Follow TV Tropes

Discussion History Main / BraveNewWorld

Go To

[009] BritBllt Current Version
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Aldous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\', and it does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us the ugly details of how it might really work.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Aldous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There doesn\\\'t seem to be anything really evil about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\', and it does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us the ugly details of how it might really work.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Aldous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seem to us when it\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Aldous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\', and it does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us the ugly details of how it might really work.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seem to us when it\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Aldous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seem to us when it\\\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seemsto us when it\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seem to us when it\\\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems to us when taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself would seemsto us when it\\\'s taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems to us when taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even needlessly inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a PoliticalStrawman. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a StrawmanPolitical. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
Changed line(s) 1 from:
Though it\'s technically a dystopia, I\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{decontruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for really making a good case for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a PoliticalStrawman. As Mustapha Mond says, we\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\'t need any heroes or poets. There\'s nothing really evil or even inefficient about the government in \'\'Brave New World\'\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\'s well-being at heart, even if it\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
to:
Though it\\\'s technically a dystopia, I\\\'ve always thought the book was an interesting {{deconstruction}} of utopia rather than a plain old dystopia, and I really admire Alduous Huxley for making convincing cases for both sides of the story rather than resorting to a PoliticalStrawman. As Mustapha Mond says, we\\\'ve spent all of civilization aiming to eliminate pain, suffering, hardship, disease, war, poverty and so on, but all our virtues are based on enduring those things. There are no heroes and poets in Paradise, because Paradise doesn\\\'t need any heroes or poets. There\\\'s nothing really evil or even inefficient about the government in \\\'\\\'Brave New World\\\'\\\'. It does genuinely seem to have the people\\\'s well-being at heart, even if it\\\'s very cynical about them. The book just takes the dream of a scientific utopia, pops open the hood and shows us how it\\\'d really work, and how depressing and stagnant utopia itself seems when taken to its furthest conclusion.
Top

How well does it match the trope?

Example of:

/

Media sources:

/

Report