Technopoly and Brave New World

Neil Postman's Technopoly makes many connections between Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World and similar situations, to the real world. Postman distinguishes the difference between a technocracy, “a society only loosely controlled by social custom and religious tradition and driven by the impulse to invent,” and a technopoly, which is a “totalitarian technocracy” (41, 48). Postman even ventures to say that the United States is a technopoly, which is slightly frightening since he also compares it to Brave New World. The underlying reason why technopolies are so powerful is broken down when they are compared to how things are run in Brave New World: “Technopoly eliminates alternatives to itself in precisely the way Aldous Huxley outlined in Brave New World. It does not make them illegal. It does not make them immoral. It does not even make them unpopular. It makes them invisible and therefore irrelevant” (48). This is easily seen in the novel since everyone believes they are working for what they believe in, which is progress. However, they cannot see that they are actually working for what their leaders believe in, since they are brainwashed not to see it.

In the nineteenth century, when inventions were booming, a new problem was introduced: “We had learned how to invent things, and the question of why we invent things receded in importance” (42). This seems similar to the question Bernard faced in the novel, as he also questioned the why, and so did a child in the beginning of the novel. However, no one else wished to know the why, since the how has become the only important thing in their society. Thankfully, in our world there is still a small hope, because “although technocracy found no clear place for the human soul, its citizens held to the belief that no increase in material wealth would compensate them for a culture that insulted their self-respect” (48). This sets us apart from the people in the novel because we still have self-respect, not just a dependence on our society and a desire for progress.

The Concept of Singularity

The article on Singularity called 2045: The Year Man Becomes Immortal, written by Lev Grossman, reveals many interesting concepts that Raymond Kurzweil has been building on since 1965. Kurzweil believes that in the future we will be able to “scan our consciousnesses into computers and enter a virtual existence or swap our bodies for immortal robots and light out for the edges of space as intergalactic godlings”. Although this may seem impossible at this point in time, based off of his point that technology is growing exponentially, I understand how this could definitely become a possibility in the future.

However, my understanding of the possibility does not mean that I would altogether support something like this. I agree that using technology to improve our lives by eliminating sickness or other related things could be beneficial to us, but the concept of infinitely continuing one’s life seems wrong. Not for any spiritual reason, but solely because if one was to stay alive forever, wouldn’t that be one less open spot for a new consciousness? I feel like if we were all to continue to live forever, that would take away the chance of any new life that should have come after us. This is similar to the novel because everyone is predestined to be a certain way, so who they would be if they were allowed to just be themselves is taken away.

The ability to merge with technology does open the possibility of becoming less human, at least in the eyes of the present. Being human seems to imply sickness, emotion, death, etc. However, this merge would affect all of these. Nonetheless, as technology exponentially grows, couldn’t our perception of what it means to be human also change? Basically, what we believe it means to be human right now would not compare to what we would believe it means to be human once we started merging with technology. So if one views it like that, than at the point in time that we could actually accomplish this, nothing drastic would really change in how “human” we are.

            I do not believe Bernard is just being romantic believing that there is a higher level of living that man can get to. Yes, technology has the potential to improve our lives. But if we lose sight of the reasons we are trying to better our lives, than there really is no point. For instance, in Brave New World, everyone is working towards perfecting their society. However, no one really has an original thought, and they have no reason to improve their society other than the reasons they have been brainwashed to believe. Bernard’s thinking has led me to believe that a better world would be a place where everyone is working to make our society better, not because they have been programmed to do so, but because they genuinely want to make this a better place.

Rhetorical Analysis of an English Essay

I decided to write about Jeremy Page’s essay Freudian Theories Present in Leroux's "The Phantom of the Opera." Page’s thesis statement, which can be found in the first sentence of the second paragraph (which, according to what we are normally taught in school, is the ‘incorrect’ place to put it), is, “Contemporary adaptations of The Phantom engage with several key Freudian concepts in order to explain and justify the development and motivation of the protagonist”. Page’s purpose in this essay is basically to reveal to readers how integrated Freud’s concepts are in popular culture by demonstrating that some Freudian beliefs are in The Phantom of the Opera.

His intended audience is probably people who are at least slightly aware of Freud’s ideas and are somewhat familiar with the play The Phantom of the Opera, however Page seems to be aware of his audience since he explains concepts and parts from the play. For instance, he uses the first paragraph of the essay to give some background to the play, which helps to broaden the audience that can read this article and actually understand what is going on.

The concept that Freud’s ideas are integrated into pieces of work without any attempts to do so could possibly cause some disturbance in the target audience because many people seem to scoff at Freud’s beliefs when applied to real life. However, since the author proves his points through the use of a widely known play, even those who may not themselves accept Freud’s views may find the essay interesting because of the connections that Page reveals between the play and Freudian concepts.

Page arranges his ideas in a certain way. He presents one of Freud’s ideas and then follows it with an explanation of how it fits in with The Phantom of the Opera. This arrangement simplifies the task of understanding the connection because he provides accurate details in order to support the Freudian concepts that he introduces. The reader does not have to figure out himself how the concepts could possibly by connected to the play just through the background information given, Page clearly lays out every point.

The diction of the essay does not suggest informality because Page does not use any sling or casually used words. He uses terms that his intended audience can easily understand, since there are a few psych terms, but he generally explains them so even those that have no knowledge of psychology can follow his essay. The language that he uses shows that he seems to know about what he is talking about and that he has some understanding of psychology, which supports his claim because it gives him credibility.

By reading this, I learned that essays should not be about meeting rules, but be about proving a point in whatever way that works for you. The author did not organize his essay with the taught introduction, three body paragraphs, and conclusion set up, nor did he form his paragraphs using the TS, CS, CM, CM restriction, however his point is still adequately made. So, instead of focusing on the rules that you may have been taught over the years, use them as mere guidelines, and go from there using your own methods of proving your point.

The article can be found at:  http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/332/freudian-theories-present-in-lerouxs-the-phantom-of-the-opera