When I read George Orwell’s 1984, I was prompted by most review sites to read another book, in the same genre – Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. I had heard of this book many years back and I also remember downloading a PDF version of the book, but I never read it because of a false perception that this book was related to LSD-induced, utopian ideals in a sex-dominated world (I had drawn this idea from the fact that this is one of the most frequently banned books in literary history, because of the “negative activities” that don’t make it worthy of being read by students.) The “soma-induced” tension-curbing and sweet-dreams predominated “soma-holiday” and carnal pleasures, as mentioned in the Brave New World, is closer to what I had thought, but it is a miniscule part of Huxley’s world. Getting my hands on a hard-cover version of the book was the best way to read and enjoy it, and to draw a comparison with George Orwell’s 1984.
Both the books foresee an era of strong propaganda and controlled ways of life, along with the impact of technological developments on society. The other similarity is in the desire of the protagonists (Winston Smith in 1984, and Bernard Marx in Brave New World) to know more about their past and to reunite with the lost past. The fear of losing individual identity in the fast-paced world of the future is the primary concern voiced by both the writers. The worlds in both these books are basically unified, as in geographical SuperStates in 1984, and the World State in the Brave New World. The demarcations of social classes clearly exist in both, and so do mental conditioning, communal recreation, state-supplied intoxicants (Gin in 1984 and Soma in the Brave New World), and survival of the past in the form of the Proles and the Savages, respectively.
The protagonists’ rebellion against the pre-defined social and political order is also a common theme. The role of science in both books is extensive and complicated. 1984’s tele-screens cannot be turned off, as A Brave New World has “feelies,” that add tactile senses to a movie. Desensitization of the masses in the face of strong control, and loss of privacy, and social acceptance of torture, and mutation is evident in both the books. The end of both is on negative notes; Bernard is exiled to work in Iceland and Winston is subjected to debilitating physical and psychological treatment.
While a discrete reader may find more comparisons between the two works, what is more evident is that the books
are two extreme ends of a futuristic world. The reality presented in dystopian literature is a backlash against some modern trends and contemporary tendencies in politics. George Orwell portrays the dangers of totalitarian regimes which show no respect for people’s individuality and freedom. Aldous Huxley satirizes consumerism and presents concerns about overuse of scientific research. In 1984, Winston bears the blunt of his mistakes, the crime of individuality and dissention. In the Brave New World, Bernard feels that society is progressing toward a materialistic and superficial end, in which all things of real value, including the relationships which make people human, will be squashed.
A Brave New World is Huxley’s expression of a fear that mankind will create a utopia by way of foregoing all that makes life worthwhile. In contrast, Orwell’s work rings more sharply of secret police paranoia and political propaganda. Aldous Huxley presents a consumerist society, dominated by technological advancements and artificial pleasures and induced happiness based on sub-conscious conditioning that begins from infancy. Huxley explores the evils of a seemingly satisfied and successful society, because that stability is only derived from the loss of freedom and personal responsibility. By getting rid of most unpleasant things, the society also rid itself of many of the true pleasures in life. There’s no real passion. Savage John says: “You got rid of them. Yes, that’s just like you. Getting rid of everything unpleasant instead of learning to put up with it.”
Both books forewarn of a day when humankind might fall slave to its own concept of how others should act. The two books don’t ask whether societies with stability, pacification, and uniformity can be created, but whether or not they are worth creating. Too often people desire things and in wanting romanticize it and are disappointed with the end result. The characters serve as a reminder that it is necessary to have pain to compare with joy, defeat to compare with victory, and problems in order to have solutions. Niel Postman aptly summarized the comparison of the two books – “Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us.”
Share and Show: 
