Currently Reading: Tender is the Night by F. Scott Fitzgerald
There are so many aspects of this novel that I would love to
discuss, but I’m pretty sure I can’t possibly fit them all into one post. I’m
going to do my best to make this coherent, but this may accidentally become a
rambling post.
Before anything else is said, I must say this up front: I
absolutely loved this book.
Seriously, I’m more irritated now that I didn’t read this in high school
because it’s so much better than a lot of the novels we did read. If you
haven’t read Brave New World, you
really should. It’s absorbing, thought provoking, and powerful.
Now, please allow me to indulge myself in sharing a few
random thoughts about the novel…
1. Mustapha Mond is by far one of the best names I have ever
come across. Somewhat jealous that Aldous Huxley came up with it first, but
also glad he did because it’s fabulous. I’m not sure why, but I think it’s
amazingly appropriate name for a man in charge of everything. Plus it’s fun to
say.
2. I love that the main “savage” character quotes Shakespeare’s
Complete Works throughout, like it’s his religious doctrine. Most likely this
is because I am a massive Shakespeare nerd and approve of Huxley’s choice to
make his work a revered piece of literature, as sacred or more so than the
Bible. I guess it helped me relate to the main character, John Savage, since I
feel the same way about Shakespeare’s writing. Plus, I’m a little jealous that
John can bust out quotes from it at any point. I wish I knew his writing that
well. I feel like I should for the amount that I’ve studied it. However, on
that note…
3. It absolutely drives me bonkers that Huxley goes through all
this trouble to create a character that knows Shakespeare inside out and
backwards, quoting him and referencing his work constantly… and then accredits
a quote to the wrong character. I’m almost 100% sure that I’m one of the few
people on the planet who would ever notice this, but it infuriates me! On page
158 of my version of the novel, John’s response to the impressive speeds of the
transportation of civilization is, “Still… Ariel could put a girdle round the
earth in forty minutes.”
FALSE!!! It’s not Ariel, the sprite/fairy creature of The Tempest, who does this. It’s Puck,
another sprite/fairy creature, but he’s from A Midsummer Night’s Dream. Again, I know that no one will care
about this anywhere near as much as I do. But seriously? You’re going to name
your novel after a Shakespeare quote and have his work be central to the novel
and then not double check this???
Really Huxley?? Ugh.
I’m such a shameless nerd.
4. While I’m on my Shakespeare bit here, if John uses
Shakespeare as his moral compass, I’m not quite sure where he gets his intense
sense of purity and chastity… After all, Shakespeare’s writing can be pretty
raunchy at times and I’m not sure there are many super pure, chaste characters
to be admired… The characters whose chastity becomes of the utmost importance
that come to mind are Isabella in Measure
for Measure and Desdemona in Othello.
In both of these instances, the obsession with these characters’ virginity
doesn’t lead anything good. Isabella’s insistence on keeping her chastity
almost costs her brother his life and the question of Desdemona’s purity gets
her smothered. It’s especially odd to me that John references Othello repeatedly and then lashes out
against Lenina, the woman he falls in love with, almost the same way Othello
lashes out against Desdemona. I’m pretty sure he missed the point of the play
since Othello is a big, flashing
warning against men being to jealous of women’s sexuality. He didn’t really
have much of a Christian upbringing and instead was raised with a vague,
non-specific American Indian spirituality. (High five for that, by the way,
Huxley. Way to just merge multiple nations’ varying beliefs into one “savage”
race’s belief system.) From what I remember of the American Indian culture
classes, I’m pretty sure monogamy wasn’t always the dominant system… It’s been
a while, so perhaps I’m confusing information, but I’m pretty sure John shouldn’t
have gotten such a strict sense of chastity from that line of teaching…
5. The discussion Mustapha Mond and John Savage have at the end
of the novel is one of the most eloquent debates I have ever read. It so
wonderfully argues each point of view in the debate between ordered, mindless
happiness and beautifully chaotic suffering. In a way, it supplies an answer to
one of the ultimate questions that I’m sure has plagued everyone at some point:
why do people have to suffer? What is the value of sadness and pain? And is
that value worth more than worldwide peace and happiness? I would try to
summarize the points they each make, but I really feel it would be better if
everyone just read it; it’s so well done.
6. I really wish there was an epilogue to this novel. I’m never
entirely sure if it’s a good or a bad sign when I find myself craving more
story at the end of a book. Part of me feels it’s a testament to how compelling
the plot is and how sympathetic the characters are that I want to know more
about what happens to the rest of the civilization at the end. However, the
other part of me feels like a really well done novel should wrap everything up
nicely so there aren’t any lingering questions. Not sure which is more
accurate… I think in the case of Brave
New World, it’s definitely more the former situation. And I understand why
Huxley ended the novel where he did because it really is the only way it can
end and the image he leaves the reader with is powerful and haunting. But I do
really want to know more about the aftermath of everything that happens in the
end.
Again, there are so many other things I could discuss about this
novel! It’s so rich with ideas and themes! Really, you should just go out and
read it if you haven’t. If you need a copy, I’m more than willing to lend you
mine just make sure you read it J
No comments:
Post a Comment