Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (Stevenson)

Can we help?:

• Ask us a question
• Submit a Product Review
• Send to a Friend
• Schedule a Gift Reminder

Description: Dr. Jekyll And Mr. Hyde (Stevenson)

Genre: Passivity (Psychology); Propaganda; Literature - Classics / Criticism; Huxley, Aldous, 1894-1963; Totalitarianism; Literature: Classics; Science Fiction - General; Classics; Literary; Fiction / Literary; Reading Group Guide; Fiction; Collectivism; Genetic engineering;

Average Review: 3.5 stars

Review: Ideas of the Time: This book has gained the reputation of being one of the most important novels of the twentieth century, yet it seems to disappoint some people in that it turns out to be not the science fiction adventure they were anticipating, nor is it (seemingly) out of the same stable as Orwell's equally if not more famous "1984". It seems to me that much of the disappointment might flow from a lack of familiarity with Huxley's writing style. From the Huxley novels I've read, I think that he was more interested in the exploration of ideas via his fiction than in writing "entertainments" driven by plot development. Therefore, what you get with "Brave New World" is a juxtaposition of attitudes, or if you like, interpretations about the way the world might be. All of course based upon Huxley's concerns about the world in which he lived. As with all such novels, it says more about the society in which the author operated as it does about any brilliantly insightful vision of the future: hence the preoccupation with eugenics. I think that generally it's a sterile task to point out what a writer got right (mostly because it avoids what they got wrong, and because no-one can be wrong all of the time). Nevertheless, it's interesting to note that Huxley was worried about the tyranny of consumerism (goodness knows what he would have made of the world today, and he missed the rise of the empire of lawyers!). I suppose the best way to approach this novel is as a clever riff on the state of the world in the early 1930s as seen through Huxley's eyes. If there is a message, it is very ambiguous - at once extolling the virtues of a meritocracy as a bastion against social and economic chaos, whilst at the same time fretting that the removal of life's inherent risks will dehumanise us (that is, make us less horrible but more meaningless and boring). You read the book and you take your choice. What of its stature? Important I think because of its ambiguity, and because ultimately it points out that whichever way you condition or program us humans, as a race we are pretty bad news. G Rodgers