What do you think?
Rate this book
Brain : a play of the whole Earth
A Brain is constructed in the Sahara Desert - presently It grows larger than the Desert-out of pure mechanism, by the whole of the human race, It controls the whole activities and does all the thinking of the world. Ultimately a star collides with the sun while man is still tied within the limits of the solar system. The Brain describes the approaching process, Its helplessness in comparison with Its former omnipotent power over the world. It deplores mankind's delay in not co-operating earlier, which makes it impossible now to escape the catastrophe. It has visions, premonitions of what might have been." -dj flap
129 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1930
8 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
April 20, 2015
brain
A brain is constructed in the Sahara Desert - presently it grows larger
than the desert - out of pure mechanism, by the whole of the human
race. It controls the whole activities and does all the thinking of the
world.
Ultimately a star collides with the sun while man is still tied within
the limits of the solar system. The Brain describes the approaching
process, Its helplessness in comparison with its former omnipotent
power over the world. It deplores mankind's delay in not co-operating
earlier, which makes it impossible now to escape the catastrophe. It
has visions, premonitions of what might have been.
"Note, I don't make any particular distinction between the sexes. The
play is really written for the male mind, to which I think in time the
female will approximate. If women can do the parts, that is purely a
question for the producer to decide. i do not feel inclined to make
concessions to female psychology. Or to the sex figments in male
psychology. Ultimately both sexism will become human".
That is Almost enough to put me off reading this entirely! While it's
good not to make a distinction, the idea that In Time a woman's brain
will be a close approximation of a male mind is HIDEOUS! Even for 1930!
I'm quite surprised that Bea, who fought so hard for women's rights,
would consider a play by an author with such a view. Gender neutrality
is very good, but not when it comes with the view that women's brains
are inferior to men's!
Includes the cast list of the original production on April 27, 1930,
including bea, and a massive list of actors! Bea's character does not
appear until Act III.
Act II, Scene I "The men are business men, manufactures and so on - or
business women" p, 31
Act III, Scene V "Two men - or etiher might be a woman; why not, if you
can find such a woman?" p 89
In the end I was only able to determine which scene Beatrix was in by a
process of elimination as her character name at the begining of the
play did not appear in the script as it was given. (Which seems like a
problem). The scene was the distant future but the conversation was all
about pregnancy, artificial and natural, marriage and ethuanasia.
I have to say I don't think this play works very well as a play. It's
got far too many characters in it, and ideas that would be either dull
or hard to portray on stage. It would have worked better as a novel of
a film. Perhaps the idea was to take something from that genre and
deliberately go about setting in on stage. But given that the cast was
around 30 it seems not very surprising that this wasn't a success and
didn't get staged more.
As far as the science fiction elements went this really wasn't that
good, especially compared to what had already been done by Wells at
this point. There was a madman who had an idea about a brain that
controlled everything, two hundred years later the idea was taken up.
The brain trust built in secret, then got rid of politicans, then the
old way of doing things, and brought in a new utopian/dystopian future.
People seemed well taken care of, everyone had jobs and no one lacked.
The Brain pleaded to get people beyond itself when it saw its doom, but
ultimately failed and after countless years controlling everything was
doomed. I'm not entirely sure what the social commentary here was
supposed to be except maybe, don't trust science to save us. Despite
the authors attempts to be gender neutral it seemed like a LOT of
misogyny came through the play. Definitely not one of the better ones
I've read.
A brain is constructed in the Sahara Desert - presently it grows larger
than the desert - out of pure mechanism, by the whole of the human
race. It controls the whole activities and does all the thinking of the
world.
Ultimately a star collides with the sun while man is still tied within
the limits of the solar system. The Brain describes the approaching
process, Its helplessness in comparison with its former omnipotent
power over the world. It deplores mankind's delay in not co-operating
earlier, which makes it impossible now to escape the catastrophe. It
has visions, premonitions of what might have been.
"Note, I don't make any particular distinction between the sexes. The
play is really written for the male mind, to which I think in time the
female will approximate. If women can do the parts, that is purely a
question for the producer to decide. i do not feel inclined to make
concessions to female psychology. Or to the sex figments in male
psychology. Ultimately both sexism will become human".
That is Almost enough to put me off reading this entirely! While it's
good not to make a distinction, the idea that In Time a woman's brain
will be a close approximation of a male mind is HIDEOUS! Even for 1930!
I'm quite surprised that Bea, who fought so hard for women's rights,
would consider a play by an author with such a view. Gender neutrality
is very good, but not when it comes with the view that women's brains
are inferior to men's!
Includes the cast list of the original production on April 27, 1930,
including bea, and a massive list of actors! Bea's character does not
appear until Act III.
Act II, Scene I "The men are business men, manufactures and so on - or
business women" p, 31
Act III, Scene V "Two men - or etiher might be a woman; why not, if you
can find such a woman?" p 89
In the end I was only able to determine which scene Beatrix was in by a
process of elimination as her character name at the begining of the
play did not appear in the script as it was given. (Which seems like a
problem). The scene was the distant future but the conversation was all
about pregnancy, artificial and natural, marriage and ethuanasia.
I have to say I don't think this play works very well as a play. It's
got far too many characters in it, and ideas that would be either dull
or hard to portray on stage. It would have worked better as a novel of
a film. Perhaps the idea was to take something from that genre and
deliberately go about setting in on stage. But given that the cast was
around 30 it seems not very surprising that this wasn't a success and
didn't get staged more.
As far as the science fiction elements went this really wasn't that
good, especially compared to what had already been done by Wells at
this point. There was a madman who had an idea about a brain that
controlled everything, two hundred years later the idea was taken up.
The brain trust built in secret, then got rid of politicans, then the
old way of doing things, and brought in a new utopian/dystopian future.
People seemed well taken care of, everyone had jobs and no one lacked.
The Brain pleaded to get people beyond itself when it saw its doom, but
ultimately failed and after countless years controlling everything was
doomed. I'm not entirely sure what the social commentary here was
supposed to be except maybe, don't trust science to save us. Despite
the authors attempts to be gender neutral it seemed like a LOT of
misogyny came through the play. Definitely not one of the better ones
I've read.
Displaying 1 of 1 review