Humanity in Dystopian Societies

The onslaught of socialism and political corruption at the turn of the twentieth century led several writers to express their fears and doubts about the future and progression of society. Products of such endeavors are seen in Orwell’s 1984, Huxley’s Brave New World, and Burgess’ A Clockwork Orange. Each of these pieces illustrates a society on the catastrophic edge of destruction and authoritarian control. Personal freedoms are expelled from society, leaving each individual under the mercy of the government’s eccentric rules and demands. As seen at the individual level, the effects of being in such an environment are both devastating and shocking; in each respective novel, the individual is demoralized, is conditioned in both thoughts at actions to adhere to administrative goals, and loses any sort of individualism due to the constraints placed on free will.

In order to first begin this investigation, it would be relevant to give some meaning to dystopia and explain what it represents, which, in the most basic sense, is a nightmarish future. According to some views, this future is an era that is sleek, clean and illustrative of the ways in which technological advancement far exceeds human sociological evolution.  And almost invariably, a positive view of the future is highlighted not just by the role of science in progress but its role in defining the lifestyle and acting as an indisposable element of sociological stratification. The upcoming destiny of human beings as depicted in Plato’s Republic, for example, is a utopian one where the virtues of governmental and humanitarian concern benefit the people as a whole. While it aspires to explore the human condition through this mode, its characters are depicted in a universe that imagines the distant future as a realization of much of the promise in our capabilities.

This is a view of the future though that is broadly contrasted by the dystopian image of the prospective society.  The cleanliness that we enjoy projecting onto the as yet unseen era is such a perspective that it illustrates a fantasy that presents an implausible discontinuity from what we know to be true about the state of our environment today.  Additionally, the democratic society of the utopia in our desires is awkwardly depicted as a coexistence that is marked with the collective perils that we have levied against one another for all manner of differences, both fundamental and imagined.  The dystopian perspective is marked by its political disposition which asserts that the empty indulgence and selfish wastefulness of capitalism are contributing to a lifestyle and eventuality in which these excesses bring about a breakdown of civil order:

“As the ecosystem gradually unravels, city dwellers feel the effects in diffuse ways.  Food prices rise until many people cannot afford enough to eat.  Poor refugees appear at the edges of the city looking for a way to survive.  Diseases seem to crop up from nowhere and spread rapidly.  Riots explode out of hunger and desperation.  A frightened population turns to the government to enforce order by any means necessary.[1]”

Hill’s characterization reflects much of the thrust of Clockwork Orange. Of course, the Korova Milkbar, a place where adolescents are free to drink drugged milk, is emblematically tied to the decadence of the novel’s setting. This quality is the one from which dystopian literature seems most to derive its momentum to brandish paranoid critique of the current society through textual renderings of the nightmarish society for which we are building prelude.

So too is the same sentiment found in Huxley’s novel. Drugs and sexual immorality is uncontrolled, but ultimately no one pays any attention to the self-indulgent behavior because they have been behaviorally conditioned to accept and embrace it as a fact of life. Within this world, people are given chemical substances to enhance or bring feelings of happiness. This “comfort state” is endorsed by the government to create a false sense of happiness wherein the government produces an “overall paralysis of any aesthetic sense…everything is machine-made, mass-produced, and sterile, and as a consequence, civilization has lost touch with the qualities that once gave life zest, qualities of passion and vitality, of irrationality and excess that were both its peril and its promise[2]”. Indeed, and as a result of this, the characters here indulge themselves in sin, forget the past, and only live in the present. And hence Huxley’s decision to change the calendar system to A.F (After Ford) instead of A.D (Anno Domini, Latin for “In the year of the Lord”).

Ford was a logical choice for Huxley, for it was Henry Ford who offered the notion that “history is more or less bunk[3]” and the author capitalizes on this ignorance to demonstrate how society fails to learn from its mistakes. In choosing to eliminate God from the minds of the people, moreover, as the government did in the novel, it simultaneously debars the importance of morals in society. The Controller says “suffer little children[4]” which is a parody of Jesus’ words “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.” (Mark 10:14). In effect, the Controller has become the savior of all, a replacement of Jesus Christ, in a world that has forsaken Him and lives in that wake. As a part of the moral bankrupt culture, the individuals suffer to the government’s pre-programming and behavioral conditioning.

Huxley continues with the references to Ford by manufacturing people just as Ford manufactured cars; in a way, the author attacks technology, but he is also attacking the authoritarian control over the means in which people have freedom to choose their destiny. Even before conception, the government’s machines are monitoring the development of the embryo where it is taken and subjected to a series of treatments that govern its physical and mental development. If the product, otherwise known as a person, is considered to be an “Alpha”, his future is promising. But even if this is not the case, and if he is a Delta or a Gamma, the authorities will subject the child to several years of psychological and behavioral conditioning, including electrical shock treatments, disturbing noises, and messages which are delivered to the children while they are sleeping. Whatever method is employed, the end result is the same; conditioning makes “people like their inescapable social destiny[5]” an ending construed and devised by the government.

 Perhaps such a sentiment—that is, the destruction of human individualism which dystopian novels disbar through conditioning—is best illuminated in this genre. In Orwell’s 1984, society is forced under the control of a totalitarian state that is ruled by a leader named Big Brother. This mysterious person is in complete control of the citizens, as he does not even allow them to have the ability to express their own thoughts. Indeed, anyone in the town who thinks rebelliously is in immediate trouble of being turned in by spies, or perhaps even caught by the telescreens which closely monitor citizens. Also, if someone’s face does not ‘look right’, they are considered guilty of a face crime, where if someone’s thoughts are not right, they are considered guilty of a thought crime. These ridiculous procedures that the government established in this world emphasize governmental power and deemphasize human individualism.

To further bolster the position of authorities within Oceania, the Ministry of Truth uses brainwashing techniques to remove ‘unpleasant’ memories while casting the Party in a positive light. Thus, unlike Huxley’s novel where the government uses technological and biochemical means to produce obedient persons, torture and brainwashing methods are used, just like in A Clockwork Orange. Either way, both governments are controlling the information the people receive (again, Ford’s ignorant comment is a useful reference to fall back on), and hence the Party’s argument that “ignorance is strength” or “slavery is freedom”[6]; in forcing people to accept such views, the lines of truth and falsehood are completely blurred. In fact, those in Orwell’s novel actually come to believe that two plus two equals five when mathematical principles inform them otherwise.

Likewise, the effects of governmental power are illustrated in Winston, a man who succumbs to governmental power in such a way so as to surrender his love for Julia. Indeed, the last words uttered in the novel indicate the extreme damage incurred to Winston. With the narrator’s ominous voice commenting, “He loved Big Brother” [7], there is no more hope left for this man. Stripped from his desires, his passion, thoughts, and even his love, he can do nothing but cling to the government. In doing so, Orwell demonstrates the havoc that tyranny can do to the human spirit.

Yet it was in the government’s interests to remove human desires—to love, cherish, and enjoy—but to do so is to exercise free will, something the Party will not have occurring in their society. As a result, the Party outlaws sex for pleasure and marriage is simply an arrangement which exists for procreation. Even the desire for intimacy must be repressed, or the individuals will be thrown in jail, which is what happened with Winston and Julia. And both Winston and Julia betray each other after being tortured in jail; such treatment ultimately proves devastating to the human psyche. This is a point that makes Orwell’s novel most intriguing; whereas other dystopias allow some form of release for pleasure and enjoyment, in Oceania none exists; there is no breathing space.

            Overall, the novels depict, in a very real and shocking fashion, the effects of a dystopian society at the individual level where the power of the government disbars human individualism and free will.  The filthy and corrupt worlds of the dystopian future are not necessarily the product of Armageddon.  It is instead the result of a more eventual descent into self-destruction. As Erich Fromm commented in his afterward to Orwell’s text, “Orwell, like the authors of other negative utopias, is not a prophet of disaster. He wants to warn and awaken us”, as did Huxley and Burgess. The terrifying vision of the dystopian school of literature is of such political importance because it utilizes our human weaknesses to demonstrate the destructive product of authoritarian rule. No matter which text reviewed here, each respectively demonstrated that, at the individual level, dystopian societies demoralize the individual and strip away any free will that he or she may desire in both thought and action, leaving personal desires and decisions up to authoritarian control. It is the individuals in the novel and, ultimately, society at large, who suffer as a result.

By Erliana Tanzil