Controversial Issues in BNW

Another controversial issue besides cloning and human reproduction that is highlighted in Brave New World is the question of whether technology hinders or helps the progression of the human race. In the world state, technology becomes such an overpowering role in society that it rules society and humans become controlled by technology rather than humans controlling the technology. "'Yes, everybody's happy now," echoed Lenina. They had heard the words repeated a hundred and fifty times every night for twelve years.'" (75). For instance, here we find the technology of Hipnopaeda controlling the citizens of the world state rather than helping them. Brave New World also arises various controversial philosophical issues. Huxley subtly sends questions such as "What is freedom?", "What is happiness", "Is life something that can be managed and maintained like machinery?" to the forefront by means of his story. Clearly Huxley's dystopia would not be so philosophically controversial if it weren't for its' various themes.

For instance, In the world state, the citizens all agree that they are happy and never hold opinions that conflict, however, Aristotle claimed in his Metaphysics: "If, however, all beliefs and appearances are true, then everything must be at the same time true and false. For many men hold opinions contrary to those of others and call deluded whoever does not think just as they do." "So, if everybody were sick or everybody insane and only two or three were well or sane, the latter would be thought sick and insane but not the majority."

As far as the issue of "What is happiness?" goes, in Huxley's World State, everyone is happy because they are predestined for what their role in society is. Aristotle claimed that happiness is the end in which men live their whole lives for; the end which they strive for, but he claimed that since "there are various actions, arts, and sciences, it follows that the ends are also various". Which means that although those in the World State may believe they are happy, they are in truth not, because they do not strive to attain their own happiness, but rather a happiness that stems from actions that they are predestined to do.

Utopia

In his Republic, Plato constructs his own utopia not so much on the foundation of fiction and exaggeration, as Aldous Huxley does, but rather on that of philosophy and logic and speaks of how an ideal state must be ruled by Philosopher Kings in order to thrive. I would agree with Plato's approach in that everyone in a utopia should be educated and wise, although I would not go so far as to say that the leaders of the utopia should be philosopher kings, but rather polymaths. If the leaders are polymaths then they would be well versed in all fields of knowledge, allowing them to answer questions from all fields of knowledge as well, allowing them to be the wises of leaders. The leaders would most definitely not be able to work in a dimension of unlimited power, but in similar restrictions to the citizens.

In my utopia, education would be promoted as often as companies who promote their products. Autodidacticism would be considered as a hobby to citizens, and video games would not be a popular form of entertainment. Citizens would travel by the most efficient transportation means possible, by magnetic trains and hydrogen-powered cars, and everything would be recyclable, resulting in a utopia not only considering all of the people that live under it, but considering Earth's role in harboring humans. Earth's genetic variety would bloom and all the obstructions that humans have caused the earth would be washed away. Earth at last would be a clean place to inhabit and humanity would live in its' modern world without causing any environmental issues.

On The Glass Castle

The story of Jeannette Walls' past is not the type of past i'd usually believe a writer and contributor to MSNBC would have. Gaining insight into one's life is always a luxury, especially a stranger's, because it proves that even though you may not know somebody personally, they carry a past. Jeannette Walls shares with the reader in impressive detail the memories that she felt compelled to compile in a work such as The Glass Castle and shows the reader that the passerby on the street may have one of the richest pasts that one has ever encountered. Walls particularly shares with the reader terrible memories, and a great majority of her memoir is comprised of these masochistic and calamitous recollections.

Somehow I feel as if the memoir would have been more satisfying if the story line completed a full circle. The beginning of the memoir is particularly compelling and luring with the scene of Walls leisurely sitting in her limousine, on her way to a party; it is at that point that she peers out of the window only to see "Mom rooting through a dumpster". With this opening scene Walls begins the tale of her life with her earliest memory: being burned at three years of age (a horrific event, going back to what I said earlier). When the story begins the reader tends to wonder how Walls' experiences eventually lead to the opening situation in which Walls is well off with an apartment, husband, college education, and stable yearly income. If the story would have also ended with the opening scene of walls in her limousine, the story would have been slightly more satisfying.

But as far as Walls' storytelling skill, she recreates her past by creatively molding the multitude of recollections that she contains from the experiences of her life. One particularly detailed and emotional scene is when she leaves for New York City, gazing out of the window as her father, Rex Walls, is shrinking in succession with the bus beginning to lift off: "Dad was lighting a cigarette. I waved, and he waved back. Then he shoved his hands in his pockets, the cigarette dangling from his mouth, and stood there, slightly stoop-shouldered and distracted-looking. I wondered if he was remembering how he, too, had left Welch full of vinegar at age seven and just as convinced as I was now that he'd never return." (241).

The whole metaphor of the glass castle signifies that the memoir focuses not only on the life of the author but also of the father, Rex Walls. Rex teaches Jeannette tender and unforgettable life-lessons by many different means, and these lessons grow on Jeannette to the point in which she becomes the only one in her family amongst her brother, two sisters, and mother who has hope for Rex even after he transforms into a raging alcoholic. The Glass Castle in its' finality serves as the metaphor that relates to her father in the way that the lives of the Walls family had the potential to not have a poor and run-down life if Rex hadn't turned to alcoholism. The glass castle was completely designed and planned out by Rex but eventually subsided into a theoretical dream only due to the fact that Rex's emotions were unstable and also his personality. Walls lets the reader know that Rex was a compassionate, intelligent and enigmatic man who desired to unlock the mysteries of the universe, and he probably could have done so if alcohol hadn't won the battle with his life and mind. "Dad said he was damned if Feigenbaum didn't make a persuasive case that turbulence was not in fact random but followed a sequential pattern of varying frequencies. " (261)

Capote's Literary Experiment

Truman Capote's "literary experiment" is like that of a movie based upon a true story. Some scenes are stressed slightly beyond the bounds of a completely true story, but still follows the true story. This means that one advantage to writing a literary work based on non-fiction events would be that readers who are mostly attracted to and enjoy reading non-fiction works would want to read the work. You could also say that those who are devoted to reading fiction works would not want to read the work because it extends too far into the non-fiction genre, however, since Capote's In Cold Blood is considered a "non-fiction-fiction", it contains attractive elements from both genres, so the reader has nothing to lose by reading In Cold Blood.

A setback for writing a "non-fiction-fiction novel" would be perhaps that the reader is found having to conform to a timeline and a set story to write to, which means that the writer instantly has less freedom. The fiction writer finds himself or herself able to create their own universe for the reader to indulge themselves in. The fiction writer is free to use their imagination to the outermost limits, and to express their thoughts on the page without limitations.

Therefore the non-fiction writer is like a drawer who traces a given picture and embellishes that picture with their artistic skills, whereas the fiction writer is like that of a drawer who begins with a completely blank page. The drawer with the blank page does not have to draw according to a traced picture, they are free to let their pencil roam and to allow their imagination be formed on the paper.

But maybe the writer who is writing according to a valid story will find it helpful to have that story. Many writers who begin writing from scratch without an actual story that happened in reality tend to allow their writing to unintentionally become off topic. Thus the non-fiction writer may use their real story to serve as a series of guidelines, just as the edge of a soccer field serves to keep the players within the area of the field. A true story serves as a container of what may become a chaos of the writing world.

If the fiction writer does not blur the door that leads to our real world and the fiction world, they will become lost in fiction. As long as the fiction writer does not do this, writing fiction does not surpass that of writing non-fiction. Just as the non-fiction writer must still be aware of what it feels like to fly from the world of reality into the world of fiction. The writer who writes in both genres will find themselves benefiting from both, just as Capote had done well in In Cold Blood.

J.D. Salinger and Catcher

Salinger's life does contain many elements of Holden's life, and may relate enough to the story line of Catcher In the Rye for a substantial amount of critics to be convinced that maybe the story is autobiographical of Salinger's life. The fact that Salinger changed many schools, and that his once wife Oona O'Neil left him for Charlie Chaplin, reflects some of the angst that J.D. Salinger portrays from Holden's perspective. But when confronted with these similarities one has to ask if it was Salinger's intent to reflect elements of his life through a literary character, and maybe the answer to this question is evident if one studies Salinger's life along with Holden's.

As previously mentioned, Salinger had been transferred from colleges and when he was finished with high school, he attended the Valley Forge Military Academy to escape his strict mother. This has parallels to Holden because Holden left his school, not for a military academy, but to rome New York City before it was his time to come home:"All of a sudden, I decided what I'd really do, I'd get the hell out of Pencey-right that same night and all. I mean not wait till Wednesday or anything...So what I decided to do, I decided I'd take a room in a hotel in New York-some very inexpensive hotel and all-and just take it easy till wednesday" (51). Unlike Salinger, though, Holden had not only changed schools but had been kicked out of these schools. Salinger himself was never really kicked out of school, but transferred from colleges such as Ursinus College and Columbia University because of Austria being annexed by Nazi Germany. Also Similar to Holden was Salinger's parents, of whom his father did not even want him to pursue an art that he loved: acting and theatre.

Holden, typical teenager?

Holden's emotional fluctuations are a universal experience amongst teenagers but the only thing which sets him apart is the magnitude of his emotions. Holden experiences sexual frustration, sadness, and different forms of confusion throughout his story but just at levels that may vary from the "typical" teen. "It was getting daylight outside. Boy, I felt so miserable...What I did, I started talking, sort of loud, to Allie." (98). Also, what quite evidently sets holden apart from a "typical" teenager is his situation to begin with. A "typical" teenager would not be roaming New York city voluntarily, or be so sad that they are speaking to a deceased sibling. Maybe this would be the case if a typical teen had been placed in Holden's situation, but it is difficult to say that this is a situation that generally fits the "typical" teenager.

But perhaps what makes Holden similar to a good amount of teenagers is his academic apathy. Many kids enjoy venturing off into their own pursuits, whether academic or not, finding joy in intrinsically reading or writing something on their own, not being pressured by a school system to read or write something that is unenjoyable. Like Holden who read Romeo and Juliet on his spare time: " 'I mean I felt so much sorrier when Mercutio got killed than when Romeo and Juliet did'" (111). Therefore he is an intelligent kid but just doesn't apply the time to allow himself to succeed academically, and he is reminded by many older figures that this is so.

One Flew over The Cuckoo's Nest: Film vs. Novel

The movie and the novel of One flew over the cuckoo's nest do generally share the same story line, however, the movie has to fit a huge amount of events into 133 minutes. Because the film contains only a limited amount of time, it narrows the scope of events that occur within the originally written novel. But although this is true, there may have been a couple relevant scenes in the novel that could have made the film a bit more effective, not affecting the time duration of the film. It is true that perchance the producer of the film also wanted to incorporate their own style to the film, not wanting to completely simulate the feel of the novel.

One of the visual elements that changes from the novel to the film is that McMurphy is portrayed different, as Jack Nicholson playing his character. Thus, in the film McMurphy doesn't have red hair or tattoos, and isn't as muscularly defined as the McMurphy in the novel: “Nobody’s sure if this barrel-chested man with the scar and the wild grin is play-acting or if he’s crazy enough to be just like he talks…” (18). A similarity between them though, would be that Jack Nicholson does a great job emulating McMurphy from the novel's personality, being the gambling jokester and taking on the persona of a leader. Therefore McMurphy's overall character is preserved, just not the proper visualization of him.

Also a drastic difference between the novel and the film is the portrayal of chief Bromden. In the novel the reader has a profound insight into the inner workings of chief's mind, and the reader has an intimate knowledge of the metaphor and motif of "The machine". This allows the reader to get to know chief much more well than the viewer of the film. The film creates a void between the watcher and chief by not "letting them in" to chief's mind, which means that the film doesn't express chief's angst and schizophrenia as well as the novel. In the novel we are constantly taken through chief's stream of consciousness and are enriched with a wide range of literary description and devices that the film can't express similarly.