by Uncola via TheBurningPlatform.com
Definition of UTOPIA
1: an imaginary and indefinitely remote place
2: a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions
3: an impractical scheme for social improvement
Definition of DYSTOPIA
1: an imaginary place where people lead dehumanized and often fearful lives
2: literature: anti-utopia
Many Americans today would quite possibly consider Aldous Huxley’s “Brave New World” to be a utopia of sorts with its limitless drugs, guilt-free sex, perpetual entertainment and a genetically engineered society designed for maximum economic efficiency and social harmony. Conversely, most free people today would view Orwell’s “1984” as a dystopian nightmare, and shudder to contemplate the terrifying existence under the iron fist of “Big Brother”; the ubiquitous figurehead of a perfectly totalitarian government.
Although both men were of British descent, Huxley was nine years older than Orwell and published Brave New World in 1932, seventeen years before 1984 was released in 1949. Both books are widely considered classics and are included in the Modern Library’s top ten great novels of the twentieth century.
Brave New World
Aldous Huxley was born to academic parents and he was the grandson of Thomas Henry Huxley, a famous biologist and an enthusiastic proponent of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution who was known as “Darwin’s Bulldog”. Huxley’s own father had a well-equipped botanical laboratory where young Aldous began his education. Given the Huxley family’s appreciation for science, it makes perfect sense that Brave New World began in what is called the “Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Centre” where human beings are artificially grown and genetically predestined into five societal castes consisting of: Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Epsilon.
Initially, the story centers on Bernard Marx, who is a slightly genetically flawed Alpha Plus psychologist with an inferiority complex due to his short stature. By the end of the novel, however, the protagonist becomes a boy named “John the Savage” who is the bastard child of the “Director of the Central London Hatchery”, and a lady named Linda, who naturally birthed John on a remote American Indian Reservation. When Bernard discovers the true identities of John and Linda, he arranges to fly them back to London in order to leverage his position with John’s biological father, the Hatchery Director.
Bernard is in love with a beautiful fetus technician named Lenina Crowne, who, upon meeting John the Savage falls madly in lust. Lenina is a gal who enjoys multiple lovers because, in the Brave New World, “everyone belongs to everyone else”. In other words, sexual promiscuity is encouraged as sort of a societal “pressure relief valve” designed to discourage negative emotions such as jealousy and envy. John the Savage, however, suppresses his sexual attraction to Lenina because he considers her a slut.
Eventually, John’s sexual repression contributes to him violently attacking some children of the Delta caste who were waiting in line for their “Soma”, a mood-altering drug; and the outburst causes both Bernard and John to be brought before the powerful Mustapha Mond, who is one of ten world controllers. A debate ensues between John and Mr. Mond who explains to the Savage that a stable society requires the controlled suppression of science, religion, and art. John, who is an avid admirer of William Shakespeare, argues that human life is not worth living without these things.
In Brave New World, the State achieves a harmonic equilibrium via the economic parity of production and consumption while utilizing Eugenics as a means to counterbalance the life and death of the citizens. Technology is employed as a means of control in lieu of any search for scientific, or spiritual, truth; as these are considered a threat to the established order. People are cloned in hatcheries in accordance to the needs of the State and trained into obedience through “Hypnopedia”, or sleep-teaching. Happiness is valued over dignity and morality, and emotions are regulated through the use of the drug, Soma, amid constant entertainment including superficial games and virtual reality venues called the “feelies”. Although there is no God or religion, per se, in Brave New World, Henry Ford is canonized in the place of a deity as a testament to corporate efficiency, assembly line production and rampant consumerism.
1984
Like Huxley, George Orwell also envisioned a future where government monitored and controlled every aspect of human life; yet the world is much more terrifying in 1984. Orwell reported on the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and he witnessed, first-hand, the ghastly barbarism of political fascism. Moreover, he previously observed the rise of Joseph Stalin in the Soviet Union and, later, Adolf Hitler in Germany. In turn, Orwell published Animal Farm in 1945 and four years later, his novel 1984, as literary warnings to mankind.
The setting of 1984 takes place in a futuristic, post-apocalyptic Great Britain which, at that time, was part of “Oceania”; one of three world super-states all engaged in never-ending warfare. The protagonist of the novel is Winston Smith, a middle-class member in the Outer Party of INGSOC, a totalitarian regime led by the figurehead known only as “Big Brother”.
Winston works in the Records Department of the “Ministry of Truth” where he revises history on behalf of the Party while under constant surveillance both at work and home. Everywhere he goes; there are posters with a photo of the party’s leader and the words: “BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU”. In an act of rebellion, Winston acquires a diary and begins to record what Big Brother and the INGSOC party would label as “crimethink” and “thoughtcrime”.
Eventually, Winston meets and falls in love with a beautiful coworker named Julia, and they engage in what they believe to be a secret affair whereby they have illicit sex as a form of political rebellion. In 1984, the Party members living in Oceania are brainwashed to have sex only for procreation and this is how sexual repression is channeled into enthusiasm for the State.
Under the threat of detection by the “Thought Police”, torture and even “vaporization”, which would eliminate every last vestige of proof he ever existed, Winston persists in his rebellion against the Party with certain fatalism. In fact, just before he and Julia are captured by the militant, jackbooted INGSOC Party authoritarians, Winston told Julia “we are the dead”; to which she replied the same words back to him.
Throughout Orwell’s dark narrative, various themes are explored such as “Newspeak” which is a language of mind control; the terrifying tyranny of totalitarianism; historical revisionism; torture, and psychological manipulation. The INGSOC Party’s prisonlike control and complete invasion of individual privacy is such that a citizen’s own facial expression could betray their inner disloyalty to the Party through what Orwell labeled as “crimeface”:
Your worst enemy, he reflected, was your own nervous system. At any moment the tension inside you was liable to translate itself into some visible symptom.
– Winston Smith, 1984, part 1, chapter 6
Orwell was near prophetic in describing the proliferation of listening devices in both public and private settings as well as “telescreens”, which simultaneously broadcast propaganda while relaying live video feeds back to the Party watchers. In Orwell’s chilling story, free will and individuality are sacrificed to the extreme demands of Collectivism and in deference to complete societal control by an authoritarian government.
Compared and Contrasted
In both, Brave New World and 1984, common themes are addressed including government, orthodoxy, social hierarchy, economics, love, sex, and power. Both books portray propaganda as a necessary tool of government to shape the collective minds of the citizenry within each respective society and towards the specific goals of the state; to wit, stability and continuity.
In Brave New World, The “Bureaux of Propaganda” shared a building with the “College of Emotional Engineering” and all media outlets including radio, television, and newspaper. Much of the brainwashing of the citizens in Huxley’s world included messaging to stay within their genetically predetermined castes or to encourage the daily use of the drug, Soma, in order to anesthetize emotional agitation:
a gramme in time saves nine
A gramme is better than a damn
One cubic centimetre cures ten gloomy sentiments
When the individual feels, the community reels.
The “Ministry of Truth”, in 1984, also known as “minitrue” in Newspeak, served as the propaganda machine for Big Brother and the INGSOC regime. Although its main purpose was to rewrite history in order to realign it with Party doctrine and make the Party look infallible, the Ministry of Truth also promoted war hysteria in order to unite the citizens of Oceania while broadcasting simple messages designed to discourage any self-determination or autonomous thought.
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
war is peace
freedom is slavery
ignorance is strength
Whereas the citizens of Brave New World used the drug Soma and cursory material distractions to vanquish any desire for real knowledge or truth; the “memory hole” in 1984 was a chute connected to an incinerator and served as the mechanism by which the Ministry of Truth would abolish historical archives as if they never existed.
In other words, truth was unimportant to the citizens of Brave New World and it was summarily rescinded from the realm of 1984.
Furthermore, in order to additionally fill the empty existence of those living in Brave New World, Huxley envisioned a character by the name of Helmholtz Watson as a creator of hypnopaedic phrases designed to fill the mental and emotional vacuum vacated by knowledge:
Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they’re so frightfully clever. I’m really awfuly glad I’m a Beta, because I don’t work so hard. And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don’t want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse. They’re too stupid to be able to read or write. Besides, they wear black, which is such a beastly colour. I’m so glad I’m a Beta.
– BNW, Chapter 2, pg. 27
In 1984, however, Orwell conceived of a character named Syme, who was an enthusiastic Newspeak redactor of language:
It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.
Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten.
– Syme, 1984, part 1, chapter 5
In Brave New World, Helmholtz Watson worked to fill the mind of people with hypnotic messages. In 1984, Syme strived to remove words from the English language in order to eliminate what the Party considered to be “thoughtcrime”.
Although the methodologies varied, mind control was prevalent throughout both the fictional worlds of Huxley and Orwell.
Social hierarchies were also present in both futuristic novels. The citizens of Brave New World consisted of the Alpha caste which held the highest jobs in the world state, and Betas, who were allowed to interact with the Alphas. The Gamma’s were considered to have average intelligence, they were eight inches shorter than Alpha’s in height, and they maintained the office jobs and held administrative positions. The Delta’s were trained from a very young age to despise books and were conditioned to work in manufacturing, while the Epsilon castes members were considered as morons who performed the menial labor within the lowest strata of society.
Although 1984 doesn’t have a caste system, per se, the citizenry were still separated into three groups: the Inner Party, the Outer Party, and the Proles, or the proletariat. The Proles constituted 85% of the population and were allowed privacy and anonymity, yet they lived in extreme privation in pursuit of bread and circuses.
As the Party slogan put it: ‘Proles and animals are free.’
– ”1984”: part 1, chapter 7
Although both Inner and Outer Party members of 1984’s Oceania lived under constant surveillance, the members of the Inner party led lives of relative luxury compared to the middle-class lifestyle of those within the Outer Party. Additionally, the members of the Outer Party were denied sex, other than within marriage and for the sole purposes of procreation. They were also denied motorized transportation and were allowed cigarettes and gin as their only vices.
Governments of both Brave New World and 1984 also filtered information and propaganda in accordance to the class ranking of their citizens.
In Brave New World, the separate castes, except for the Epsilons who couldn’t read, received their own newspapers delivering specific propaganda for each class of society; whereas the INGSOC party members of 1984 were allowed newspapers and to view broadcasted reports of world news via their telescreens.
Even though there is no actual organized religion described in either book, there were deities endorsed by the government, primarily for economic reasons, and complete with mandated rigorous orthodoxies.
Again, the aforementioned god of Brave New World was called “Ford”, after Henry Ford, in celebration of his efficient assembly-line production of goods that was worshiped by both the overseers and citizenry of the world state.
In 1984, Big Brother served as the almighty “beginning and end”, creator, judge, grand architect and savior for the INGSOC party disciples.
In Huxley’s vision of the future, the higher power of consumerism guided the people; complete with memorized short phrases designed to encourage the replacement of material items in lieu of repairing them; and, those wearing older clothes were shamed into purchasing new apparel:
Ending is better than mending.
The more stitches, the less riches.
BNW, Chapter 3, pg. 49
Orwell, on the other hand, considered war as the means by which a collectivist oligarchy could maintain a hierarchical society by purging the excess production of material goods from the economy; thus, keeping the masses impoverished and ignorant by denying them the surplus “spare time” that is afforded via the convenience of modern technology:
The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.
— Emmanuel Goldstein, ”1984”: part 2, chapter 9
The futuristic societies envisioned by Huxley and Orwell, additionally, both discouraged romantic love, yet diverged on the subject of sex. As mentioned earlier, Brave New World treated sex as a “pressure relief valve” remaining constantly open in order to release any negative emotions like suspicion, distrust, jealousy, rage or envy. “Everyone belonged to everyone else”, so there was no need for secrets. Even children were encouraged to sexually experiment guilt free. Of course, sex was meant to be enjoyed only as a means of pleasure in Brave New World; as procreation was considered an anathema by the people and beneath the dignity of mankind.
In Orwell’s dark dystopia, however, promiscuous sex was encouraged among the proletariat and the Ministry of Truth even had a pornography division called “Pornosec”, which distributed obscene media for consumption by the Proles alone. Conversely, and also as mentioned prior, the members of the INGSOC party were required to abstain from sex; except for married couples attempting to procreate solely on behalf of the government.
In reading both books, it was also fascinating to see how both Huxley and Orwell painted their female protagonists, Lenina Crowne and Julia, respectively, as shallow nymphomaniacs.
Nevertheless, the procreative sterilized purity and casual sexual promiscuity of Brave New World along with 1984’s hierarchical rationing of sex, combined with the twisted morality of the INGSOC Party, represented the power of government invading into the most personal means of expression, and engenderment, between individuals of both worlds.
The concept of “everyone belongs to everyone else” in Brave New World allowed intimate acts to be considered merely as trivial recreation whereas the Party’s power over copulation in 1984, created a sense of fatalism within Winston and Julia as they made love knowing they were “the dead”.
In spite of any differences, both scenarios were the end result of extreme philosophical collectivism manifested into distorted and perverse destinies of speculative, future populations.
The Future is Now
For reasons described heretofore, many might consider Brave New World to be a utopian dream. In the context of individual autonomy, however, as well as the pursuit of truth, the opportunity for personal self-actualization, the dilemma of ethical considerations and the governmental dispensation of immoral law; Huxley’s vision of the future removes the lid of a veritable Pandora’s Box of questions. In reality, the societal structure as delineated in Brave New World would greatly resemble what could be called a “prison of pleasure” and, perhaps, even a “penitentiary of profligate practicality”.
Applying the same philosophical critique of 1984, and in similar fashion, Orwell’s nation-state of Oceana would be considered as a bona fide dystopian “prison of fear”.
As a matter of fact, both societies portray prisons of man’s own making, formed by governments following their own directions toward their respective future destinations. To say it another way: The road to hell is actually paved with bad intentions. As the Inner Party member (and administrator of torture), “Obrien”, admitted to Winston Smith in Room 101 of The Ministry of Love:
We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.
– Obrien, ”1984”: part 3, chapter 3,
Both power structures in Brave New World and 1984 chose to diminish individual rights in order to achieve societal stability. To the governments of both super-states, their citizens were considered as mere “means to an end”; namely, the continuation of power.
Now I will tell you the answer to my question. It is this. The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness; only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps they even believed, that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that.
– Obrien, ”1984”: part 3, chapter 3,
This is a perfect description of mankind striving to be as gods; an attempt to create metaphysical law from carnal desire. Foregone were the virtues of mercy, humility, temperance, autonomy, self-reliance, and restraint.
Mustapha Mond, one of ten world controllers in Brave New World and the evil Obrien of 1984’s nation of Oceana, both knew what they were doing. They were fully conscious in order to exert complete control and ensure the continuation of their respective, fictional nation-states.
But, could this type of power consolidation occur in the real (non-literary) world?
To answer that question one only needs to study history then, go turn on all of the various “telescreens” in their private homes: Televisions, smartphones, tablets, lap-taps and desktop computers. Tyrannical regimes have been centralizing and fortifying ramparts of power from the time man first crushed grapes. And, obviously, as the exiled enemy of the State, Edward Snowden, has revealed, modernity is no antiserum to the cancerous systematization of power.
When considering the prosperous technological paradise of Brave New World, where the societal elite had unrestricted access to intercontinental transportation and private helicopters; where even the lower classes enjoyed pampered lives of perennial comfort, ceaseless entertainment, and eternal recreation; as compared to the dingy, post-apocalyptically war-torn, third-world existence of 1984; it becomes difficult not to view both Huxley and Orwell as prophets.
Indeed, both futures have come to pass and are merely economically separated and dispersed into diverse geographic locations.
Today, it is the westernized cultures of the world, including Asian nations like Japan and South Korea, that more closely resemble Brave New World, whereas vestiges of 1984 can be seen in the eastern bloc communist countries, China, North Korea and the Islamic societies of the middle-east.
Although Adam Smith’s “invisible hand” of Capitalism had created a rising economic tide that lifted many boats; much of the world’s population still languishes in squalor and will never rise from the muck.
Moreover, even the modernized nations today have sacrificed individual freedom upon the altar of Collectivism as political correctness stifles free speech; families suffocate beneath mountains of debt and United Nations Agenda 21 policies release a deluge of regulations causing extra-governmental autonomous innovation to collapse before the inexorable, gravitational pull of the hive-mind.
Corporations like Amazon, Microsoft, Samsung and Apple have become the eyes and ears of Big Brother who is always watching, and ever listening.
To the sounds of mouse-clicks, once free people have “accepted” the “terms” of their surrender and have forfeited their liberty in the name of convenience. Like buzzing insects, the citizens of modern societies are caught in silicon honey traps mortgaged with plastic and electronically powered via USB cable nooses wrapped tightly around their collective throats.
The Technocratic Powers That Be wield weapons far more powerful than any time prior in history and soon, people will wake up to realize the electronic buzzing sound ringing in their ears was not emanating from their own wings, but rather, it was merely the sound of drones over their heads.
Like in Brave New World, science now rules supreme over ethics as medical professionals sell fetus organs to advance the cause of genetic research. The United States currently leads the world in illegal drug use and consumes near all of the global opioid supply; according to U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy:
In most countries, the use of opioid prescriptions is limited to acute hospitalization and trauma, such as burns, surgery, childbirth and end-of-life care, including patients with cancer and terminal illnesses. But in the United States, every adult in America can have “a bottle of pills and then some.
Just as 1984’s Ministry of Truth purveyed pornography to the Proles, statistics show at least 35% of all internet downloads and at least 30% of all data transferred across the internet are porn-related. Also similar to Huxley’s Brave New World, sex runs rampant throughout the modernized nations as cases of sexually transmitted disease have reached a record high in the United States.
In correlation to the ever-expanding gulf between rich and poor, strict adherence to orthodoxy now determines how high one can rise in the societies of the westernized nations, as political correctness defines the faith of the pantheistic disciples of Mother Earth in the form of Gaia worship; and social hierarchy is increasingly determined via the identity politics of the collectivist left. The American body politic has now witnessed the rise of the warrior cop and the militarization of domestic law enforcement, as interminable wars are eternally fought on foreign shores and sovereign nations are bombed under false pretense.
Even 1984’s “Victory Gin” has manifested in the form Russian Vodka within the eastern nations, as Oceania’s type of man-made orthodoxy silently drowns the human spirit in devastating despair, while contorted moralities overtake both the Christian and Islamic societies of the modern age.
Orwell defined “doublethink” as:
the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them
— Emmanuel Goldstein, ”1984”: part 2, chapter 9
Only in wealthy westernized nations do billionaires own multiple mansions, fly private jets and ride in eight-cylinder limousines to climate-change conferences where policies are decreed to lower the carbon footprint of the proletariat. Only in wealthy westernized nations, do ever-increasing numbers of women consider white men to be pigs while simultaneously striving to be their equals. And, only in the wealthy Christian nations of the northern hemisphere will citizens support a women’s right to third-trimester abortions, while rigorously and righteously battling for legislation to save endangered dung beetles.
Throughout Islamic societies, drinking alcohol and gambling is forbidden, but the governments and their citizens gladly tolerate canings, whippings, lashings, honor killings, suicide attacks, and the genital mutilation of young girls.
This does NOT prevent, however, the citizens of the wealthy Christian nations in the West to welcome with open arms, and in the name of “tolerance”, the pervading flood of Islamic immigrants.
The writings of Huxley and Orwell resonate by the echoes of history, over the canyons of time, and to the very cliff upon where mankind now stands. Propaganda daily spews via the machinations of five corporations which control 90% of all mainstream media channels. These companies toe the war-party line and wield their great powers of disinformation to contort facts or even censor the failures of the politicians whom they favor while, simultaneously, attacking their political enemies with lies and innuendo; even to the point of creating a phony election hacking narrative to satisfy their radioactive lust for war with nuclear powered enemies.
Even the characters of both Brave New World and 1984 are resonant of familiar archetypes from days gone by. Brave New World portrayed the character Bernard Marx as being short like Hitler, with a small man’s inferiority complex and complete with the surname of Karl Marx, the eponymous founder of Marxism.
The noble sounding Lenina Crowne’s name contains the surname of Vladimir Lenin, and Orwell’s portrayal of Julia does not seem overly diverse from former President’s Obama’s vision of “The Life of Julia”. Even the mustachioed, evil-eyed Big Brother from 1984’s dystopian nation of Oceana, looks eerily similar to just about every other tin-pot dictator who ever walked the earth.
Art imitating life? Indeed.
Yet the irony fails to impress America’s young social justice warriors of the Millennial generation who have been raised on a steady diet of socialism, political correctness, and participation trophies; a far cry from the rugged individualists of previous American generations. In the 2016 U.S. Democratic Party Primaries, and with the same sense of vague dissatisfaction as exhibited by Huxley’s Bernard Marx, millions upon millions of rainbow worshipping Snowflakes, old and young alike, turned out in force to show their support for another Bernard: Bernard Sanders, a redistributionist of the line of Robin Hood who, in the spirit of Santa Claus, offered free college educations to all of Uncle Sam’s children.
Sadly, Big Brother is here to stay and, with time, he will only grow more bigly; regardless of any transitory elected politicians in the governments of the world’s “sovereign” nations today.
Although Aldous Huxley and George Orwell valiantly spun fictional narratives in order to warn the real world’s future citizens, they were not alone in their efforts.
On January 17, 1961, former President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of an ever-encroaching “Military Industrial Complex” in his farewell address to the nation:
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Exactly 100 days after Ike’s farewell, on April 27, 1961, John F. Kennedy spoke before the American Newspaper Publishers Association in an address that later became known as his “Secret Society” speech. In that address, he stated the following:
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence: on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed. Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed– and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy.
Thirty months after that speech, President Kennedy was assassinated in Dallas, Texas on November 22, 1963.
Many people consider Kennedy to have been the last American president not controlled by a financial global elite hell bent on world domination.
In one of the twentieth century’s minor ironies, Aldous Huxley died on the very same day that John F. Kennedy was killed. It was also the exact day C.S. Lewis, the British author, and Christian apologist, passed from this earth.
Coincidence? Only God knows.
Regardless, by 1984 all had been forgotten; and, in a Brave New World, none of it really matters anyway.
Uninclusive? Why didn’t you consider Ayn Rand’s Anthem when talking about dystopian futures? It is because she is a woman, isn’t it? Are you secretly Bill O’Reilly?
‘…Behind my beloved waterfall, in the little room that was hidden beneath the cave, I
found it. I brushed away the dust of the years, and picked it up, holding it reverently in
my hands. I had no idea what it might be, but it was beautiful…’
‘…I learned to lay my fingers across the wires, and to turn the keys to make them sound
differently. As I struck the wires with my other hand, I produced my first harmonious sounds
and soon my own music! How different it could be from the music of the Temples! I can’t wait
to tell the priests about it!…’
What can this strange device be?
When I touch it, it gives forth a sound
It’s got wires that vibrate and give music
What can this thing be that I found?
Since Trump’s bogus bombing of Syria, I am no longer turning out essays every few days in his defense (for now).
Moreover, I am also enjoying writing without that same sense of urgency in a daily race against the headlines, and am therefore, choosing to currently take more time in completing pieces like the above which should, in turn, have a little more shelf-life.
If this blog could be considered as a buffet for the mind, delivering delicious intellectual sustenance to the remnant; you can be assured Ayn Rand will be served in short order.
In other words, and in Bill O’Reilly’s absence, I shall soon be “killing” Ayn Rand. ?
Do me a favor, Unobjective. See if you can include some discussion of We The Living, which is Ayn’s semi-autobiographical novel about a young woman whose upper-class world disappeared in the Revolution. I think TBPers might benefit from a discussion of how a family of means copes when their entire lives are STOLEN from them by the “state” to redistribute to the masses.
If you have earned what you possess, why should anyone else have a right to ANY of it. The state, which claims the right to redistribute your worth, lacks the ability to earn anything.
So, please, kill Ayn Rand softly… I find her heroine’s death in We The Living to be one of the “best” tragic ends EVER.
Yeah, there are many parallels between Ayn’s own life, her literary works and today’s headlines. In fact, her celebration of the individual could be considered as a therapeutic counteractant to the material ailments as diagnosed by Huxley, Orwell and others.
Remember that part in BNW where they discuss reutilizing the dead for power?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9101874/Minister-praises-plan-to-heat-swimming-pool-from-fires-of-crematorium.html
Congratulations Unco, you just joined the Zerohedge fraternity. Welcome.
Maybe it’s because Ayn Rand is unreadable.
Nah, Unc is not Bill Ohreally. It’s just that Ayn Rand couldn’t write fiction to save her life.
Yes, Neil Peart was heavily influenced by Rand and the dystopian message of 2112 is a masterpiece of musicianship and message………
As Geddy Lee agonizes in the denouement
Just think of what my life might be, in the world that I have seen,
I don’t think I can carry on, carry on this cold and empty life…….
A future for mankind, whether controlled by pleasure and distraction or fear and propaganda is a dark future either way and one I would not wish for my progeny.
sorry, don’t know why my post was “anonymous”
“Hope” to tear the temples down
“Hope” for “Change”
Where have I heard that before (will Neil Peart ever live these lines down?) Not hard to see why Uncola left ‘Atlas’ out of his example. Yes it’s relevant in one regard, but also so full of ideology that it opens up too many roads leading to too many places (like Syrinx) as the quote above should illustrate. The article loses no impact by leaving these topics out.
Nothing matters save the work, our secret, our evil, our precious work.
A thoughtful treatise commensurate with the quality we expect from Admin Himself. Bravo!
I agree… our little jfish growed up to be quite the thinker.
Just F.I.S.H.
[img
[/img]
Rand was an oracle just as Orwell was warning of the future script. Huxley was a eugenics minded tool of the elite. Their books were the warning from TPTB of what is to come as there is always some warning even if it is 50 to 100 years in advance.
Enough “Soma” and you won’t care if is UTOPIA or DISTOPIA, now will you?
Maggie
Your discussion of Ayn Rand’s We the Living reminds me also of Dr Zhivago, in part the tale of an idealistic physician whose upper middle class life also was upended by the Russian Revolution. Sad that there are many examples in life and literature that teach us what not to do as a society, yet those lessons are either not learned or are learned, then lost. Fourth Turning (Generational) Theory suggests that the lessons are learned, only to be later forgotten, inexorably leading to the cycles of crises characterized by Fourth turnings.
Wow.
YOU should be writing a book.
Consistently strong, thorough and insightful pieces and of the caliber of the book I was reading this morning (The Essential Agrarian Reader). There is a reason TBP is one of only three or four websites I visit and it is the consistently solid writing in a wide variety of styles and topics that makes the Internet worthwhile.
I don’t know that there’s anything else I could add other than I just asked my son to read it so we could discuss it further.
Outstanding.
what hsf said!
I really appreciate your comments above, Hardscrabble. They mean more to me than you might realize.
With the festive atmosphere of a neighborhood bar, paired with the intellectual stimulation of a collegiate debate society, I am in agreement this forum is an ideal place for the like-minded and the curious to gather.
Perhaps all the more so in the days ahead.
I am very grateful to Admin and The Man With No Name for maintaining this platform. Hopefully, people will remember to keep “tipping their waiters”, so to speak.
Hello,
I have to insert here rather than at the end of the line.
Uncola,
What an excellent thought provoking piece you have written.
For all the predictable misery it portends, for some reason,
your words have given me hope.
Thanks! I’ve never compared the two books in light of eastern and western civilization. Brilliant! It may be too late to change the future, but if it can happen, it will begin with honest, truthful commentary, to ensure we are on the right path. Blessings.
Nice work Uncola. I believe both books should be required reading for all. Today, I believe both approaches are being used. Bread & Circus (Talmud Vision & Intoxicants) & Police State (NSA, TSA, militarized police, etc. etc. etc.). I got through “Atlas Shrugged” after 3 tries. It was definitely worth reading. I think Ayn would love the “50 shades of Grey” books. She would have love to have her ass whipped by some rich industrialist LOL.
I’ve used this quote from Neil Postman in previous articles:
“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egotism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny “failed to take into account man’s almost infinite appetite for distractions.” In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that our fear will ruin us. Huxley feared that our desire will ruin us.”
Amusing Ourselves to Death
In the article we see that knowledge is blocked by lack of creativity, individualism suppressed by a theoretical total care of desire and need. Like Alexis de Tocqueville wrote in the 19th century after touring America, the South was much less vibrant and even prosperous be caused the people who would drive such vibrancy were less driven than in controlling their slaves and subjects.
So strange that they were both so precise yet so inaccurate. This is the one thing that Rand got right. Whether we are presented with Utopia or dystopia, ultimately it is the inclination of the individual mind that creates each individual’s reality. This is why, even as the fake news stories come ever more fast and furious, we see a simultaneous explosion in populism, “audit the fed-ism”, “Brexit-ism”, etc. That’s called winning, and should be all the proof you need of the one thing both books got wrong:. You CANNOT crush the human spirit. These books are great warnings, but I have no fear whatsoever that the few parallels to today in any way portend our digression into the full realities they describe. Do you dare overlook all that has happened in the time since they were written? Clearly the only boot stomping on any face has been the boot of human self determinism stomping on the face of Collectivism all over the world. Sure, in every war there is collateral damage to both sides but there is still no grey area about which way the tide is going. Yes, your TV is spying on you but it’s not Lenin, Castro or Chavez on the other end. Sadly it’s just misguided people who are ultimately invested in the same -topia as you, and who will give up their positions more readily when they hear the boots coming ( at least 75% of our intelligence agencies are made up of “Pre-Snowdens” just waiting for one more nudge). So the takeaway message here should be one of encouragement. The game isn’t totally over, but we’re winning by a huge margin. Never lose sight of that. “Who is John Galt?…We are!”
Thank you, Administrator; that’s the clearest and most profound statement of the difference between 1984 and Brave New World that I have seen. And you are the first in this discussion to cite Huxley’s Brave New World Revisited, in which he clearly explains why the Brave New World utopia is more likely than the 1984 distopia, at least in the West.
While we were reading both books in the 1960s, the reaction of my classmates was most revealing. They were horrified by the harsh repression of 1984, but they were intrigued by the sensuousness and permissivism of Brave New World. I seemed to be the only one who was repulsed by both and who identified completely with John the Savage. To most, Brave New World seemed much less frightening; and perhaps for that reason, its prospect of realization is even more frightening.
I find that your works give more food for thought than my pea brain can process at one time. Thank you. Much of what I read on TBP expands my thinking as opposed to almost everything else out there.
It seems as if our retrograde superstate is trying to amalgamate the most repressive aspects of 1984 and brave new world into some kind of hybridized tower of babel. we recently watched the movie the giver where the society seems ordered along the lines of a brave new world. One thing that struck me was that no matter how hard the powers that shouldn’t be try, they are unable to extinguish the flame of freedom in mans mind.
Personally I live in the brave new world. whenever I am working by the road that fronts part of our property, covered in dirt and sweat, as the soma filled people drive by in their brand new cars. I must seem to them as one of the reservation dwellers. I wouldn’t trade being a filthy savage for all the soma in the world.
Both of these books were required reading for our kids growing up, including Ayn Rand and some others. Both kids can think for themselves and disdain much of what their snowflake peers try to push as gospel.
This essay of yours could be made into a whole study on the battle between the collective and the individual. It would be a great class for all high school seniors and open up many rabbit holes to deeper understanding. Young minds are such fertile ground for this kind of thinking exactly because they only hear the hive mind side of things. Keep up the good work.
That’s what I’m talking about! I just finished making this same point. Always remember, that boot can’t stomp on your face until you lie down for it. I get the impression that you’re not lying down for anyone. Neither am I. And I daresay neither is Trump, unlike his predecessor who lied down or bent over on command.
So come get some O’ Brien. War will definitely be war.
Have always thought our world has come to resemble a blending of the two novels.
My oldest kid actually brought 1984 home as a reading project over the Christmas break. I was shocked. I didn’t think they allowed kids access to anything so controversial anymore. Then he tells me he chose to read this particular book and that in fact, it was not easy to track a copy down. He had to borrow it from one of his other teachers on the promise he would return it when he was finished.
We read 1984 and Animal Farm in school. There were stacks of both of them in the English teacher’s room. Sadly, not anymore.
Read both books in the 70’s. Living them today. The message went unheard, deemed too preposterous to come true till Kennedy got shot in the head, America was dead and the snowball of centralization, manipulation and control started rolling down the hill. It’s now a world gone mad, but mad is the new normal. Embrace it or become the unsightly nail that needs to be hammered back down. Next time around elect Charlie Manson as Psychopath In Chief, after all he said, “no sense makes sense”, what a fitting slogan for our times. The only thing Orwell got wrong was the title, should ‘ve been 2017.
“Like buzzing insects, the citizens of modern societies are caught in silicon honey traps mortgaged with plastic and electronically powered via USB cable nooses wrapped tightly around their collective throats.”
Dude..I mean this is some seriously beautiful writing. I am keeping this one for further study. Thanks for taking the time to express your thoughts. In our “controlled society” there is no other place where we can exchange ideas which are contrary to the approved doctrine.
But still we have to ask – if not this, then what? It is powerful to insight dissatisfaction but it is useless without a clear explanation of a viable alternative. How about we all spend some time coming up with a viable alternative to the oppression of our overlords. What would it be? How can we achieve it?
I will start with my opinion that the only way out is to stop voting for people who are already in power. No term limits. You will never get them from those who wish to continue to suckle at the teat of power. A once and done voting mentality might just disrupt this entrenched oligarchy.
Paul Rosenberg over at http://www.freemansperspective.com offers some very thoughtful solutions — per your request above.
Better yet…stop PAYING “elected officials”…don’t allow political office to become a career path. Only those who are self-funded would be able to serve. That should cut out most of the riff-raff(And the bureaucracy should NEVER pay more than the private sector). Note that, despite Trump’s turning his back on his base, barely 100 days in, neither he, nor many of his cabinet members, take a salary. Contrast with most on the left, who enter DC “tlhousandaires”, but leave multimillionaires.
Also, do you think people like Feinstein, Reid, or Schumer would be Senators were it not for the 17th Amendment?
The answer does not depend on voting. Them guys are just
front men, (Maggie, and women) and we loathe them
because they are so transparently foul.
Look to the bankers and the mega corps. They are the source
of crime and fraud and (even when they openly admit it)
are never caught up and punished for anything. They are rewarded
by their peers.
What can we do? Not much against “them” but we can lead our lives honestly, and teach what we can to our children through example.
The answer to it all is so simple. It’s Lew Rockwell’s mantra: Laugh at them. Laugh really hard and really seriously and right in their face. Laugh at the boot and laugh at the idea of it stomping on your face. Laugh at their fake news, laugh at their fake money, laugh at their fake ‘men’ and ‘women’, and NEVER STOP. Its like kryptonite to them. You’ll be amazed it was so simple that you didn’t try it sooner. Break your mental chains, stop giving credibility to obvious nonsense, and laugh at it. Then you’ll be as optimistic as I am. I’m laughing my ass off over here. Because we’ve already won.
Greetings,
Great read but I’d suggest a change – Orwell did not report on the Spanish Civil War but fought in the Spanish Civil War. He was shot in the throat by a sniper and nearly died. Orwell fought with the Anarchists who were betrayed and attacked by Stalin. It was this experience that prompted Animal Farm which, though simple and childish, is probably his best work.
I’ve read just about everything written by Orwell and I have an incredible amount of respect for him because he didn’t just write about these things but actually lived them.
Yeah, I suppose I was remiss to leave those details out of my above essay.
Orwell was a pretty fascinating guy. He was a Burmese police officer, later became a teacher like you, and yes, he did fight in the Spanish Civil War on behalf of what I believe was called the Workers Party and made the rank of corporal.
Because Orwell was over 6 feet tall, he stood above the other soldiers and his silhouette could be seen when he stood against a trench parapet and thus, took a sniper’s bullet to the throat.
When I wrote that Orwell “reported” on the Spanish Civil War I was referring to his book “Homage to Catalonia”.
In addition, another ironic detail I failed to mention was that in 1917, at Eton College, George Orwell was taught French by Aldous Huxley.
Jeez Louise, can’t slip anything by this crowd. Thanks Nickel.
Excellent observation, NickelthroweR! Animal Farm purports to be a children’s story, but it is one of the most profound and clairvoyant political treatises ever written.
just came across this
Wrightwood. California.
21 October, 1949
Dear Mr. Orwell,
It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book.
It arrived as I was in the midst of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor sight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Agreeing with all that the critics have written of it, I need not tell you, yet once more, how fine and how profoundly important the book is.
May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution?
The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual’s psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf.
The philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a sadism which has been carried to its logical conclusion by going beyond sex and denying it.
Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful.
My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World.
I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.
Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers
and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government.
Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations.
Another lucky accident was Freud’s inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism.
This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years.
But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.
Within the next generation I believe that the world’s rulers will discover that infant conditioning and narco-hypnosis are more efficient, as instruments of government, than clubs and prisons, and that the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging and kicking them into obedience.
In other words, I feel that the nightmare of Nineteen Eighty-Four is destined to modulate into the nightmare of a world having more resemblance to that which I imagined in Brave New World.
The change will be brought about as a result of a felt need for increased efficiency.
Meanwhile, of course, there may be a large scale biological and atomic war — in which case we shall have nightmares of other and scarcely imaginable kinds.
Thank you once again for the book.
Yours sincerely,
Aldous Huxley
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2111440/Aldous-Huxley-letter-George-Orwell-1984-sheds-light-different-ideas.html#ixzz4etcXuzRb
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
cc: Scott Adams
What does cc Scott Adams mean?
Probably means that someone should send a copy of this to Scott Adams, who writes a lot about hypnosis and persuasion. Adams has a very interesting blog. I don’t agree with him on everything, but he’s always worth reading, and I often see ideas there that I don’t see anywhere else.
Check him out at blog.dilbert.com
“But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects.”
It’s like Huxley predicted the Monarch Mind Control program. Whenever you hear about mass shootings, the killers are always on anti-depression drugs. I still wonder if something like that was to used to the American Sniper Chris Kyle.
Very well written and thought-provoking.
I would not despair, however. The fact that you are able to produce such a writing right now largely free of interference should provide hope. That is, I suspect we are nearing the worst it will get within our lifetimes because every government throughout the entire world is bankrupt (both economically and morally). In these last 8 years following the wake of financial disaster, these governments have done nothing to really entrench themselves further; they have simply partied on. The world ten years from now will be a very different place because the facade is already cracking. It will be both better and worse, but your words – as well as those of Huxley and Orwell – can serve as a reminder of what may pass if people are not diligent.
Thank you.
and vigilant…
Most excellent piece Uncola. It makes me wonder if the authors belonged to that Secret Society. It seems they had some grasp of future technologies in advance. It is a disgrace that the money spent on research benefits not the people. We did not hear much about drones before”o”. Police depts all want them now. We now need to watch and see if Trump rolls back even one of these programs.
Doctors are now glorified pill pushers. In 79 the doctor says take some aspirin and get on back to work. In 91 they say if these aren’t strong enough just come right back, and we’ll fix you up. From there everybody had a script, then came pain mgmnt. Clinics popping up with more hoops to jump through, while cutting others off meds completely. Thus giving rise to another heroin epidemic, as cheap afghani heroin rolled in. SOMA for all. Yes 1984 brings a brave new world, who is awake to see it. GREAT POST!! Ty for the song Maggie, I hadn’t thought about that one for years.
If you read a little bit of Orwell’s bio you will see that he came into the circles of some very powerful insiders who advanced his career and financed him throughout his life. Tavistock Institute/Fabian Society, etc. When you see what those folks were up to it leads inevitably to the conclusion that they were using him for some purpose and that he was aware of their activities and fell out- possibly- when he wrote his novels and exposed a lot of their ideology.
Or it was intentional.
Hard to say.
Excellent review of the two novels and much needed for today. When I read them scores of years ago, I wondered which is correct. Answer: they both are.
Art imitates life? In this case, art reported on the plan known to both authors devised by socio/psychopaths for NWO Globalist, no-family, no-nation complete control of humanity by the inhumane.
Ambrose Bierce wrote The Devils Dictionary between 1881 and 1906, and like Orwell and Huxley it could have been written about today.
Here are a few definitions:
Forbidden-Invested with a a new and irresistible charm.
Absurdity, n. A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one’s own opinion.
Bigot: One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that you do not entertain.
Orwell wrote about Tyrants. Huxley wrote about people. Two different perspectives, but put the two together, and you have something.
Excellent article. The two books are bookends showing how the present day incorporates the politics of both in ways most interesting and complex. Really well done. Congrats.
There are spirals of less gravity than the norm that will go on to tell why the ancient monuments were built. The two I am most sure of are at Giza and in Florida. The Egyptian one passes directly through the three main peaks, and it is the reason why the area rose up to become a plateau. The one in this hemisphere starts at Corkscrew Marsh; as it grows, probably by a factor of Pi, it goes through the area of Coral Castle, a study unto iteself, and then over the keys, which it drew up to become islands. The reason why the keys are not directly on the pattern of a golden-mean spiral is due to local tides and currents having some influence over their placements. See, the once and future osiris.blogspot.com… A whole, new world of math is waiting for a resurrection. Joe Richardson
Picked up by Zero Hedge
I see they link-attributed my own little site when I would prefer they did TBP so new people could come here (and donate here).
It is also a fact no one would have ever seen any of my essays if it wasn’t for TBP.
For that, I would like to express my gratitude to Admin; for his drive to get this thing rolling, his perseverance through the years, and his daily commitment to this site by getting up early and working late every day to both write, and post, relevant articles; and all in spite of his very long daily commute to (and from) his day job.
I will say tho, that the links to the books: BNW, 1984 and “Rise of the Warrier Cop” are embedded via TBP’s Amazon tab, so maybe some people throughout the interwebs will buy and TBP can rake in some 6% commissions.
Regardless, thank you again, Admin.
Cool thoughts and comments….it’s a good start to pinning the tail on the Don Quixote.
Wow. Just wow! This is print worthy…that means I will work hours to make my iPad send a traceable signal to my spying printer and I myself will be living dangerously as I print, knowing tptb are watching me print this and will one day seek out this crimethought so they can write right history. I shall also text this to my kids, therefore punishable for corrupting the next generation. My last words, molon Labe…..if you can find it……
Great article. I posted it on SLL, and congratulations on Zero Hedge.
Thank you Robert.
Great breakdown on two prophetic books of our time.
Please consider reviewing Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. A third alternative dystopia resulting from the mental regression of a people who have lost interest in reading books and intellectual curiosity to discussing ideas in favor of shallow television programing and listening to the constant buzzing of clamshell earphones. A harbinger of today’s smartphone society that communicates via text messages written at a third grade reading level on the most mundane topics.
“It was a pleasure to burn”.
I particularly like Bradbury’s Fireman, whose wife just wants him to be able to buy her that fourth viewing wall so that she can actually be PART of the imaginary world she is viewing on only three walls. If I remember correctly (and maybe I do and maybe I’m embellishing?) if she could get the fourth wall, she was to be allowed to have speaking lines, which meant she could be part of her own viewing life.
I see this has been posted over at LewRockwell.com this morning, and with attribution to TBP.
Thanks again, Admin.
I’m gonna go see you on Lew Rockwell, Unsung.
Wonderful article. At my age, I see the worst nightmares from my long gone youth coming to pass. Have you considered an analysis of Margaret Attwoods’ “Oryx and Crake” ?
Edward, I was not familiar with that particular book, I researched it and it looks pretty interesting. I have added it to my recently growing list of post-apocalyptic fiction for future consideration.
Some other commenters here, and via e-mails from my own blog, have suggested “The Devil’s Advocate” by Tayler Caldwell (1952) and “The Mandibles: A Family, 2029-2047” by Lionell Shriver (2016) among other similar books.
I have been considering what to write about next and, this morning, an idea came to mind that I am excited about. It is another literary comparison piece and will be tied into current events. In fact, I believe it pairs philosophically (and could even expand) with what was established in the above piece with Huxley and Orwell.
If this piece comes together the way I hope it will, it will tie in a classic author (various books), with a book in which I believe is now becoming a classic, and both tied to a historical American figure with, perhaps, a little of my own personal history tied in as well.
This morning I put together the 1st 500 words and I may start over without my personal history – because – right now it may seem a little overly self-indulgent, and I may need to cut the word count at some point. Not sure.
Still working out an outline and I will need to do a fair amount of research / revisiting / refreshing . I own three of the books I will need, have borrowed another from a friend, just picked up one from the library this morning and have another on reserve waiting for it to come back at said library (it is overdue now). If I can’t get the last book, I will have to order it and this could take up to 10 days, unless I can find it locally.
Not sure how fast it will all come together. For now, I have dated the piece for May 3rd. But – it could take much longer. As I mentioned in the above commentary, I plan to enjoy taking my time writing these essays as opposed to churning out current event articles in a race against the daily headlines (unless something really unexpected occurs, of course).
Stand by…
I’d never seen that JFK quote re: challenging conventional wisdom and embracing controversy. I shall cite it in future contrarian posts that get me pilloried by the peanut gallery.
Also, I have heard that Ike also warned against the “Science Industrial Complex.” Of “science” promoted and shaped by government sponsors. If this is in fact true, maybe you can write on this less known warning (but maybe even more important).
I think sales of both these books continue to increase, more evidence that at least some of us are worried that the present and future is imitating past “art.” Thanks for this piece.
Those who fully understand the past are best prepared to change the future.