Mid-20th century dystopian future novels: an analysis...

Volpone

Zombie Hunter
OK. You've got your big trilogy: "A Brave New World," "1984," and "Atlas Shrugged." I decided I wanted to break them down and analyze them just a bit. Turns out I read them in reverse order of when they were written. Rand wrote "Atlas Shrugged" in 1957, Orwell's "1984" was from 1948* and "Brave New World" was written by Huxley in 1932. Huxley and Orwell were both English and their stories take place in London. Rand was an American of Russian descent and her story takes place in the USA.

"Atlas Shrugged" is perhaps the most familiar novel to an American reader. True, Rand went with trains instead of airlines as the preferred mode of mass transit, but other than that...you have a crony capitalist system with an increasingly meddlesome government. The rest of the world has already fallen to the eeeevils of socialism, but a few valiant individualists still hold out in the USA. For a time. But these people have been disappearing, vexing one of the remaining ones, Dagny Taggart, who runs the family railroad, even though her brother is nominally the boss. By the end of the book, we learn that the movers and the shakers have gone "on strike" and withdrawn their genius to let the bureaucrats and socialists have exactly what they want rather than fight it. In the end, they plan to return and sweep up the wreckage and rebuild society.

"1984" is a bit more depressing. Communism has won. Winston Smith, a Party Member who lives in London is miserable. His job is to revise history so that The Party is never wrong. Any inconvenient truths are revised and the originals disappear. Every aspect of his life is viewed and monitored. In spite of this, he starts a diary and starts to form views on Big Brother. Meanwhile, the majority of people are "proles," who have a much more normal life than Party members. Oh, and there is always a war going on with rocket bombs periodically falling to destroy buildings and kill people. Eventually Winston meets a girl and they have an affair in a supposedly safe rented room before ultimately trying to join a conspiracy to overthrow Big Brother and the Party. Unfortunately for him and his girlfriend, the whole thing is a trap that has been in the works for some 7 years and they are taken away, tortured, and brainwashed back into conforming. All he has to look forward to is eventually being killed for his treason and there is no hope for mankind because each of the superpowers is similarly organized and they've ensured there is no way to overthrow the status quo.

"A Brave New World" is a bit different. Truthfully, it is a society that actually works and is sustainable. In The Future, the family unit doesn't exist. Sex is purely recreational and people are conceived and gestated in test tubes. Their future is predetermined for them and there is a rigid caste system. Factory workers are conditioned to excel at--and enjoy factory work, etc. Physical and mental traits are influenced by chemicals during gestation and mental conditioning during childhood. The system seems capitalist, but is clearly crony capitalist/centrally planned. Henry Ford is treated as a kind of god and conspicuous consumption is encouraged. (Sports are developed based on how much equipment you'll need to play them, clothes are designed to wear out and people are conditioned to constantly want new clothes, etc.) A guy who's a bit of a misfit takes a girl he fancies on vacation to basically an Indian reservation in New Mexico in the USA. While they're there, the run into a woman from London who accidentally got left behind and who had been pregnant at the time (her birth control had failed and the shame of being a mother prevented her from alerting the authorities so she could leave). Her son, however, is interested to see this "brave new world" so arrangements are made to bring both back to London. The mother is a political pawn and a pariah while the son is a curiousity akin to Pocahontas, when she was brought to London. The girlfriend falls in love with the son, who reciprocates, but the son believes in monogamous love while the girlfriend is conditioned to easy promiscuity so it doesn't work out. Meanwhile, the misfit's only friend is also a misfit--but because he's too bright to fit in. After an altercation when the mother dies, they are all brought before a World Planner. The World Planner reveals that he is a misfit too, but has chosen to work within the system and sustain it. Meanwhile, he "exiles" the other 2 to islands--where he says they'll be around other bright individuals, free to learn and grow instead of shoehorned into their roles in society. But he refuses to let John the Savage (the son brought back from the reservation) leave with them (for somewhat inexplicable reasons other than to advance the plot). He fails to fit in and exiles himself, but ultimately is found by the media and hounded to the point of suicide.

OK. I think that about covers everything. Next we look at how they compare and/or fit together. It's kind of ironic. Not only did I read the books in reverse order, but the longest one, "Atlas Shrugged", has the shortest synopsis here while the shortest one, "A Brave New World," has the longest plot explanation. I don't know if that says anything. Anyway, on to analysis!

*OK, it was published in 1949, but basically he flipped the last 2 digits to pick the title--48/84.
 

Volpone

Zombie Hunter
OK. I kinda let this one slide.

First off, one thing I forgot about "A Brave New World": Soma, basically Valium, is a key part of the culture. Keeps everyone relaxed and complacent.

So, "A Brave New World" is the outlier for me. I'll come back to it.

"1984" and "Atlas Shrugged" could, conceivably fit together. Atlas happens in America while 1984 is in England. In Atlas, Europe is farther along the road to socialism than the US is. In 1984, the entire world has embraced socialism. That's how the model works in 1984--as long as the whole world sucks, the balance of power is maintained; if there's a non-sucky superpower, it wins the war. The flaw with 1984 is that it isn't sustainable. Even if no outside power defeats Big Brother, things keep getting shittier and shittier. No one has shoes. People are starving. The chocolate ration gets smaller every year. Buildings are destroyed by the rocket bombs and there are really no skilled people or materials to rebuild. Ultimately it has to collapse into Caveman Days. They kind of gloss over who keeps the dictation machines and the telescreens and all the sophisticated technology running. I find it hard to believe a society that can't keep people fed and clothed is able to maintain a complex data network, although I'm not enough of a student of the Soviet Union to be able to say for sure that's the case.

At any rate, while the novel was written later, chronologically, Atlas could fit in at an earlier point than 1984. America has not yet collapsed. And rather than being rounded up and purged, the Movers and Shakers are going into hiding, to come out after everything's burned to the ground. The very end of "Atlas Shrugged," when John Galt says it's time to come back and rebuild could have happened *after* "1984." Or maybe even during 1984--once the USA has crashed and burned, it can be rebuilt before moving on to the rest of the world. The timeline gets tricky then, because Atlas happens in a relatively short period of John Galt's life while the situation in 1984 has been going on for decades, but I still think they are sort of complementary.

Then there's "A Brave New World," which, truth be told, I don't even entirely consider dystopian. But I'll get to that later.
 

Volpone

Zombie Hunter
Dammit. :confused:

Well, I see it is online for free. I miss having a really good bookstore around. And video rental places. I gotta get a library card.

FYI, IIRC, F451 was published about 4 years before Atlas. So it'll be interesting to see how the two relate.
 
Top