"And anyhow, hadn't you better wait till you actually see the new world?" (139). So what did I learn from this book? More than anything, it is very, very much so like our world. To begin with, the use of technology not to improve, but rather retrogress life. We're getting lazier with everything that we do, and there is no connection between people anymore unless it's via text or call. Next, the idea that it's better to buy something new if the old one breaks, rather than trying to fix it. This I think is most like our world, we rarely fix things, instead we buy new and better models of the broken object. Next, the use of soma everyday for the people in the book. Our world today thinks that life is better or more fun if you're not sober. This book, more than anything, has taught me to change my ways of thinking and doing things.

"Slowly, very slowly, like two unhurried compass needles, the feet turned towards the right..." (259). He died. That's so original. I think that the first author who decided that the protagonist would die in the end of the story was original, but since then it's just gone down hill. I thought he would die, but I didn't expect the whole Lenina incident to occur. The way John portrayed himself as by the end of the book I think hurt him more than helped him. He showed the world that you kind of go crazy without all of the soma and conditioning and Ford. In the end, nothing good happened. People were sent away, which I guess is sort of good; But John dies, the government is still intact, and nothing changes. Or did something change?

"'I think,' said Lenina suddenly, breaking a long silence, 'I'd better take a couple of grammes of soma'" (178). I see a lot of Lenina in Linda, John's mother. I feel as if there were to be a sequel to this book, Lenina would be exactly like Linda. Linda, who lived for years on the reservation, goes back to civilization, and she becomes a totally different person. Linda eventually dies due to the amount of soma that she takes. I feel as if Lenina will do the same very soon. It's their therapy, their method of coping with the faults of their world. Almost comparable to alcohol, some people drink to get away from their problems. Others feel as if their life would be boring if they were sober.

"It was John, then, they were all after" (156). This quote is from the part of the book after John's identity is shared with others. His father, the D.H.C., partially made him famous. But more than anything, his being a true savage in a civilized world made him even more famous. People have always had this fascination with odd things. From the freak shows and circuses of the 1920s to "My Strange Addiction" and "Ripley's Believe it or Not" type shows today. In the book, Bernard even throws a party where people can go and meet the "Savage." Which by the way, totally makes me think of Pocahontas and John Smith's letters we read last year. I also find it odd that John is the one considered a "Savage." I almost think that the civilized people in this book are more savage than John is.

"'O brave new world,' he repeated. 'O brave new world that has such people in it" (139). This quote is said by John after Bernard invites him to go with him to the Other Place. It is a quote from William Shakespeare's The Tempest. Earlier in the story, the reader learns that John began reading Shakespeare at the age of 12. But what I find most interesting about John is that he knows, with out being told, that literacy brings power. He know that being able to read will get him further than others, and more specifically, he knows that Shakespeare is a bit of a big deal. He shows he knows how important reading is on page 130 when the other children are making fun of his clothes. He says to himself that the other children are unimportant because they don't even know what reading is. John seems to be a very interesting character, but I think he'll be more of an anti-hero than a protagonist.

"The dress of the young man who now stepped out on the terrace was Indian; but his plaited hair was straw-coloured, his eyes a pale blue, and his skin a white skin, bronzed" (116). This description is of John. I think that he will become the next protagonist in the story line. What I find most interesting about this section of the book is John's story to how he got to be in the Reservation. When it's pieced together, the reader finds out that his father is the D.H.C., the man whom Bernard detests. This is when Bernard's back handedness begins to show. Bernard implies in the book that he'll bring John back to the Other Place so John can experience new things, when in fact, he plans to use John against the D.H.C. I find this a bit upsetting because I thought that Bernard was the "good guy." As it turns out, he's just like everyone else in the book: brain-washed and selfish.

"Queer...very queer...I don't like it. And I don't like that man" (107). In my opinion, the hardest thing to grasp in the book is Huxley's writing style. It seems to have both a new age and old age feel to it. It has the etiquette and proper writing of the 1940s, but also the futuristic dialect of today. The way that he writes makes the reader not totally sure of the time period. Also, there doesn't seem to be a character who just says something. Everything everyone says in the story thus far seems to hint at having more than one meaning to it. Every character also seems to have back-handed intentions underneath the surface. This can make the book hard to truly understand.

"I drink to the Greater Being" (81). Big Brother, Hal, "Eagle Eye," and now Ford, all of these are figures, whether in a book or movie, that see all, know all, and can do whatever they want. But I'm going to focus on the book examples. At the beginning of this novel, the Controller was explaining the old world to the students. In his explanation, he said that they had gotten rid of all religions, when in fact, they really didn't. In this new world (and 1984's world) children grow up praising and being at total awe of a Being. This Being can do whatever it wants, it know absolutely everything, and is completely omniscious. Isn't that, in a way, sort of a dark religion? It seems to me that religion can never die. People will always need an answer to every mystery and religion seems to be the answer.

"Progress is lovely, isn't it?" (100). Brian washing and omnipotent figures seem to be the makings of a good novel. In this story, they describe sleep conditioning. This is when, at a young age, certain ideas and morals are told to children as they think. This way, they think a certain way with out even know it. Also, as mentioned before in a blog, there is this all-knowing "Ford" character. He is this demi-god to the people in the novel. This being that knows all, thinks all, and can tell all. But they've never even seen or heard from him. In a weird way, he's almost their religion.

"He raged against himself-what a fool!" (104). I've noticed that this sci-fi novel, like others, has standard themes that run through the duration of the book. To begin with, the age old theme of internal conflicts. Bernard is having major issues with a) his self confidence and b) the world he lives in and contributes to. His self confidence issues spur from the shallow world he is living in. Everyone must be perfect if they are alphas or betas. He is mainly upset, however, because he understands the corruption, maybe not totally, but he still has a partial understanding of what is wrong in society. However, he also contributes to this corruption. He has no other option, but he must. My next blog will talk about the other themes that are seen through this novel and many other sci-fi novels.

"'The matter?' He dropped heavily into a chair. 'I'm going to be sent to Iceland'" (103). I feel like I honestly don't know what is going on through most of this book. What's so bad about Iceland? Who is this "Ford" man, and where is he right now? Why do some people like Bernard understand the messed up world, and others like Lenina don't? How did the world become this way? Huxley's style seems to leave a lot of unanswered, or open-ended, questions for the reader. I understand parts of things, like all the social levels, why they use soma, and the weird conditioning for children. At the moment though, I feel like I have more questions about the book than answers.

"The Warden was a blond and brachycephalic Alpha-Minus, short, red, moon-faced..." (101). I've noticed that part of Huxley's style is by using direct characerization for every character. Indirect characterization is when the author tells the reader what the character looks and dresses like, what they say and feel, and what they do. He describes each character as they come into play into the book. He describes Lenina as "uncommonly pretty" (16). He describes Watson as "a powerfully built man, deep-chested, broad-shouldered, massive..." (66). The director is described as ageless in a way, for no one can determine just how old he is. Bernard Marx is described as "ugly" (46) by another character in the book, Fanny. Huxley's technique and style make the descriptions unique to each character.