Brave New World | Sociological Criticism

 Brave New World

by Aldous Huxley

Aldous Huxley

Hello everybody! For today we have a Sociological Criticism for Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. 

    Brave New World was published in 1931 by Aldous Huxley. This novel show how a “world population” is divided in categories and created and controlled through the use of high advanced technology. The main controller is called “The Director”, who works in the Central London Hatching and Conditioning Centre. There are a group of young students visiting the “World State” to learn about the fertilizing room. We can compare those guys with us. The reading takes us through the student, seeing how the world would be in the future because of the excessive use of technology. The fertilizing room is the place where “humans” grow up inside bottles to be taught by hypnopedia that society’s worth should be always over people. 

   In the world state, humans are divided into several castes: Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons. The divisions are according to the physical appearance which is wrong. They want people to be differentiate by colors and labels. Alphas citizens are one of the best ones. They are intelligent, tall and have a good physical shape. Gammas are stupid and wear green and Deltas wear light brown. Epsilons are the worse, they’re ugly and wear black.

Brave New World is a future controlled and sterilized society that reflects a different world without sensitivity, morals and education. Aldous Huxley related the novel with some aspect of his personal life. He was addicted to Hallucinogenic Drugs. In the reading, they use a drug called “Soma”. Also, the world is projected with an “open mind” with no taboos. Children grow up in a sexual environment which is not good for them. The word “sex” and the practice of this, is something normal for them. Besides that, the divisions of the humans are a way to practice discrimination. Alphas are the best ones; they are “perfect”. On the other hand, Epsilons are considered as the worse of the world state. Nobody want to play with them, because they are ugly and fool. 

I want to know your opinion about “Brave New World”. Consider you are living in this World State and you have the “POWER” to change things.

         1.  Would you accept a world with divisions?

               2.   What would you like to change?

Here I attach a link to a website with a detailed summary about Brave New World

See you soon!

-Bell Solís

Harrison Bergeron | Traditional Criticism

Kurt Vonnegut

       HARRISON   BERGERON

      by Kurt Vonnegut

Hello everybody! Here you have a traditional criticism for “Harrison Bergeron”.

Kurt Vonnegut was born on November 11^th, 1922 in Indianapolis. He was an American writer, best known for his satirical literary style, as well as the science-fiction elements in much of his works. He belonged to a wealthy family in Indianapolis. He died on April 11^th, 2007 in New York City, at the age of 84.

    In “Harrison Bergeron”, there is a way to reflect the future coming. In this story, we have two different ways of seeing “life” in this world. First of all, we have our reality. There are many differences between people: beauty, weight, height, personality, and occupations. We live all together, with no divisions or categories, no matter the physical appearance. Besides that, we face a lot of differences between countries. There are wars, poverty, unhappiness, insecurity and we are exposed to any dangerous circumstances. On the other hand, in “Harrison Bergeron” there is a crucial situation that reflects “technology” as the future controller of our lives. Making divisions, changing people’s thoughts, personalities, and perspectives. Technology through a kind of government (or a group of special people) is taking the control of everything. They want to treat us like “puppets”. That’s why is a connection between the reading and the image that Vonnegut used to represent his story.

    The story shows a different “life”, and it points out for the future that comes. He opens the story with this descriptive narration about social equality in the future.

“The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the Law. They were equal in every which way. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th… Amendents to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General”.

    In the story, the case of “Harrison Bergeron” is special. He is a different young boy, that wants to have the control of his own life. He is different in all ways. He is an intelligent handsome boy that fights for his freedom and acceptance by the society. The world showed in the story is of “equality”, privated of liberty and personal decisions. There’s a change of the reality we live now. Our society enjoys freedom of thought, intellectual ability, physical beauty and strength, but is being manipulated through the use of technology and by government decree. That’s a nice story that presents the “real life” for the futures years. Sadly, we are becoming puppets of technology. Development and advanced technology have been taking the control of our life. A world of equality controlled by a “government” with lack of freedom and personal thoughts. The story presents a change in everything. From my personal point of view, life is perfect, but it’s true that hard times are coming and nobody can change that. Vonnegut published this story in 1961, but he was sure that this destructive phenomenon called technology would take the control of our lives and make us “equal”.

Now, I have a question for you to know what you think about this story:
Is there any "reality" in the story related to the control of technology in our future lives?

Here I attach a link to a web site with information and a short video of "Harrison Bergeron"

See you soon! 💁
-Bell Solís

CRASH | Movie Analysis

Paul Haggis - 2013

                         CRASH

                          by Paul Haggis

He was born on March 10, 1953 in London, Ontario, Canada.

He lives in Santa Monica, California

Canadian director, screen writer and producer. He is atheist.

He won the “Best Picture Oscar” twice: Million Dollar Baby (2004) and Crash (2005).

CHARACTERS:

Rick and Jean Cabot They are married. He is the white District Attorney of L.A. She doesn’t work, unhappy girl who has everything	Peter and Anthony They are friends. Afro-Americans. They steal car to get money by selling them. They belief that society is against black people. They stole Cabot’s car	Cameron and Christine Thayer They are married. Afro-Americans. Cameron is a television director. Christine grow up in a more privileged environment than other African Americans
Officer John Ryan White police officer who hates black people. His father is sick.	Officer Tom Hansen He hates racism and stereotypes. He likes to help black people.

White people are seen as the well-educated population, with a good economic situation and high status. Black people are seen as the poor population, with a bad life quality and they suffer from racism. White people have the power over Afro-Americans

The “Great American Dream” is not what is expected. Moving to U.S.A is hard decision, people should be prepared for the worst. At the beginning it turns difficult, and having a good life takes time.

Crash expresses the racial and stereotypical prejudices that every ethnicity and race experience in everyday life. The mood of the movie is definitely hostility. The characters are pushed into very uncomfortable situations.

The tittle is significant for the movie because we encounter all types of races and ethnicities in everyday life. It’s as if the encountering is us “crashing” into each other. If a person is racist, it will find the way to let everyone notice it.

I want to know what you think about this movie, here you have a questions:

Does the movie teach you something? Why?

Here I attach two links to the movie: Crash (YouTube) and Crash (Netflix).

See you!

-Bell Solís

Thank you, M'am | Traditional Criticism

    

Langston Hughes 

 THANK YOU, M’AM

by Langston Hughes

Hello everybody! For today we have a Traditional Criticism about Thank You, M’am by Langston Hughes.

   In "Thank you, M'am", there are many factors that affect that little boy and take the humanist view. This story is about a young boy called Roger, who stole a purse of an elderly woman. The boy was about fourteen or fifteen, he did not realize that action could be that much bad. It was around eleven o'clock at night. What was doing that young boy in the street at night? The reason of why he stole that purse was because he wanted money to buy a pair of blue suede shoes. Probably, this woman could have punished and took him to the Police Office. But the reality was totally different. She took him to her house, she helped Roger and gave him food. The good action from this woman, Mrs. Luella Bates Washington Jones, teach us that there is always a deep reason of the bad actions people do. M'am threated him in a nice way, even though this boy tried to snatch her pocketbook, she discovered he just wanted to buy a pair of shoes and he didn't thought he was affecting someone else to get what he desired. 

   Throwing back long time ago, the situation of African Americans in USA was quite difficult. They were discriminated and bullied. There was a lot of racism and xenophobia for black people. The economic situation was awful, Afro-Americans were bad paid, with a low life quality and not well-educated and prepared in studies. Besides, Roger's parents couldn't give him money to buy a pair of shoes and they didn't care about him, because it was too late that night for a young boy walking down the street. Probably, Roger wasn't taught that stealing someone else's things was wrong and that getting money in that way could end in jail. In the 1900's, Afro-Americans were full of poverty, discrimination and bad qualities conditions. Roger was a little boy with a single and normal desire at that age, he just wanted a pair of blue suede shoes. At the end of the story, M'am gave him money and left him go. She had a sensible heart and treated him in the best way she could. Mrs. Luella understood his situation because she knew how was his life condition, and she saw her childhood in through the eyes of that little Roger. I really like the decision she took towards the situation, she taught him a lesson in a very suitable way.

I want to know what you guys think about this nice story of the 1900's in USA

Here you have these questions: 

1. What would you do if something similar happens to you? 

2. How do you think were Afro-Americans' situation in those years?

Here I attach a link to a website with more information about this story:  "Thank You, M'am" 

See you!

-Bell Solís.