当前位置: X-MOL 学术American Book Review › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Brave New Theory
American Book Review Pub Date : 2021-04-19
Jeffrey R. Di Leo

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • Brave New Theory
  • Jeffrey R. Di Leo (bio)

Mathematical theory speculates that we are now using the equivalent of 1.6 planets to provide the resources we use and to absorb our waste. This means that it takes the Earth one year and six months to regenerate what we use in a year. The contemporary mathematician Joel E. Cohen believes that one way to save the world is to reduce this ratio through the use of theory.

In Cohen's view, extensively articulated in How Many People Can the Earth Support? (1995), there have been three general theoretical approaches this past century to the problems of poverty, overpopulation, environmental degradation, and social injustice. The first, is the Bigger Pie Approach, which advocates the use of technology to produce more and alleviate shortages; the second is the Fewer Forks Approach, which "make contraception and reproductive health care available to eliminate unwanted fertility and slow population growth"; and the third, is the Better Manners Approach which says "eliminate violence and corruption; improve trade, the operation of the markets, and government provision of public goods; reduce the unwanted aftereffects of consumption, such as environmental damage; and achieve greater social and political equity between young and old, male and female, rich and poor." Be this as it may, "enthusiasts of one school often neglect and suspect suggestions from the others," says Cohen.

Moreover, these general theoretical approaches to saving the world are nowhere to be found in contemporary literary and cultural theory. This of course does not mean that literary and cultural theorists are not interested in these approaches or the problems that give rise to them. It also does not mean that literature and culture does not address them. In fact, arguably, these three approaches are frequently explored in literature, perhaps most famously and memorably in a work that now has a permanent albeit problematic place in our cultural imagination, namely, Aldous Huxley's novel Brave New World (1932).

In the literature classroom, novels like Brave New World provide the opportunity to directly address the problems of poverty, overpopulation, environmental degradation, and social injustice—and to explore the social and political consequences of theories used to address them. In the case of Brave New World, the two major theories are Fordism and Freudianism, which respectively might be associated with Cohen's Bigger Pie and Fewer Forks approaches. Huxley uses these theories in tandem to postulate a future world where "Everybody's happy now." To exhibit their interrelatedness, Huxley has Mustapha Mond, "Our Ford," the Resident Controller of Western Europe, refer to himself as "Our Freud," when he speaks of psychological matters.

While the reason for this shift in self-identification is enigmatic to the narrator of Brave New World, it is quite clear to the reader: to establish Freudian psychology as one of the central theoretical inspirations of this future society. Writes Huxley,

Our Freud had been the first to reveal the appalling dangers of family life. The world was full of fathers—was therefore full of misery; full of mothers—therefore of every kind of perversion from sadism to chastity; full of brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts—full of madness and suicide.

The "brave new world" of Huxley's dystopic satire is a "World State" set 600 years in the future that is controlled by a group of ten of these Fords (or Freuds). The sway between Our Ford and Our Freud is one between the two major world-making theoretical-axes of the future circa 1930: the industrialized world exemplified by the development of the assembly line technique of mass production, homogenization, and consumption of disposable goods (Ford) and the psychological world characterized by the development of techniques of psychological manipulation, classical conditioning, and sleep-learning (Freud).

Nevertheless, it bears noting that "Our Freud" is not the unqualified champion of happiness that Huxley makes him out to be in Brave New World. Though Freud is linked in the popular imagination with the idea that sexual activity is associated with happiness, he was far less enthusiastic about the possibility of happiness in modern civilization. What Huxley is after in Brave New World is a "revolution" in psychology—or theory more broadly conceived—that...



中文翻译:

勇敢的新理论

代替摘要,这里是内容的简要摘录:

  • 勇敢的新理论
  • Jeffrey R.Di Leo(生物)

数学理论推测,我们现在正在使用相当于1.6颗行星的行星来提供我们使用的资源并吸收我们的废物。这意味着地球需要一年零六个月的时间才能再生一年中使用的能量。当代数学家乔尔·科恩(Joel E. Cohen)认为,拯救世界的一种方法是通过运用理论来降低这一比例。

在科恩看来,《地球可以支持多少人》详细阐述了这一点。(1995年),在过去的一个世纪中,针对贫困,人口过剩,环境恶化和社会不公等问题,已经有三种通用的理论方法。第一个是更大的派方法,该方法提倡使用技术来制造更多的产品并缓解短缺问题。第二种是较少的叉子方法,该方法“提供避孕和生殖保健服务以消除不想要的生育力和缓慢的人口增长”;第三是更好的态度方法其中说:“消除暴力和腐败;改善贸易,市场运作和政府提供的公共物品;减少不必要的消费后遗症,例如环境破坏;并在男女老少之间实现更大的社会和政治平等女性,富人和穷人。” 不管怎样,科恩说:“一所学校的热情经常被忽略,并且怀疑来自另一所学校的建议。”

而且,在当代文学和文化理论中找不到这些拯救世界的一般理论方法。当然,这并不意味着文学和文化理论家对这些方法或由此产生的问题不感兴趣。这也不意味着文学和文化不解决这些问题。实际上,可以说,这三种方法在文学中经常被探索,也许是最著名和最令人难忘的一部作品,尽管它现在在我们的文化想象力中具有永久性的问题位置,即奥尔多斯·赫x黎的小说《新世界》(1932年)。

在文学教室中,像《勇敢的新世界》这样的小说提供了直接解决贫困,人口过剩,环境恶化和社会不公正问题的机会,并探索了用来解决这些问题的理论的社会和政治后果。在《勇敢的新世界》中,两个主要的理论是福特主义和弗洛伊德主义,它们可能分别与科恩的《大派》和《福克斯更少》的方法有关。赫x黎(Huxley)结合运用这些理论来推论一个“每个人现在都快乐”的未来世界。为了展示它们之间的相互联系,赫x黎邀请了西欧的驻地总监Mustapha Mond(我们的福特)来称自己为“我们的弗洛伊德”。

尽管《勇敢的新世界》的叙述者无法理解这种自我认同转变的原因,但对于读者来说却很清楚:将弗洛伊德心理学确立为这个未来社会的主要理论灵感之一。赫x黎写道,

我们的弗洛伊德人是第一个揭示家庭生活危险的人。这个世界充满了父亲,因此充满了痛苦。到处都是母亲,因此从虐待狂到贞操都有各种各样的变态;到处都是兄弟,姐妹,叔叔,阿姨,到处都是疯狂和自杀。

赫x黎的反位讽刺小说的“勇敢的新世界”是未来600年的“世界状态”,由十个人(其中包括福特)(或弗洛伊德)控制。我们的福特和弗洛伊德之间的影响力是大约在1930年左右世界上两个主要的世界性理论轴之间的一种:工业化世界以大规模生产,均质化和一次性用品的消费流水线技术的发展为例(福特(Ford)和以心理操纵,经典调理和睡眠学习(Freud)技术发展为特征的心理世界。

然而,需要指出的是,“我们的弗洛伊德”并不是赫x黎使他脱颖而出的《勇敢的新世界》无可匹敌的幸福拥护者。尽管弗洛伊德在大众的想象中与性活动与幸福相关联,但他对现代文明中幸福的可能性却不那么热衷。赫x黎在《勇敢的新世界》中所追求的是心理学的“革命”-或更广泛的理论-……

更新日期:2021-04-19
down
wechat
bug