Recreational Reading
Ever since I learned to read, not too long ago, I’ve tried to average a book read per week. Sometimes, I’ve got multiple books going at the same time. Lately, I’ve been writing more than reading. But, given it’s the start of winter break, I want to dedicate more time to recreational reading.
But for me, an autistic person, recreational reading is a bit different than just sitting down with a book and flipping through the pages. Plus, because I tend to have more than one, these books are often complimentary. This allows my brain to see patterns and draw connections and conclusions that wouldn’t be possible if I was just reading one book at a time.
When I mention this style of reading to my students, they think I’m nuts. Who reads for pleasure? Who reads multiple books at the same time for pleasure? Who can keep all of that verbal stuff in working memory … across days? I can … now. And, I quite enjoy it.
The Pandemic’s Recreational Reading
Because of the hectic schedule of becoming a teacher, and writing a couple of books, I haven’t read recreationally since the pandemic. Then, with everyone talking about the government’s crackdowns and whatnot, I thought it might be fun to read 1984 vs A Brave New World - both of which now have graphic novel versions (cool!).
As sales of George Orwell’s iconic dystopian novel skyrocketed during the pandemic, people were often discussing its disturbing vision of invasive government surveillance, manipulation, and control. But, for that rabbit hole, “1984” is only half the story. To fully grasp the theme, we need to also consider Aldous Huxley’s equally prophetic work, “Brave New World.”
Spoiler alert for those who haven’t read the books
Huxley depicts a chilling world in which citizens willfully embrace forces that erode their individuality, creativity, and capacity for independent thought. Through endless distraction, pleasure, and highly-effective propaganda, the totalitarian regime achieves a blissful self-cannibalism rather than needing overt oppression. From birth, people are psychologically conditioned not just to accept lost freedoms, but to love their subjugation.
Censorship abounds, but citizens excitedly self-censor, flooded with so much noise, ads, and useless information that social control gets welcomed through willful ignorance. Slogans like “Community, Identity, Stability” mask the pyramid scheme of power, presenting exploitation as mutually beneficial belonging. History gets erased through glut of present-tense stimulus rather than outright banning.
So whilst Orwell shows how cognitive dissonance destroys free minds, Huxley reveals how distracted conformity is an equally great threat. Without need for force, the regime achieves its ends through citizens losing themselves in shared yet meaningless connection. Together, these books capture the Scylla and Charybdis between which we now finds ourselves crushed – the brute power of the state versus the siren song of the crowd.
What Huxley gets right that Orwell doesn’t
Here’s where my autistic brain kicks in. It loves to do a sort of compare / contrast internal argument with itself. Considering today’s issues, my brain seems of the opinion that “Brave New World” is closer to the state of things today than “1984.” Here’s why.
Psychological control vs brute force control: In “Brave New World,” control over the population is maintained not through brute force, but by conditioning people psychologically from birth to accept and even enjoy their lack of freedom. “1984” emphasises strict, overt control through surveillance, force, and fear. “Brave New World,” on the other hand, recognizes that you don’t strictly need force if you can mold psychology … a hint at the worries about LLM AI chat bots doing a bit of neurolinguistic programming.
Comfort and happiness as control: Huxley realized decades before that you can control a population by making them so comfortable and flooded with pleasure that they don't realize or care about their loss of deeper freedoms. (Here’s Yuval Harari saying essentially the same thing recently) In “1984” the population is kept purposefully uneasy and uncomfortable at all times.
Distraction over censorship: In Huxley’s world, there is no need to censor history or arts because people are simply too distracted by empty pleasures to care about deeper meaning. The government doesn't have to rewrite books since no one reads anyway. In Orwell's world, censorship and rewrite of history is central, missing how distraction can be a more insidious threat.
The power of science: Huxley focuses much more centrally on how scientific progress for social control could enable the dystopian world through genetics, psychology conditioning, mood altering drugs. He realised science in the service of control was perhaps an even greater threat than straightforward totalitarian violence and censorship depicted by Orwell.
So whilst “1984” serves as an excellent warning on obvious totalitarian control, “Brave New World” takes a more nuanced psychological approach in analysing how technology and distractions can erode freedom while keeping the population docilely happy. It is chilling because it seems more rooted in modern realities of endless distraction and entertainment dulling deeper thinking and vigilance over freedoms being eroded.
Relevance to today’s world
Naturally, as the pandemic unfolded, the various pundits accused the other side’s people of a manor of crimes against humanity. Terms like authoritarian and fascist were flung about regularly. My brain, doing what it always does, wanted to test their claims wondering where each of the societies depicted might fall on a realistic political spectrum.
I discovered that, from a political spectrum standpoint, the dystopian societies depicted in in the books would both be considered authoritarian regimes with strong government control, though they take slightly different approaches.
The society in “1984” would be seen as a far-right totalitarian regime. It exerts extremely strict control on the personal lives of citizens through not just surveillance and force, but also thought control. There is no tolerance for dissent. The government demands complete obedience to authority, emphasises extreme nationalism and patriotism, and relies heavily on the manipulation of information to shape public opinion. Economically, there also seem to be fascist elements with control of industries by the state. So “1984” blends some of the most totalitarian and oppressive aspects of far-right fascism.
The society of “Brave New World,” whilst still authoritarian in enforcing conformity, would likely be viewed more as an authoritarian corporatist / technocratic regime with strong elements of so-called “crony capitalism.” Rather than overt government control, much of the power is exercised indirectly by way of large corporations, consumer culture, and the scientific / technical elite (behavioural psychologists and biotech engineers). They shape public behaviour and opinions through monopolistic mass media, entertainment industries, drugs, and technology. The economic system is based around endlessly promoting mass consumption of goods, services, and leisure activities to power economic growth. So there’s an unholy alliance of industry and government (an almost pure late-stage capitalist fascism).
So whilst both societies result in loss of freedom for individuals, “1984” does it mostly openly through police state tactics whilst “Brave New World” relies more on consumer / celebrity culture and behavioural psychology to encourage willing participation of citizens in their own restriction of deeper liberties and independent thought. They represent useful warnings on how authoritarian control can emerge through technological corporate alliance with government.
A critique of capitalism?
I remember vividly that social media was flooded by all sides with quotes and images that attempted to bring these texts over to their side. The far-right, however, failed to notice that both books can be seen as powerful critiques of unrestrained capitalism, albeit in different ways.
In “1984,” the totalitarian government relies heavily on perpetual war and hate campaigns to sustain power and control resources. This mirrors how unrestrained capitalist economies use nationalistic xenophobia and military-industrial complexes to protect corporate interests abroad, often at the expense of public good. The three super states fighting over resources echoes capitalistic imperialism and violence in pursuit of profit.
Additionally, the “proles” peasant class in “1984” lives in extreme poverty and squalor while Inner Party elites live in luxury, parallel to the massive economic inequality unrestrained capitalism produces. Through repression of information and history, citizens become appendages serving production rather than self-aware individuals - much like exploited labourers in capitalistic systems.
In “Brave New World,” the economics are driven by mass production and consumption via consumer conditioning, much like modern corporations manipulate demand today through advertising. Citizens’ endless hedonistic consumption of goods and leisure reflects the superficial consumerist culture enabled by capitalism in pursuit of profit over meaning.
Moreover, humans get selectively engineered and conditioned by social class just to meet economic demands, reducing lives to servitude to keep production going - essentially slaves genetically bred to fuel economic interests. This echoes the dehumanizing aspects of capitalism Marx critiqued.
So whilst the regimes have authoritarian control, the underlying economic incentives, class divides, exploitation, and consumerism strongly echo failures writers like Marx identified in profit-above-all capitalistic systems. Both serve as useful artistic renderings of capitalism’s dangers unchecked by ethics, democratic values, and focus on human well-being over efficiency and profits. They imagine economic elements of 20th century capitalism extended to terrifying endpoints for individual freedom and dignity.
Final thoughts and choices around this winter’s reading selection
Maybe a bit of supporters’ choice is in order here. Are there any books that you know of that might work well together in the way I’ve written about here? If so, put them in the chat below.
By way of example, here are some interesting pairings of classic books that approach the same crucial topics from different angles and together give readers a more complete understanding.
Individualism vs. Community: Walden by Henry David Thoreau + The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne
These two classics of American literature provide contrasting perspectives on the tension between individual freedom versus social conformity. Thoreau’s memoir extols the spiritual nourishment of solitary living in nature whilst Hawthorne’s novel reveals the torment felt by outliers like Hester Prynne who transgress strict religious community norms. Read together, they offer a rich debate on finding balance between being true to oneself and belonging to society.
Capitalism vs. Labor: Hard Times by Charles Dickens + Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
Though written a century apart, both deal with themes of capitalism, morality, and workers’ dignity. Dickens sympathises with the struggling labourers of industrial England’s carted as expendable in profit-driven systems whilst Rand coldly praises the innovations of capitalists as driving progress. A great juxtaposition illuminating two sides of the responsibility debate between the capitalist class and the working class.
Nature vs. Civilisation: Frankenstein by Mary Shelley + Walden by Henry David Thoreau
Two seminal examinations of science, nature, and technology’s impact on humanity. Shelley’s gothic novel about experimental science run amok speaks to anxiety about unbridled industrialization whilst Thoreau's memoir brings transcendentalist awe of nature as a restorative, ethical counterbalance. Together they form compelling dialectic on modernity’s blessings and costs.
Gender as Construct vs Essence: Gender Trouble by Judith Butler + Written on the Body by Jeanette Winterson
Butler's seminal philosophical text deconstructs performativity of gender roles whilst novelist Winterson explores the fluidity of love and desire beyond fixed markers of identity. A rich dialogue emerges on the metaphysics of gender and attraction.
Disability Rights Movement: Borderlands/La Frontera by Gloria Anzaldúa + The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime by Mark Haddon
Anzaldúa's genre-bending writings push for recognition of marginalized “border” identities whilst Haddon’s novel gives an empathetic window into an autistic protagonist’s perspective. Together they expand ideas on inclusivity in society.
Queer Desire and Religion: Giovanni’s Room by James Baldwin + Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit by Jeanette Winterson
Both landmark queer coming of age tales explore protagonists grappling with same-sex attraction within conservative religious communities. Though stylistically different, they complement each other beautifully in tackling faith, family, and owning one’s truth.
Let me know in the comments below if any particular contrast catches your interest for a deeper dive.