This is a good book

This is a good book

I agree.

It conforms to the typical sci fi/fantasy stereotype of presenting great ideas with average writing. It's still a good book, regardless.

You should really be catching up on your weekend homework rather than shitposting here, though, friendo.

Alright, worth a read but imho plays second fiddle to 1984.

Shouldnt compare but cant help it

I haven't read it yet.
It's on my list; I found it among recommendations of Fahrenheit 451, so I'll check it soon.
First I need to finish what I'm currently reading before deciding to read anymore books.

It's inferior in scope, depth, and writing to 1984, but you should read them as complementary to each other, rather than competing. Both focus on different methods of social control that are very real today. While they share the theme of public ignorance to amplify political power, Orwell's is a dystopia borne of fear of the elite, whereas Huxley's dystopia is borne of love, happiness, and distraction. In this way it's possible to argue Huxley's BNW is more insidious than Orwell's 1984, as it twists the romantic values of humanity into an existential prison.

The last chapter is pure shit.

>It's inferior in scope, depth, and writing to 1984
Writing I'll agree on, but I'd say his scope was deeper because it predicted modern civilization slightly better, and depth, well, it's still a dystopic book.

By scope and depth, I meant that the world was more detailed and complete. Huxley's world felt comparatively disjointed and shallow to me.

In what ways do you think civilization is more accurately predicted by Huxley?

>Huxley's dystopia is borne of love, happiness, and distraction
Fahrenheit 451 did it better.

That's the only one of the highschoolcore dystopia trilogy I haven't read, I'll take your word for it.

casual sex, trannies (those girls with beards), drug induced recreational "vacations", lack of stimulating thought from feelies, lack of wanting to read any literature, etc.

fahrenheit was the simplest and worst written of the 3.
1984 > brave new world >>>>> fahrenheit 451

First chapter is dreadful, tho

I loved this in middle school - re-read it recently and holy shit is it god awful. The prose is poorly written, the characterisation two-dimensional and its all pretty comically edgy. The conversation with Mustapha Mond near the end is hard to read.

The premise and its ideas carry the book and I can understand its significance in this respect - even though by 2016 they're so well known that it diminishes their novelty or impact.

Perhaps cause you read it in the english translation. It was meant for german, translation makes it weird. Or rather, shitty. Still, one can figure it out man, it's quite pretty book.

>Perhaps cause you read it in the english translation. It was meant for german, translation makes it weird. Or rather, shitty. Still, one can figure it out man, it's quite pretty book.
what did you mean by this?

Which one are you reading?

It is right? Very confusing and I don't see the -lit- in it.

It's that they lacked the will to read any lit, they just didn't have it at hand. They were asleep. Different from 1984 where the government gave them literature, although totally censored, or edited.

Well, yeah, they guy giving the tour and all, but... I mean, it was a nice small place to start the plot.
And perhaps that this wasn't your normal dystopian lit. This one was explained, in some pseudo complicated things which gave you the feel that the world was real. I guess that awful intro was necessary.

Meanwhile in reality we have a synthesis of the two, a mix between the E! channel and the media as described in Manufacturing Consent.

You see, german has no continuous present, for example. Meaning:
When you say in english, "I am", it's different from "I am being", well, german doesn't uses that, aka the "ing" at the end of your normal verb.
Ich = I
Bin = am/being

Ich bin could be any of those, so if this is a little example, I'd say that if a whole book contained many of these, the result translation might be weird, or rather wrong than that which the original writer wanted.

Still not that sure about german tho, just started learning it like a month ago. But the difference and grammar is quite big, Although phonetics are alike between these two.

Well, but... We have it right? I mean, we can go to any bookstore aka google piracy or bookzz and we get it. They had no way.

Just realized i'm shit at explaining some things.

Shut the fuck up

le i have nothing to say so i'll just dump some random sexy ass argument.

Never gets old.

We have what? Proletarian access to unbiased media? We don't though.

Google is a prime example, actually. The source, and therefore bias, of the news you google is decided by google based on their algorithm which judges your political opinion. Media biases therefore reinforce already biased opinions. A typical /pol/tard is going to have Fox at the top of their search results. A pansexual demigod whatever-the-fuck is more likely to have CNN. Sure, one can google for one particular source, but en masse? Media has a total monopoly on proletarian political decisions.

fuuuuuuuucccccccccccccjjjkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkklfdvnbmf

I admit you are very right. Masses don't really even know about this. But, admit it:

Probably 70-90% of the whole population has ever heard of "books".

And, you see.. I probably found Veeky Forums because of google. Started reading because of it. There are sources, there's even a lot of 18 or early-19 century books which have no more copyright, so they're for the general public, meaning:

It's there, it's people who just don't wanna see it.

Of course, it's easier to see the news everyday, E!, the Kardashians, Bieber, 1D, Selena... Shit, even a lot of Veeky Forums's percent is marked by it. Threads about ponys, porn, manga (which isn't bad, but most of it is only to entertain), /b/, etc

the lit, pol, int, his, DIY, Arts, creative, /mu/ boards are there, WE HAVE THEM. it's just, people sometimes just doesn't wants to see them.

yeah 1984 does a much better job of drawing you into the world. that opening sentence about the bells. and the ending was much, much better than brave new world or fahrenheit's.

But admit what? You just rearranged my initial point here: >it's just, people sometimes just doesn't wants to see them.
Sure, between self-censorship, apathy and distraction, it's inaccessible to people. My point is media in general conditions people to be their own thought police; the guard to their own prison of which they are a prisoner, so to speak.
As far as arts are concerned, they have been subverted, quite naturally and perhaps accidentally, by consumerist culture and egoism. There is no value in any of the boards you have mentioned, including Veeky Forums, when they are relegated to subjective, narrow critical theories.

Yes. It is.

I think few would disagree that Orwell is a better writer, but I think Huxley was smarter and his predictions are probably closer to the truth.
Anyone fuck with Island?

1984 was more beautifully written. Huxley just wanted to jerk off to his shitty fetishes.

ur gay

His predictions are closer to the current world -- and Orwell is a faggot for copying him.

i see 1984 not as much as an actual prediction of the future but rather as a very accurate portrayal of the nature of totalitarianism that was applicable at the time and still is today (see ISIS destroying ancient relics that don't fit the narrative of their political ideology for example)

I agree with your interpretation but whenever people talk about Orwell they speak as if he were predicting the future.
Libertarians do it constantly
I don't think there's any proof that Orwell ever read Brave New World though

>it predicted modern civilization better

This matters why? The books are about different things despite both being dystopian novels.

I think Huxley was ashamed of BNW. The book I have has a forward where he admits to wanting to rewrite the book.

They both copied We.

This. Yevgeny Zamyatin did it earlier, and better. Glass apartments are a great idea.

Also The Iron Heel by Jack London.