Modern psychology saw its roots grow in the late nineteenth century as a budding psychologist developed his theories of the mind. This psychologist, Sigmund Freud, is seen as the father of modern psychology, and his theories continue to influence culture and psychology today. One of the most popular applications of Freud’s theories is in Aldous Huxley’s novel Brave New World. In this novel, a dystopian society’s foundation upon Freud’s theories, and the flaws of doing so are revealed through various characters. Freud’s theories, while groundbreaking, are continually under debate.
His theories depended on lust and violence being the core of humanity and received great acclaim during his lifetime. However, Huxley was not fond of Freud, as many of his contemporaries were. He took Freud’s theories to the extreme in his novel. By doing this, he pokes fun at the ridiculousness of the time period in which Huxley lived, the 1930’s, that had become so infatuated with Freud and his theories (Saracino, 10).
Huxley, being friends with fellow author D. H. Lawrence, whose “passionate engagement with Freudianism, as well as his dogged but rather confused attempts to refute Freud’s theory… ertainly made an impression on Huxley” (Buchanan, 114), was able to master the use of Freudian concepts and complexes. He was able to remain above the zealotry behind Freud’s support and understand the concepts behind his theories (Bloom, 104). Freud believed that the mind had three layers to it: the superego, the ego, and the id. The superego was the personality that a person develops to show his best traits, while the ego is one’s motivation. The id, the deepest layer, is where the instincts of a person lie. The id, considered the darkest part of the human psyche, is believed by Freud to be centered around violence and lust.
Huxley builds a society in which the id’s motivations are satisfied without the need for the pretenses of the superego or the ego. This society encourages sex and the use of a drug, soma, so that anger and lust are quickly medicated and eradicated. The World State trains its citizens to believe that it is not only okay but is encouraged for people to have sexual relations with anyone and everyone, as they are all shared amongst each other. The character Lenina Crowne, a citizen of the World State and a firm believer in the dogma taught to her, serves as a bridge between the societal norms of the World State and the reader.
She is appealing in the ways that she does not comply with the society, such as her attraction to fellow citizen, Bernard Marx, and her display of monogamousness for several months. In the end, however, she is just as much a member of the society as she was before, a firm believer in the ideals fed to her in her sleep. She is seen as a sex object amongst men; a source of lustful relief. When experiencing any emotion other than contentedness, her friend, Fanny Crowne, informs her that any “odd feelings” are a result of her monogamy, encouraging her “to be a little more promiscuous” (Huxley, 35).
She need only have sex to feel better about herself and the world around her. Lenina’s exhibition of monogamy is not only odd, but it is appalling. It is harmful to not only her health, but society is suffering now, too. Monogamy is seen as a source of discord within the World State, a concept that Lenina introduces to the reader. Lenina also introduces the drug soma. She familiarizes the reader with the commonality of medicating in order to feel nothing. She reminds her companion, Bernard, that “a gramme [of soma] is always better than a damn” (Huxley, 75).
Her use of soma whenever upset shows the reader the centrality of the drug and the avoidance of emotions within the World State. Mustapha Mond, one of the leaders in the World State, explains that Freud was the “first to reveal the appalling dangers of family life” (Huxley, 32). Family life was considered dangerous because of the exclusivity, the fostering of jealousy and irrational feelings towards parents. The root of the dangers lies in the development of the Oedipus complex, or when children “begin to have sexual feelings towards both parents, and compete with each parent in turn for the affections of the other. (Tyson, 59)
This competition results in unhealthy relationships and jealousy, harming the child’s development and affecting their relationships as they grow older. The Oedipus complex is solved in this new society by eradicating all parents. It is an extreme reaction to Freud’s theories, but by doing this Huxley has eliminated the chance of developing the complex: for “children will not have any mother to be obsessed or any father (or fatherly figure) to be urged to destroy” (Saracino, 11).
Freud, who states that the result of Oedipal tendencies is violence arising from jealousy, and his followers no longer have reason to worry since no one ever experiences jealousy in this new society. No one has a significant other or strong ties to anyone, as siblings or spouses may towards people that their loved one interacts with. By getting rid of any personal connection one may have with another, Huxley has successfully rid this new society of jealousy, and ergo any violence that could arise from it. The radical extermination of parents was possible through the development of hatcheries.
The Director of Hatcheries, where children are grown and raised, says that, aside from decanting, “we sat the hatchery] also predestine and condition. We decant our babies as socialized human beings, as Alphas or Epsilons, as future sewage workers or future… Directors. ” (Huxley, 10) This decanting process includes a series of altercations of the environment the embryo grows in in order to predestinate what caste they will end up in. Those with oxygen restricted to them in this process end up incapable of thinking at higher levels and end up less attractive than those in higher caste levels.
The decanting process enables the World State to completely rid society of biological parents, by simply fertilizing an egg several thousand times. Furthermore, by making words associated with parents, like mother and father, taboo they make the concept of parents heretical. The home life, prior to the World State, is described as “squalid psychically” (Huxley, 30) as mothers suffocate their children while doting, a practice now seen as revolting in this new world. The government then replaces both parents and education.
The government is capable of controlling everything a person hears and learns, influencing one through reprimanding and conditioning. The government ensures that its citizens worship Freud and grow up to never question authority, take drugs when unhappy, and have frivolous sex. Children grow up with whisperings of lessons in their sleep. They’re told “never put off till to-morrow the fun you can have to-day” two hundred times, twice a week (Huxley, 79). The caste systems are developed off of a hierarchy, growing up conditioned to not fraternize with one another and think of themselves as lucky to be in the caste that they were given.
The five castes, which can be divided into two groups: on the one hand, the Alphas and the Betas are rather intelligent people who have got the most demanding jobs, on the other hand, the Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons have to do menial work” (Real) are treated in order to maintain a social unity and prevent discord. Everyone sees the other castes as important and useful but does not stray from their own caste. Huxley does not stray from the upper caste levels in his novel, other than to describe the situations of the lower ones.
The upper caste levels offer a view of how the World State is run, and are able to function at higher levels because of the “predestination” that takes place while growing embryos. Bernard Marx, a member of one of the highest ranking castes, experiences jealousy when in relation to Lenina, and is similarly angered when it comes to his poor stature as an Alpha. His “unsavoury reputation” (Huxley, 27) resulting from his own physical inadequacies and lack of conformity. He behaves aggressively to convey his points, despite being intelligent, and his lack of promiscuity is a reason for his discontentedness.
He is unhappy with the status of the World State as he does not wish to be just another cog in the machine. Unhappiness, here, is not for the reason he gives, but instead for the exact opposite: Bernard wants to fit in, and dreams of being able to partake in the daily life everyone else around him enjoys. His own cynicism is rooted in his lack of belonging. Bernard’s profession as a psychologist that studies conditioning gives insight to the use of Freud’s theories of psychoanalysis and their application in the World State.
The alternative to the World State is the Reservations. Here, people live without the restraints of the government of the World State, have their own religion, and have more freedoms than those living in the World State. However, they have the constraints of parents and monogamy and believe in a savage god that needs displays of dedication through self-flagellation. In the novel, the Oedipus complex and the dangers of having parents is demonstrated through the character John the Savage from one of the Reservations in what was formerly the United States.
John, whose mother was a former citizen of the World State and was not used to monogamy or even the concept of parenthood, experiences jealousy and rage towards those who sleep with his mother or have intimate relations with her. He becomes violent, attempting to murder the man his mother sleeps with most. The core of the id — lust and violence — never changes, which is why the novel remains impactful, or as Margaret Atwood put it, “it’s still as vibrant, fresh, and somehow shocking”.
The id is an underlying motivation behind everything one does: it contains the rawest, purest, and most savage of motivations within a person. Everyone has or will experience lust and violence within their lifetime, the two instinctual feelings remaining constant. The status of Freud’s theories and their practicality make no difference, as the novel remains a very real example of what can happen when an ideology is taken too far, regardless of its merits. This novel serves as a warning to future generations and societies: one must not exploit an ideology, nor may they blindly follow it.
