English language hasn't been shrinking, it has been GROWING. Language is the one thing the government could never really get control of. It changes to fast and unpredictably.

And in regards to wars, we don't live in fear of them. We're apathetic to them! How many of you can name ever country the US currently occupies? We don't care. We have our XBoxes and Playstations and Skyrim and nobody could give two shits! Huxley had it right.

Now excuse me, this argument has left me too angry and I'm going to go take another gram of soma.

[Anonymous No.2178207]

>>2178193
considering it was written in the 1940s I think Orwells depiction of a box in every home spouting propaganda at you in monotonous simplistic words was fairly accurate.

He used war as a way for the government to demonstrate their own importance to you, "Without us in charge 'they' would kill you", Which is EXACTLY what is happening now. "We need to protect you from the Soviets, Commies, Muslims, Terrorists"

[Anonymous No.2178208]

BNW is far more relevant in 2011 than 1984 is. For example, no history rewriting really happens in the 'civilized world'.

The facts are largely just ignored. Truly, Huxley hit the nail on the head with the thought that it's not lack of information or food that creates a 'human dome', rather it's abundance of everything that creates a sterile world. And that's pretty much where the u.s. and EU are now.

[Anonymous No.2178209]

>>2178193
>We're apathetic to them!
Or, better yet, entertained by them. Media-mediated snuff for everyone.

[Anonymous No.2178211]

>>2178193
Well, let me explain myself.

From my point of view, George Orwell demonstrated pretty nice how language shapes human thinking...I never said something about the shrinking of languages. But more how language is a tool to , for example, hide valuable facts, lead to an other conclusion, play down crimes, applied daily trough media.

by fear of wars I ment the terrorism, and I dont think we need to argue how it changed the peoples perceptions.

Do you understand my point now?
Excuse my gramma, I am not a native speaker.

[Anonymous No.2178221]

>>2178182
write like what?

[Anonymous No.2178224]

>>2178221

bloviating

[Anonymous No.2178229]

>>2178224
I apologize for having a vocabulary. My bad.

[Anonymous No.2178231]

>>2178229
>welcome to lit
just don't let it happen again

[Anonymous No.2178236]

>>2178229

i have a huge dick but i dont walk around with my fly open

[Anonymous No.2178244]

>>2178236
But unlike your dick I actually get a chance to use my vocabulary

[Anonymous No.2178246]

>>2178244

you're right my dick doesn't get a chance to use your vocabulary

GRAMMAROWNED BITCH

[Anonymous No.2178248]

>>2178246
meh, you still got burnt

[Anonymous No.2178249]

>>2178244
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA amazing

[Anonymous No.2178263]

iesus nazarenus rex iudaeorum

[Anonymous No.2178266]

BNW isn't dystopian.

[Anonymous No.2178351]

I'm always jelly of those dystopia people, who in this case get drugs, fuck whoever they want and generally have a good time

what the hell is wrong with that

same with that silverberg novel about huge city skyscrapers

[Anonymous No.2178361]

>>2178351
bnw is an utopia not a dystopia.

[sage No.2178941]

>>2178351

>skyscrapers
Urbmons

Now The World Inside was a a cool book. Brave New World didn't hold my interest. The ideas are interesting, but the writing sucks.

[Anonymous No.2178946]

Books alike Brave New World and 1984?

[Anonymous No.2178948]

>>2178361

if you like nursing homes, sure

[Anonymous No.2179262]

>>2178351
'Cuz distopias are written by writers, and there's nothing writers love more than writing; so the most awful evil thing they can think of is an attack on writing. Though I'm not saying that this isn't bad, just the most obvious thing to a writer.

See newspeak and Helmholtz' storyline in BNW

Brave New World works vastly better as a parody of utopian fiction rather than a straight up dystopia. mostly because other than the stuff Huxley explicitly tells us is bad, its basically exactly what we should strive for, everyone's happy and useful, dissidents can go to an Island and philosophize and write as much as they want. It's basically the usual early 20th c. British romantic anti-Enlightenment conservatism.

[Deist !!fMq8ZXuIWTO No.2179303]

>>2178119

Brave new world predicted what society would become much better than 1984 did, with most of us being controlled by pleasure.

A Brave New World was written by Huxley trying to figure out a 'utopian' world from a utilitarian perspective. He figured this out. The society he presented is what he came up with as a utopia.

The 'savage' represents his own emotional response to this utilitarian society. The romantic perspective.

-------------------

It can be viewed as more utopian than dystopian. Its predictive as well.

[Anonymous No.2179321]

>>2179303
why the fuck are you assuming that BNW and 1984 are meant to be predictive?

[Deist !!fMq8ZXuIWTO No.2179339]

>>2179321

1984 was meant as a warning

Brave New World was partially meant to be predictive.

I never said nor implied 1984 was meant to be predictive. My last sentence refers to brave new world.

It was just a statement that came into my head 'its predictive as well'

it is. This adds to its quality imo, regardless of authors intent

[Anonymous No.2179343]

>>2179339
swell but you say that bnw is better than 1984 in part because its more predictive

well, 1984 isn't supposed to be predictive, it's meant to be talking about totalitarianism

so there

[Deist !!fMq8ZXuIWTO No.2179345]

>>2179343

>swell but you say that bnw is better than 1984 in part because its more predictive

Certainly BNW is more relevant because of its predictive nature, and relevance personally is one of my judgment criteria. If you disagree with me and my criteria for judgment, thats fine, art is subjective. I wouldnt try and force my views and prejudices on you.

>well, 1984 isn't supposed to be predictive, it's meant to be talking about totalitarianism

The problems it talks about, to me, are not as relevant as the problems discussed in BNW. SEE

>>2178172

That is my desktop background btw. Re arranged to look more square.

[Anonymous No.2179346]

>>2179345

POST


MORE


INTERESTINGLY


YOU


PEDANT

[Anonymous No.2179348]

It's a world without humanity. What we have now, more or less.

[Deist !!fMq8ZXuIWTO No.2179349]

>>2179346

You've said this before in another thread, i have no idea what you want or expect me to do.

Not knowing (and to be frank, not caring) what you want means i will not do it.

[Anonymous No.2179350]

>>2179349

you even get indignant boringly

[Anonymous No.2179351]

>>2179345
totalitarianism is basically the most interesting thing ever

>>2179349
i guess he wants you to be a better poster (you are not a good poster)

[Deist !!fMq8ZXuIWTO No.2179356]

>>2179351

What makes me not a good poster? Precisely? With supporting examples?

I have strong opinions, and decent logical consistency.

[Anonymous No.2179374]

dude you suck. be nicer.

[Anonymous No.2179380]

1984 seemed more engaging because it's further from reality and it feels "newer" or "different"; BNW's premise is tangible and maybe that makes people brush it aside in favor of something that seems more exotic or unlikely.

Anyway, they're both great books.

[Anonymous No.2179388]

1984 Is, from a writer's perspective, a wonderfully crafted novel. It has all the elements needed to enrapture readers. Compelling plot, strong characters, fuck, great antagonist ( well, if you can describe an entire government and way of life as an antagonist). But as far as dystopian novels go in accuracy towards the future, BNW is a lot more relevant. Look at us nowadays, look at our generation and the one coming up. Bound and gagged by popular culture, wallowing in our own shallow shitpools. Facebook, Youtube, hell even 4chan. But the thing is, I think that BNW isn't about controlling people, you would have seen that the governmen would be doing something behind the backs of the people. But Brave New World isn't about control, it's about complacety and the human capacity to... well... not want to think or feel, which is understandable considering those things cause suffering. The internet got this way because people MADE it this way. Shit like jersey shore is on tv because it's popular, people can relate to it now. Facebook feeds the ego and it is still alive because people WANT to feed their ego. Human beings will naturally turn to a society like huxley predicted because it's what the vast majority wants: Constant pleasure, free from thoughts and fears and pains and anything deeper than the surface. I mean, the vast majority of people on 4chan who are so broken are so broken because... They care. They think, they have a soul and know what's right. They go against the grain, a lot of times. How many times have we wished that we could throw away everything we have and not give a shit? Fuck, if I could not be conscious of what i'd be missing, i would love to fuck chicks all day and be high all the time and get a job mixing chemicals. But that's the thing, we're too touchy-feely and the majority of people aren't and what is considered best for the majority of mankind is never what's best for the individual.