Aldous Huxley's Letter to George Orwell

[Ichingcarpenter]

In October of 1949, a few months after the release of George Orwell's dystopian masterpiece, Nineteen Eighty-Four, he received a fascinating letter from fellow author Aldous Huxley —

What begins as a letter of praise soon becomes a brief comparison of the two novels, and an explanation as to why Huxley believes his own, earlier work to be a more realistic prediction.

In 1917, long before he wrote this letter, Aldous Huxley briefly taught Orwell French at Eton.







Wrightwood. Cal.
21 October, 1949

Dear Mr. Orwell,

It was very kind of you to tell your publishers to send me a copy of your book. It arrived as I was in the midst of a piece of work that required much reading and consulting of references; and since poor sight makes it necessary for me to ration my reading, I had to wait a long time before being able to embark on Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Agreeing with all that the critics have written of it, I need not tell you, yet once more, how fine and how profoundly important the book is. May I speak instead of the thing with which the book deals — the ultimate revolution? The first hints of a philosophy of the ultimate revolution — the revolution which lies beyond politics and economics, and which aims at total subversion of the individual's psychology and physiology — are to be found in the Marquis de Sade, who regarded himself as the continuator, the consummator, of Robespierre and Babeuf. The philosophy of the ruling minority in Nineteen Eighty-Four is a sadism which has been carried to its logical conclusion by going beyond sex and denying it. Whether in actual fact the policy of the boot-on-the-face can go on indefinitely seems doubtful. My own belief is that the ruling oligarchy will find less arduous and wasteful ways of governing and of satisfying its lust for power, and these ways will resemble those which I described in Brave New World. I have had occasion recently to look into the history of animal magnetism and hypnotism, and have been greatly struck by the way in which, for a hundred and fifty years, the world has refused to take serious cognizance of the discoveries of Mesmer, Braid, Esdaile, and the rest.

Partly because of the prevailing materialism and partly because of prevailing respectability, nineteenth-century philosophers and men of science were not willing to investigate the odder facts of psychology for practical men, such as politicians, soldiers and policemen, to apply in the field of government. Thanks to the voluntary ignorance of our fathers, the advent of the ultimate revolution was delayed for five or six generations. Another lucky accident was Freud's inability to hypnotize successfully and his consequent disparagement of hypnotism. This delayed the general application of hypnotism to psychiatry for at least forty years. But now psycho-analysis is being combined with hypnosis; and hypnosis has been made easy and indefinitely extensible through the use of barbiturates, which induce a hypnoid and suggestible state in even the most recalcitrant subjects...................



more at the link:

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/03/1984-v-brave-new-world.html

[leveymg]

1. ++Orwell and Huxley were both right - the proles get the boot,the Outer Party have video and soma

Last edited Wed Mar 7, 2012, 09:34 AM - Edit history (1)

No question that we live in society that is ruled by an Inner-party that uses both machine guns and hypno-screens to keep power.

[longship]

2. But hypnotism is demonstrable bunk

There is no such thing as a hypnotic trance, as every stage "hypnotist" knows. It's merely a stage performer giving people permission to act silly. Mesmer's claims were debunked by none other than Benjamin Franklin, who also happened to invent the musical instrument which Mesmer used to put people in the mood to be "hypnotized", the glass harmonica

Look it up. It's one of those quirky historical stories which may tickle your fancy.

[leveymg]

3. The "hypnotic effect" of staring at moving images on video screens is real & demonstrated by science

Reduced Alpha wave activity has been found by virtually all researchers, and many have shown reduced Beta and Gama, as well. The change in brain activity is real, as to whether this is "hypnotic" in the sense of greater suggestibility to specific behavior patterns is not as well understood. Theories that have found a specific link to changes in psychological outlook, such as the "mean world syndrome," seems to be due to a combination of individual predisposition to certain types of messages and the violent, threatening content of TV programming.

[longship]

4. Okay, you're correct

But neuroscience is a messy business because the brain is an extremely complex system. I think we can both agree that "stage hypnotism" is mere entertainment, not science. Furthermore, all the attributes of hypnotism in pop culture have been falsified. There is no "trance" in hypnotism. And therapeutic hypnotism has been shown to be dodgy at best.

It seems like many people believe the Hollywood version of hypnotism ("Afghanistan Banananistan&quot . It's fun in a movie, like the Star Trek warp drive. But it isn't real.

But don't believe me. Look it up for yourself.

[leveymg]

5. I think we agree. The point is that Huxley got it right that people would be doped, distracted,

and mesmerized into a state of acceptance of tyranny by a small cabal of world leaders, and that western society would become a stratified, regulated system, largely because most people couldn't imagine an alternative. Orwell made largely the same point about how the point of totalitarian system is to make the imagination of alternatives impossible by the control of language and communications.

Even in 1984, most of the actual brutality was carried out in secret within the walls of the Ministry of Love, but the real violence to humanity was part of Smith's job as a propagandist/history eraser at the MOT. The image of a boot crashing down on a human face, over and over again, forever, is largely a secret reserved for the Thought Police torture chambers and the odd occasional drunken prole who gets unruly.

I think we've embraced both dysutopias, and effectively surpassed them in America and Britain in 2012. Our protests are just an impotent way of blowing off steam that is tolerated because it's closely monitored and maintains the fiction believed by most that regular people are still free to change the system. That's the ultimate tyranny Orwell tried to warn us - the belief that Slavery is Freedom.

[longship]

6. I am with you --- 100%. eom

Thanks for the post and the response.

[Newest Reality]

7. ++ Good! - NT

[leveymg]

8. ++ Thanks!

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. I think that we're further away from BNW and 1984 than when they were written

in terms of control of the public. The internet may be the prime reason for that. Look at how quickly individuals have combined to force a boycott of Limbaugh; look at how it enabled Tunisian and Egyptian citizens to get their messages out around the world. Far from having a monopoly on information, governments are less and less able to control it.

The BNW technological 'bread and circuses' distractions are here, but they're not used for central control; they're used for profit. And when Big Brother watches you now, it's chiefly to be able to sell you things, not to prevent dissent.

[leveymg]

24. Smart kings figured out long ago that tolerating (some) public display of dissent creates loyalty

Who are you more likely to work hard for and defend against enemies - a boss who's a tyrannical prick or someone who appears sympathetic and tolerant of your minor errors and indiscretions? Loyalty engenders loyalty.

Besides, a ruler who allows posting of dissent in a place where it can be monitored knows who's unhappy and needs to be watched more closely, and what's making people unhappy. That's why in the 1840s the Prussian Chief of Police allowed the erection of poles in easily surveilled locations in Berlin to be papered over with revolutionary broadsheets. But, only those poles that could be used for that purpose. They were called "Litfass Columns" -- http://journals.democraticunderground.com/leveymg/211 -- which, along with Beijing's so-called Democracy Wall in the 1980s was the prototype for "anonymous" posting on the Internet.

[The Stranger]

15. doubleplusgood

[deutsey]

22. Check out, if you haven't, a BBC documentary series called "Century of the Self"

"This series is about how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy." Adam Curtis, the person who produced the documentary.

[lunasun]

26. correct IMO

None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.

I think that was Goethe

[UnrepentantLiberal]

10. I don't know...

There was a hypnotist at my high school graduation. He asked the people he'd hypnotized to do what they normally do at a party. A girl started taking her clothes off. How would you explain that?

[longship]

11. Hmmm

Are you really saying that this girl had no choice in the matter? Or is this just a case that the stage hypnotist gave her an opportunity to do something risky but because of the mistaken cultural opinion of what hypnotism actually is, she can get away with taking her clothes off.

There's substantial research on hypnotism. All the bunk you see in pop culture is basically rubbish. But don't take my word for it. Look it up for yourself.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

12. I'm very cynical and not one to believe in woo of any kind.

All I can tell you is what I saw. I can spot bad acting and people hamming it up. They were doing weird things with a strait face. Maybe power of suggestion?

[longship]

16. Please don't be cynical

Be skeptical.

If you eschew woo then you know that your anecdotal evidence is basically meaningless. What matters is what the facts reveal. The value of hypnosis is minimal at best. Studies show no value for things such as quitting smoking, something which the anecdotes seem to support (they don't). So too with many of the other hypnotism claims.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

19. Here's one you'll like.

The Amazing Randy visited a class of college students and told them he would read their charts (or something) and give them a card that would tell them about themselves. They were excited and amazed when he gave them their cards until he told them that they all said the same thing: "you would have been better suited living in another era." (I think it was.) Then they were PISSED. "That's not cool, man."

[longship]

20. Randi is the real deal

He used to frequently appear on the Tonight Show (Johnny Carson). Once he did a "psychic surgery" exposing it for the utter fraud that it is. The NBC switchboards lit up after the airing of the program. People by the thousands were calling in to get in touch with the psychic surgeon who could apparently cure things without scalpel, anesthesia, etc.

People are not so willing to give up their pet beliefs.

You say there's a big foot? Fine. Show me a body (or a living one, or two, or a family of big feet --- how does one pluralize big foot?). Short of that, your blurry video and your foot prints in the mud are meaningless.

Thanks for the post.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

21. He's great.

[usrname]

23. Even a well known skeptic as Richard Feynman

said that the power of hypnosis is not to be dismissed. It works, especially if the subject wants or allows it to work. He had to actively fight it off and even then, he felt doing things that he did not want (supposedly) to do.

It was detailed in his book, "Surely You Must Be Joking"

[zeemike]

27. You would be surprised.

But there is a percentage of the population that can be easily hypnotised....I know this for a face because I was interested in this subject at an early age...and have had experience in it.

[Recursion]

9. Find a copy of Marat/Sade somewhere and watch it

It brilliantly explores that sadistic side of revolutionary thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marat/Sade_%28film%29

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. I think this is why psychotropic drugs are illegal such as LSD, Pot , Mescaline... etc

The populace is now drugged with Oxycodone heroin derivatives and mood enhancers that the medical and drug companies push.

BTW.... both of these guys did psychotropic drugs which are illegal because they raise consciousness.

Plus one for Huxley on that one.

Interesting letter ... I have to admit which is why I posted it.

[pansypoo53219]

17. the onion boiled it down to humans looking at rectangles.

various rectangles.

[malthaussen]

18. The fnords! The fnords! I can see the fnords!

Cool idea, but pills are better.

-- Mal

[McCamy Taylor]

25. Dystopian sci-fi is a reaction to the author's own world.

Jack Booted thuggery existed in Orwell's Europe- including the UK.

Sophisticated methods of brainwashing existed for hundreds---no, make that thousands---of years before Huxley, as did rigid social stratefication. Churches are especially adept, though the military is a close second. The mother's voice, coaxing a child to be an Alpha and not a Beta---even though the child may be a Beta at heart---is the social equivalent of hyponosis, and it is very powerful hyponosis.

The individual's resistance to these two types of tyranny has also been lauded since humans first put pen to paper, stylus to clay tablet and now, finger to keyboard.

There is a precarious balance of individual needs versus social needs in every culture. The result is that in some cultures you can't be gay. In others, you can't be female. In others, you can't get high. In others, you can't cry. All these "can'ts" wear away at the individual's notion of self.

You can only "get the future right" if you predict the technology that will be available for society to enforce its norms upon the individual. And technology is, at least initially, driven by consumer demand and the desire to make profit.

I think "The President's Analyst" got it right, with their dystopian future in which every single one of us is joined at the hip to our phone. But then, it is easier to predict the technology of the near future than of the distant future.