My Biggest Issue with Brave New World

I believe that one of the most underrated in regards in its importance components to fiction would be the strength in the writing of characters. The reason character writing specifically is so important is because of how prominent characters are in the overall experiencing of a work of fiction. We, the readers are reading characters' reactions to their situation. Also, having fun and interesting characters just make the overall experience enjoyable, and vice-versa. When reading, we are experiencing a world, even if that world is in our head. I'd say that this principle is the same in real life: everyone enjoys meeting and interacting with pleasant, enjoyable, or at least intriguing people. Everyone doesn't like meeting annoying, non-enjoyable, and boring people. The same goes for literature. I don't like reading about characters that are not written well. It's just like having to encounter unlikable people in real life (isn't fiction supposed to be a form of escapism)?

If you don't believe any of that, just do some pondering for a moment. Think of some of the largest, most popular works of fiction every created. I'll give some examples: Harry Potter, Star Wars, The Office, the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Spongebob Squarepants. A common theme between all of these? They all have an abundance of unique, extremely easy to love, likable characters that help enrich their story and their world.

So here's my view on the character writing in Brave New World, broken down character by character

One of the very few good examples of a very good character in this book was Mustapha Mond. He gets introduced as this big scary, cliche "the man" or "manifestation of evil authority" character, yet at the end of the novel he's revealed to not be this way at all (it's too bad that up until this point he only made brief, one-dimensional appearances until he goes onto a two-chapter long tangent that fits all of his character development in it). Instead, he's a very intelligent, misguided man who is able to provide some very intellectually intriguing incite into philosophy, art, religion, and happiness. I don't agree with his views, but they are very interesting.

Lenina is very one-dimensional. Throughout the whole novel, she is just a normal sheep, sex-driven, consumed by the propaganda, "kool-aid drinker" like the rest of the "Brave New World." I get that having one of these characters in the book would have been very likely, but that still doesn't mean that the execution on her character is very stellar. Throughout the whole book she just goes along with the plot and provides he BNW-society view on the situations the other two main characters (Bernard and John) in a way that seems very preachy. Again, I realize that a character that served as this would have very likely been inevitable no matter the execution in the writing of the book, but that doesn't make it any less bothersome when she's constantly spewing out the state's propaganda and doesn't do anything else until around 3/4 into the book when she starts to get just a little bit of character development. I do think that the fact that she loves John yet has been so conditioned to not love that she only "likes" him a lot is some great character writing. Overall though she doesn't seem like she's contributing to the plot or overall narrative of the story until that part of the novel.

Bernard before his visit to the reservation is one of two small glimpses of interesting, compelling, and enjoyable character writing. He's challenging society. He's starting to wake up. He seems like he's going to be a great and interesting protagonist. He's got his love interest set up. Then, he goes to the reservation. His character then understandably takes a back seat to developing, fleshing out, and expanding upon the new characters and environment introduced. However, after getting back to society with John, his character completely changes to an unbelievable degree.

All works of fiction must operate within their own rules. If those rules are broken for plot convenience, that is very lazy writing. And that happens in this novel. His character drastically changes so that he is no longer the main character, he no longer fits the role of the protagonist - John does. Meanwhile, Bernard goes crazy with fame the rest of the book. The rule that the author breaks is just one of common sense - no one, regardless of situation, practically changes their personality to the point of becoming a new person, over the course of several days. Also, on top of all of this - the new Bernard is mean. He's destructive of personal relationships. That's not really that fun to read about someone like that. I can see the argument that it's supposed to be a representation of how fame goes to people's head, but still no amount of fame will change someone that much that fast - even in 2540.

John, by far had my least favorite character writing in the whole book. The part about his writing that I dislike the most is probably that he's ultimately set up to be a tragic hero. But, he's no deserving of that title. He's kind of a hero for challenging the order of the government he was under. But I would argue that he's not tragic at all. We constantly are supposed to feel sorry for him, but he's so unlikable and the way he analyzes certain situations is so disagreeable that I can't feel sorry for him. He's way too attached to his mother, and doesn't fully grasp the situation of her death. She was a horrible mother, and she ended up committing suicide basically. John cannot see this at all. The reader is supposed to feel sorry for John that his mother died, but he should have not really felt anything for her because of her lack of parenting. Another instance of John being unlikable is how he rejects his love for Lenina. He obviously really loves her (which I don't really understand, I never felt much chemistry between them), and yet he rejects the love for no good reason. I am honestly extremely perplexed as to why he rejects his feelings. Love is obviously one of the biggest marks of being uncivilized in this book, and his whole goal is to be as uncivilized as possible. That hypocrisy is very unlikable.

There was so much potential with his character. The interactions he could have had being uncivilized with a civilized world could have made for some great content, but most of his initial time spent in civilization is overshadowed by the public's and Bernard's view on John coming to civilization. He's supposed to be the voice of reason in the book, "the audience character." However his un-likability and brashness in his decisions tarnish the potential his character conceptually had.

Liam McDougal