Post-Apocalpytic/The Road

The Road written by Cormac McCarthy, I would say, is considered a post-apocalyptic and a dystopian novel. According to Wikipedia, The Road portraits all of these characteristics and how it set foot into a society of all humanity becoming extinct except a father and a son. Seeking for life, the bond between them is an important figure concentrated in the story after a tragic incident of the world. The style of McCarthy's writing is very interesting to me. The story seems as if the father is the narrator and the setting begins to be on the road. It is mysterious to readers that the characters in the novel has not yet been revealed, but we do know their relationship and the goals they seek. All demises of these societies were driven from apocalyptic causes that resulted from a dystopian society. This reminds me of the movie I am Legend. That society had a belief of curing cancer, but in fact, created human beings who were infected and became zombie-like creatures. There is no reason or difference of a dystopian society to have different meanings. The answer of all those societies to be regular people and a society that is balanced. Even nature is balanced in a way, a way that is stablized no matter how much is changed.

Happiness Or Truth

As the book ends with John's suicidal death, he faces many spectacular events that contains truth and happiness. The events that led to his death brought up the topic I had in class about truth and happiness. When someone faces a truth in reality, they begin to avoid that truth and seek opportunities of happiness. I believe John is no different than that society because he, in the end, seeks death to be happy. When he thinks about the past events about Linda, feelings for Lenina and also her perfume, he begins to harm himself so that he can avoid the truth of what has happened. Usually when that society has gone into depression, they would always take an amount of soma. But since John did not believe in soma and actually threw them out of the window, the only choice was to hit himself.
This book is awesome, but the end is just ridiculous. John thinks that the society that he lived in did not use soma to avoid depression and seek happiness, but he in the end did use soma and chose suicidal to escape the truth. I mean why would anyone be as crazy as him? You say your not like these people living in this horrible society and says "I ate civilization...It poisoned me". I just really think hes impulsive. A moron who tries to seek a better society, a society that fits him but when he knows that the other civilization is just as bad, he starts to go mad. I wonder if that's how Huxley portraits this society when he wrote the book. People just seek death when they know the truth of something and to seek happiness is death. So he created a society in Brave New World to take a drug that gets rid of depression and receive 100% happiness all day. Its like getting high. Overall, the book is good and it has a lot of meaning towards life and death. To able to predict the future during that time period was pretty amazing.

Fortune, Faith, Future

As Freeman Dyson's "Can Science Be Ethical?" have said, technology is basically doing harm for our world. He questions the use of technology and gave explicit examples of technology and how it was used in the past and the present. To be able to disagree with his argument will not be an easy task to accomplish. His idea and argument makes sense in many ways, but I believe whether science can be ethical or not can be varied. The prime example is the short story "Harrison Bergeron" by Vonnegut and the novel Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. In both these stories, we are introduced in a society of technical advanced equipments that is used to alternate the society and its people. Freeman Dyson constantly argues the fact that technology only does good for the rich but not the poor. This may not be true. Technology in my definition, is to provide support and enables less work to be performed in the society, but the technology created in both of these stories are actually implied towards the people directly. It does not do them any good, but rather confines them of their abilities. They are neither rich, nor poor to begin with.

Relations of Dystopia

Along with the fact that Brave New World has a society that totally perfects in technology and the idea of mass producing babies, why are they made to do a certain task for the future and the society? Say for example, the mvoie "I, Robot". Why is the people in that society especially the police force rely so much on the robots to do the jobs of the people in that society? Is it to make the society more peaceful? Or more happier like the novel Brave New World? I seriously don't think having robots installed in our homes will make us feel secured and safe. Haven't all these scientists ever thought about the flaws and technical difficulties it may have? The odd part of both these dystopian society is that the people in those societies actually cope with the changes. For the film, I noticed that the creation of human technology actually changes the way people in the society acts.
I believe this dystopian society defies the laws of nature because it is always true that what nature creates, nature can destroy. But what about the things that human creates? Can it be destroyed as easily as nature can or will it actually go against us? Same thing for humans. Nature creates us and it can destroy us, but the actual mystery is that we can prevent nature from destroying us. As I' am typing this now, I have just noticed one amazing similarity that both the novel and the film shares. The character Bernard Marx in Brave New World and Det. Del Spooner in "I, Robot". I felt they are the same exact character is because both characters showed an element of uniqueness that both readers and viewers can distinguish. What I mean by that is that Bernard Marx is an Alpha but is different than any other Alpha by being able to think in his own way, not the way he was made to think, which is happiness all the time. As compared to Det. Spooner in "I, Robot", he is a half robot, half human who does not believe robots should be used in the society. Basically, the things that we create can never ever be what we image it to be. An overpowered society will always be abolished by the inferiors who believe that there must be a change in the society. Not just dystopia, but also in our living society. We live with a law and we can always change the law to make the society a better place for all to live in equilibrium.

Brave New World

The novel Brave New World shows many exciting aspects about the future and how it regulates society to be stabilized using the all-reliable technology. It begins to introduce the reader how the society produces babies through factories without the process of sexual activities of male and female. I began to link the mass production idea of Henry Ford and the novel's idea about baby production and it's necessities for the future. I particularly feel that the assembly line and the novel's use of dividing the baby productions into segments that would specify their future roles for the society in which they live in.
Dystopia also plays a significant role in the novel by showing the reader how the society in the book adapts and abuses technology to make the society what they call "happier". This type of utopia concentrates on the ideal society that is believed to be unnatural of the regular society that we live in. Laws are not changed in this society, but rather alter what nature has created for the world. The author of Brave New World, Aldous Huxley, have experienced through his life about what the people of modern society want as a perfect society. Thus, he creates a world of which he and only himself can create inside this novel, Brave New World.