“That was when science first began to be controlled- after the Nine Years War. People were ready to hav e even their appetites controlled then. Anything for a quiet life. We’ve gone on controlling ever since. It hasn’t been very good for truth, of course. But it’s been very good for happiness. One can’t have something for nothing. Happiness has got to be paid for.”
The dialogue between John and Mustapha Mond serves to illustrate the discordances between truth and happiness. Throughout the debate in chapters 16 and 17, Mond contends that society must sacrifice art, science, religion, beauty, and truth in order to achieve a state of stability, and ultimately happiness. However, John the Savage is unable to comprehend a life devoid of these things and fails to see how one is better off living in a state of self-induced delusion. While Mond does not discount the merit of these things, he insists upon the idea that society must pay for happiness by denying themselves of these pleasures in order to maintain stability, which according to him is what people want, especially after the Nine Years War. Because Helmoltz finds too much interest in beauty he must be sent to an island where he can freely indulge in it, since beauty is incompatible with the happiness and stability of this civilization. Mond even admits to his own indulgence in science and truth, which he had to sacrifice in order to serve the happiness of others. This idea of truth and happiness as inharmonious values seems to be a recurrent theme throughout the novel. The world state is comprised of deluded individuals who are conditioned to avoid the unpleasantness of life. They are relieved of the burdens that things such as personal relationships, passion, and grief impose, and any slight inclination of discomfort that manages to emerge can be alleviated by the effects of soma. By neglecting the truth about the world around them and being denied the opportunity to uncover it, these people are able to live in a world of oblivion and happiness.
Would it actually be more desirable to live in a society in which truth and happiness do not coexist? Are we forced to draw a line between the two, or is it possible to achieve happiness while being informed of the world around us?
No comments:
Post a Comment