How Brave New World Updated Huxley's “FLAWED” and “DATED” sci-fi classic - You'd get a better adaption by looking outside your window

wtfNeedSignUp

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Dec 17, 2019

N 1932, ALDOUS HUXLEY’S NOVEL BRAVE NEW WORLD ENVISIONED A FUTURE THAT WAS ANYTHING BUT.

Almost 90 years later, a new show attempts to modernize a science fiction novel of overwhelming influence in an overwhelming year. In doing so, some changes had to be made. "It wasn’t a matter of adapting the book faithfully. It was [about] being true to the ideas,” showrunner David Wiener tells Inverse. “We hit the same places Huxley does. But we get there in different ways."


Premiering July 15 on NBC's Peacock, Brave New World adapts Huxley’s most famous work for a streaming audience. Set in a future “New London” ruled by class hierarchy and bodily pleasures that dull the populace, an outsider disrupts order with chaotic ideas like love, liberty, and individuality.

This is the third time NBC adapts Huxley’s book to television screens. But as the streaming wars heat up, NBC is giving Brave New World its overdue prestige treatment.

Where to begin? First, Wiener started with what he thinks the book is not. Even on Wikipedia, Brave New World is described as a "dystopian novel."


"A lot of people think the book is dystopian. I think it has a genre of its own," Wiener says. "It’s a Utopian book that exposes the dystopia inside humans."

Wiener zeroed in on the book's characters, specifically Lenina Crowne, someone Wiener feels was "an oversight" in the book and "a product" of Huxley's time.

"Lenina doesn't evolve in the book," he says. "She is the same at the beginning of the book as the end. That was an opportunity. For our story Lenina is very much at the center.”


Played by Jessica Brown Findlay (Downton Abbey), Lenina is a "Beta," an upper class tier in New London's hierarchy. Like other Betas, Lenina is sexually hyper-active and has a routine intake of "soma," a mandatory drug that induces artificial happiness. But when Lenina takes a vacation to the "Savage Lands" with her boss, Bernard Marx (Harry Lloyd), she meets John (Alden Ehrenreich, Solo: A Star Wars Story), an outsider who opens her eyes to new/old ideas about the world.

“There's no genetic legacy [in New London]. That makes the hierarchy pure as an idea,” Wiener explains. “No one wants to be anything other than what they are until John disrupts those notions. Lenina and Bernard find who they are inside doesn't align with who they're told to be."



More changes came in John himself, an outsider connected to New London in ways he doesn't know; and the "Savage Lands," John's rural home where people still live a life familiar to our own, with monogamy, marriage, and natural birth. In the show, New Londoners visit the Savage Lands as a getaway resort to revel in — to borrow phrasing from the in-universe marketing — the "misery" of the old world "with all the comforts" of the new one.

The Savage Lands’ makeover into a Westworld-style vacation park is in contrast to its role in the book, where it was a reservation New Londoners visit to gawk at primitives. Wiener felt Huxley's "savages," described in the book with Puebloan imagery, was problematic.

"That didn't seem right in the context of our culture," he says. "He uses race as a way of reinforcing the stratification of New London."


The modernized Savage Lands, now closely resembling the rural southwest United States, stems from the indignities natives feel of the luxury tourism industry. "I remember the day we landed on that in the writer's room," Wiener says. "We thought about what it's like for the privilege to go somewhere. You go to Sandals, to a quote 'authentic' native experience. It's a solipsistic existence."

The rebooting of the "savages" afforded a rebooting of John. In the book, John shakes up New London with wacky ideas like love and war, based on his obsession for the forgotten art of William Shakespeare.


"In the book John is kind of Mike Pence-like," Wiener says. "He's got a strict sense of propriety based on Elizabethan ideas."

Wiener believes Huxley's John would have made for boring television, but still wanted him to have "his private oasis" that defined him. They found it in music.

From Lou Reed to Radiohead, John fills his head with familiar music that sound ancient to the ears of New London. (One character asks John why anyone made music "with words in them.") In contrast to the new world's synthesized rhythms, John is a rugged Bruce Spingsteen ballad given form. "It helped us find John's attitude, through the Lou Reed he listens to."

There are other changes to Brave New World that feel made for 2020: Live streaming, which Huxley never could have predicted in his lifetime, is the new ephemeral media the author feared at the dawn of radio and television. The loss of privacy feels especially urgent now than it did in 1932. Consent, a foreign concept in a world of free sex and excluded from Huxley's book, has a moment in the seventh episode that reveals how alien the brave new world is to ours.

"What does consent mean where everybody says 'yes' all the time?" Wiener says. "It has huge implications, the sexual corrosion of a whole group of people. We wrestle with that."

But it's the spirit of Huxley's work that remains intact 90 years later. Just as it was explored in the book, the need for one's identity and the raw gift of feeling is essential to the series.

"It was important to be true to the philosophical questions he set up," Wiener says. "If you look at the book, it's flawed, dated. We have the benefit of being able to pass the book through the filter of our own time. Everything in the book really lends itself to that."

BRAVE NEW WORLD STREAMS ON NBC'S PEACOCK ON JULY 15.

*Internal screaming intensifies*

For those who are blissfully unaware, Brave New World is a story about a future where the masses are bred and educated into different heirarchies based on intellectual power. The society is kept stable by constant supply of drugs and entertaiment in between their wage cages. There is no community or family, only you and your stand within your clique. Abortion is near mandatory and is told to every girl. There is few places where the society doesn't exist and is used cynically for the more wealthy individuals to feel superior to primitives. In short it's pretty much a dead on prediction of modern western countries.

Anyways I'm off to writing a long ass autistic rant on everything wrong with this.
 
Don't forget, they also watch mindless TV ("feelies") and have kids that grow up amongst each other rather than with parents and are encouraged to start early and often masturbate and engage in sexual play with each other. That doesn't sound like modern day at all.

scool.PNG


Huxley was pretty tuned in, into what changes were coming, in this 1958 interview, even talking about NPCs:


And finally, I'm sure the re-imagination of the showrunners is going to be to make sure that you see Trump as the controller of mass media and that it doesn't accidently help you see the man behind the curtain.

>
.
 
Last edited:
What the fuck is this man smoking?

"A lot of people think the book is dystopian. I think it has a genre of its own," Wiener says. "It’s a Utopian book that exposes the dystopia inside humans."

The book literally ends with John becoming an hero.

Wiener zeroed in on the book's characters, specifically Lenina Crowne, someone Wiener feels was "an oversight" in the book and "a product" of Huxley's time.

"Lenina doesn't evolve in the book," he says. "She is the same at the beginning of the book as the end. That was an opportunity. For our story Lenina is very much at the center.”

Lenina not evolving wasn't "an oversight", it was literally the fucking point. She was conditioned to NOT WANT to change and she wasn't emotionally capable of understanding change.

Lenina and Bernard find who they are inside doesn't align with who they're told to be."

This never happened to Lenina because it was literally impossible based on her conditioning from birth. It happened to Bernard because he was jealous since he was considered an inferior Alpha Plus due to him being shorter than other Alphas. It's actually mentioned that something went wrong during Bernard's maturing process.

"That didn't seem right in the context of our culture," he says. "He uses race as a way of reinforcing the stratification of New London."

It's not supposed to reflect our culture; it's supposed to be a warning.

Also, did you not read the first three chapters of the book? Alphas, betas, gammas, deltas, and epsilons were decided before birth. The reservation wasn't even considered part of society.

The modernized Savage Lands, now closely resembling the rural southwest United States, stems from the indignities natives feel of the luxury tourism industry. "I remember the day we landed on that in the writer's room," Wiener says. "We thought about what it's like for the privilege to go somewhere. You go to Sandals, to a quote 'authentic' native experience. It's a solipsistic existence."

You were thinking about Brave New World, and the first idea that came up in your head was a couples resort?

"In the book John is kind of Mike Pence-like," Wiener says. "He's got a strict sense of propriety based on Elizabethan ideas."

Comparing John to Mike Pence is the most insane thing I've ever heard, and I've heard A LOT in the last two months.

Consent, a foreign concept in a world of free sex and excluded from Huxley's book, has a moment in the seventh episode that reveals how alien the brave new world is to ours.

"What does consent mean where everybody says 'yes' all the time?" Wiener says. "It has huge implications, the sexual corrosion of a whole group of people. We wrestle with that."

THAT WAS THE POINT HE WAS MAKING! Everyone belonged to everyone! There are literally scenes in Chapter 3 or 4 where Lenina's friend is admonishing her because she's dating the same person TOO OFTEN.

But it's the spirit of Huxley's work that remains intact 90 years later. Just as it was explored in the book, the need for one's identity and the raw gift of feeling is essential to the series.

"It was important to be true to the philosophical questions he set up," Wiener says. "If you look at the book, it's flawed, dated. We have the benefit of being able to pass the book through the filter of our own time. Everything in the book really lends itself to that."

BRAVE NEW WORLD STREAMS ON NBC'S PEACOCK ON JULY 15.

You completely missed the points he was making. You literally don't understand basic concepts of the world he built. You thought that the trip to the reservation was like a Sandals resort.

This sounds like HBO Watchmen levels of missing the fucking point.

Actually it sounds like just a basic live/laugh/love love story that just happens to have Brave New World settings to piss on the author's grave.


Edit: I'm sorry. I didn't mean to sound MOTI. I guess I was just bored and couldn't believe the shit I was reading.
 
Last edited:
"If you look at the book, it's flawed, dated. We have the benefit of being able to pass the book through the filter of our own time. Everything in the book really lends itself to that."

My copy of Brave New World is not currently with me.
Still, that screams like the good old "replace, do not repair" theme in the fucking book. To see the very book they try to adapt being able to fuck their narrative is depressing.
I hope this outrage crashes and burn.
 
Selling the idea shallow entertainment, drugs and orgy porgy are not all there is to life, in a world of shallow entertainment, drugs and tinder sounds tough. Better just to use the name to sell shallow entertainment to people who've heard of the book but are too lazy to read.
 
Okay, paragraph by paragraph:
"It wasn’t a matter of adapting the book faithfully. It was [about] being true to the ideas,” showrunner David Wiener tells Inverse. “We hit the same places Huxley does. But we get there in different ways."
This is wrong on so many levels as you'll see below.
Set in a future “New London” ruled by class hierarchy and bodily pleasures that dull the populace
The very first sentence and it's already wrong. Class hierarchies is a very poor way of describing how the children are made in literal factories where their body is poisoned to be withing specific IQ level before even being implanted in the artificial womb, plus an education where they are brainwashed to not be associated with people not in their groups.
an outsider disrupts order with chaotic ideas like love, liberty, and individuality.
This is flat out wrong, "the outsider" doesn't cause anything bigger than a slight uncomfort and a small scale "literal" autistic riot. His "ideas" are more in line with intimacy, duty and community (all in short supply), very different things.
"A lot of people think the book is dystopian. I think it has a genre of its own," Wiener says. "It’s a Utopian book that exposes the dystopia inside humans."
No, it's a dystopian book that shows how humankind will gladly live in a steel box.
Wiener zeroed in on the book's characters, specifically Lenina Crowne, someone Wiener feels was "an oversight" in the book and "a product" of Huxley's time.

"Lenina doesn't evolve in the book," he says. "She is the same at the beginning of the book as the end. That was an opportunity. For our story Lenina is very much at the center.”
ALL THE CHARACTERS IN THE STORY BESIDES THE OUTSIDER DON'T EVOLVE, THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT. THEY WERE RAISED TO BE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND MATURE CONCEPTS. But hey, we can't have a women being nothing else than a paragon nowdays.
Played by Jessica Brown Findlay (Downton Abbey), Lenina is a "Beta," an upper class tier in New London's hierarchy. Like other Betas, Lenina is sexually hyper-active and has a routine intake of "soma," a mandatory drug that induces artificial happiness. But when Lenina takes a vacation to the "Savage Lands" with her boss, Bernard Marx (Harry Lloyd), she meets John (Alden Ehrenreich, Solo: A Star Wars Story), an outsider who opens her eyes to new/old ideas about the world.
Soma isn't mandatory as much as heavily pushed by society and having hard withdrawl, plus Lenina never understand the ideas because she isn't mentally able to grasp them.
“There's no genetic legacy [in New London]. That makes the hierarchy pure as an idea,” Wiener explains. “No one wants to be anything other than what they are until John disrupts those notions. Lenina and Bernard find who they are inside doesn't align with who they're told to be."
No, they both treat John as a toy for status.
The Savage Lands’ makeover into a Westworld-style vacation park is in contrast to its role in the book, where it was a reservation New Londoners visit to gawk at primitives. Wiener felt Huxley's "savages," described in the book with Puebloan imagery, was problematic.

"That didn't seem right in the context of our culture," he says. "He uses race as a way of reinforcing the stratification of New London."

The modernized Savage Lands, now closely resembling the rural southwest United States, stems from the indignities natives feel of the luxury tourism industry. "I remember the day we landed on that in the writer's room," Wiener says. "We thought about what it's like for the privilege to go somewhere. You go to Sandals, to a quote 'authentic' native experience. It's a solipsistic existence."
"Problematic". Just to mention, the savage lands had christianity and you can bet your ass it will be replaced by picture perfect niggers+indians who never existed.
The rebooting of the "savages" afforded a rebooting of John. In the book, John shakes up New London with wacky ideas like love and war, based on his obsession for the forgotten art of William Shakespeare.

"In the book John is kind of Mike Pence-like," Wiener says. "He's got a strict sense of propriety based on Elizabethan ideas."
Yeah, it's not like those ideas are being incredibly demonized nowdays.
Wiener believes Huxley's John would have made for boring television, but still wanted him to have "his private oasis" that defined him. They found it in music.
Kill yourself, this will be a net good for humanity.
There are other changes to Brave New World that feel made for 2020: Live streaming, which Huxley never could have predicted in his lifetime, is the new ephemeral media the author feared at the dawn of radio and television.
The book had a lot of crazy futuristic shit, who fucking cares about live streaming that's not even that departure from regular tv?
The loss of privacy feels especially urgent now than it did in 1932.
Tere is privacy in the books you fucking morons. It's just that people were raised to feel uncomfortable alone, like how you just glimpsed as your cell phone as you were reading this.
Consent, a foreign concept in a world of free sex and excluded from Huxley's book, has a moment in the seventh episode that reveals how alien the brave new world is to ours.
Fuck off, that's the thing you feel alien and not literally having orgies for small children with their sisters and brothers? Not that it should surprise me by now.
"What does consent mean where everybody says 'yes' all the time?" Wiener says. "It has huge implications, the sexual corrosion of a whole group of people. We wrestle with that."
This will be a funny statement once the guy gets inevitably excosed as a sexual predator.
But it's the spirit of Huxley's work that remains intact 90 years later. Just as it was explored in the book, the need for one's identity and the raw gift of feeling is essential to the series.

"It was important to be true to the philosophical questions he set up," Wiener says. "If you look at the book, it's flawed, dated. We have the benefit of being able to pass the book through the filter of our own time. Everything in the book really lends itself to that."
The idea about the book is loss of moral and community and replacing it with narcissism and consumerism. This work would fit right in into the book. Also if you like the book don't fucking insult it everytime it's mentioned you degenerate philistine.
 
ALL THE CHARACTERS IN THE STORY BESIDES THE OUTSIDER DON'T EVOLVE, THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT. THEY WERE RAISED TO BE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND MATURE CONCEPTS. But hey, we can't have a women being nothing else than a paragon nowdays.

You make some very good points. I just want to add that John himself couldn't evolve either due to his upbringing even though he wasn't conditioned from birth. That's why he feels such regret after the lighthouse orgy and when whipping himself didn't work he killed himself.
 
tl;dr our media overlords find a way to turn one of the best and most relevant dystopian novels into the very thing it was warning against, and here's why that's a good thing.

I know such a grotesque display of absurd irony should shock, outrage or amuse me, but I can only feel depressed. This shit is just saddening, tbh.
 
You make some very good points. I just want to add that John himself couldn't evolve either due to his upbringing even though he wasn't conditioned from birth. That's why he feels such regret after the lighthouse orgy and when whipping himself didn't work he killed himself.
I'm not sure, John started pretty optimistic and goes progressively darker and less sane by the end. He is a very tragic character that could never fit in with the savages due to his upbringing but also unable to accept the brave new world due to it going against the concept of growing up both intelectually and emotionally (which is the largest flaw in that society, none of the other people in it had the emotional maturity of a person over 18 year old... at least 50 years ago).
 
tl;dr our media overlords find a way to turn one of the best and most relevant dystopian novels into the very thing it was warning against, and here's why that's a good thing.

I know such a grotesque display of absurd irony should shock, outrage or amuse me, but I can only feel depressed. This shit is just saddening, tbh.

Create nothing, destroy everything.
 
>tfw we become so degenerate that people unironically think Brave New World is Utopian

>People are specifically bred to do mundane jobs, to the point where elevator operators get sexual satisfaction from reaching the desired floor
>Children play "sex games" out in the open instead of normal development
>Monogamy is akin to heresy, familial terms are akin to slurs
>Henry Ford is revered as a god (ok, maybe this is based)
>People have to regularly take drugs in order to be happy
 
I'm not sure, John started pretty optimistic and goes progressively darker and less sane by the end. He is a very tragic character that could never fit in with the savages due to his upbringing but also unable to accept the brave new world due to it going against the concept of growing up both intelectually and emotionally (which is the largest flaw in that society, none of the other people in it had the emotional maturity of a person over 18 year old... at least 50 years ago).

Ok, I can't argue that. That's how I remember it too.

It's more that he evolved but didn't like who he was becoming I guess.
 
Back