1. Without Soma, would this society still be able to function without rebellion?
I don't think that the World State could exist in the same way without Soma. Soma is a drug that creates artificial happiness in place of the true happiness the World State lacks. Individual spirits seem to be strained out the babies during the decanting process in this society. Instead, people are given Soma to ease away their unhappiness. "Christianity without tears—that’s what soma is," (Huxley). Soma is the driving force of this society, so if it were to be taken away, chaos would ensue shortly thereafter.
2. How does the title tie into the rest of the story?
I think that the most obvious connection to the title is the 'new world' part of it. This is an entirely new world that Huxley has created on his own, so that is where this portion would come form. The brave portion could be an adjective, noun, or verb. If used as a verb, it could be describing John's step into this strange new world which caused him great discomfort. If meant as an adjective or noun, this could be describing John or any other member of the society who was forced to endure the strangeness and discomfort of the World State. Regardless, I think the title is making a point out of the newness of the world which the characters have to live through.
3. Why wouldn't the author want to provide everyone with a mother instead of decanting children?
The decanting process leads to a disconnect with strong emotions in children. Having a separate mother for each child would interfere with the society and equality. However, if the same mother was used for every child, this would still allow equality. The problem with this would be that it wouldn't be possible for the mother to have a strong and true relationship with each child. There would be unintentional favoritism for the children who could access their mother. Decanting prevents any problems relating to the inequality of children.
No comments:
Post a Comment