Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Ah, Thank You!
Try to rest up a little before school starts...isn't it nice to have the bulk of the homework behind you? I will be seeing you soon.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Ideals in Our Culture
Huxley shows in his book how disgusted the civilized people are at the sight of Linda. To them, anything that diverges from the norm is horrifying. Any difference in appearance, even Bernard's shortness, is cause disgust.
I believe that this ties in to our own society. Through the media, we see idealized people and strive to be like them. We look at people who are different with disgust. We pretend to not be bothered, but most of us have felt uncomfortable in the presence of physically deformed people. We go home, and pity them for not being like the rest of us. And even more so with television. We constantly get messages about the way we are supposed to look and because of this, we avoid differences even more.
Unfortunately, as we constantly try to fit in, we also come closer and closer to the world Huxley has created.
I believe that this ties in to our own society. Through the media, we see idealized people and strive to be like them. We look at people who are different with disgust. We pretend to not be bothered, but most of us have felt uncomfortable in the presence of physically deformed people. We go home, and pity them for not being like the rest of us. And even more so with television. We constantly get messages about the way we are supposed to look and because of this, we avoid differences even more.
Unfortunately, as we constantly try to fit in, we also come closer and closer to the world Huxley has created.
I just have to say that i loved Brave New World. It was very interesting and the ending was kinda surprising. My favorite characer was Bernard Marx. He was just different and i thought but i didnt find that as a bad thing. He didnt like to take the soma or talk openly about his relationships.i felt bad for him when he couldnt get the respect of those in a lower class than him.He wanted more than just a world of conditioning.You know how there always repeating that "everybodys happy now" well Bernard was not happy with the life he hadd to be in.The director didnt like the way he was acting. And was always threatning to banish him for the sake of the society. Even though Bernard was different and considered to be an outcast in there society, i still thought he was a great character.
Death to the Media
Postman suggests that the media is in charge of what our society actually sees. As I began to think about it, he is correct. The media have the ability to manipulate how the world views such things. Since our society watches television all the time, we gradually begin to trust what we see (especially the younger, more naive television watchers).
For example, we believe what we are used to seeing. That is why if people are used to watching television shows that portray blacks as gangbangers and pimps, as well as loud and crazy individuals, when on the streets our society will expect this from all blacks. As horrible as it sounds, it is true. When on the streets,I am not Alberto Sparks III, who hold the door open for people, and gives up his seat for very old people while riding the bus on train. Instead I am a Tyrone Jackson, who gangbangs and disrespects women and rips people off. This is only because the media conditions society to believe that.
Fair? Not one bit. I deserve a chance to be respected just as much as a white boy my age. Of course, not all think this way. However, the ones that do are mainly influenced by the media. Manipulating what they want society to feel, and think, and act around the things they choose to be liked or dislike; to be trusted or not. Kind of sounds like Brave New World, right? The media and government work together to keep us conditioned from things like being naked in public. Most see that as disgusting and repulsive because we have laws against it, and it isn't allowed to be expressed. However, in Europe, nudity isn't shunned as much as it is here. Women are allowed to expose their breasts, and they have countless nude beaches there. Probably that is why birthrate between teens is higher in America than in Europe. Europeans don't see much in nudity as we do here.
So, I would like to propose that our media should be careful with what the show on television because people these days believe what they see. Either that or prepare for an uprising... which would probably make my race look even more dangerous and wild as it already is shown on television.
Shame on you media.... SHAME.
LAST POST!
For example, we believe what we are used to seeing. That is why if people are used to watching television shows that portray blacks as gangbangers and pimps, as well as loud and crazy individuals, when on the streets our society will expect this from all blacks. As horrible as it sounds, it is true. When on the streets,I am not Alberto Sparks III, who hold the door open for people, and gives up his seat for very old people while riding the bus on train. Instead I am a Tyrone Jackson, who gangbangs and disrespects women and rips people off. This is only because the media conditions society to believe that.
Fair? Not one bit. I deserve a chance to be respected just as much as a white boy my age. Of course, not all think this way. However, the ones that do are mainly influenced by the media. Manipulating what they want society to feel, and think, and act around the things they choose to be liked or dislike; to be trusted or not. Kind of sounds like Brave New World, right? The media and government work together to keep us conditioned from things like being naked in public. Most see that as disgusting and repulsive because we have laws against it, and it isn't allowed to be expressed. However, in Europe, nudity isn't shunned as much as it is here. Women are allowed to expose their breasts, and they have countless nude beaches there. Probably that is why birthrate between teens is higher in America than in Europe. Europeans don't see much in nudity as we do here.
So, I would like to propose that our media should be careful with what the show on television because people these days believe what they see. Either that or prepare for an uprising... which would probably make my race look even more dangerous and wild as it already is shown on television.
Shame on you media.... SHAME.
LAST POST!
The Enemy Is Our Friend
The medium was television. The medium now is the INTERNET.
And didn't Postman offer the solution by using the school and the television to educate about the dangers of new (corrupt) media.
Well thanks there Ms. Fletcher! We're using THE MEDIA against The Media :)
Books
Postman has a definite bias for books. The written word, he believes, is a much better medium than the every-entertaining television. His entire book was mostly against the flood of entertainment in our world.
In spite of this, isn't a book a means of entertainment? Very few best selling books, even in the early-American years, were telling people information they could use in their daily lives. Most of the books were stories and poems: none of which could help the common man. Just as television is our main source of entertainment now, books were the source of entertainment for them. The medium and culture has changed, but the purpose has not.
Despite this, the society back then and the society today have changed. Television has more discontinuities, as Postman says, and a much more what i want when i want feel. With books, people had to wait days or weeks to find out the entire story, and that story never had a break.
In spite of this, isn't a book a means of entertainment? Very few best selling books, even in the early-American years, were telling people information they could use in their daily lives. Most of the books were stories and poems: none of which could help the common man. Just as television is our main source of entertainment now, books were the source of entertainment for them. The medium and culture has changed, but the purpose has not.
Despite this, the society back then and the society today have changed. Television has more discontinuities, as Postman says, and a much more what i want when i want feel. With books, people had to wait days or weeks to find out the entire story, and that story never had a break.
Postman to Huxley connection
I love having found a connection between Postman and Huxley. In the utopia that Huxley created everyone is doing something, you can really notice it when Bernard is mentioned because he always wants to do nothing and be quite with only his thoughts. While others are playing weird games, going to movies that are only interesting to the audience because of the technology that alows them to feel the things happening to them, and dances which have songs that are sung about soma and feeling good, never about sad or slow things. All these things are designed to keep the crowd entertained to an extent that they don't have to think, not to mention the help of some there.
Now, in Postman's book, he talks and talks about what the world was and how the world is. He claims that we must all be entertained through media and many other things or else we turn our attention away from something to find another amusing thing. Just like in the Huxleyan society, we must both be kept at almost the same level of amusement. Which makes me wonder if this is just another clue as to whether or not we are going to become like the utopia in Brave New World.
Now, in Postman's book, he talks and talks about what the world was and how the world is. He claims that we must all be entertained through media and many other things or else we turn our attention away from something to find another amusing thing. Just like in the Huxleyan society, we must both be kept at almost the same level of amusement. Which makes me wonder if this is just another clue as to whether or not we are going to become like the utopia in Brave New World.
THIS IS IRRELEVANT BUT NO IT'S NOT IRRELEVANT IT IS ONLY MY LAST POST
Typography vs. Telegraphy vs. Photography vs. The Tele
Postman loves typography the best, obviously. He loves books and epistemology. He loathes the television and the photograph. Or it just really seems like he does.
With all the argument against anything but typography, I have come to the conclusion that Postman is not the kind of guy who appreciate visual aeathetics very much. Television is there, photography is there, the image is there, but he pretends that they can never overcome the power of THE WORD. You know they say a picture is worth a thousand words. There can also be analyzing and rationalizing in a photo (if you're more imaginative than dense that is). There is a power with the visual image that is different but can be equally strong than the one of literature.
I love the visual arts. I love movies and photographs and commercials. They trigger emotions and ideas in me. They can inspire as much as books and words. It's a pity that Postman did not realize the IMPORTANCE of the art in these. Like literature, the television can also be a source of positive inspiration. There might be irrelevant stuff in the "news of the day", but some of those irrelevant stuff might just inspire the next philantrophist, the next writer, the next political leader, the next teacher, the next anything.
Irrelevance can lead to something important.
El American Dream: More than materialistic
The concept of the American Dream has been around for a long time. Since the 18th hundreds, people from all over the world have come to this country with the hope of prosperity and economical stability.
Some of them, having come here, find that it is in fact a pretty difficult journey to make the picture of the American Dream become into reality. My father, in his negativity due to several tragedies, said once, "American Dream? There is no american dream. It is only an idea that this country sells to other countries through movies and advertisement. In most movies, they don't show you the true negative aspects of this culture. No one is safe from hardships in their lives; not even those who live in 'the land of opportunity'".
I found this an interesting point of view, because it is true that our culture promotes capitalist philosophies that affect our rationality and view of our society. Such as the idea that every problem can be solved through technology or science, and the concept that materials equals happiness. These reasons cause for the quality of our culture to decay.
Later on, I was able to convince my father that there is in fact an American Dream. I told him I was living the dream. I came here and became trilingual, I learned about cultures and customs, I have higher opportunities of getting a scholarship and great quality education, and I enjoy what is being taught.
People from the 18th hundreds came here for the same reason. Most didn't just come here to work and attain land, or become richer. Some wanted improvement in themselves. They wanted to enjoy the freedoms that this country provides, or wanted to get out of corrupt or unjust governments, etc.
The American Dream was never about big houses with nice lawns, but about improving ourselves and providing for our families. The definition has changed along with our culture. We have become so materialistic that American Dream now means having the "hottest items". There is still an american dream, people just don't see it because of the importance we've given to materialism.
Some of them, having come here, find that it is in fact a pretty difficult journey to make the picture of the American Dream become into reality. My father, in his negativity due to several tragedies, said once, "American Dream? There is no american dream. It is only an idea that this country sells to other countries through movies and advertisement. In most movies, they don't show you the true negative aspects of this culture. No one is safe from hardships in their lives; not even those who live in 'the land of opportunity'".
I found this an interesting point of view, because it is true that our culture promotes capitalist philosophies that affect our rationality and view of our society. Such as the idea that every problem can be solved through technology or science, and the concept that materials equals happiness. These reasons cause for the quality of our culture to decay.
Later on, I was able to convince my father that there is in fact an American Dream. I told him I was living the dream. I came here and became trilingual, I learned about cultures and customs, I have higher opportunities of getting a scholarship and great quality education, and I enjoy what is being taught.
People from the 18th hundreds came here for the same reason. Most didn't just come here to work and attain land, or become richer. Some wanted improvement in themselves. They wanted to enjoy the freedoms that this country provides, or wanted to get out of corrupt or unjust governments, etc.
The American Dream was never about big houses with nice lawns, but about improving ourselves and providing for our families. The definition has changed along with our culture. We have become so materialistic that American Dream now means having the "hottest items". There is still an american dream, people just don't see it because of the importance we've given to materialism.
Poor Unfortunate Souls(Little Mermaid Status)
In Huxley's book Brave New World they use hypnopaedia on the children to make them mature quickly, but isn't hypnopaedia just another word for brain washing? These kids are being taught lessons in their sleep so that the Controllers do not have the patience to wait for them to grow up. Though, this just goes along with why they do not have a mind of their own. Yes, that is what the utopia is striving for but how do they end up having different traits like how Lenina is always pneumatic, or so Bernard thinks. If these people of the Huxleyan society are built and programed, yes I went there, programed, then why do some have these differences like how Bernard would rather be alone? He was taught the same, brought up in the same places as the other but what makes him stand out if this is so? Is it because through all this maddness Huxley decided to lace in a thread of hope for these poor lifeless souls?
Obama Might As Well Be a Regular on Entertainment Tonight....Oh Wait. He Already Was
Postman makes a good point on chapter 9 where he sheds light on the politican-celebrities and image politics.
"...just as television commercial empties itself of authentic product information so that it can do its PSYCHOLOGICAL WORK, image politics empties itself of authentic political substance for the same reason." (Postman 136)
Politicians should not be known for their lifestyles, but for what they ought to bring. Moreover, the politician's reputation and image should be dependant on his/her intelligence and position on issues. Charm comes last of all the qualities of a politician.
In image politics, the main priority is the look. Of course by saying image, the sense being used is sight. The audience sees a flat and obvious image. Rationalizing is not necesarrily required upon seeing an image. This type of campaigning could probably be the most useful one for the politician. The psychological work is at play. The image, since it is so flat and straightforward, enforces the audience's mind to assume a general idea of the politician. Image politics, as done in television then favors the best looking candidate; the one that smiles the best. Intelligence and issues go behind the face.
With this I'd like to bring attention to Pres. Obama's much televised lifestyle. Remember those times when the news would show the President (or daughters) playing with new dogs, the First Lady picking out dresses, the President and the Cabinet ordering burgers? Although, it all happened after inauguration, I still find it quite annoying how so much image politics was being used. Obama gained the political-celebrity status during his candidacy - he was different, charming, had a fashionable wife, perfect little girls. And he won. What did we know of McCain? I don't know myself. How did his wife look like? All the bad rep was swung upon old McCain. Obama's political stands might have been much appealing and considerate than McCain, but even if he had super left wing views most of his then supporters would've probably stayed by his side; all due to the IMAGE POLITICS - the CHARM. Now my annoyance goes not with the candidacy, but after. Who the heck cares what Obama's wife's closet looks like? Who cares what his daughters are doing? What's with all the publicity after he already won. I mean yeah they look like the perfect American family, but what of it? Is it to shoo all the Obama haters?
Don't get me wrong. I rather have Obama than McCain as President, but just the image is killing me.
Don't get me wrong. I rather have Obama than McCain as President, but just the image is killing me.
Examining Postman's Answer
In the end of Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman concludes that there are only two answers for us to be more media-consciousness. The first answer was to create television programs that teach people how T.V. should be perceived. But he concludes that is nonsensical since the programs would only help what they are criticizing. His second solution is to look to schools to educate people on media.
Let's examine the second solution of Postman. Has our society tried the solution ever since this book has been published? I don't believe so. I don't ever remember getting a lecture in class on what television is for. Just look at our society today. It seems that we haven't been any more media-consciousness since the release of this book. We still turn to T.V. as one of our main mediums of discourse. And with internet as the new main medium of information, we still look at things visually and not actually interpreting them. It seems it is inevitable that we will become the culture Huxley wrote about in Brave New World.
Let's examine the second solution of Postman. Has our society tried the solution ever since this book has been published? I don't believe so. I don't ever remember getting a lecture in class on what television is for. Just look at our society today. It seems that we haven't been any more media-consciousness since the release of this book. We still turn to T.V. as one of our main mediums of discourse. And with internet as the new main medium of information, we still look at things visually and not actually interpreting them. It seems it is inevitable that we will become the culture Huxley wrote about in Brave New World.
And Tonight's Entertainment is...
In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Postman mentions that one of the problems of television is not that there are too many entertaining shows but that too many shows are made to be entertaining. In other words, the problem is that everything on television is supposed to entertain people, even serious stuff. For example, the news always has something about murders, car accidents, or natural disasters. These kinds of things should make people feel sad, but it makes many people want to watch that news station more, because the things they talk about are exciting, in other words, entertaining. A person I know does not like watching things on TV that are boring to him such as documentaries or educational shows, but if they have even a little bit of violence, he will rush to the television to watch it.
However, entertaining shows that are serious might not be all bad because of shows like America's Most Wanted. They show short clips of a criminal which is entertaining to most people. Because it is entertaining, they pay more attention to it and the criminal could get caught. Over 1,000 criminals have been found because of this show. Although, not all shows are bad, it might be time to consider what we watch and why.
However, entertaining shows that are serious might not be all bad because of shows like America's Most Wanted. They show short clips of a criminal which is entertaining to most people. Because it is entertaining, they pay more attention to it and the criminal could get caught. Over 1,000 criminals have been found because of this show. Although, not all shows are bad, it might be time to consider what we watch and why.
Entertainment Prone at a Yound Age?
"The Philadelphia public schools have embarked on an experiment in which children will have their curriculum sung to them. Wearing Walkman equipment, students were shown listening to rock music whose lyrics were about the eight parts of speech." (Postman 94)
In our society cant we be taught without being entertained? Postman touches on this subject in chapter six with the quote above. It seems that we are always turning to technology to help us learn. When we are little kids we watch the educational television shows that teach us new words, how to count, and even read. It seems that since our first learning experiences are fun and entertaining we expect this throughout our lives.
Now these same kids that grew up watching Sesame Street want to be entertained while learning through Elementary, Middle, and High school. Because of this now learning things by watching a video in class is regular. Like in a science class a teacher puts in a video that is supposedly going to help you learn about the subject. For me personally I do not learn very much from watching them. The videos shown in class seem to be for the purpose of entertainment than teaching a subject.
Postman also writes about how teachers integrate humor into their curriculum to entertain their students. I do pay attention more when the lesson is more entertaining and funny, and I think it helps me remember details about the lesson better. But this does go back to what Postman says about learning and entertainment. Do we expect to be entertained while learning because of our early experiences watching TV?
In our society cant we be taught without being entertained? Postman touches on this subject in chapter six with the quote above. It seems that we are always turning to technology to help us learn. When we are little kids we watch the educational television shows that teach us new words, how to count, and even read. It seems that since our first learning experiences are fun and entertaining we expect this throughout our lives.
Now these same kids that grew up watching Sesame Street want to be entertained while learning through Elementary, Middle, and High school. Because of this now learning things by watching a video in class is regular. Like in a science class a teacher puts in a video that is supposedly going to help you learn about the subject. For me personally I do not learn very much from watching them. The videos shown in class seem to be for the purpose of entertainment than teaching a subject.
Postman also writes about how teachers integrate humor into their curriculum to entertain their students. I do pay attention more when the lesson is more entertaining and funny, and I think it helps me remember details about the lesson better. But this does go back to what Postman says about learning and entertainment. Do we expect to be entertained while learning because of our early experiences watching TV?
Possible racism in Brave New World?
The separation between classes of social hierarchy is clearly obvious in Brave New World. Gamma's, Beta's, Alpha's, Epsilons and Deltas are all created in an order of rankings. Beta's think there the best and from there on it goes till the bottom where the Epsilons and Gamma's are. Each class is differentiated by the colors of the clothing they are wearing. What is it that makes the Beta's so high and mighty over everyone else? What gives them the right to? This is a sign of social hierarchy coming into play in the novel. As one goes up the levels of classes the higher the social status the more hatred there is towards the others below them. Is this not how are society is today?
We all have our reputations whether its good or bad. Depending upon our social status most people do look down upon others just like the Beta's do when they are amongst the other classes. Our worlds today has many types of different classes or social status's. Are we really like the society of "Brave New Worlds" where it's the top who rule and the bottom who get left with nothing?
We all have our reputations whether its good or bad. Depending upon our social status most people do look down upon others just like the Beta's do when they are amongst the other classes. Our worlds today has many types of different classes or social status's. Are we really like the society of "Brave New Worlds" where it's the top who rule and the bottom who get left with nothing?
Brave New World: The Movie
We did it you guys! We’re finally done with the reading, the thinking, the writing and constantly being in Huxley-Postman-World :] ..well for about 12 more days at least. Meanwhile, I just wanted to let those who are interested know that there’s actually a movie of Brave New World that’s up on Youtube , then again EVERYTHING seems to be on Youtube nowadays. Ever since it became the source of entertainment for this generation, advertisement companies and other big time businesses now target this site as their source of reaching out to the public. Anyways this rendition of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World was released in 1998 and Peter Gallagher stars as Bernard Marx. Just with any book-turned-into-movie, I actually think that it strayed away from the actual story line of the book. A much newer version of this film is also planned to be released on 2011 as well. It appears that Leonardo DiCaprio and Ridley Scott are working together to produce an adaptation of this book. Excited? Are you anticipating a movie that completely points out the direction that our society has fallen into? Will the audience understand the irony in this situation, that a movie has been created that talks about a world that’s engrossed entertainment, technology, pain-relieving, and all time convenience?
No One is Perfect
In the Brave New World the civilized society which they call a Utopia believes that they are a perfect society. But little did they know that no one in the world no matter how perfect they think they are. There are some weak points somewhere to anyone. There is one crack on the glass of their Utopia. That crack is Linda, born and raised in the utopia, she was left pregnant in Malpais the Savage society. She slowly adapted the savages' way without the help of technology and soma. After all these years Linda still likes the father of the child. The Director of Hatcheries is the father. To think that an enforcer of the Utopia committed such a horrid act. It came to me that humans are creatures that find it difficult to learn and understand things. That is why they make mistakes. That is why they laugh and cry...and fall in love. Do you think someone can be perfected with our technology rapidly advancing? Will we be able to keep our individuality in the future? Or are we gonna be changed into the Bodanovsky process?
Hypnopaedia is Racist
When the boys are touring the Nursery, he tells about how hypnopaedia works. He explains that it sleep teaches them to teach the children the morals of the World State's society. He shows them an example of a lesson where a Beta child is taught that even tho he's not as good as the Alphas, they are was better than the Epsilons. They are taught that they don't want to play with the Epsilons just because they are in a different caste. He says that it is the perfect tool for social stability.
This in my mind shouted racism. For example, some peope back in previous times, were conditioned to either treat the other castes badly or ignored all together. India once had a tier of their caste that were called the untouchables. The other members of society were taught to look down upon not because they did anything particularly wrong towards them, but just because they are from a lower caste. Racism has proven itself time and time again that it it indeed not socially stable at all. So I completely disagree with the World States take ofn hypnopaedia creating social stability.
This in my mind shouted racism. For example, some peope back in previous times, were conditioned to either treat the other castes badly or ignored all together. India once had a tier of their caste that were called the untouchables. The other members of society were taught to look down upon not because they did anything particularly wrong towards them, but just because they are from a lower caste. Racism has proven itself time and time again that it it indeed not socially stable at all. So I completely disagree with the World States take ofn hypnopaedia creating social stability.
I watch news alot. Im not sure if all you guys like to watch news but i like it. the News you watch on channel 9 is not real news its just entertainment.When im watching a tv show i see the commercials they have for news where they say something like coming up Michael Jacksons doctor or something close to that. I know alot of the time it has to do with a star or something. I remember my history teacher last year telling us to watch real news then compare it.The day Michael Jackson died and more than 2 weeks after, everthing was centered around him. The news didnt report anything , they might say one or 2 things but then go straight to Michael Jackson.I know everyone was upset even me. But did it affect us? I mean nothing on the news affects us. Its not like everybody cried for Michael Jackson because they were related to him.When we hear a soilder died we never really think about it because it doesnt affect our lives personally. Or that a super model was murdered , we might wonder things like why would they do that but we know we dont truly care.
Huxley's Warning
At the end of Brave New World, the crowd that has surrounded the Savage begins to do as he does. Because of their conditioning, they are inclined to cooperate with whoever seems to be in charge or giving them suggestions.
Recently, I've started to wonder if maybe this cooperation is becoming a part of our own "conditioning." We find it so easy to simply cooperate, that we don't think about why we are doing so. I especially noticed this in the 2008 presidential election. Obama, apparently, was a promise for change. This in itself isn't a lie, but the way people used it was slightly disturbing to me. People were being fed this line from the media, but never stopped to think about what Obama was about. They simply thought, I want change. My friend told me that she wanted Obama to win because we needed change. When I asked her what we needed to change, she had no clue. (in fact, she didn't even know who McCain was) How many people were voting for Obama because they "wanted change" and knew nothing else? We simply cooperated with Obama's campaign, followed the millions of other Obama-voters and never stopped to think: "What sort of president is Obama going to make? What kinds of views does he have on issues I find important?"
We may not have begun to beat each other, but we did see the media screaming, and followed without a thought.
Recently, I've started to wonder if maybe this cooperation is becoming a part of our own "conditioning." We find it so easy to simply cooperate, that we don't think about why we are doing so. I especially noticed this in the 2008 presidential election. Obama, apparently, was a promise for change. This in itself isn't a lie, but the way people used it was slightly disturbing to me. People were being fed this line from the media, but never stopped to think about what Obama was about. They simply thought, I want change. My friend told me that she wanted Obama to win because we needed change. When I asked her what we needed to change, she had no clue. (in fact, she didn't even know who McCain was) How many people were voting for Obama because they "wanted change" and knew nothing else? We simply cooperated with Obama's campaign, followed the millions of other Obama-voters and never stopped to think: "What sort of president is Obama going to make? What kinds of views does he have on issues I find important?"
We may not have begun to beat each other, but we did see the media screaming, and followed without a thought.
Thoughts on the Utopian Population
When going back and looking at the first chapter of Brave New World I noticed a few things. The first was how Mr. Foster talks about statistics with students and he mentions how he is competing with other countries to see who can produce the most humans from one ovary. He explains how Singapore was able to squeeze out 16,500 humans from one ovary and was a record score.
That brought up a few questions to my mind such as: Do the controllers and hatcheries act as if the creation of life is just a simple game to see who can create the most?, If these humans are created with special genes where they can stay looking young and they are healthier do they live longer?, and if they do and just one country was able to produce 16,500 humans from one ovary what is the world's population like during that time?, and if 16,500 people were all created from the same ovary would that not make them look alike or have the same genes which makes me wonder are they all clones?
I would think that with the better genes they would live longer and look very similar if not clones. And with thousands of humans being produced at a time population growth would be on a rise instead of dropping which would mean with all these people being created the population might be a problem. But what does everyone else think?
That brought up a few questions to my mind such as: Do the controllers and hatcheries act as if the creation of life is just a simple game to see who can create the most?, If these humans are created with special genes where they can stay looking young and they are healthier do they live longer?, and if they do and just one country was able to produce 16,500 humans from one ovary what is the world's population like during that time?, and if 16,500 people were all created from the same ovary would that not make them look alike or have the same genes which makes me wonder are they all clones?
I would think that with the better genes they would live longer and look very similar if not clones. And with thousands of humans being produced at a time population growth would be on a rise instead of dropping which would mean with all these people being created the population might be a problem. But what does everyone else think?
Thank you, Kids
I have so much to read...thank you for your hard work this summer. One of my tasks this evening is to create the final roster that I will submit to the high school office on Monday.
I collected notebooks at 4:15, after band camp was dismissed. I even received a few notebooks face to face, which is fun. Really, kids...I appreciate the hard work you've done during your time off from school.
Irrelevance
Did you hear about the latest celebrities faux pas? I didn't either till I watched the news today. Postman writes about how the news today makes irrelevant news relevant. Did learning about this celebrities mistake change anything about my life? No it didn't. The news today is full of nonsense like this that seems to qualify as news. It seems that most of the things on the news are just something to bring up in small talk. This just goes back to show most of the television shows today are just interested in entertaining even the news. In chapter five Postman writes about how this trend started with the invention of the telegraph.
The telegraph allowed people to communicate across long distances quickly. Now people in Delaware could learn about the presidents visit to California almost instantly. I like this quote Postman added, "[there's] water everywhere without a drop to drink" (67) This seems to relate exactly with the amount of information that's thrown at us everyday, but how much of it can we actually use? or even remember? Lets face it almost nothing on the news will affect how your day ends up. Sure you might change what your going to wear because you hear about the weather, but they are very few news stories that are relevant to you. Just like any other show the news is simply made to entertain.
The telegraph allowed people to communicate across long distances quickly. Now people in Delaware could learn about the presidents visit to California almost instantly. I like this quote Postman added, "[there's] water everywhere without a drop to drink" (67) This seems to relate exactly with the amount of information that's thrown at us everyday, but how much of it can we actually use? or even remember? Lets face it almost nothing on the news will affect how your day ends up. Sure you might change what your going to wear because you hear about the weather, but they are very few news stories that are relevant to you. Just like any other show the news is simply made to entertain.
Age of the Internet
Postman claims that we are entering an age of television, but already that has ended. The age of the internet has appeared instead.
With the age of the internet, comes a new medium: the computer. The computer is much more vast in its uses than the television: it can be read like a book, watched like a television, listened to like a radio, and treated as a social gathering. No other medium can produce so much "news of the day" as a computer. It costs no money to post on a blog, and anyone with access to a computer can do it. The quantity of information that can be transmitted across the web is infinite.
I don't know exactly what Postman would have written about it all, but I can try to guess. Most likely, he would have seen its vast irrelevance and entertainment. We can now know exactly what kind of weather Beijing is having, or if some person in London had a terrible cough that day. He might have noticed the "give me what I want, when I want it" attitude that computers as a medium give.
I was wondering if anyone had an opinion, or a guess at what Postman might have thought about this age of the internet?
With the age of the internet, comes a new medium: the computer. The computer is much more vast in its uses than the television: it can be read like a book, watched like a television, listened to like a radio, and treated as a social gathering. No other medium can produce so much "news of the day" as a computer. It costs no money to post on a blog, and anyone with access to a computer can do it. The quantity of information that can be transmitted across the web is infinite.
I don't know exactly what Postman would have written about it all, but I can try to guess. Most likely, he would have seen its vast irrelevance and entertainment. We can now know exactly what kind of weather Beijing is having, or if some person in London had a terrible cough that day. He might have noticed the "give me what I want, when I want it" attitude that computers as a medium give.
I was wondering if anyone had an opinion, or a guess at what Postman might have thought about this age of the internet?
Same Reaction?
At the beginning of chapter 6 on page 83 of "Amusing Ourselves to Death" Postman tells of a story where the television has helped in a difficult situation. It explains how a college student went back to his home to study for a big test when he found his lamp broken to the point where it could not be fixed. He then turns on the T.V. and sitting with his back towards it he continued to finish studying for his test. I wonder if things would have gone differently with some one today. The T.V. is very popular and entertaining. It is able to steal our attention while were doing other things. If a college student today were faced with a difficult situation like that would they be disciplined enough to resist the temptation of the T.V. if i were in a situation like that a little bit of my mind would be on the T.V. it would all depend on how serious you are about passing the class. But I do not think students today would keep one hundred percent of their attentions on their work.
Religion on TV
I am not Christian, so I don't go to church. I don't know what if feels like to listen to a sermons or to the priest. But I do see the sermons on television. I find it quite interesting. The church is big and always crowded and everyone is attentive. The priest is on the podium talking in a great voice. I also see Christian music on television. I often see Christian rock bands that have long hair and playing a guitar.(Maybe I just don't watch enough of that channel)Then I remembered the book by Postman. I start thinking how my life would change if there were Buddhist monk praying daily on the television. Would more people become Buddhist? Would my mom make me watch it?
What do you think would happen if other major world religions were on the television? Would people start to think of religion as only entertainment?
What do you think would happen if other major world religions were on the television? Would people start to think of religion as only entertainment?
Which Civilization?
So from what we know about Brave New World, there are two main civilizations: the dystopian English society and the Savage Reservation. One found pain to be an unnecessary impediment and removed anything unpleasant from the society. The other embraced pain as a form of self purification and considered it an essential part of their culture. So which civilization are we most similar to? Humanity has a hunger for pleasure and self-gratification similar to that of the dystopia. But we also share in the thought that a certain amount of pain is required to achieve the better things in life (well at least that's what I think). I personally think we're right in the middle of the two, having a fairly equal balance of pain and pleasure. We are willing to pursue happiness to an extent, depending on the requirements; but we at least know when we've reached our limits (supposedly). I don't know. What do you guys think? Do we come across as more of a primitive and masochistic nation or a super-advanced but ignorant civilization?
What's the Point in Conditioning?
Conditioning. Stability. Thats what everything in Brave New World is centered around.
If the World State is so controlled through their conditioning in hypnopaedia, then they've lost almost all -if not all- their humanity. Humans have the ability to feel emotions (love, hate, pain, anger, betrayal, hurt, frustration) and act unpredictably, but the citizens of the New World have been conditioned so much that there is nothing unexpected from them. It is known what they will do because they have no choice. "And that," put in the Director sententiously, "that is the secret of happiness and virtue–liking what you've got to do. All conditioning aims at that: making people like their unescapable social destiny." If you've already been forced to like what you've got to do without choice, what's the point of living? The people can't possible understand that though because they've already been conditioned as to not even consider it. But what's the point? What's the point in the Director of Hatcheries or a World Controller conditioning all of the people to do their jobs and just that? It makes a stable, secure world in which everyone is happy because they're ignorant of everything else, but what do the World Controllers do? They just watch their brain-washed, idle population while reading old literature of the past.
Brave New World is similar to a totalitarian government, however in the past totalitarian governments, dictators controlled their people through force to benefit themselves and to gain despotic control. Yet the World Controllers aren't getting that, so why are they doing this? In their civilization, it's as if all time has stopped. They forbid any reading into the past, and they also freeze any study into literature, high art, and science, so they can't move further. They're just stuck in one place with nowhere to go because they've got no goals to achieve and nothing to work towards.
Oh, George Orwell
"A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language."
How true it is. We text and say that we're practicing our writing skills, but are we really if we aren't writing essays with our miniature keyboards? How can we practice writing skills if we aren't writing how we normally would for our English class? We get caught up in the TTYLs and the LOLs and get worse and worse at true writing. Not only can we not write well, we can't write if we don't have technology to prod us on. How much do those Benchmark English tests suck? Where you have to write an essay about a poem you don't care about in 50 minutes or less? What makes them so horrible, the topic or the fact that we have to put pen to paper and write as we go. No Googling how to spell a word, or using dictionary.com to find a synonym that sounds better. We have to sit and write without the aid of the Internet and a keyboard. It's just not realistic though because any other item that we have to compose, the computer is at our full disposal. We've forgotten how to simply write.
How true it is. We text and say that we're practicing our writing skills, but are we really if we aren't writing essays with our miniature keyboards? How can we practice writing skills if we aren't writing how we normally would for our English class? We get caught up in the TTYLs and the LOLs and get worse and worse at true writing. Not only can we not write well, we can't write if we don't have technology to prod us on. How much do those Benchmark English tests suck? Where you have to write an essay about a poem you don't care about in 50 minutes or less? What makes them so horrible, the topic or the fact that we have to put pen to paper and write as we go. No Googling how to spell a word, or using dictionary.com to find a synonym that sounds better. We have to sit and write without the aid of the Internet and a keyboard. It's just not realistic though because any other item that we have to compose, the computer is at our full disposal. We've forgotten how to simply write.
"P" as in "Pneumatic"
After many texts and such, asking for the definition of "pneumatic," I decided to look it up myself. Apparently, pneumatic means air-filled or pertaining to gas or air. so why would Lenina call herself pneumatic? why would chairs, in the novel, be pneumatic? The citizens of the World State are not only content, but also, not plump, but well sized. Lenina is airy just like the chair mentioned. It seems as though a person being pneumatic, would be saying he or she is plump, but they're not in weight size, but in quality. The population have lost all possible humanity, that they are now considered pneumatic. lenina is no longer a human, moreso an item of comfort. The citizens of the World State are as human as an inflatable matress.
BNW
In the quote below from Brave New World, ch. 16, the Savage asked Mustapha Mond, "Why don't you make everybody an Alpha Double Plus while you're about it?" as they had the power, technology, and authority to create as many Alpha Double Pluses or Epsilons as they wished. Mustapha said "...we have no wish to have our throats cut... We believe in happiness and stability. A society of Alphas couldn't fail to be unstable and miserable. Imagine a factory staffed by Alphas–that is to say by separate and unrelated individuals of good heredity and conditioned so as to be capable (within limits) of making a free choice and assuming responsibilities.
The same with how an all Alpha society would completely fail to function, neither would any other society. In civilization today, people are split up into different social castes based on their race, income, and looks. The rich, the middle-class, and the poor. Even zooming into the smaller perspective of high school, the traditional high school caste system ranks from thethe highest caste which includes cheerleaders, jocks, honor students, preps, non-conformists; the middle class of drama people, choir, punks; the second-middle class of geeks and nerds; and the lowest caste of special students and foreign students who don't speak English as their first language. (I looked up the 'high school caste system' from yahoo) The modern high school caste system exists because people need others to admire, as well as others to push down and make fun of because they're lower or less-privileged than they are.
Bernard, as an Alpha, never fit in with the other Alphas because of his physical condition as well as his wandering mind. Then after he was connected with the Savage, he became popular and well-liked by everyone. All the rumors about him disappeared and everyone was buddying up to him, "... Bernard had only to hint at the possibility of an invitation, and he could have whichever of them he liked. "
With all the similarities between Huxley's Brave New World and the connections Postman makes between them, we really are already a Brave New World, just like everyone said.
Hypnotising Or What?
In "Brave New World" hypnopaedia was used, a type of sleep teaching. The phrases that were taught often had a rhythmic tone. Obviously, so that the phrases taught could be remembered with no problem. There is a phrase used by Lenina "A gramme is always better than a damn."(90), this phrase is quite catchy. This technique of a rhythmic or catchy tone is used by advertisement and companies. For example, McDonald's with their "Para pa pa pa, I'm Lovin' It" song. Or even songs on the radio that get stuck in our head that we later end up looking up the name of because we begin to like the song and later buy the album. Could we be victims of a type of hypnotism? Have companies and artists found a way into our heads for the sake of their money?
Our looks
Susan Boyle. Do you guys remember her frim Britains got talent? Well if you dont she was an amazing singer. We all judged her when she went up there. We thought that just because she wasnt the most beautiful the she hadd to be horrible. I dont know about you but thinking back to that i remeber how surprised i was when i heard her voice. welli think she got more media attention about her looks than her talent.Going back to chapter 1 of Amusing Ourselves To Death, i remember postman saying that our media is based on look. They only put the most beutiful on tv. When we are searching through the channels we pass up a channel because we dont see something appealing in looks.Well even though Susan Boyle didnt win but, i wish more people like her could win competions like that on Britains got talent and even other shows that i know we all watch American idol.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The Accuracy of Huxley's Predictions
Most of us can agree that Brave New World almost predicts the world today or what will be in the near future with great detail, but what made me believe that he had an even more accurate prediction about humans and electronics was in Chapter 6 specifically on the pages of ninety and ninety-one.
In this chapter Bernard takes Lenina on a "date" and he chooses to visit the ocean at night time to watch the moon and the waves which would seem peaceful, but Lenina believes it is horrific and is forced to turn on the radio to forget about it. These descriptions of having turn to radio on a peaceful trip reminds me of many people today (sometimes even myself). For example when ones go on trips like camping instead of taking in the views and sounds they have to bring some sort of electronic with them to keep them occupied. At first I read these pages and thought to myself what is wrong with her that she cant relax and enjoy the view but when I thought about it, to be honest I might have done something similar.
So it just makes me think about how accurate Huxley was with his predictions and that he could have very well been hinting at the "electronic obsession" many people have today.
In this chapter Bernard takes Lenina on a "date" and he chooses to visit the ocean at night time to watch the moon and the waves which would seem peaceful, but Lenina believes it is horrific and is forced to turn on the radio to forget about it. These descriptions of having turn to radio on a peaceful trip reminds me of many people today (sometimes even myself). For example when ones go on trips like camping instead of taking in the views and sounds they have to bring some sort of electronic with them to keep them occupied. At first I read these pages and thought to myself what is wrong with her that she cant relax and enjoy the view but when I thought about it, to be honest I might have done something similar.
So it just makes me think about how accurate Huxley was with his predictions and that he could have very well been hinting at the "electronic obsession" many people have today.
Bernard UNINTENIONAL Marx?
In "Brave New World", I came to an opinion about Bernard Marx. Since he is an Epsilon, expected to be tall, "good looking" one can say; is a short not too attractive person. Anyone in his position would have the lowest self-esteem around in my opinion. Although he does not notice it, unintentionally, he seems to be a very strong character who is way more valuable and important than what he believes he is. This reminds me of the various or many teenagers, who at this time of their lives when hormones are all over the place, believe they are not good enough or do not fit in. Believing is or not, they are sometimes worth much more than everybody else especially when they learn to be independent and again unintentionally careless of what others think. While reading Bernard Marx's part in the book, it made me think of even myself when sometimes I feel the way he does. Do any of you relate to him as well?
Are we being conditioned too?
I think it's a little harder for us to understand everything that Postman is talking about because of the time in which we were born. As he says, we were born with the television and the computer. We didn't really see much wrong with our media because we didn't see the shift he talks about from the serious tone in literature to the entertainment that our current media brought along. The reason for this is also that we weren't really ever taught about the history of media.
Anyhow, this means that our generation has grown accustomed to everything our media gives us and because of that, our generation doesn't question it. In Brave New World, the people didn't question their civilization either. The reason was that they had grown accustomed to it and that they were conditioned that way. In a way, do the media we have also condition us? Will future generations be even more conditioned than ours?
Mario Ayala
Anyhow, this means that our generation has grown accustomed to everything our media gives us and because of that, our generation doesn't question it. In Brave New World, the people didn't question their civilization either. The reason was that they had grown accustomed to it and that they were conditioned that way. In a way, do the media we have also condition us? Will future generations be even more conditioned than ours?
Mario Ayala
Turkey Buzzards
"Three days later, like turkey buzzards, settling on a corpse, the reporters came" (Huxley 169).
The media in Brave New World is very similar to the media we have today. It is amazing how accurate Huxley's theories are. As soon as something happens it is immediately on the news or in a tabloid magazine. The novel also said after John pushed one of the reporters, there was a story on The Hourly Radio about the incident eight minutes after it occurred. The media and paparazzi never seem to rest.
Do people really demand to know about stories as soon as they happen? The media claims to be giving people what they want, but are people this interested in celebrities and other news? Maybe the media fuels peoples' desire for news by trying to make everything seem important. There are many news stories every day. This reminds me of something Postman addressed in Amusing Ourselves to Death. When discussing the telegraph he said, "To the telegraph, intelligence meant knowing of lots of things, not knowing about them" (70). Today this is very common. No one can discuss one subject very long because they do not know much about it, they only of the the story's existance. At one point, most people were well informed, but that sounds so long ago.
The media in Brave New World is very similar to the media we have today. It is amazing how accurate Huxley's theories are. As soon as something happens it is immediately on the news or in a tabloid magazine. The novel also said after John pushed one of the reporters, there was a story on The Hourly Radio about the incident eight minutes after it occurred. The media and paparazzi never seem to rest.
Do people really demand to know about stories as soon as they happen? The media claims to be giving people what they want, but are people this interested in celebrities and other news? Maybe the media fuels peoples' desire for news by trying to make everything seem important. There are many news stories every day. This reminds me of something Postman addressed in Amusing Ourselves to Death. When discussing the telegraph he said, "To the telegraph, intelligence meant knowing of lots of things, not knowing about them" (70). Today this is very common. No one can discuss one subject very long because they do not know much about it, they only of the the story's existance. At one point, most people were well informed, but that sounds so long ago.
To the Abyss and Back
"Moral education, which ought never, in any circumstances, to be rational."
How rational are the rules that we live by in society? How far will we go to preserve order? In Brave New World, what society wants you to believe and how it wants you to act is engraved in your very subconscious. Today, we have to painstakingly teach our young to behave appropriately. Is Huxley's method safe enough to be used?
Hypnopaedia could be used to reduce the amount of effort used to train a child. While they sleep, soft whispers would caress them, "Wash your hands before you eat. Sharing is caring." But this leads to the question to what lengths will we go to make our lives easier? Is our comfort worth the sacrifice that people in Huxley's world have given up? Their lives are solely comfortable; they will never be truly happy without their synthetic happiness from soma.
We create our own happiness through overcoming adversity, hardwork, blood, sweat, and tears. How can we truly appreciate all this if we choose an easy life over true gratification?
How rational are the rules that we live by in society? How far will we go to preserve order? In Brave New World, what society wants you to believe and how it wants you to act is engraved in your very subconscious. Today, we have to painstakingly teach our young to behave appropriately. Is Huxley's method safe enough to be used?
Hypnopaedia could be used to reduce the amount of effort used to train a child. While they sleep, soft whispers would caress them, "Wash your hands before you eat. Sharing is caring." But this leads to the question to what lengths will we go to make our lives easier? Is our comfort worth the sacrifice that people in Huxley's world have given up? Their lives are solely comfortable; they will never be truly happy without their synthetic happiness from soma.
We create our own happiness through overcoming adversity, hardwork, blood, sweat, and tears. How can we truly appreciate all this if we choose an easy life over true gratification?
Another Question
For the CSUMentor extra credit, does the message we need to print out say "Congratulations, your new CSUMentor account has been created!"?
The Dialectic Within a Brave New World
Within this Brave New World society, there is a great tension that exists between two conflicting or interactive forces. A dialectic is also known as a Hegelian process which is the process, in Hegelian and Marxist thought, in which two apparently opposed ideas, the thesis and antithesis, become combined in a unified whole, the synthesis.
This factor is greatly displayed in this book for there is John, the savage, whose belief does coincide with the belief of the entire World State. John believes that the World State is corrupted and the dictators there no that as well. The dictators know that they are oppressing the people of that society, but the people of their society are unaware of that because they are so happy and drunk with soma that they don't even realize that. So I ask everyone. Is there other dialectics within our world today? What is your intake on this?
This factor is greatly displayed in this book for there is John, the savage, whose belief does coincide with the belief of the entire World State. John believes that the World State is corrupted and the dictators there no that as well. The dictators know that they are oppressing the people of that society, but the people of their society are unaware of that because they are so happy and drunk with soma that they don't even realize that. So I ask everyone. Is there other dialectics within our world today? What is your intake on this?
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Attention Attention
In Amusing Ourselves to Death chapter four, Postman talks about how Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas used to have incredibly long debates between one another. He states that the audience watching was very attentive and took part in clapping for things they agreed on. He says that so he can compare today's attention span to theirs. Though, I have trouble hearing that today's attention span is incredibly short. I do, see, and hear things that need my full attention and know others that do as well. Marching band, we need to put all our focus into where to breath, what to play, how to play it, where to march, and where to stop. Postman believes that the majority of the world has that dumb, goldfish attention span but I'd like to say at least half, we are not all mindless freaks that need to be entertained every five seconds.
Marching band isn't even the end of it, a lot of people that I know would love to sit at a symphonic band's concert and listen to the music. And out in the world there are people who sit at the Obama speeches and want to hear what he has to say because it's important to them.
The television is not something that is commonly important to someone, therefore someone will not give it their full attention. Though if it's something they love, something they have a passion for of course it's going to have their full attention and that could last for hours on end. Postman believes we have a short attention span but he's only comparing that to television programs, he's not looking farther into it where he should.
Marching band isn't even the end of it, a lot of people that I know would love to sit at a symphonic band's concert and listen to the music. And out in the world there are people who sit at the Obama speeches and want to hear what he has to say because it's important to them.
The television is not something that is commonly important to someone, therefore someone will not give it their full attention. Though if it's something they love, something they have a passion for of course it's going to have their full attention and that could last for hours on end. Postman believes we have a short attention span but he's only comparing that to television programs, he's not looking farther into it where he should.
Spread of American Culture
“the question, Does television shape culture of merely reflect it? Held considerable interest for many scholars and social critics. " (pg. 79, Postman)
With what I have seen outside of the United States, this is true. Our current fashion trends (skinny jeans, vest…), music, and even celebrity reach other countries. Only a few hours after I land in Vietnam, people almost immediately ask about the death of Michael Jackson. We talked about him and listened to his songs for hours on end.
Currently, I am listening to a lot of Korean Pop and I have seen many artists wear skinny jeans. Also many artists have been influenced by American singers (Justin Timberlake, Ne-yo, Lady Gaga). This entertainment is a part of our culture that is seen through television.
Another point that interested me was our movies. I have seen American movies (in the theaters) of countries in Europe, Asia (China and Vietnam) and Australia. I don’t think that they watch it only because they find it interesting, but they can find American culture in it.
Do you agree with the quote? How great of an influence do you think American culture has on the world?
The Postman Delivers Truth
In chapter 5 of "Amusing Ourselves to Death", Postman suggests that the invention of the telegraph changed how discourse was conveyed. The telegraph eventually became the ideal way of sending information. But the information sent in the years following its debut was highly irrelevant. Information sent from another state that didn't concern the receiver was eventually called 'news'. Unfortunately, this is the function of the T.V.
Today, I can turn on the T.V. and watch something in Japan from my living room and it will have no effect on my life but I would watch because it is entertaining. Now that doesn't make sense does it? But that is exactly what many of us do. We watch a show mainly because it is entertaining and don't see or understand the message of the show and we buy into that program's lie. Postman has foreseen the initial objective of television programs, whether good or bad, and has warned the world fervently. We should heed his warning and discover for ourselves the goal of a specific show.
Today, I can turn on the T.V. and watch something in Japan from my living room and it will have no effect on my life but I would watch because it is entertaining. Now that doesn't make sense does it? But that is exactly what many of us do. We watch a show mainly because it is entertaining and don't see or understand the message of the show and we buy into that program's lie. Postman has foreseen the initial objective of television programs, whether good or bad, and has warned the world fervently. We should heed his warning and discover for ourselves the goal of a specific show.
Truth Telling
How do you know what is the truth? Is it an opinion or a fact?
In Huxley's world, it was what you were conditioned to believe. All contradicting truths were eliminated in favor of stability. Your truth was what they told you, what you learned in your sleep, what you knew from your environment. What is your truth now? Is it what you believe? If it is true to you, is it true to another as well?
All these thoughts were planted in my mind by the time I finished Brave New World. How do we know what is a lie? Bernard knew that conditioning exercises were all that the masses would know, but he also knew that there was other information beside it. The masses believed that entertainment was all they needed to know; that thinking for themselves was overrated. In reality, how were they to advance and evolve with this truth that others had woven for them?
Do the little truths that we know equal a bigger truth or is the real truth lost because of censorship, white lies, and machinations of another kind?
In Huxley's world, it was what you were conditioned to believe. All contradicting truths were eliminated in favor of stability. Your truth was what they told you, what you learned in your sleep, what you knew from your environment. What is your truth now? Is it what you believe? If it is true to you, is it true to another as well?
All these thoughts were planted in my mind by the time I finished Brave New World. How do we know what is a lie? Bernard knew that conditioning exercises were all that the masses would know, but he also knew that there was other information beside it. The masses believed that entertainment was all they needed to know; that thinking for themselves was overrated. In reality, how were they to advance and evolve with this truth that others had woven for them?
Do the little truths that we know equal a bigger truth or is the real truth lost because of censorship, white lies, and machinations of another kind?
Matt Groening's Brave New World
As you may all be aware of, Matt Groening is the creator of the popular tv series, The Simpsons. That is what many of you know him by. But aside from the Simpsons, Matt also created another cartoon series called Futurama. This series features a clueless guy named Fry, a bending robot named Bender, and a ex job determination worker Leela. Upon watching the pilot episode, one might see a great similairity with Brave New World.
During the pilot, Fry is in the year 1999 as a loser who lost his girlfriend and is working in a dead-end job as a pizza delivery boy. On a delivery, he accidentally falls into a chamber. There he is frozen where he is transported 1000 years into the future to the year 2999. When he is unfrozen, he sees the new and technological future. Its more than he ever thought was possible. Then he is told by the scientists who unfroze him to go to the Fate Determination Officer. There he meets Leela, a one eyed alien woman. Leela tells him that he has to have a pre determined chip implanted in him that determines his job based on his physical and mental attributes. He is labeled as a delivery boy once more because he is best at it. When he asks Leela why she's making him do this, she relies by saying that its their job and that "you have to do, what you have to do." Otherwise saying that he has no choice in the matter. Hating the job he flees and escapes from Leela for the time being.
He explores the new world. Upon trying to find his great great...etc. grand nephew, he finds himself in a suicide booth with a robot named Bender. They survive and become unlikely friends. They then get sighted by Leela and flee once more. They find themselves hiding in a museum with the only way out being a barred off window. Fry says that since Bender is a bending robot he needs to bend it. But Bender replies that he is only programmed for business purposes and denies. Fry asks if even if hes programmed to fly off a bridge then should he do it? Bender checks his programming and says yes because he is programmed to do so. Bender crashes into a lightbulb and changes his mind to bend the bars and get away. While in the sewers, Fry visits the old New York. He states that he is alone and that all he knows is in the past. Leela finds them once more but decides to take off her chip and join them in unemployment. They then go to Fry's great great...etc. nephew Professor Farnsworth. They find that he is an old man, Crazy and wierd like Fry (because their related) but ultimately a great source of knowledge. After escaping, they are offered a job by the Professor as space delivery people. (Which is ironic because this is what Fry was running away from the whole episode)
After watching these events unfold, many things came to my mind. A big idea was that this was super similar to Brave New World. Fry could be labeled as John the Savage in that he is a generally unappealing person who is then exposed to the new world. Although unlike John, Fry is very dumb. But non-theless finds flaws in the somewhat utopia of Futurama.
Bender in my opinion could be labeled as Bernard. He is an outcast robot that is trying to find his new place in the world. When he fails to kill himself, he finds that he has a new place in the world, to live it up as Fry's friend no matter the consequence.. Bernard as you might have read, felt insecure, isolated, lonely. The same applies to Bender as that was the reason he was trying to kill himself in the first place where he met Fry. This new friend makes Bender willing to participate in his antics as well as with the meriment of society. Albeit he trys to steal stuff from society, he wants to participate in it non-theless as it provides him with the pleasure of self and instant gratification. Bernard became popular and famous along with the finding of a new person in John. With his finding, he participates in pleasure with self and instant gratification when he sleeps with so many women.
Leela could be labeled as the Director in some way. For one, she is in charge of assigning people with their fate. The Director like Leela, is in charge of how the different castes are destined to be by pre determining their fate. She also goes against society by removing her chip, which is considered blastphamy. The Director on the other hand, is the father of a child who would ultimately go against society.
Finally, Professor Farnsworth could be labeled as Helmholtz Watson. Although not attractive or strong, the Professor is filled with knowledge as he has made many inventions. His relationship with Fry could mirror the relationship between John and Helmholtz. As John and Helmholtz share simliar ideas (about Shakespeare for example) they undoubtly have different views about how its presented. He sees the greatness of Shakespeares works but laughs at the ideas of things like mothers. He is defined by what that culture makes him. This shows that even the smartest of people aren't entirely invincible to how society tries to manipulate them. The same could be said about Fry and the Professor. Fry is amazed at the future. But even though Fry and the Professor share the same ideas, (granted Fry's are more abstract and vague) the Professors ideas are influenced by the future by the way he sees things.
Is it just merely chance that Matt Groening has made his basis of a show on that of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World? Is it just chance that these cartoon characters could share these similar traits with those from the book? Coincidence?...I think not.
During the pilot, Fry is in the year 1999 as a loser who lost his girlfriend and is working in a dead-end job as a pizza delivery boy. On a delivery, he accidentally falls into a chamber. There he is frozen where he is transported 1000 years into the future to the year 2999. When he is unfrozen, he sees the new and technological future. Its more than he ever thought was possible. Then he is told by the scientists who unfroze him to go to the Fate Determination Officer. There he meets Leela, a one eyed alien woman. Leela tells him that he has to have a pre determined chip implanted in him that determines his job based on his physical and mental attributes. He is labeled as a delivery boy once more because he is best at it. When he asks Leela why she's making him do this, she relies by saying that its their job and that "you have to do, what you have to do." Otherwise saying that he has no choice in the matter. Hating the job he flees and escapes from Leela for the time being.
He explores the new world. Upon trying to find his great great...etc. grand nephew, he finds himself in a suicide booth with a robot named Bender. They survive and become unlikely friends. They then get sighted by Leela and flee once more. They find themselves hiding in a museum with the only way out being a barred off window. Fry says that since Bender is a bending robot he needs to bend it. But Bender replies that he is only programmed for business purposes and denies. Fry asks if even if hes programmed to fly off a bridge then should he do it? Bender checks his programming and says yes because he is programmed to do so. Bender crashes into a lightbulb and changes his mind to bend the bars and get away. While in the sewers, Fry visits the old New York. He states that he is alone and that all he knows is in the past. Leela finds them once more but decides to take off her chip and join them in unemployment. They then go to Fry's great great...etc. nephew Professor Farnsworth. They find that he is an old man, Crazy and wierd like Fry (because their related) but ultimately a great source of knowledge. After escaping, they are offered a job by the Professor as space delivery people. (Which is ironic because this is what Fry was running away from the whole episode)
After watching these events unfold, many things came to my mind. A big idea was that this was super similar to Brave New World. Fry could be labeled as John the Savage in that he is a generally unappealing person who is then exposed to the new world. Although unlike John, Fry is very dumb. But non-theless finds flaws in the somewhat utopia of Futurama.
Bender in my opinion could be labeled as Bernard. He is an outcast robot that is trying to find his new place in the world. When he fails to kill himself, he finds that he has a new place in the world, to live it up as Fry's friend no matter the consequence.. Bernard as you might have read, felt insecure, isolated, lonely. The same applies to Bender as that was the reason he was trying to kill himself in the first place where he met Fry. This new friend makes Bender willing to participate in his antics as well as with the meriment of society. Albeit he trys to steal stuff from society, he wants to participate in it non-theless as it provides him with the pleasure of self and instant gratification. Bernard became popular and famous along with the finding of a new person in John. With his finding, he participates in pleasure with self and instant gratification when he sleeps with so many women.
Leela could be labeled as the Director in some way. For one, she is in charge of assigning people with their fate. The Director like Leela, is in charge of how the different castes are destined to be by pre determining their fate. She also goes against society by removing her chip, which is considered blastphamy. The Director on the other hand, is the father of a child who would ultimately go against society.
Finally, Professor Farnsworth could be labeled as Helmholtz Watson. Although not attractive or strong, the Professor is filled with knowledge as he has made many inventions. His relationship with Fry could mirror the relationship between John and Helmholtz. As John and Helmholtz share simliar ideas (about Shakespeare for example) they undoubtly have different views about how its presented. He sees the greatness of Shakespeares works but laughs at the ideas of things like mothers. He is defined by what that culture makes him. This shows that even the smartest of people aren't entirely invincible to how society tries to manipulate them. The same could be said about Fry and the Professor. Fry is amazed at the future. But even though Fry and the Professor share the same ideas, (granted Fry's are more abstract and vague) the Professors ideas are influenced by the future by the way he sees things.
Is it just merely chance that Matt Groening has made his basis of a show on that of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World? Is it just chance that these cartoon characters could share these similar traits with those from the book? Coincidence?...I think not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
