Individualism in Aldous Huxley's Brave New World
By Ryan Nunez
The majority of the main characters in Aldous Huxley’s dystopian novel Brave New World make conscious decisions to rebel against the World State that controls them and eventually suffer the consequences of such decisions. Lenina Crowne, the only female protagonist, differs from her male counterparts in that her unorthodox actions are unintentional; while Helmholtz Watson, Bernard Marx, and John the Savage are aware of their differences and individuality among the rest of society, Lenina never acknowledges her own. Lenina and John are alike in that both Lenina’s subconscious acts of rebellion and John’s particular choice of lifestyle and moral ideologies speak to the persistence of the natural instincts that the World State so desperately desires to quash. However, Lenina’s rebellion is not a conscious attempt to differentiate herself as an individual from the conditioned masses, whereas John is the embodiment of solitary individualism. This key difference in Lenina and John’s actions is why they are treated so differently by the World State. Lenina’s unintentional displays of individuality go unnoticed by the World State because she still associates herself with and supports the civilization she has always belonged to. However, John’s bold individualism is something that must be rebuked and contained; he is much more threatening to the World State’s uniform society than Lenina because of his conscious refusal to conform to their societal norms and because of his obvious distaste for and condemnation of their utopian society. The fates of John and Lenina demonstrate that despite the ease with which the World State is able to homogenize its society, individuality, even when limited, is still strong enough to seriously threaten the fragile stability of the World State’s society.
In Brave New World, Bernard Marx, Helmholtz Watson, and John the Savage all purposefully rebel against the World State. Bernard Marx, who has spent a lifetime being ostracized by his associates, disagrees with many aspects of his society and chooses to act counter to them; he refuses to take the cure-all drug soma, prefers to spend time alone, and does not normally partake in the various activities, such as “Obstacle Golf” and “feelies”, that are such an essential part of the average citizen’s daily life. Bernard even tells the World Controller, Mustapha Mond, his objections, and that he “agree[s] with the Savage in finding civilized infantility too easy or… not expensive enough” (Huxley 146-147). Helmholtz Watson reads an illicit poem he wrote aloud to his emotional engineering class, and he later joins to fight with John during his soma riot. John the Savage, though, rebels with nearly everything he chooses to do. He was brought up in the Savage Reservation, and is an outsider in the World State. John’s values align with those of the Savage culture, meaning that he promotes abstinence, marriage, and family, as well as ideals like honor and free will; all of these go directly against what the World State values, which is happiness, uniformity and stability. Despite how these characters rebel, they all do it with full knowledge of the implications of their actions.
Lenina Crowne also exhibits rebellious behavior towards the World State. In chapter three, Fanny Crowne—one of Lenina’s good friends—criticizes Lenina for not being promiscuous enough. Lenina had only been seeing one man, Henry Foster, for the past four months, and Fanny had noticed. Later in the book, Lenina moves on from Henry Foster and becomes fixated on John the Savage, lusting after only him and eventually, though she does not seem to notice, even falling in love with John. Lenina’s inclination towards monogamy is frowned upon in a society where “every one belongs to every one else” and having multiple sexual partners is expected (Huxley 46). Lenina is unlike the male protagonists of the novel in that there seems to be no intent to assert her individuality or freedom behind her actions. After Fanny accuses Lenina of seeing no one other than Henry Foster, Lenina replies that “No, there hasn’t been any one else… And I jolly well don’t see why there should have been.” (Huxley 46) Lenina never seems to draw the conclusion that the way she is acting is not appropriate in her community.
This lack of intent behind Lenina’s rebellious actions suggests that she is driven to act this way by a primal, human force. Throughout their entire lives, Lenina and her comrades are heavily conditioned to act and think a certain way, especially in regards to love and sexuality. From a young age, children are encouraged to participate in “erotic play”, and there is assumed to be something wrong with the child if they do not feel comfortable playing such games (Huxley 38). This promotion of promiscuity as a positive idea continues throughout a person’s life, as he or she grows up hearing phrases such as “everyone belongs to everyone else,” is expected to attend pornographic films called “feelies,” and, in the case of women who are still able to get pregnant, carry around a “cartridge belt, bulging… with the regulation supply of contraceptives” in anticipation of regular sexual intercourse (Huxley 56). Despite having undergone all of this conditioning to encourage promiscuity, Lenina still has monogamous relationships with Henry Foster and John the Savage. This, coupled with the fact that Lenina is not consciously aware of her inclination towards monogamy, suggests that Lenina is acting in response to some innate, powerful force, and speaks to the perseverance of some kind of natural instincts. Peter Edgerly Firchow concludes that “for all the technology and conditioning and impulses toward uniformity, there is still something profoundly human about them [the characters]…for all the genetic engineering and conditioning, basic humanity remains much the same as it always was.” (The End of Utopia…)
Lenina’s choice in clothing could also be suggestive of these underlying natural instincts. In the World State, the citizens are divided into five castes, with each caste identified by a different color; the Alpha caste’s color is grey, the Beta’s is mulberry, the Gamma’s is green, the Delta’s is khaki, and the Epsilon’s is black. Based on where she works and the type of work she does, readers can infer that Lenina must be a member of either the Alpha or the Beta caste. However, Lenina is never described as wearing grey or mulberry. She is only ever described as wearing green (the Gamma caste’s color), white or pink (which belong to no caste). In chapter three, Lenina is described as wearing a jacket “made of bottle green acetate cloth with green viscose fur at the cuffs and collar”, “green corduroy shorts and white viscose-woollen stockings”, a “green-and-white jockey cap”, “bright green” shoes, and a “silver-mounted green morocco-surrogate cartridge belt” that Henry Foster had given her (Huxley 55-56). In chapter thirteen, when Lenina tries to seduce John, she is wearing a “white acetate-satin sailor suit”, a “round white cap”, and “zippicamiknicks” (which seem to be undergarments) that were a “pale shell pink” (Huxley 172-75). In the final chapter, Lenina meets John dressed “in green velveteen shorts, white shirt, and jockey cap” (Huxley 229). None of the other characters in Brave New World are described as dressing in colors that do not belong to their caste, and no one ever notices Lenina’s obvious discrepancy in clothing. Fanny Crowne praised Lenina for her green belt in chapter three, and Henry Foster gave her the belt. Not even Lenina seems to be aware of her own inconsistency, because she specifically tells Henry “I’m glad I’m not a Gamma” despite wearing their color so frequently (Huxley 68).
There is no clear reason as to why this irregularity appears in the novel. David Leon Higdon argues that Huxley had begun writing Lenina’s character to be another rebel like Helmholtz, Bernard, and John, but that she was “left undeveloped because Huxley could not conceive of a woman rebel.” (“The Provocations of Lenina…”) Another possibility, though, is that Huxley was trying to use the color of Lenina’s wardrobe to subtly symbolize something else. The color green, for example, is typically associated with things like nature, fertility, and life, while the color white is associated with purity and innocence. Lenina’s green clothes could be an outward sign of the subconscious natural instincts that reside within her.
John the Savage also seems to possess the same natural instincts that plague Lenina. John grew up in a unique and objective position— as an outsider to both the Savage reservation and the World State. John grew up on the Savage reservation where he was physically separated from the conditioning and culture of the World State. Though John grew up on the Savage reservation, Coleman Carroll Myron explains that John was an outsider there because his mother was “a former inhabitant of the new world who—from the old world’s perspective—prostitute[d] herself.” (15) Despite never truly belonging to either society, John still had both of the culture’s influences to draw from throughout his life. John learned about the different aspects of the Savage’s culture through listening to stories and observing their traditions. John’s mother, Linda, brought him bits and pieces of the new world’s culture through the dream-like stories and hypnopaedic rhymes she filled him with; she also constantly told him about how repulsive the Savage’s culture and lifestyle was compared to the World State’s. John ends up becoming a hybrid of the two cultures, singing new world songs while sculpting old world clay pots (Huxley 125-26).
Though John experiences both cultures growing up, he chooses to follow the heroic ideals and morals of the Savage’s culture; he seems to idolize their people and want nothing but acceptance from them, despite what he was always told about them by his dear mother. For example, when Bernard and Lenina first meet John, he is lamenting over not being able to be the reservation’s sacrifice, proclaiming that “they could have had twice as much blood from [him]” if they had let him. John wanted to sacrifice himself to show that he could “bear pain without crying out…to show that I’m a man.” (Huxley 111) Though John had no reason to be partial to one particular culture, he may have chosen to follow the Savage’s values because they are the ones unconditioned people are innately drawn to. These heroic ideals were only solidified by reading William Shakespeare’s romanticized works, and by experiencing the World State’s own version of what is morally right first hand. John is the embodiment of natural instincts and individualism because he was free to choose to believe in what he intuitively thought was right. John and Lenina’s shared natural instincts could be why they are so inexplicably drawn to one another.
Though Lenina and John are alike in that they both exhibit these natural instincts in a world that has conditioned them out of most people, they differ from one another when it comes to their awareness of said instincts. The people in the World State are drugged and conditioned to such an extent that natural instincts and individual thought are not possible in the majority of them. The fact that Lenina and John are able to display these characteristics at all automatically sets them apart from the majority of the World State. John is consciously aware of his differentiation from the whole, and he acts in accordance with that knowledge by acting like an individual and independent human being. Lenina is unlike John because she never consciously realizes that she is different from the rest of her society. Lenina still sees herself as a part of the World State instead of separate from it like John. Her conditioning does not seem to allow her to realize or even conceive of the possibility that she is different. For example, readers know Lenina is aware of the fact that “every one belongs to every one else” because she recites this phrase several times throughout the novel. However, it never occurs to her that she is doing anything wrong by not adhering to this clear rule; this suggests that the idea of not being the same as everyone else in Lenina’s society, that being distinct or individual at all, is such a foreign and unknown concept to Lenina that she cannot even fathom the idea, and instead chooses to simply ignore the conflict between her beliefs and her actions.
The World State’s aversion to natural instincts and individualism stems from their desire for peace and stability. According to Mustapha Mond, the World Controller for Western Europe, there can be “No civilization without social stability. No social stability without individual stability.” (Huxley 47) In order for the world they live in to run smoothly, the World Controllers need to ensure that their people think as alike as possible so the least amount of conflict will arise. Mond goes on to explain the dangers of natural instincts, describing how “Impulse arrested spills over, and the flood is feeling, the flood is passion, the flood is even madness.” (Huxley 49) Natural instincts lead to strong emotions that can easily upset the balance of the new world; therefore, there can be no place for them.
Lenina and John’s differing views about themselves regarding their relationships to society and individuality account for why they are treated so differently by a World State that interprets these traits as dangerous. Though Lenina displays traces of natural instincts that cause her to act in ways that threaten the stability of their society, she is never formally punished by the World Controllers. This is possibly because Lenina never actually identifies herself as being an individual; she still associates herself as being a part of the whole and not distinctly separate. The World Controllers may not bother to punish Lenina like they do the other rebels because she is not trying to go against the homogeneous society the leaders have created, and therefore the threat that she will incite rebellion from others is quite small. Another possibility as to why the World Controllers do not punish Lenina is that her infractions are so minor when compared to the other characters (especially John) that the Controllers completely overlook them.
John, however, is not spared like Lenina. He is punished in the most horrific way possible for him—by being forced to stay in the World State. John is punished because he poses a great danger to the stability of the World State. John despises everything about the new world. After a long conversation with Mustapha Mond, John even forces himself to throw up in order to purge himself of civilization, explaining that “It poisoned me.” (Huxley 216) John does not see himself as a part of society like Lenina does; in fact, because he has always been treated and considered as an outsider, John is the very embodiment of individualism and natural instinct. John is all the more dangerous because of his refusal to accept the World State’s society and conform to their societal norms. John demonstrates this defiance during the soma riot in chapter fifteen where he tries to encourage a group of Delta workers waiting for their daily supply of soma rations to stop taking the drugs, commanding them to “Throw it all away, that horrible poison.” (Huxley 191) When this attempt fails, he takes matters into his own hands by throwing the soma rations out the window himself, driving the Deltas to riot in horror and rage at the loss of their soma. John’s willingness to take such actions in an attempt to “free” the people of the new world seems to be the main reason as to why the World State chose to punish him so harshly.
The punishment that Mustapha Mond imposes on John is not the one that he usually carries out. Instead of being sent away to an island like Bernard and Helmholtz, John was forced to remain in the World State to “go on with the experiment.” (Huxley 217) Mond may have chosen this particular course of action because he knew what would eventually become of John if he were forced to stay in the World State, and he wanted to make an example out of John’s death. Mond was an incredibly smart man, and after John’s breakdown in the hospital, it would not be hard for him to conclude that John would not be able to survive long surrounded by the people of the World State. Mond may have wanted John to die in order to reinforce to the general public the ridiculousness and dangers of individuality, as well as to discourage other potential rebels from emulating John. Another reason Mond may have had for wanting John to die would be to destroy the threat John poses to the World State as an individual who is free of the confines of conditioning and limited thinking, as well as to keep John’s knowledge and understanding of how the World State works and what exactly is being sacrificed to keep it working from ever reaching the people on the islands, other individuals who may use both the information and John to the World State’s disadvantage.
The outcomes of John and Lenina demonstrate that, though they both eventually succumb to the World State and conform to their ways, individuality and independent thought is a powerful and destructive force against totalitarian power systems. Lenina, who exhibited unintentional individualist qualities throughout the novel, is prevented from ever achieving true, conscious individuality because she is blinded to her own differences by the pressure and desire she feels to conform to her society’s lifestyle. Though John strongly asserts his individuality throughout Brave New World, he also eventually conforms to the World State’s societal norms. John was unable to handle living in a society whose lifestyle and ethics were so profoundly different from his own. The ignorant, indifferent, and commercial way the people of the World State lived their lives was, to John, fundamentally flawed. Despite John’s fervent refusal to conform, the pressure of being the only sane man in a seemingly crazy world was too much for him. John retreats to a secluded part of the World State in the hope that he can live in peace, but soon the crowds of people find him, eager to catch a glimpse of him as if he were some strange, wild beast. At the unceasing urging of so many people, John finally gives in to the pressure, brutally beating Lenina and succumbing to the sexual desires he had long suppressed in an effort to avoid sin. This failing of his morals was too much for John to bear, so he hung himself in the lighthouse “just under the crown of the arch.” (Huxley 231)
Though the World Controllers are obviously masters at eradicating as much individuality in their society as possible, nonconformists are still quite common as there are entire islands full of them. These individuals pose a serious threat to the government of the World State because their independent thoughts put them out of the leaders’ control. The World State’s governmental system appears to be indomitable; however, their power is completely reliant on the indifference and uniformity of their populace. Though small in number, individuals like John are dangerous to the World State’s totalitarian control because they upset the delicate balance that the government’s system depends on. These individuals introduce unorthodox ideas, emotions, and conflicts into a system that was not built to handle such things. Because of this, if enough free-thinking individuals were to break away from their designated molds, the delicate balance that the World State’s system requires to function properly could become corrupted and cause their society to easily crumble and fall.
In Brave New World, Bernard Marx, Helmholtz Watson, and John the Savage all purposefully rebel against the World State. Bernard Marx, who has spent a lifetime being ostracized by his associates, disagrees with many aspects of his society and chooses to act counter to them; he refuses to take the cure-all drug soma, prefers to spend time alone, and does not normally partake in the various activities, such as “Obstacle Golf” and “feelies”, that are such an essential part of the average citizen’s daily life. Bernard even tells the World Controller, Mustapha Mond, his objections, and that he “agree[s] with the Savage in finding civilized infantility too easy or… not expensive enough” (Huxley 146-147). Helmholtz Watson reads an illicit poem he wrote aloud to his emotional engineering class, and he later joins to fight with John during his soma riot. John the Savage, though, rebels with nearly everything he chooses to do. He was brought up in the Savage Reservation, and is an outsider in the World State. John’s values align with those of the Savage culture, meaning that he promotes abstinence, marriage, and family, as well as ideals like honor and free will; all of these go directly against what the World State values, which is happiness, uniformity and stability. Despite how these characters rebel, they all do it with full knowledge of the implications of their actions.
Lenina Crowne also exhibits rebellious behavior towards the World State. In chapter three, Fanny Crowne—one of Lenina’s good friends—criticizes Lenina for not being promiscuous enough. Lenina had only been seeing one man, Henry Foster, for the past four months, and Fanny had noticed. Later in the book, Lenina moves on from Henry Foster and becomes fixated on John the Savage, lusting after only him and eventually, though she does not seem to notice, even falling in love with John. Lenina’s inclination towards monogamy is frowned upon in a society where “every one belongs to every one else” and having multiple sexual partners is expected (Huxley 46). Lenina is unlike the male protagonists of the novel in that there seems to be no intent to assert her individuality or freedom behind her actions. After Fanny accuses Lenina of seeing no one other than Henry Foster, Lenina replies that “No, there hasn’t been any one else… And I jolly well don’t see why there should have been.” (Huxley 46) Lenina never seems to draw the conclusion that the way she is acting is not appropriate in her community.
This lack of intent behind Lenina’s rebellious actions suggests that she is driven to act this way by a primal, human force. Throughout their entire lives, Lenina and her comrades are heavily conditioned to act and think a certain way, especially in regards to love and sexuality. From a young age, children are encouraged to participate in “erotic play”, and there is assumed to be something wrong with the child if they do not feel comfortable playing such games (Huxley 38). This promotion of promiscuity as a positive idea continues throughout a person’s life, as he or she grows up hearing phrases such as “everyone belongs to everyone else,” is expected to attend pornographic films called “feelies,” and, in the case of women who are still able to get pregnant, carry around a “cartridge belt, bulging… with the regulation supply of contraceptives” in anticipation of regular sexual intercourse (Huxley 56). Despite having undergone all of this conditioning to encourage promiscuity, Lenina still has monogamous relationships with Henry Foster and John the Savage. This, coupled with the fact that Lenina is not consciously aware of her inclination towards monogamy, suggests that Lenina is acting in response to some innate, powerful force, and speaks to the perseverance of some kind of natural instincts. Peter Edgerly Firchow concludes that “for all the technology and conditioning and impulses toward uniformity, there is still something profoundly human about them [the characters]…for all the genetic engineering and conditioning, basic humanity remains much the same as it always was.” (The End of Utopia…)
Lenina’s choice in clothing could also be suggestive of these underlying natural instincts. In the World State, the citizens are divided into five castes, with each caste identified by a different color; the Alpha caste’s color is grey, the Beta’s is mulberry, the Gamma’s is green, the Delta’s is khaki, and the Epsilon’s is black. Based on where she works and the type of work she does, readers can infer that Lenina must be a member of either the Alpha or the Beta caste. However, Lenina is never described as wearing grey or mulberry. She is only ever described as wearing green (the Gamma caste’s color), white or pink (which belong to no caste). In chapter three, Lenina is described as wearing a jacket “made of bottle green acetate cloth with green viscose fur at the cuffs and collar”, “green corduroy shorts and white viscose-woollen stockings”, a “green-and-white jockey cap”, “bright green” shoes, and a “silver-mounted green morocco-surrogate cartridge belt” that Henry Foster had given her (Huxley 55-56). In chapter thirteen, when Lenina tries to seduce John, she is wearing a “white acetate-satin sailor suit”, a “round white cap”, and “zippicamiknicks” (which seem to be undergarments) that were a “pale shell pink” (Huxley 172-75). In the final chapter, Lenina meets John dressed “in green velveteen shorts, white shirt, and jockey cap” (Huxley 229). None of the other characters in Brave New World are described as dressing in colors that do not belong to their caste, and no one ever notices Lenina’s obvious discrepancy in clothing. Fanny Crowne praised Lenina for her green belt in chapter three, and Henry Foster gave her the belt. Not even Lenina seems to be aware of her own inconsistency, because she specifically tells Henry “I’m glad I’m not a Gamma” despite wearing their color so frequently (Huxley 68).
There is no clear reason as to why this irregularity appears in the novel. David Leon Higdon argues that Huxley had begun writing Lenina’s character to be another rebel like Helmholtz, Bernard, and John, but that she was “left undeveloped because Huxley could not conceive of a woman rebel.” (“The Provocations of Lenina…”) Another possibility, though, is that Huxley was trying to use the color of Lenina’s wardrobe to subtly symbolize something else. The color green, for example, is typically associated with things like nature, fertility, and life, while the color white is associated with purity and innocence. Lenina’s green clothes could be an outward sign of the subconscious natural instincts that reside within her.
John the Savage also seems to possess the same natural instincts that plague Lenina. John grew up in a unique and objective position— as an outsider to both the Savage reservation and the World State. John grew up on the Savage reservation where he was physically separated from the conditioning and culture of the World State. Though John grew up on the Savage reservation, Coleman Carroll Myron explains that John was an outsider there because his mother was “a former inhabitant of the new world who—from the old world’s perspective—prostitute[d] herself.” (15) Despite never truly belonging to either society, John still had both of the culture’s influences to draw from throughout his life. John learned about the different aspects of the Savage’s culture through listening to stories and observing their traditions. John’s mother, Linda, brought him bits and pieces of the new world’s culture through the dream-like stories and hypnopaedic rhymes she filled him with; she also constantly told him about how repulsive the Savage’s culture and lifestyle was compared to the World State’s. John ends up becoming a hybrid of the two cultures, singing new world songs while sculpting old world clay pots (Huxley 125-26).
Though John experiences both cultures growing up, he chooses to follow the heroic ideals and morals of the Savage’s culture; he seems to idolize their people and want nothing but acceptance from them, despite what he was always told about them by his dear mother. For example, when Bernard and Lenina first meet John, he is lamenting over not being able to be the reservation’s sacrifice, proclaiming that “they could have had twice as much blood from [him]” if they had let him. John wanted to sacrifice himself to show that he could “bear pain without crying out…to show that I’m a man.” (Huxley 111) Though John had no reason to be partial to one particular culture, he may have chosen to follow the Savage’s values because they are the ones unconditioned people are innately drawn to. These heroic ideals were only solidified by reading William Shakespeare’s romanticized works, and by experiencing the World State’s own version of what is morally right first hand. John is the embodiment of natural instincts and individualism because he was free to choose to believe in what he intuitively thought was right. John and Lenina’s shared natural instincts could be why they are so inexplicably drawn to one another.
Though Lenina and John are alike in that they both exhibit these natural instincts in a world that has conditioned them out of most people, they differ from one another when it comes to their awareness of said instincts. The people in the World State are drugged and conditioned to such an extent that natural instincts and individual thought are not possible in the majority of them. The fact that Lenina and John are able to display these characteristics at all automatically sets them apart from the majority of the World State. John is consciously aware of his differentiation from the whole, and he acts in accordance with that knowledge by acting like an individual and independent human being. Lenina is unlike John because she never consciously realizes that she is different from the rest of her society. Lenina still sees herself as a part of the World State instead of separate from it like John. Her conditioning does not seem to allow her to realize or even conceive of the possibility that she is different. For example, readers know Lenina is aware of the fact that “every one belongs to every one else” because she recites this phrase several times throughout the novel. However, it never occurs to her that she is doing anything wrong by not adhering to this clear rule; this suggests that the idea of not being the same as everyone else in Lenina’s society, that being distinct or individual at all, is such a foreign and unknown concept to Lenina that she cannot even fathom the idea, and instead chooses to simply ignore the conflict between her beliefs and her actions.
The World State’s aversion to natural instincts and individualism stems from their desire for peace and stability. According to Mustapha Mond, the World Controller for Western Europe, there can be “No civilization without social stability. No social stability without individual stability.” (Huxley 47) In order for the world they live in to run smoothly, the World Controllers need to ensure that their people think as alike as possible so the least amount of conflict will arise. Mond goes on to explain the dangers of natural instincts, describing how “Impulse arrested spills over, and the flood is feeling, the flood is passion, the flood is even madness.” (Huxley 49) Natural instincts lead to strong emotions that can easily upset the balance of the new world; therefore, there can be no place for them.
Lenina and John’s differing views about themselves regarding their relationships to society and individuality account for why they are treated so differently by a World State that interprets these traits as dangerous. Though Lenina displays traces of natural instincts that cause her to act in ways that threaten the stability of their society, she is never formally punished by the World Controllers. This is possibly because Lenina never actually identifies herself as being an individual; she still associates herself as being a part of the whole and not distinctly separate. The World Controllers may not bother to punish Lenina like they do the other rebels because she is not trying to go against the homogeneous society the leaders have created, and therefore the threat that she will incite rebellion from others is quite small. Another possibility as to why the World Controllers do not punish Lenina is that her infractions are so minor when compared to the other characters (especially John) that the Controllers completely overlook them.
John, however, is not spared like Lenina. He is punished in the most horrific way possible for him—by being forced to stay in the World State. John is punished because he poses a great danger to the stability of the World State. John despises everything about the new world. After a long conversation with Mustapha Mond, John even forces himself to throw up in order to purge himself of civilization, explaining that “It poisoned me.” (Huxley 216) John does not see himself as a part of society like Lenina does; in fact, because he has always been treated and considered as an outsider, John is the very embodiment of individualism and natural instinct. John is all the more dangerous because of his refusal to accept the World State’s society and conform to their societal norms. John demonstrates this defiance during the soma riot in chapter fifteen where he tries to encourage a group of Delta workers waiting for their daily supply of soma rations to stop taking the drugs, commanding them to “Throw it all away, that horrible poison.” (Huxley 191) When this attempt fails, he takes matters into his own hands by throwing the soma rations out the window himself, driving the Deltas to riot in horror and rage at the loss of their soma. John’s willingness to take such actions in an attempt to “free” the people of the new world seems to be the main reason as to why the World State chose to punish him so harshly.
The punishment that Mustapha Mond imposes on John is not the one that he usually carries out. Instead of being sent away to an island like Bernard and Helmholtz, John was forced to remain in the World State to “go on with the experiment.” (Huxley 217) Mond may have chosen this particular course of action because he knew what would eventually become of John if he were forced to stay in the World State, and he wanted to make an example out of John’s death. Mond was an incredibly smart man, and after John’s breakdown in the hospital, it would not be hard for him to conclude that John would not be able to survive long surrounded by the people of the World State. Mond may have wanted John to die in order to reinforce to the general public the ridiculousness and dangers of individuality, as well as to discourage other potential rebels from emulating John. Another reason Mond may have had for wanting John to die would be to destroy the threat John poses to the World State as an individual who is free of the confines of conditioning and limited thinking, as well as to keep John’s knowledge and understanding of how the World State works and what exactly is being sacrificed to keep it working from ever reaching the people on the islands, other individuals who may use both the information and John to the World State’s disadvantage.
The outcomes of John and Lenina demonstrate that, though they both eventually succumb to the World State and conform to their ways, individuality and independent thought is a powerful and destructive force against totalitarian power systems. Lenina, who exhibited unintentional individualist qualities throughout the novel, is prevented from ever achieving true, conscious individuality because she is blinded to her own differences by the pressure and desire she feels to conform to her society’s lifestyle. Though John strongly asserts his individuality throughout Brave New World, he also eventually conforms to the World State’s societal norms. John was unable to handle living in a society whose lifestyle and ethics were so profoundly different from his own. The ignorant, indifferent, and commercial way the people of the World State lived their lives was, to John, fundamentally flawed. Despite John’s fervent refusal to conform, the pressure of being the only sane man in a seemingly crazy world was too much for him. John retreats to a secluded part of the World State in the hope that he can live in peace, but soon the crowds of people find him, eager to catch a glimpse of him as if he were some strange, wild beast. At the unceasing urging of so many people, John finally gives in to the pressure, brutally beating Lenina and succumbing to the sexual desires he had long suppressed in an effort to avoid sin. This failing of his morals was too much for John to bear, so he hung himself in the lighthouse “just under the crown of the arch.” (Huxley 231)
Though the World Controllers are obviously masters at eradicating as much individuality in their society as possible, nonconformists are still quite common as there are entire islands full of them. These individuals pose a serious threat to the government of the World State because their independent thoughts put them out of the leaders’ control. The World State’s governmental system appears to be indomitable; however, their power is completely reliant on the indifference and uniformity of their populace. Though small in number, individuals like John are dangerous to the World State’s totalitarian control because they upset the delicate balance that the government’s system depends on. These individuals introduce unorthodox ideas, emotions, and conflicts into a system that was not built to handle such things. Because of this, if enough free-thinking individuals were to break away from their designated molds, the delicate balance that the World State’s system requires to function properly could become corrupted and cause their society to easily crumble and fall.
Works Cited
Firchow, Peter Edgerly. "The End of Utopia: A Study of Aldous Huxley's “Brave New World”." The End of Utopia: A Study of Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World,'. Bucknell University Press, 1984. Rpt. in Contemporary Literary Criticism. Ed. James P. Draper and Jennifer Allison Brostrom. Vol. 79. Detroit: Gale Research, 1994. Literature Resource Center. Web. 10 Apr. 2014. N. pag.
Higdon, David Leon. "The Provocations of Lenina in Huxley's Brave New World." International Fiction Review 29.1-2 (2002): 78+. Literature Resource Center. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
Huxley, Aldous. "Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited (foreword by Christopher Hitchens)." (2004).
Myron, Coleman Carroll. "The Nonconformers pause and Say: ‘There’s Gotta Be Something More.’" Huxley's Brave New World: Essays. Izzo, David Garrett, and Kim Kirkpatrick, eds. McFarland, 2008. 11-16. Web.
Higdon, David Leon. "The Provocations of Lenina in Huxley's Brave New World." International Fiction Review 29.1-2 (2002): 78+. Literature Resource Center. Web. 23 Apr. 2014.
Huxley, Aldous. "Brave New World and Brave New World Revisited (foreword by Christopher Hitchens)." (2004).
Myron, Coleman Carroll. "The Nonconformers pause and Say: ‘There’s Gotta Be Something More.’" Huxley's Brave New World: Essays. Izzo, David Garrett, and Kim Kirkpatrick, eds. McFarland, 2008. 11-16. Web.