What do you think?
Rate this book
A ilha
De volta às livrarias com nova tradução e novo projeto gráfico, A ilha foi o último romance escrito por Aldous Huxley, publicado originalmente no início dos anos 1960. Na obra, o escritor volta a falar de uma sociedade idealizada, como em Admirável mundo novo, escrito três décadas antes, mas sob uma óptica diferente. Em vez de situar seus personagens em um futuro sombrio, dominado pelo consumo e por sofisticados mecanismos de controle social, o autor elegeu uma ilha fictícia como palco de uma civilização que persegue serenamente a felicidade. Lá a utopia da existência plena é possível, e esse é o grande tema da discussão proposta na obra por Huxley.
Ao sofrer um naufrágio, o jornalista e dublê de negociante Will Farnaby vai parar acidentalmente na costa da ilha Pala. Lá, ele encontra uma civilização em que as utopias políticas dão lugar à prática do que a humanidade tem de mais valoroso. À medida que se familiariza com o estilo de vida na ilha, Will descobre que os alicerces daquele povo foram lançados duas gerações atrás pelo Velho Rajá, grande autoridade espiritual, e pelo médico e cientista escocês Andrew MacPhail para conciliar o melhor das culturas oriental e ocidental. Budismo e ciência encontram ali um equilíbrio sábio.
Um livreto filosófico chamado Notas sobre o que é o quê e sobre o que seria razoável fazer a respeito disso, escrito pelo Velho Rajá, é uma espécie de guia para os habitantes de Pala. A população da ilha renega o consumismo e o progresso tecnológico sem propósito. Hipnose, meditação, técnicas de ioga sexual e uma droga que permite mergulhar na autoconsciência—o moksha—fazem parte da vida cotidiana e aproximam as pessoas da realização de suas potencialidades.
431 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1962
4382 people are currently reading
63344 people want to read
About the author
Aldous Huxley
962 books13.7k followersAldous Leonard Huxley was an English writer and philosopher. His bibliography spans nearly 50 books, including non-fiction works, as well as essays, narratives, and poems.
Born into the prominent Huxley family, he graduated from Balliol College, Oxford, with a degree in English literature. Early in his career, he published short stories and poetry and edited the literary magazine Oxford Poetry, before going on to publish travel writing, satire, and screenplays. He spent the latter part of his life in the United States, living in Los Angeles from 1937 until his death. By the end of his life, Huxley was widely acknowledged as one of the foremost intellectuals of his time. He was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature nine times, and was elected Companion of Literature by the Royal Society of Literature in 1962.
Huxley was a pacifist. He grew interested in philosophical mysticism, as well as universalism, addressing these subjects in his works such as The Perennial Philosophy (1945), which illustrates commonalities between Western and Eastern mysticism, and The Doors of Perception (1954), which interprets his own psychedelic experience with mescaline. In his most famous novel Brave New World (1932) and his final novel Island (1962), he presented his visions of dystopia and utopia, respectively.
Born into the prominent Huxley family, he graduated from Balliol College, Oxford, with a degree in English literature. Early in his career, he published short stories and poetry and edited the literary magazine Oxford Poetry, before going on to publish travel writing, satire, and screenplays. He spent the latter part of his life in the United States, living in Los Angeles from 1937 until his death. By the end of his life, Huxley was widely acknowledged as one of the foremost intellectuals of his time. He was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Literature nine times, and was elected Companion of Literature by the Royal Society of Literature in 1962.
Huxley was a pacifist. He grew interested in philosophical mysticism, as well as universalism, addressing these subjects in his works such as The Perennial Philosophy (1945), which illustrates commonalities between Western and Eastern mysticism, and The Doors of Perception (1954), which interprets his own psychedelic experience with mescaline. In his most famous novel Brave New World (1932) and his final novel Island (1962), he presented his visions of dystopia and utopia, respectively.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,630 reviews
April 25, 2025
When I was a kid I was mercilessly mocked by bullies, because of my introspective passivity. When I was confined to a hospital in my early twenties, the doctors wanted to lift the rocks of my dozy subconscious to uncover my own nightcrawlers.
Trouble was, my only nightcrawlers were the bullies - among whose number these physicians were simply the latest professional examples. But they had blurred their confused ethical lines - and I just liked to be left alone to dream.
Dreamers are good for the soul of humankind. But nowadays, no one shows the slightest interest in dreamers' spiritual sides. Writers, doctors and scientists only want to show you how simple it is to find your spiritual happiness WITHIN the ersatz nirvana of our utopian world.
Nice try, guys. That utopia is glaringly dystopian.
Why even bother?
Such, however is Aldous Huxley in this book. Get this - he thinks nirvana is EASY with chemicals and clinical know-how. He's bought the whole bill of goods.
***
Laura Archera Huxley, Aldous' second wife, wrote a stunningly candid biographical study of their life together amid the coolly intellectual ambience of their South California Hollywood home. It's called This Timeless Moment, and it's revelatory.
She describes in it how she interested him in the supernatural and occult.
She was a firm believer, in her new-agey way, in the afterlife. So when Aldous received a shocking diagnosis of terminal throat cancer in the early sixties, they agreed to try an experiment:
Aldous would send a message, any message, after he passed away to let her know the afterlife was a fact.
And sure enough, shortly after he died, Laura received a personal message, to whit: go to the main bookshelf, third row from bottom, and take the second book from the right. Laura followed the instructions, and came to a book entitled Eternity is Real (or that’s the general idea, as my faulty memory now dictates).
And so what? We believers already knew our "hearts will go on."
***
Now, I said previously that I’m a dreamer. Like Huxley was becoming, too, under the warming influence of his new wife. A second childhood? Except he retained all his traditional intellectual pursuits: modern science, technology and medicine.
So what happens when you combine your playful dreaming with serious intelligence? Well, you get a mishmash - an intellectual smorgasboard of irrelevant arcane trivia, pop thinking, and new age religion - LIKE THIS BOOK.
You see, we can’t take this book seriously. The plot never really progresses, the characters possess no reality, and the religion is flakey and half-baked.
***
Back in the semester of 1972/73, I belonged to my university Choral Society, though I couldn’t sight-read. I needed the credit that went with the contribution of my feeble voice.
Anyway, my fellow singers were either college professors out to unwind a bit, music majors, or intellectual flyweights with golden voices. And I was none of the above. A misfit in the larger academic world, I would take books to our rehearsals.
This was the book I lugged with me that winter.
Quite frankly, I considered it an utter dud. It just didn’t work at any level. I had read Brave New World in high school, but Huxley seemed to have lowered the bar to ankle level with this one.
And now, fifty years later, I read other people’s reviews here on GR and find my discontent verified objectively.
It’s NOT among his best.
***
Did you know Huxley died of mouth cancer the same day C. S. Lewis died of his routine surgery?
Which man, you might wonder, was the wiser of the two?. In other words, which man died within sight of his eternal home in Heaven?
I'll let you guess.
Make believe and disingenuous guys must Face the Fire First!
Trouble was, my only nightcrawlers were the bullies - among whose number these physicians were simply the latest professional examples. But they had blurred their confused ethical lines - and I just liked to be left alone to dream.
Dreamers are good for the soul of humankind. But nowadays, no one shows the slightest interest in dreamers' spiritual sides. Writers, doctors and scientists only want to show you how simple it is to find your spiritual happiness WITHIN the ersatz nirvana of our utopian world.
Nice try, guys. That utopia is glaringly dystopian.
Why even bother?
Such, however is Aldous Huxley in this book. Get this - he thinks nirvana is EASY with chemicals and clinical know-how. He's bought the whole bill of goods.
***
Laura Archera Huxley, Aldous' second wife, wrote a stunningly candid biographical study of their life together amid the coolly intellectual ambience of their South California Hollywood home. It's called This Timeless Moment, and it's revelatory.
She describes in it how she interested him in the supernatural and occult.
She was a firm believer, in her new-agey way, in the afterlife. So when Aldous received a shocking diagnosis of terminal throat cancer in the early sixties, they agreed to try an experiment:
Aldous would send a message, any message, after he passed away to let her know the afterlife was a fact.
And sure enough, shortly after he died, Laura received a personal message, to whit: go to the main bookshelf, third row from bottom, and take the second book from the right. Laura followed the instructions, and came to a book entitled Eternity is Real (or that’s the general idea, as my faulty memory now dictates).
And so what? We believers already knew our "hearts will go on."
***
Now, I said previously that I’m a dreamer. Like Huxley was becoming, too, under the warming influence of his new wife. A second childhood? Except he retained all his traditional intellectual pursuits: modern science, technology and medicine.
So what happens when you combine your playful dreaming with serious intelligence? Well, you get a mishmash - an intellectual smorgasboard of irrelevant arcane trivia, pop thinking, and new age religion - LIKE THIS BOOK.
You see, we can’t take this book seriously. The plot never really progresses, the characters possess no reality, and the religion is flakey and half-baked.
***
Back in the semester of 1972/73, I belonged to my university Choral Society, though I couldn’t sight-read. I needed the credit that went with the contribution of my feeble voice.
Anyway, my fellow singers were either college professors out to unwind a bit, music majors, or intellectual flyweights with golden voices. And I was none of the above. A misfit in the larger academic world, I would take books to our rehearsals.
This was the book I lugged with me that winter.
Quite frankly, I considered it an utter dud. It just didn’t work at any level. I had read Brave New World in high school, but Huxley seemed to have lowered the bar to ankle level with this one.
And now, fifty years later, I read other people’s reviews here on GR and find my discontent verified objectively.
It’s NOT among his best.
***
Did you know Huxley died of mouth cancer the same day C. S. Lewis died of his routine surgery?
Which man, you might wonder, was the wiser of the two?. In other words, which man died within sight of his eternal home in Heaven?
I'll let you guess.
Make believe and disingenuous guys must Face the Fire First!
July 23, 2013
Let me open the review with a bold but defensible statement: This work has no literary merit. This "sci-fi" (Huxley couple were not happy that this work was considered a science fiction) utopian novel is a vehicle to deliver what Huxley believed to be The answer to one of the most critical questions of our existence - we know the present value systems are fucked up but what is the alternative? The Island, Pala, is where Huxley materializes in words his vision, relying and borrowing heavily from Eastern religious philosophies, particularly those of Buddhism and Hinduism.
The systems suggested are ingenious as such (even while they are derivative) and thought provoking, if the book is an initiation to the alternate world-views presented here (and the book did serve as an introduction for much of the western audience at that time). I was extremely skeptical of the book's promise after being disappointed by the overenthusiam of Huxley in The Doors of Perception, but here, Huxley shows he is not just an enthusiast but a true intellectual, that his understanding of the spiritual philosophies is not a mere fascination of its promises and mysteries and the rich metaphysics. Thus, what could have been a ridiculous/didactic/dull work, becomes a serious suggestion for the reader's consideration. Add to that Huxley's insights into the Western man's (or at least the Western-man-of-that-time's - the Hero's) innate dilemmas and insecurities and their root causes. To profess a final answer to any question one must first have a deep understanding of the question itself. This Huxley exhibits with careful sensitivity, as much as an exhibition of careful sensitivity is permitted by the novel's form/genre.
Also, while the book may not be read for fun alone it is a lot of fun. Some of the side characters are caricatured, the dialogues are often witty and the hero has a self-acerbic humor. This helps while the reader is being educated.
Reading this will remind you of Avatar, of Dances with the Wolves, of Razor's Edge. It will also remind you very much of the movie Mindwalk, provided you have seen it (chances are you haven't and I highly recommend it if you haven't). So, if you know what you are going for and are still curious/open-minded, go for it.
The book was a dying man's earnest attempt to show the troubled world what he thought was a glimmer of hope.
I believe in this hope.
The systems suggested are ingenious as such (even while they are derivative) and thought provoking, if the book is an initiation to the alternate world-views presented here (and the book did serve as an introduction for much of the western audience at that time). I was extremely skeptical of the book's promise after being disappointed by the overenthusiam of Huxley in The Doors of Perception, but here, Huxley shows he is not just an enthusiast but a true intellectual, that his understanding of the spiritual philosophies is not a mere fascination of its promises and mysteries and the rich metaphysics. Thus, what could have been a ridiculous/didactic/dull work, becomes a serious suggestion for the reader's consideration. Add to that Huxley's insights into the Western man's (or at least the Western-man-of-that-time's - the Hero's) innate dilemmas and insecurities and their root causes. To profess a final answer to any question one must first have a deep understanding of the question itself. This Huxley exhibits with careful sensitivity, as much as an exhibition of careful sensitivity is permitted by the novel's form/genre.
Also, while the book may not be read for fun alone it is a lot of fun. Some of the side characters are caricatured, the dialogues are often witty and the hero has a self-acerbic humor. This helps while the reader is being educated.
Reading this will remind you of Avatar, of Dances with the Wolves, of Razor's Edge. It will also remind you very much of the movie Mindwalk, provided you have seen it (chances are you haven't and I highly recommend it if you haven't). So, if you know what you are going for and are still curious/open-minded, go for it.
The book was a dying man's earnest attempt to show the troubled world what he thought was a glimmer of hope.
I believe in this hope.
January 24, 2019
I bet just about every review of this book starts with a sentence along the lines of “I am reading this because I read Brave New World . . .” Well, I am no different! Brave New World is one of my favorite (if not my most favorite) book, so I figured I would give another Huxley book a try.
I am giving this one 3 stars – not because it is good or because it is bad, but because it just is!
Island is a utopian manifesto thinly veiled behind a story on a fictional island of Pala. I have seen many say it is considered the flip-side novel of the dystopian society presented in Brave New World. I have always enjoyed the story in BNW through many readings. Island, however, is much more textbook – in fact, each scene has a different utopian ideal discussed with almost bullet point precision.
I felt like the ideas presented were interesting and many still relate today. I can’t say I agree or disagree with everything presented, but it definitely provides some food for thought. At the time of the release (1960s) many of the ideals discussed sound like they would directly appeal to the counter-culture opposing Vietnam War/Post WWII era thoughts on sex, religion, birth control, consumerism, politics, money, education, war, racism, drugs, health care, death, love, the afterlife, etc. While I was not alive during this time period, I can imagine a well-worn copy of this book in the back pocket of many of the protesters seen in iconic photos and videos from that time.
For me, I am glad I read it to see some more of Huxley’s work, but I don’t come away from it feeling like I read a novel. I would recommend it to you if you have an interest in a study on utopia vs dystopia. Also, if you like getting a perspective on some opposing viewpoints to where our world stood in the mid-20th Century, it doesn’t get much better than this.
I am giving this one 3 stars – not because it is good or because it is bad, but because it just is!
Island is a utopian manifesto thinly veiled behind a story on a fictional island of Pala. I have seen many say it is considered the flip-side novel of the dystopian society presented in Brave New World. I have always enjoyed the story in BNW through many readings. Island, however, is much more textbook – in fact, each scene has a different utopian ideal discussed with almost bullet point precision.
I felt like the ideas presented were interesting and many still relate today. I can’t say I agree or disagree with everything presented, but it definitely provides some food for thought. At the time of the release (1960s) many of the ideals discussed sound like they would directly appeal to the counter-culture opposing Vietnam War/Post WWII era thoughts on sex, religion, birth control, consumerism, politics, money, education, war, racism, drugs, health care, death, love, the afterlife, etc. While I was not alive during this time period, I can imagine a well-worn copy of this book in the back pocket of many of the protesters seen in iconic photos and videos from that time.
For me, I am glad I read it to see some more of Huxley’s work, but I don’t come away from it feeling like I read a novel. I would recommend it to you if you have an interest in a study on utopia vs dystopia. Also, if you like getting a perspective on some opposing viewpoints to where our world stood in the mid-20th Century, it doesn’t get much better than this.
September 17, 2014
I'm on a roll. Or rather I've finally figured out how to find lots of books that I'll love. So many five stars, and it's only February. Anyways.
This book is like a savory meal that is extremely good for you. Or any activity that is rewarding in all the right ways. Hardin's 'Tragedy of the Commons' comes to mind, or more a massive extension on its logic in a world where there's a country that fully accepts it. Will brings enough cynicism into the utopia to put up a good fight, but his acceptance and appreciation was inevitable. His main issue was jealousy; from this stems his desire to bring the place down to the level that he has been forced into acclimatizing to for his entire life. You can't keep that attitude up for long though under these circumstances. At least, I definitely wouldn't be able to.
And Huxley. He took his amazingly keen analysis of human nature and applied to a future of improvement, not the future of the inevitable as he did in 'Brave New World'. There's little chance of it, but oh how I wish this story would come to pass. In some way, some form, somehow. Long after I'm dead, that's for sure.
The world is too bogged down by those who don't appreciate the logic and genius reasoning behind all this. Of course it’s awfully idealistic and whatnot but still. It's a shame, really. I can't see any reason to dim the brilliance of this book in order to acknowledge its imperfections. It's again like Hardin says. People are so used to rejecting any imperfect reform that comes around in favor of maintaining the status quo, that nothing ever really happens. Perhaps it's a bit much to apply it to book reviews. But hey, I love this book. And I get to apply recent learning. I love being able to do that.
This book is like a savory meal that is extremely good for you. Or any activity that is rewarding in all the right ways. Hardin's 'Tragedy of the Commons' comes to mind, or more a massive extension on its logic in a world where there's a country that fully accepts it. Will brings enough cynicism into the utopia to put up a good fight, but his acceptance and appreciation was inevitable. His main issue was jealousy; from this stems his desire to bring the place down to the level that he has been forced into acclimatizing to for his entire life. You can't keep that attitude up for long though under these circumstances. At least, I definitely wouldn't be able to.
And Huxley. He took his amazingly keen analysis of human nature and applied to a future of improvement, not the future of the inevitable as he did in 'Brave New World'. There's little chance of it, but oh how I wish this story would come to pass. In some way, some form, somehow. Long after I'm dead, that's for sure.
The world is too bogged down by those who don't appreciate the logic and genius reasoning behind all this. Of course it’s awfully idealistic and whatnot but still. It's a shame, really. I can't see any reason to dim the brilliance of this book in order to acknowledge its imperfections. It's again like Hardin says. People are so used to rejecting any imperfect reform that comes around in favor of maintaining the status quo, that nothing ever really happens. Perhaps it's a bit much to apply it to book reviews. But hey, I love this book. And I get to apply recent learning. I love being able to do that.
September 1, 2020
Mr. Roarke and Tatto stand on a hillside waiting, and as they wait they discuss Aldous Huxley’s 1962 novel Island.
Roarke: You know it was Huxely’s final book.
Tattoo: Yes, and he returned to many of the themes that he had written about in his long and distinguished career, like population, ecology, religion and the state.
Roarke: Yes, and similar to his seminal work Brave New World, he explores the ideas of a utopia / dystopia but in this sense it is as a cynical journalist is shipwrecked on an otherwise idyllic setting in the South Pacific.
Tattoo: Yes, but even that fantasy island is beset with trouble in the form of encroachments by modern materialistic life as a young ruler is seduced by the dark side.
Roarke: I found many similarities with Ernest Callenbach’s 1975 novel Ecotopia and suspect that he was very much influenced by Huxley.
Tattoo: While this is in the form of a story about the shipwrecked writer, this is really just a vehicle whereby Huxley can discuss and expound upon ideas about a utopian society.
Roarke: Agreed, and while this was an illuminating essay, as a novel, it lacks a clear plot and also many of Huxley’s ideas are only loosely developed and countered with strawman arguments.
Tattoo: Still a worthwhile read, I always like Huxley’s writing style. Oh, look! The plane! The plane!
Roarke: You know it was Huxely’s final book.
Tattoo: Yes, and he returned to many of the themes that he had written about in his long and distinguished career, like population, ecology, religion and the state.
Roarke: Yes, and similar to his seminal work Brave New World, he explores the ideas of a utopia / dystopia but in this sense it is as a cynical journalist is shipwrecked on an otherwise idyllic setting in the South Pacific.
Tattoo: Yes, but even that fantasy island is beset with trouble in the form of encroachments by modern materialistic life as a young ruler is seduced by the dark side.
Roarke: I found many similarities with Ernest Callenbach’s 1975 novel Ecotopia and suspect that he was very much influenced by Huxley.
Tattoo: While this is in the form of a story about the shipwrecked writer, this is really just a vehicle whereby Huxley can discuss and expound upon ideas about a utopian society.
Roarke: Agreed, and while this was an illuminating essay, as a novel, it lacks a clear plot and also many of Huxley’s ideas are only loosely developed and countered with strawman arguments.
Tattoo: Still a worthwhile read, I always like Huxley’s writing style. Oh, look! The plane! The plane!
September 27, 2012
I'm not even finished with this and already it has had a profound effect on me. I resonate with this book like Cat's Cradle or Stranger in a Strange Land. It will take me two or three more reads—at least—to grok it in fullness, but it already feels as if some of the thoughts were for me, some of me. It's been a very long time since I fell so profoundly in love with a book, and it's a delicious, delightful, very spiritual experience.
Read
August 29, 2020Well. Well. Well.
Well that got me round the awkward problem of how to begin this review. Island can hardly qualify as a novel, certainly not as a good one by normative criteria. Most of the book consists of one character, Will Farnaby, shipwrecked on the island paradise of Pala, having conversations with other 'characters' who to all intents and purposes could almost all have been the same person. For about half of the book Farnaby, who, with apologies for the technical details, seems to have busted his knee in the course of arriving on the Island, is having these conversations while laying on a hospital bed while various people come and see him. Obviously Farnaby is the representative troubled person from the real world alias the insane world - as in So Long and Thanks for all the Fish, or Dystopia, and since Pala represents Utopia, its denizens have to explain its Utopian qualities to him, as is traditional in utopian literature.
There is a plot. Farnaby is not on Pala accidentally. Naturally the purpose of a Utopia is either for the author to explode it - either to show us that it is dystopia or to show it is unsustainable in the face of the 'real' world. In this case the island paradise sits across the water from an expansionist militaristic state and on top of oil reserves - all this is revealed pretty early on. Indeed Farnaby is meant to be part of the conspiracy to end the Island's independence but naturally over the course of numerous conversations with the islanders he is converted, cured of the problems related to his 20th heritage and upbringing...however the clock is ticking. Although the book is strongly didactic I was surprised to find myself moved - not to the edge of my seat, the philosophy of the book teaches us not to be slaves to such transitory passions, but moved all the same.
Anyway we realise that this island has to be Utopia because the women wear very few clothes and everybody has plentiful and satisfying sex as well as psychedelic experiences for which the islanders are prepared through their education system.
'Wait a minute', you might say 'that reminds me of another book'...sex, drugs and clothes with zips - it can only be Brave New World. And indeed Island is more or less Brave New World pulled inside out. With the Farnaby character roughly equivalent to the Savage in the earlier book.
I think that is the interesting part of it, Aldous Huxley at age of writing Brave New World plus time and experience equals Island, can also be expressed as the hopes and fears of the 1920s and 30s that we see in We, Brave New World, and eventually in 1984 are not the hopes and fears of the 1950s and 60s which we see expressed in Island, and it struck me that Huxley's holistic vision in this book combining popular culture, ecology, education, a humane economy rather than homo economicus, health and spirituality is still contemporary if not so far mainstream . Or indeed predicting the epidemic of chair related illnesses due to people not being physically active enough, Huxley's Utopia is built around the human and what the human needs to function healthily, while his earlier Dystopia was structured around a steady state economy - there the humans had to be shaped in the womb and thoroughly socially conditioned in order to be fit and appropriate economic actors.
A book is an invitation into an author's life and in this case we can transit from a mental world transfixed by industrialisation and maintaining consumption societies to one frightened of over population, and environmental destruction. Living the Good Life hangs in the background. For Young Huxley this was possible in the context of a universal totalitarian industrial society ruled by Philosopher Kings who could rescue independent souls and send them into exiles where they could be safe from consumer societies. While for Huxley the Elder the Good Life is inter-related with theology. If God is wholly other and good, then humanity must be bad and individuals will be self-torturing and intolerant, angry and exploitative (they will also beat their children, might well own slaves, but will be nice to their pets since like God they too are wholly other). On the other hand if humanity is part of the Divine, then the lion can lay down with the lamb without eating it. For Huxley the Good Life can become the good Society by teaching people tantric sex and providing them with contraceptives, while hypnosis allows for pain free births.
Huxley is strong on the Utopian tradition - so this society is on an island as per Gullivers Travels or Tommy More's book, or for that matter Plato's Atlantis, and Butler's Erewhon is referenced several times, the Utopian society is brought about by a philosopher king and his philosophical advisor, unfortunately the nature of monarchy is that it doesn't last and the heir to power in this generation is homosexual and obsessed with the neighbouring military dictator - who allows him to drive his car too fast, the Prince's mother is naturally overbearing , so far so Freudian or perhaps Jungian. Another sign maybe that we are at the dawn of the 1960s, NLP has just been invented, psychology is mainstream and eastern philosophies on the verge of fashionability, Mahayana Buddhism with a splash of Hinduism provides the cultural bedrock that the creators of the utopia work with.
Apparently Old Man Huxley is overshadowed by his younger self and our rampant consumer society keeps his Brave New World evergreen, but Island remains as its counterpoint.
Well that got me round the awkward problem of how to begin this review. Island can hardly qualify as a novel, certainly not as a good one by normative criteria. Most of the book consists of one character, Will Farnaby, shipwrecked on the island paradise of Pala, having conversations with other 'characters' who to all intents and purposes could almost all have been the same person. For about half of the book Farnaby, who, with apologies for the technical details, seems to have busted his knee in the course of arriving on the Island, is having these conversations while laying on a hospital bed while various people come and see him. Obviously Farnaby is the representative troubled person from the real world alias the insane world - as in So Long and Thanks for all the Fish, or Dystopia, and since Pala represents Utopia, its denizens have to explain its Utopian qualities to him, as is traditional in utopian literature.
There is a plot. Farnaby is not on Pala accidentally. Naturally the purpose of a Utopia is either for the author to explode it - either to show us that it is dystopia or to show it is unsustainable in the face of the 'real' world. In this case the island paradise sits across the water from an expansionist militaristic state and on top of oil reserves - all this is revealed pretty early on. Indeed Farnaby is meant to be part of the conspiracy to end the Island's independence but naturally over the course of numerous conversations with the islanders he is converted, cured of the problems related to his 20th heritage and upbringing...however the clock is ticking. Although the book is strongly didactic I was surprised to find myself moved - not to the edge of my seat, the philosophy of the book teaches us not to be slaves to such transitory passions, but moved all the same.
Anyway we realise that this island has to be Utopia because the women wear very few clothes and everybody has plentiful and satisfying sex as well as psychedelic experiences for which the islanders are prepared through their education system.
'Wait a minute', you might say 'that reminds me of another book'...sex, drugs and clothes with zips - it can only be Brave New World. And indeed Island is more or less Brave New World pulled inside out. With the Farnaby character roughly equivalent to the Savage in the earlier book.
I think that is the interesting part of it, Aldous Huxley at age of writing Brave New World plus time and experience equals Island, can also be expressed as the hopes and fears of the 1920s and 30s that we see in We, Brave New World, and eventually in 1984 are not the hopes and fears of the 1950s and 60s which we see expressed in Island, and it struck me that Huxley's holistic vision in this book combining popular culture, ecology, education, a humane economy rather than homo economicus, health and spirituality is still contemporary if not so far mainstream . Or indeed predicting the epidemic of chair related illnesses due to people not being physically active enough, Huxley's Utopia is built around the human and what the human needs to function healthily, while his earlier Dystopia was structured around a steady state economy - there the humans had to be shaped in the womb and thoroughly socially conditioned in order to be fit and appropriate economic actors.
A book is an invitation into an author's life and in this case we can transit from a mental world transfixed by industrialisation and maintaining consumption societies to one frightened of over population, and environmental destruction. Living the Good Life hangs in the background. For Young Huxley this was possible in the context of a universal totalitarian industrial society ruled by Philosopher Kings who could rescue independent souls and send them into exiles where they could be safe from consumer societies. While for Huxley the Elder the Good Life is inter-related with theology. If God is wholly other and good, then humanity must be bad and individuals will be self-torturing and intolerant, angry and exploitative (they will also beat their children, might well own slaves, but will be nice to their pets since like God they too are wholly other). On the other hand if humanity is part of the Divine, then the lion can lay down with the lamb without eating it. For Huxley the Good Life can become the good Society by teaching people tantric sex and providing them with contraceptives, while hypnosis allows for pain free births.
Huxley is strong on the Utopian tradition - so this society is on an island as per Gullivers Travels or Tommy More's book, or for that matter Plato's Atlantis, and Butler's Erewhon is referenced several times, the Utopian society is brought about by a philosopher king and his philosophical advisor, unfortunately the nature of monarchy is that it doesn't last and the heir to power in this generation is homosexual and obsessed with the neighbouring military dictator - who allows him to drive his car too fast, the Prince's mother is naturally overbearing , so far so Freudian or perhaps Jungian. Another sign maybe that we are at the dawn of the 1960s, NLP has just been invented, psychology is mainstream and eastern philosophies on the verge of fashionability, Mahayana Buddhism with a splash of Hinduism provides the cultural bedrock that the creators of the utopia work with.
Apparently Old Man Huxley is overshadowed by his younger self and our rampant consumer society keeps his Brave New World evergreen, but Island remains as its counterpoint.
September 25, 2020
"Attention!" This is exactly the kind of book the world needs right now, perhaps more relevant today than it was upon its publication in 1962.
Looking out the window, at the smoke-filled skies, the streets full of protesters, the degradation of social and democratic norms, one can't help but feel we're on a precipice of sorts. Every day seems to bring with it more horrors than the last. Who can help but look ahead and grimace at the thought of what is still to come?
Imagine that last year at this time you got a glimpse into the world of today, a view onto the marches and the masks, at the division tearing at us all. It would be horrifying, to say the least. It's perhaps even more horrifying that today, we're almost used to it. We've become exhausted by it all, desensitized. We can't move but are paralyzed and rubbed so raw by the actions taking place all around us that we can only sprawl, exhausted and immobile, at the damage being done.
I saw a gif the other day of a woman stepping out of her house only to see government buildings exploding in front of her in a scene out of the 1996 film "Independence Day." She nonchalantly waves it off and goes back inside.
You'll see a lot of criticism of "Island" based on the fact that many believe it to not be a "novel" at all. But how would they know? What is a novel, anyway? Is Elena Ferrante's "Neapolitan Quartet" novels? Is Karl Ove Knausgaard's largely autobiographical "My Struggle" series novels?
The concept of the novel has been evolving as long as the novel itself has existed. You can find valid arguments that the works of Homer really aren't novels, that Cervantes' "Don Quixote" isn't a novel, and so on.
Is "Island" really a philosophical treatise masquerading as a novel? So what if it is? What is a "novel" if not something needing to be said packaged as something else? I don't think "Island" should be judged harshly on that account. Rather, the general definition of a novel is that of an at least vaguely fictional premise and/or fictional characters. By that standard, "Island" more than fits.
Throw in the fact that "Island" is as captivating as anything you might find on the "Fiction" shelf at your local bookstore, and I'd say that "Island" is a successful "novel," all the more so because it leaves you changed, or at least gives you something to think about.
Here, Aldous Huxley imagines a utopian society and the threat that encroachment from the outside world presents to it. To my mind, Huxley diagnoses what ills modern society perfectly. Largely, materialism and dogmatism, particularly as it concerns religion.
There are so many absolutely brilliant exchanges throughout the book, but one of my favorites comes in the form of children in a field who are controlling scarecrows in an effort to protect the land. The scarecrows have all been created in the likenesses of various deities.
Will Farnaby, our shipwrecked capitalist who's washed ashore on this strange utopian landscape asks his hosts what the purpose of such a display is.
We "wanted to make the children understand that all gods are homemade, and that it’s we who pull their strings and so give them the power to pull ours.”
In another exchange, corporal punishment is criticized as destroying children's creativity.
“Major premise: God is wholly other. Minor premise: man is totally depraved. Conclusion: Do to your children’s bottoms what was done to yours, what your Heavenly Father has been doing to the collective bottom of humanity ever since the fall: whip, whip, whip!"
In short, "A people’s theology reflects the state of its children’s bottoms.”
I could quote this book all day, there is so very much to take away. But perhaps nothing more so than that which is repeated ad infinitum by Pala's mynah birds.
"Attention! Attention! Here and now, boys!"
It may be that, right now, we're on the precipice of something great, or something horrible. It may be that, years from now, we'll have the ability to look back and say that we had already tipped over the edge of that precipice and that today, September 25, 2020, we were already falling fast down the other side.
Regardless of which side of the divide we may be on, looking ahead or looking back is futile.
The only thing we can do is take action and pay attention to the here and now.
Looking out the window, at the smoke-filled skies, the streets full of protesters, the degradation of social and democratic norms, one can't help but feel we're on a precipice of sorts. Every day seems to bring with it more horrors than the last. Who can help but look ahead and grimace at the thought of what is still to come?
Imagine that last year at this time you got a glimpse into the world of today, a view onto the marches and the masks, at the division tearing at us all. It would be horrifying, to say the least. It's perhaps even more horrifying that today, we're almost used to it. We've become exhausted by it all, desensitized. We can't move but are paralyzed and rubbed so raw by the actions taking place all around us that we can only sprawl, exhausted and immobile, at the damage being done.
I saw a gif the other day of a woman stepping out of her house only to see government buildings exploding in front of her in a scene out of the 1996 film "Independence Day." She nonchalantly waves it off and goes back inside.
You'll see a lot of criticism of "Island" based on the fact that many believe it to not be a "novel" at all. But how would they know? What is a novel, anyway? Is Elena Ferrante's "Neapolitan Quartet" novels? Is Karl Ove Knausgaard's largely autobiographical "My Struggle" series novels?
The concept of the novel has been evolving as long as the novel itself has existed. You can find valid arguments that the works of Homer really aren't novels, that Cervantes' "Don Quixote" isn't a novel, and so on.
Is "Island" really a philosophical treatise masquerading as a novel? So what if it is? What is a "novel" if not something needing to be said packaged as something else? I don't think "Island" should be judged harshly on that account. Rather, the general definition of a novel is that of an at least vaguely fictional premise and/or fictional characters. By that standard, "Island" more than fits.
Throw in the fact that "Island" is as captivating as anything you might find on the "Fiction" shelf at your local bookstore, and I'd say that "Island" is a successful "novel," all the more so because it leaves you changed, or at least gives you something to think about.
Here, Aldous Huxley imagines a utopian society and the threat that encroachment from the outside world presents to it. To my mind, Huxley diagnoses what ills modern society perfectly. Largely, materialism and dogmatism, particularly as it concerns religion.
There are so many absolutely brilliant exchanges throughout the book, but one of my favorites comes in the form of children in a field who are controlling scarecrows in an effort to protect the land. The scarecrows have all been created in the likenesses of various deities.
Will Farnaby, our shipwrecked capitalist who's washed ashore on this strange utopian landscape asks his hosts what the purpose of such a display is.
We "wanted to make the children understand that all gods are homemade, and that it’s we who pull their strings and so give them the power to pull ours.”
In another exchange, corporal punishment is criticized as destroying children's creativity.
“Major premise: God is wholly other. Minor premise: man is totally depraved. Conclusion: Do to your children’s bottoms what was done to yours, what your Heavenly Father has been doing to the collective bottom of humanity ever since the fall: whip, whip, whip!"
In short, "A people’s theology reflects the state of its children’s bottoms.”
I could quote this book all day, there is so very much to take away. But perhaps nothing more so than that which is repeated ad infinitum by Pala's mynah birds.
"Attention! Attention! Here and now, boys!"
It may be that, right now, we're on the precipice of something great, or something horrible. It may be that, years from now, we'll have the ability to look back and say that we had already tipped over the edge of that precipice and that today, September 25, 2020, we were already falling fast down the other side.
Regardless of which side of the divide we may be on, looking ahead or looking back is futile.
The only thing we can do is take action and pay attention to the here and now.
October 27, 2022
Whatever the precise definition of the “novel” concept might be, it certainly does not hold “Island” as its epitome. It is comprehensible.
After the release of the acclaimed dystopia known as “Brave New World”, Huxley’s name became forever imprinted into the respectable hall of fame of science fiction writing, which might have hindered his prospects into finding other ways to convey his own opinions. In “Island”, the reader is overcome with the feeling that he might have been coerced into masquerading the book’s message as a “novel”. Despite it, the book reveals tremendous intellectual achievement, and it is efficient in attaining its ultimate goal: to cogently spread an alternative approach to the entire scheme of contemporary life.
In order to accomplish this monstrous task, Huxley utilizes his immense knowledge on the fields of oriental philosophy. He creates the character of Wll Farnaby, a journalist from an England newspaper, and sends him on his way to Pala, an isolated island over the coast of Asia, on a journey is one of discovery and enlightenment. Once in there, he finds the natives friendly and surprisingly hospitable. Their purpose is to edify his perceptions, and change his true nature. Together, the palanese (Huxley himself) attempt to imprint within his mind their own interpretation of reality.
Huxley’s tale about a utopian society based in oriental philosophy is not a fictional narrative in its traditional sense. It is, instead, a brilliant, creative, and mind warping essay about the current state of occidental civilization.
After the release of the acclaimed dystopia known as “Brave New World”, Huxley’s name became forever imprinted into the respectable hall of fame of science fiction writing, which might have hindered his prospects into finding other ways to convey his own opinions. In “Island”, the reader is overcome with the feeling that he might have been coerced into masquerading the book’s message as a “novel”. Despite it, the book reveals tremendous intellectual achievement, and it is efficient in attaining its ultimate goal: to cogently spread an alternative approach to the entire scheme of contemporary life.
In order to accomplish this monstrous task, Huxley utilizes his immense knowledge on the fields of oriental philosophy. He creates the character of Wll Farnaby, a journalist from an England newspaper, and sends him on his way to Pala, an isolated island over the coast of Asia, on a journey is one of discovery and enlightenment. Once in there, he finds the natives friendly and surprisingly hospitable. Their purpose is to edify his perceptions, and change his true nature. Together, the palanese (Huxley himself) attempt to imprint within his mind their own interpretation of reality.
Huxley’s tale about a utopian society based in oriental philosophy is not a fictional narrative in its traditional sense. It is, instead, a brilliant, creative, and mind warping essay about the current state of occidental civilization.
February 4, 2017
Tiresome but worthwhile, Island is more sociological treatise than novel. Huxley wrote a guide to his ideal society: communal, pacifist, profoundly spiritual, a country that focuses on its citzens' well-being and happiness over environmental devastation and false corporate prosperity. Pala, Huxley's fictitious South Asian island nation, is the societal equivalent of an ecosystem, the complex networks of each community rely on mutual dependence, a form of structured anarchism. I was spellbound and nodded my head in agreement as speech after speech flowed implausibly from the mouths of the Palanese, from spirited young girls to spry old men.
Huxley adopts a thoroughly Buddhist lens which he peppers throughout his characters' constant pontifications. He takes a courageous stand against the creation of "Otherness" on which Western society thrives. Over pages of exposition and inquiry, Huxley lays out a worldview that is based on oneness, an absolute refusal to buy into dualism. Good and evil are part of life, and should be cherished. Compassion and bliss, pain and joy are all necessary, for only when one experiences true sorrow can one know bliss. Death is just as necessary as life. The ecosystem only works because of the endless cycle of birth, life, and death. Getting caught up in religious, political, or economic dogmatism only leads to strife and jealousy, endless war, and unfettered consumerism. State communism and capitalism are corrupt and incompatible with true happiness.
Respectful free love is encouraged and taught to young children as a way to sow joy and compassion into their inner minds. The stigmatization that comes with sex in the West is actively destroyed in Pala. And the family is a significantly more loosely defined concept. Each child is part of a Mutual Adoption Club (MAC), where they have several parents, siblings, cousins, and grandaparents, all of whom help out each other. Have a problem with your biological mom? Spend a few nights with your mom down the road, and when everyone has cooled down, come back with a clear head.
The idea of non-biological kinship networks fascinates me. As an only child, I never wanted a sibling, but always wished that my family was closer to our neighbors. Huxley is right when he maligns that the nuclear family in the West is sometimes a small prison. As we all know, escape from the family is just as important as quality time with mom and pop. As the sole kid, it was hard to escape the ever watchful eye and judgment of my doting parents. An MAC, the true expression of the French expression "vivre ensemble," would have been a godsend.
Equally as important for the Palanese is the balance of mind and body, the physical and the spiritual. From a young age, children are expected to perform community duties. Boys and girls are taught to let go of their anger by stamping on the ground and yelling and forgive rather than begrudge. The protagonist, Will, often makes sarcastic comments that the Palanese find distasteful. Bliss, beauty, and wonder are used sincerely, something that would never slide in the West. We thrive on irony and sarcasm to an unbearable extent.
Huxley's descriptions of moksha-medicine, the hallucinogen that Palanese use to tune their spiritual lives, are the polar opposite of his descriptions of drug use in Brave New World. Moksha creates both beauty and pain and leads Will to recognize the infinite multiplicity of every rock, tree, cloud, and person. Soma, the state-distributed drug used in BNW, creates only positive experiences, which is why the drug is so morally and intellectually deadly. Huxley's point in BNW is expanded in Island, where only by using moksha autonomously can one finally understand the oneness of things.
While Island portrays Pala in an overwhelmingly positive light, the specter of invasion by the neighboring authoritarian state of Rendang is inevitable. No one should be surprised by the book's conclusion after reading the first 50 pages, but it still existentially disturbed me. Even in Huxley's most positive moments, inevitable destruction looms. Is it worth trying to create a better, pacifist society knowing the invasion inevitably comes? Huxley cries "Yes!" As the Palanese say again and again, you must pay attention and savor, strive for a better life, even in the face of assured devastation.
Island is completely worth reading for its ideological wealth, even if it's sometimes a slog to get through. Pala seems like a fine place to me. Recommended.
Huxley adopts a thoroughly Buddhist lens which he peppers throughout his characters' constant pontifications. He takes a courageous stand against the creation of "Otherness" on which Western society thrives. Over pages of exposition and inquiry, Huxley lays out a worldview that is based on oneness, an absolute refusal to buy into dualism. Good and evil are part of life, and should be cherished. Compassion and bliss, pain and joy are all necessary, for only when one experiences true sorrow can one know bliss. Death is just as necessary as life. The ecosystem only works because of the endless cycle of birth, life, and death. Getting caught up in religious, political, or economic dogmatism only leads to strife and jealousy, endless war, and unfettered consumerism. State communism and capitalism are corrupt and incompatible with true happiness.
Respectful free love is encouraged and taught to young children as a way to sow joy and compassion into their inner minds. The stigmatization that comes with sex in the West is actively destroyed in Pala. And the family is a significantly more loosely defined concept. Each child is part of a Mutual Adoption Club (MAC), where they have several parents, siblings, cousins, and grandaparents, all of whom help out each other. Have a problem with your biological mom? Spend a few nights with your mom down the road, and when everyone has cooled down, come back with a clear head.
The idea of non-biological kinship networks fascinates me. As an only child, I never wanted a sibling, but always wished that my family was closer to our neighbors. Huxley is right when he maligns that the nuclear family in the West is sometimes a small prison. As we all know, escape from the family is just as important as quality time with mom and pop. As the sole kid, it was hard to escape the ever watchful eye and judgment of my doting parents. An MAC, the true expression of the French expression "vivre ensemble," would have been a godsend.
Equally as important for the Palanese is the balance of mind and body, the physical and the spiritual. From a young age, children are expected to perform community duties. Boys and girls are taught to let go of their anger by stamping on the ground and yelling and forgive rather than begrudge. The protagonist, Will, often makes sarcastic comments that the Palanese find distasteful. Bliss, beauty, and wonder are used sincerely, something that would never slide in the West. We thrive on irony and sarcasm to an unbearable extent.
Huxley's descriptions of moksha-medicine, the hallucinogen that Palanese use to tune their spiritual lives, are the polar opposite of his descriptions of drug use in Brave New World. Moksha creates both beauty and pain and leads Will to recognize the infinite multiplicity of every rock, tree, cloud, and person. Soma, the state-distributed drug used in BNW, creates only positive experiences, which is why the drug is so morally and intellectually deadly. Huxley's point in BNW is expanded in Island, where only by using moksha autonomously can one finally understand the oneness of things.
While Island portrays Pala in an overwhelmingly positive light, the specter of invasion by the neighboring authoritarian state of Rendang is inevitable. No one should be surprised by the book's conclusion after reading the first 50 pages, but it still existentially disturbed me. Even in Huxley's most positive moments, inevitable destruction looms. Is it worth trying to create a better, pacifist society knowing the invasion inevitably comes? Huxley cries "Yes!" As the Palanese say again and again, you must pay attention and savor, strive for a better life, even in the face of assured devastation.
Island is completely worth reading for its ideological wealth, even if it's sometimes a slog to get through. Pala seems like a fine place to me. Recommended.
July 15, 2008
About a utopian SE Asian island society on the cusp of being corrupted by exploitation of oil. Reads more like a socio-political manifesto than a novel. The plot, such as it is, is just an excuse to contrive situations for characters to explain their life, philosophy, culture etc, rather than the driving force. This also means that none of the characters are very convincing because they are almost incidental caricatures (and many of them are too good to be true).
January 11, 2019
Ten pages from the end, sitting at a bar, the bartender asked me: "Are you one of those people who reads the last sentence of a book before they start it, to see if it'll live up to your expectations?"
Uh, say what? I thought. Is that a common practice? Seriously? "No," I replied, "but I can see it might be kinda interesting."
"Yeah," he said, "but it's a pretty big spoiler alert. It can really ruin it."
Digesting that bit of logic, I finished the book, my wine, and the bartender brought the credit card machine over. "You know," I said, struck with utopian-dystopian visions, fully sincere: "I'm really glad I didn't read the last sentence first for this book. It would have completely ruined it." The bartender nodded knowingly.
Endings, in the same vein of logic as my friendly bartender's, can make or break an entire book. The last sentence, though, usually isn't given quite that much credit -- that is, until you're reading someone like Huxley, who is all about the "show don't tell" of literature. Then, every phrase has weight: the first and last sentences more than anything. I was debating my star rating right up until those last few words: 3? 4? And then, sharply, it all finally clicks. Because I don't want to spoil you, because Huxley is best served fresh and read with snarky, attentive eyes, I won't say anything about the last sentence EXCEPT: everything is a circle, and it all comes back around.
Island is more philosophy than novel. Early on, Huxley hangs a lantern on its Erewhon influence: stumble across a weird and isolated society, hear about its utopian elements one by one, the reader must reflect on how garbage their own society is. Done and done.
It's a counterpoint to Brave New World in quite a few ways: ideology (utopia, not dystopia); plot (little to none); theme (potential, not despair); drug amiability (lots). The Eastern-religion influence is massive, and it's clear this was written post-Doors. While that can be a little infuriating at times (like........I get it. Psychedelics bro. Radical. You're not more aware of the universe because you got high, man.), it's Huxley, so there's thoughtful rationale behind it. While none of what I read seemed particularly new, that's not necessarily the fault of the book: it compiles a lot of interesting social possibilities in a fairly unique manner. It smacks of Huxley rethinking some of his fears regarding the world of Our Ford. Soma and sex? Maybe not so bad, as long as they're not mindless...
That's the crux of this book, really -- mindfulness. Worth a read, times twelve, if only to get to the last sentence and see where he was heading. Just don't read it first. Or do. Maybe it won't matter. We all get there in the end.
(shrooms might help though)
Uh, say what? I thought. Is that a common practice? Seriously? "No," I replied, "but I can see it might be kinda interesting."
"Yeah," he said, "but it's a pretty big spoiler alert. It can really ruin it."
Digesting that bit of logic, I finished the book, my wine, and the bartender brought the credit card machine over. "You know," I said, struck with utopian-dystopian visions, fully sincere: "I'm really glad I didn't read the last sentence first for this book. It would have completely ruined it." The bartender nodded knowingly.
Endings, in the same vein of logic as my friendly bartender's, can make or break an entire book. The last sentence, though, usually isn't given quite that much credit -- that is, until you're reading someone like Huxley, who is all about the "show don't tell" of literature. Then, every phrase has weight: the first and last sentences more than anything. I was debating my star rating right up until those last few words: 3? 4? And then, sharply, it all finally clicks. Because I don't want to spoil you, because Huxley is best served fresh and read with snarky, attentive eyes, I won't say anything about the last sentence EXCEPT: everything is a circle, and it all comes back around.
Island is more philosophy than novel. Early on, Huxley hangs a lantern on its Erewhon influence: stumble across a weird and isolated society, hear about its utopian elements one by one, the reader must reflect on how garbage their own society is. Done and done.
It's a counterpoint to Brave New World in quite a few ways: ideology (utopia, not dystopia); plot (little to none); theme (potential, not despair); drug amiability (lots). The Eastern-religion influence is massive, and it's clear this was written post-Doors. While that can be a little infuriating at times (like........I get it. Psychedelics bro. Radical. You're not more aware of the universe because you got high, man.), it's Huxley, so there's thoughtful rationale behind it. While none of what I read seemed particularly new, that's not necessarily the fault of the book: it compiles a lot of interesting social possibilities in a fairly unique manner. It smacks of Huxley rethinking some of his fears regarding the world of Our Ford. Soma and sex? Maybe not so bad, as long as they're not mindless...
That's the crux of this book, really -- mindfulness. Worth a read, times twelve, if only to get to the last sentence and see where he was heading. Just don't read it first. Or do. Maybe it won't matter. We all get there in the end.
(shrooms might help though)
September 18, 2014
Aesthetically, not his best work, but wonderful none the less. The book is basically just an essay on politics, science, philosophy, religion, society, man, and ultimately, Utopia, masked as a novel. This is a forewarning to those looking for deep characters or a driving plot. However, the debate set forth by Huxley is more than a little intriguing, and should definitely hold the attention of anyone who has dreamed of a better life for the world and the people in it. One of the biggest arguments presented in the book (one I happen to agree quite strongly with) is that each of the disciplines (in the Arts, Sciences, and Religions) of life fails, in its collective Ego, to understand that it alone is not the solution to life's problems, nor the answer to its most important questions. Life requires a healthy amalgam of all these areas.
This was Huxley's last book (published a year before his death), and it is quite beautiful to see that his parting thoughts were of that tiny shard of hope (and, dare I say, optimism) that Man can indeed achieve happiness.
This was Huxley's last book (published a year before his death), and it is quite beautiful to see that his parting thoughts were of that tiny shard of hope (and, dare I say, optimism) that Man can indeed achieve happiness.
June 10, 2008
It should be stated as a caveat to this review, that I believe that Huxley is one of the most important, intellectual, and enlightened mystics of the 20th century. I originally read this book 8 or nine years ago when my knowledge of spirituality, religion, and literature was sparse. However, it was one of those books that struck me like lightning and forever change the way I frame the world and our society.So a re-read…
Island is an active dialogue between relatively few characters who bring Huxley’s Perennial Philosophy to a narrative form. Will Farnaby , the protagonist is a deranged, self-loathing, confused journalist who finds himself a survivor of a shipwreck and is welcomed into the utopian land of Pala. Here he witnesses Huxley’s vision of a society harmonizing with nature, but also embracing science and compassion. Now that I’m writing this I find it hard to write an adequate summary and so I’ll leave it on a quote that I earmarked. There is really so much wisdom embedded in these pages, that often this novel could be read like any piece of philosophic or religious text.
In one scene the children of Pala are actively moving scarecrows to protect their crops. The scarecrows are representations of gods or enlightened beings such as Buddha, Shiva,… will was confused by this, so he inquired about the purpose of it.
“ He wanted to make the children understand that all gods are homemade, and it’s we who pull their strings and so give them the power to pull ours.”
Island is an active dialogue between relatively few characters who bring Huxley’s Perennial Philosophy to a narrative form. Will Farnaby , the protagonist is a deranged, self-loathing, confused journalist who finds himself a survivor of a shipwreck and is welcomed into the utopian land of Pala. Here he witnesses Huxley’s vision of a society harmonizing with nature, but also embracing science and compassion. Now that I’m writing this I find it hard to write an adequate summary and so I’ll leave it on a quote that I earmarked. There is really so much wisdom embedded in these pages, that often this novel could be read like any piece of philosophic or religious text.
In one scene the children of Pala are actively moving scarecrows to protect their crops. The scarecrows are representations of gods or enlightened beings such as Buddha, Shiva,… will was confused by this, so he inquired about the purpose of it.
“ He wanted to make the children understand that all gods are homemade, and it’s we who pull their strings and so give them the power to pull ours.”
July 2, 2022
Aldous Huxley wrote his last novel a year before his death and thirty years after the cult "Oh, Brave New World". The twentieth century was a time of literary dystopias, Huxley's most famous book was often published under the same cover with Zamyatin's "We" and Orwell's "1984" - the classic "anti". But in fact, the "Wonderful World" is much more of a utopia. Yes, it is grotesque, based on selection and chemically stimulated contentment instead of democratic principles, but it is a working model of a society in which everyone is happy.
Here, who hears what drums (or the music of the spheres, if you prefer it that way), Huxley is initially set up for a constructive world order with a minimum of pain and suffering. And equal opportunities, social elevators and other gains of democracy in his coordinate system are not so significant and lead to even greater enslavement. That is, when you broke through to the top, got a prestigious position and a solid income with sweat and blood, what will you do?
That's right, to consume intensively, indirectly contributing to the destruction of the environment. Will it make you happy? No, there is more comfort, but it is not synonymous with happiness. A high position entails great responsibility, the need to maintain relations with unpleasant people, noblesse oblige, representation expenses and deficit are already at another level (soup is liquid - pearls are small) Plus the fear of not holding on to the positions won - a solid neurosis.
"No, guys, it's not like that" and "we'll go the other way," Huxley says. First, and much more importantly, to change the assemblage point, attitude, worldview. Professor Preobrazhensky said that the devastation is in the heads, but there are also neuroses, aggression, immoderate thoughtless consumerism. And so, with his final message to the world, the writer makes a utopia based on the principles of New Ageism with a Buddhist worldview taken as a basis.
Все граждане счастливчики, поют себе мотивчики и все без исключения об острове родном
Раздался звук одиночного выстрела. Затем грянули очереди из автоматов.
Труд целых столетий уничтожался всего за одну ночь. И все равно факт оставался фактом – была печаль, но где-то пролегал и конец всех печалей.
Свой последний роман Олдос Хаксли написал за год до смерти и спустя тридцать лет после культового "О, дивный новый мир". ХХ век был временем литературных антиутопий, самую известную книгу Хаксли нередко издавали под одной обложкой с замятинским "Мы" и "1984" Оруэлла - классическими "анти". Но на деле, "Дивный мир" в куда большей степени утопия. Да, гротескная, основанная на селекции и химически стимулированном довольстве вместо демократических принципов, но это рабочая модель общества, в котором все счастливы.
Тут уж кто какие барабаны слышит (или музыку сфер, если вам так больше нравится), Хаксли изначально настроен на конструктивное мироустройство с минимумом боли и страданий. А равные возможности, социальные лифты и прочие завоевания демократии в его системе координат не столь значимы и ведут к еще большему закабалению. То есть, вот прорвался ты наверх, добыл потом и кровью престижную должность и солидный доход, что будешь делать?
Правильно, усиленно потреблять, косвенно способствуя разрушению экологии. Сделает это тебя счастливым? Нет, комфорта больше, но он не синоним счастья. Высокая должность влечет большую ответственность, необходимость поддерживать отношения с неприятными людьми, noblesse oblige, представительские расходы и дефицит уже на другом уровне (суп жидок - жемчуг мелок) Плюс страх не удержаться на завоеванных позициях - сплошная невроз.
"Нет, ребята, все не так" и "мы пойдем другим путем" - говорит Хаксли. Прежде, и гораздо важнее, поменять точку сборки, мироощущение, мировосприятие. Профессор Преображенский говорил, что разруха в головах, но там же и неврозы, агрессия, неумеренное бездумное потребительство. И вот, своим финальным посланием миру писатель делает утопию, основанную на принципах нью-эйджизма со взятым за основу буддистским мировоззрением.
"Остров": о том, как замечательно все могло бы быть. если бы люди начали жить. относиться к природе, строить отношения разумно. Беспринципный циничный эгоист с отягощенной совестью и кучей комплексов, развившихся из детских психотравм попадает на райский тропический остров. где устроена правильная и справедливая жизнь. Смотрит, разговаривает, знако��ится с людьми, вникает в функционирование учреждений и принципы в основе общественных институтов.
По сути книга не роман, а такой философский нон-фикшн на тему "как нам обустроить мир". Тут, примерно как в индийском фильме, где персонажи то и дело принимаются танцевать - всякий герой лектор, освещающий какую-то из сторон местной жизни. Вот так мы учимся осознанному пребыванию в "здесь и сейчас", так утишаем боль, так сублимируем агрессию в полезную деятельность, так учим, так лечим. так воспитываем детей, так устроена наша система призрения пожилых и сирот, так улучшаем генофонд,.так развлекаемся.
Хаксли был адептом ЛСД, много экспериментировал с этим веществом, инъекция 100 мкг которого помогла ему покинуть мир без мучений - писатель умирал от рака горла, а случилось это, к слову, в день убийства Кеннеди. Так вот, островитяне употребляют лекарство Мокша на основе растительных экстрактов. по воздействию схожее с производными лизергиновой кислоты. Название неслучайно, мокша в индуизме - выход из колеса Сансары, освобождение от круговорота рождений и смертей. Не нужно на этом основании делать вывод, что там все торчки обдолбанные. Мокшу употребляют крайне редко, в ритуальных целях и после серьезной психической подготовки длительными медитациями. "Медитация - ежедневная пища, мокша - банкет," - говорит героиня.
Признаюсь, я взялась за эту книгу только и исключительно потому, что аудиоверсию исполнил Игорь Князев, просто слушаю у него все. И да, это превосходное исполнение, хотя формат череды перетекающих одна в другую лекций изрядно утомителен. Ну вот должно в книге что-то происходить, помимо просветительства и психоделики. Собственно, и произойдет, в конце, удивительно созвучном аксеновскому "Острову Крыму", написанному через семнадцать лет.
И эта концовка буквально опрокидывает в "здесь и сейчас". Такое:
Смотри,
это твой шанс узнать, как выглядит изнутри
то, на что ты так долго глядел снаружи;
запоминай же подробности, восклицая «Vive la Patrie!»
Here, who hears what drums (or the music of the spheres, if you prefer it that way), Huxley is initially set up for a constructive world order with a minimum of pain and suffering. And equal opportunities, social elevators and other gains of democracy in his coordinate system are not so significant and lead to even greater enslavement. That is, when you broke through to the top, got a prestigious position and a solid income with sweat and blood, what will you do?
That's right, to consume intensively, indirectly contributing to the destruction of the environment. Will it make you happy? No, there is more comfort, but it is not synonymous with happiness. A high position entails great responsibility, the need to maintain relations with unpleasant people, noblesse oblige, representation expenses and deficit are already at another level (soup is liquid - pearls are small) Plus the fear of not holding on to the positions won - a solid neurosis.
"No, guys, it's not like that" and "we'll go the other way," Huxley says. First, and much more importantly, to change the assemblage point, attitude, worldview. Professor Preobrazhensky said that the devastation is in the heads, but there are also neuroses, aggression, immoderate thoughtless consumerism. And so, with his final message to the world, the writer makes a utopia based on the principles of New Ageism with a Buddhist worldview taken as a basis.
Все граждане счастливчики, поют себе мотивчики и все без исключения об острове родном
Раздался звук одиночного выстрела. Затем грянули очереди из автоматов.
Труд целых столетий уничтожался всего за одну ночь. И все равно факт оставался фактом – была печаль, но где-то пролегал и конец всех печалей.
Свой последний роман Олдос Хаксли написал за год до смерти и спустя тридцать лет после культового "О, дивный новый мир". ХХ век был временем литературных антиутопий, самую известную книгу Хаксли нередко издавали под одной обложкой с замятинским "Мы" и "1984" Оруэлла - классическими "анти". Но на деле, "Дивный мир" в куда большей степени утопия. Да, гротескная, основанная на селекции и химически стимулированном довольстве вместо демократических принципов, но это рабочая модель общества, в котором все счастливы.
Тут уж кто какие барабаны слышит (или музыку сфер, если вам так больше нравится), Хаксли изначально настроен на конструктивное мироустройство с минимумом боли и страданий. А равные возможности, социальные лифты и прочие завоевания демократии в его системе координат не столь значимы и ведут к еще большему закабалению. То есть, вот прорвался ты наверх, добыл потом и кровью престижную должность и солидный доход, что будешь делать?
Правильно, усиленно потреблять, косвенно способствуя разрушению экологии. Сделает это тебя счастливым? Нет, комфорта больше, но он не синоним счастья. Высокая должность влечет большую ответственность, необходимость поддерживать отношения с неприятными людьми, noblesse oblige, представительские расходы и дефицит уже на другом уровне (суп жидок - жемчуг мелок) Плюс страх не удержаться на завоеванных позициях - сплошная невроз.
"Нет, ребята, все не так" и "мы пойдем другим путем" - говорит Хаксли. Прежде, и гораздо важнее, поменять точку сборки, мироощущение, мировосприятие. Профессор Преображенский говорил, что разруха в головах, но там же и неврозы, агрессия, неумеренное бездумное потребительство. И вот, своим финальным посланием миру писатель делает утопию, основанную на принципах нью-эйджизма со взятым за основу буддистским мировоззрением.
"Остров": о том, как замечательно все могло бы быть. если бы люди начали жить. относиться к природе, строить отношения разумно. Беспринципный циничный эгоист с отягощенной совестью и кучей комплексов, развившихся из детских психотравм попадает на райский тропический остров. где устроена правильная и справедливая жизнь. Смотрит, разговаривает, знако��ится с людьми, вникает в функционирование учреждений и принципы в основе общественных институтов.
По сути книга не роман, а такой философский нон-фикшн на тему "как нам обустроить мир". Тут, примерно как в индийском фильме, где персонажи то и дело принимаются танцевать - всякий герой лектор, освещающий какую-то из сторон местной жизни. Вот так мы учимся осознанному пребыванию в "здесь и сейчас", так утишаем боль, так сублимируем агрессию в полезную деятельность, так учим, так лечим. так воспитываем детей, так устроена наша система призрения пожилых и сирот, так улучшаем генофонд,.так развлекаемся.
Хаксли был адептом ЛСД, много экспериментировал с этим веществом, инъекция 100 мкг которого помогла ему покинуть мир без мучений - писатель умирал от рака горла, а случилось это, к слову, в день убийства Кеннеди. Так вот, островитяне употребляют лекарство Мокша на основе растительных экстрактов. по воздействию схожее с производными лизергиновой кислоты. Название неслучайно, мокша в индуизме - выход из колеса Сансары, освобождение от круговорота рождений и смертей. Не нужно на этом основании делать вывод, что там все торчки обдолбанные. Мокшу употребляют крайне редко, в ритуальных целях и после серьезной психической подготовки длительными медитациями. "Медитация - ежедневная пища, мокша - банкет," - говорит героиня.
Признаюсь, я взялась за эту книгу только и исключительно потому, что аудиоверсию исполнил Игорь Князев, просто слушаю у него все. И да, это превосходное исполнение, хотя формат череды перетекающих одна в другую лекций изрядно утомителен. Ну вот должно в книге что-то происходить, помимо просветительства и психоделики. Собственно, и произойдет, в конце, удивительно созвучном аксеновскому "Острову Крыму", написанному через семнадцать лет.
И эта концовка буквально опрокидывает в "здесь и сейчас". Такое:
Смотри,
это твой шанс узнать, как выглядит изнутри
то, на что ты так долго глядел снаружи;
запоминай же подробности, восклицая «Vive la Patrie!»
June 12, 2015
BRAVE New World is one of my all time favourite books so when I bought this one it seemed like a no-brainer. Island is a really interesting and thought-provoking book. A word of warning to anyone considering reading this though... this isn't your typical story; there is no real complication, it is a series of philosophical ponderings surrounding the main character. I loved it but I know it is not for everyone. I found that the story got me thinking a lot and I often had to pause to consider what I had read. This book took me a long time to get through because I could never sit down and read a hundred pages- I had to have breaks. It's a really great book and whilst it is not as good as Brave New World (in my eyes at least) I would recommend it to any Huxley fans.
November 2, 2018
3,5 ***
opinião em breve
opinião em breve
June 3, 2025
"L'Isola" a volte non è semplice da seguire, a metà strada tra un romanzo quasi privo di trama e un saggio sociologico su di un ipotetico sistema di vita alternativo utopico.
Narra di un uomo naufragato casualmente (forse) su di un'isola proibita dove viene soccorso dai suoi abitanti e vi trascorre alcuni giorni affascinato e incuriosito dal loro sistema sociale.
L'isola di Pala da un centinaio di anni basa l'educazione sociale dei suoi abitanti su un concetto pragmatico di buddismo, libertà di espressione e famiglia aperta, garantendo pace e felicità a tutti i suoi abitanti.
La narrazione procede molto lentamente, la trama è praticamente assente, i personaggi semplici mezzi per portare avanti i tanti dialoghi atti unicamente a descrivere le varie caratteristiche socio-politiche di questo sistema alternativo di vita. Tanti i concetti filosofici e psicologici che, seppur positivi, a volte si fatica a seguire.
Di Aldous Huxley avevo letto "Il Mondo Nuovo" che con "1984" di Orwell e "Faranheit 451"
di Bradbury reputo fondamentali esempi per la letteratura distopica ma "L'Isola" è forse un libro trascurabile pur avendo un messaggio positivo atto a far riflettere.
Narra di un uomo naufragato casualmente (forse) su di un'isola proibita dove viene soccorso dai suoi abitanti e vi trascorre alcuni giorni affascinato e incuriosito dal loro sistema sociale.
L'isola di Pala da un centinaio di anni basa l'educazione sociale dei suoi abitanti su un concetto pragmatico di buddismo, libertà di espressione e famiglia aperta, garantendo pace e felicità a tutti i suoi abitanti.
La narrazione procede molto lentamente, la trama è praticamente assente, i personaggi semplici mezzi per portare avanti i tanti dialoghi atti unicamente a descrivere le varie caratteristiche socio-politiche di questo sistema alternativo di vita. Tanti i concetti filosofici e psicologici che, seppur positivi, a volte si fatica a seguire.
Di Aldous Huxley avevo letto "Il Mondo Nuovo" che con "1984" di Orwell e "Faranheit 451"
di Bradbury reputo fondamentali esempi per la letteratura distopica ma "L'Isola" è forse un libro trascurabile pur avendo un messaggio positivo atto a far riflettere.
May 29, 2012
Aldous Huxley wrote this just before he died and to me this is his swan song. Island is set somewhere in the Pacific and depicts an Englishman's journey of spiritual enlightenment and self discovery. A progressive community takes mind-altering drugs and rejects conventional societal values for their own utopia. Everyone has the freedom to choose their own work, worship their own gods and have sex freely without the taboos of Western civilization. The community are exceptionally kind and open to Will Farnaby and show him that true happiness is found when you embrace life to the full and learn to love yourself and mankind.
Unfortunately, the despotic Colonel Dipa has other plans. The Island is plentiful in natural oil and already, power hungry capitalists are hoping to exploit this nirvana for their own dastardly ends. Aldous Huxley and others of his generation were deeply saddened by the state of the world after the Second World War. Images of brainwashed nazis and the rampant materialism in post-war America are interwoven into this tale as a warning that mankind will ultimately end destroying all that is good and true in the world.
Aldous Huxley must have known that this was going to be his last book as death seems to be a major theme. Will Farnaby learns that death does not have to be depressing or traumatic, it can be a celebration of someone's life as they take a journey into the unknown. I think Huxley must have felt that he too was ready to embark on that last chapter of his life...
Island is a beautifully written book and I would definitely recommend it.
Unfortunately, the despotic Colonel Dipa has other plans. The Island is plentiful in natural oil and already, power hungry capitalists are hoping to exploit this nirvana for their own dastardly ends. Aldous Huxley and others of his generation were deeply saddened by the state of the world after the Second World War. Images of brainwashed nazis and the rampant materialism in post-war America are interwoven into this tale as a warning that mankind will ultimately end destroying all that is good and true in the world.
Aldous Huxley must have known that this was going to be his last book as death seems to be a major theme. Will Farnaby learns that death does not have to be depressing or traumatic, it can be a celebration of someone's life as they take a journey into the unknown. I think Huxley must have felt that he too was ready to embark on that last chapter of his life...
Island is a beautifully written book and I would definitely recommend it.
March 6, 2008
This is a book to read and re-read for the philosophical and spiritual issues that it examines. The utopia of Pala is examined by an outsider, much like ourselves. Will has been brought up through the typical patriarchal pedagogy, which resents and demeans anything different.
He learns to embrace a parallel if not complementary way of living. The Palanese integrate teachings across philosophies (not just religions) of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity and accept the spectrum of individuals (muscle men, peter pans) but find ways to allow peaceful interaction. There is no monopolistic forcing of one's ways on others but continuously appropriate and attentive choices made by an intellectually and humanely informed population, all the way from children to adults.
This book gets at an essential that many of us have not taken the time to absorb - but that is evident in the background should we choose to make the effort to observe it - like the saying the democracy depends on a well informed electorate and Albert Einstein's quote: "peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding."
I choose to believe that the ending is just the future truth being revealed by the moksha-medicine, and that Will wakes up and takes actions that allow the little heaven on earth to still be in existence, resilient to the ever-present outside forces trying to get in and corrupt/conquer. It harks to the daily fight each of us undergoes since we were born. That is the beauty of the ending - you can make up your own!
He learns to embrace a parallel if not complementary way of living. The Palanese integrate teachings across philosophies (not just religions) of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity and accept the spectrum of individuals (muscle men, peter pans) but find ways to allow peaceful interaction. There is no monopolistic forcing of one's ways on others but continuously appropriate and attentive choices made by an intellectually and humanely informed population, all the way from children to adults.
This book gets at an essential that many of us have not taken the time to absorb - but that is evident in the background should we choose to make the effort to observe it - like the saying the democracy depends on a well informed electorate and Albert Einstein's quote: "peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding."
I choose to believe that the ending is just the future truth being revealed by the moksha-medicine, and that Will wakes up and takes actions that allow the little heaven on earth to still be in existence, resilient to the ever-present outside forces trying to get in and corrupt/conquer. It harks to the daily fight each of us undergoes since we were born. That is the beauty of the ending - you can make up your own!
Read
April 13, 2020Za razliku od Vrlog novog sveta koji je distopijska knjiga, Ostrvo/Otok je utopijska. Kroz njega nam Haksli predstavlja kako bi moglo da izgleda savremeno društvo u kojem su pomirene religija i nauka u korist njegovih ljudi.
Dosta kritike upućeno je ideološkim i naročito religioznim konceptima na kojima su vekovima vaspitavane generacije zapadnjaka. Priča je smeštena u izmišljenoj ostrvskoj državi Pali. Njeno stanovništvo, većinom budističko, prihvata sintezu religije i nauke radi srećnijeg života budućih naraštaja. Jedina pretnja njihovom sistemu je nafta, koje žele da se dokopaju određene grupacije, a u sklopu toga Haksli aludira i na tadašnje, a i sadašnje stanje u svetu u vezi sa tim dragocenim resursom. Odlični su opisi halucinacija nakon uzimanja psihoaktivnih gljiva, koje je i sam Haksli primenjivao na sebi.
U ovom romanu Haksli piše kako nešto može, nema samo kritike, već i konkretnih ideja kako čovek
može biti u ravnoteži sa drugima i samim sobom.
Dosta kritike upućeno je ideološkim i naročito religioznim konceptima na kojima su vekovima vaspitavane generacije zapadnjaka. Priča je smeštena u izmišljenoj ostrvskoj državi Pali. Njeno stanovništvo, većinom budističko, prihvata sintezu religije i nauke radi srećnijeg života budućih naraštaja. Jedina pretnja njihovom sistemu je nafta, koje žele da se dokopaju određene grupacije, a u sklopu toga Haksli aludira i na tadašnje, a i sadašnje stanje u svetu u vezi sa tim dragocenim resursom. Odlični su opisi halucinacija nakon uzimanja psihoaktivnih gljiva, koje je i sam Haksli primenjivao na sebi.
U ovom romanu Haksli piše kako nešto može, nema samo kritike, već i konkretnih ideja kako čovek
može biti u ravnoteži sa drugima i samim sobom.
March 22, 2018
Strange things, these novels of ideas. You read, you read, so charmed and challenged by the intellectual debate that somewhere along the road you completely forget to pay attention to the plot, to the characters and generally to all that makes the essence of a novel. And only in the end you ask yourself if it is a novel what you’ve just read after all. The explanation is of course quite simple: plot and characters are only embodiments of ideas and such writings, while mimicking the narrative structure, with its setup, conflict and resolution, follow subtly in fact either the Hegelian dialectic of thesis-antithesis-synthesis or the essay questioning parts of what-how-why.
Island, the last Huxley’s book, is the perfect example of such writing. It was seen as the utopian answer to the dystopian Brave New World, but is it? It seems to me both novels develop, in different ways, the same thesis: that mankind cannot stay beauty. Oh, humans may create it, recognize and even admire it for a while, but in the end they always pervert and destroy it. And beauty is not artistic creation, at least not only. Beauty is superior knowledge and constant seek of harmonious relationships – be it in or between people, or between people and nature, or between people and gods. In the name of this coveted harmony was built the World State with its strict regulations and its five casts and its fix-numbered population and its soma to appease any metaphysical anxiety, the perfect, brave new world where happiness was induced artificially from birth and knowledge was forbidden as dangerous. This is civilisation way, Huxley warned then, the Gotterdammerung of mass culture.
Thirty years after, he imagines another way to reach harmony: isolation from civilisation, reinterpretation of all the values of the society, from family to economy and politics. After identifying all the wrongs in human civilisation and finding a solution for every one of them, Pala becomes a true terrestrial paradise, whose inhabitants are in permanent touch with nature and themselves helped by (this time) a beneficial drug, moksha medicine, and by a deep and original understanding of Tantra philosophy:
But of course, such a society cannot compete with the human genius of destruction. Furthermore, it is not allowed to exist (I cannot help thinking this was Huxley’s foreboding of Tibet's fate). The brave new world is waiting just around the corner for the moment to step in and swallow this world and re-create it in its image. Why?
And third, because the world as a rule has no place for Karuna, that is for compassion. The people of Pala will always be “the savages” of the World State as John was, to be isolated, ridiculed and finally destroyed. The conclusion is therefore identical in both novels: humanity cannot to be saved, for even when it is shown a glimpse of happiness it does its utmost to destroy it. And it is only natural to be this way, since the purpose of the society has never, never been to turn its members into “full-blown human beings”:
…I close the book with a sad smile and I realize that one day I will probably forget all about Will Farnaby, and Robert MacPhail and Murugan and the Rani, but I will never forget the utopic society of Pala, which really believed that Shiva-Nataraja would forever dance for them, while stamping on Muyalaka, to free them of the world’s malignity.
Island, the last Huxley’s book, is the perfect example of such writing. It was seen as the utopian answer to the dystopian Brave New World, but is it? It seems to me both novels develop, in different ways, the same thesis: that mankind cannot stay beauty. Oh, humans may create it, recognize and even admire it for a while, but in the end they always pervert and destroy it. And beauty is not artistic creation, at least not only. Beauty is superior knowledge and constant seek of harmonious relationships – be it in or between people, or between people and nature, or between people and gods. In the name of this coveted harmony was built the World State with its strict regulations and its five casts and its fix-numbered population and its soma to appease any metaphysical anxiety, the perfect, brave new world where happiness was induced artificially from birth and knowledge was forbidden as dangerous. This is civilisation way, Huxley warned then, the Gotterdammerung of mass culture.
Thirty years after, he imagines another way to reach harmony: isolation from civilisation, reinterpretation of all the values of the society, from family to economy and politics. After identifying all the wrongs in human civilisation and finding a solution for every one of them, Pala becomes a true terrestrial paradise, whose inhabitants are in permanent touch with nature and themselves helped by (this time) a beneficial drug, moksha medicine, and by a deep and original understanding of Tantra philosophy:
If you’re a Tantrik, you don’t renounce the world or deny its value; you don’t try to escape into a Nirvana apart from life, as the monks of the Southern School do. No, you accept the world and make use of it; you make use of everything you do, of everything that happens to you, of all the things you see and hear and taste and touch, as so many means to your liberation from the prison of yourself.
But of course, such a society cannot compete with the human genius of destruction. Furthermore, it is not allowed to exist (I cannot help thinking this was Huxley’s foreboding of Tibet's fate). The brave new world is waiting just around the corner for the moment to step in and swallow this world and re-create it in its image. Why?
First, because it simply isn’t possible for Pala to go on being different from the rest of the world. And second, because it isn’t right that it should be different.
And third, because the world as a rule has no place for Karuna, that is for compassion. The people of Pala will always be “the savages” of the World State as John was, to be isolated, ridiculed and finally destroyed. The conclusion is therefore identical in both novels: humanity cannot to be saved, for even when it is shown a glimpse of happiness it does its utmost to destroy it. And it is only natural to be this way, since the purpose of the society has never, never been to turn its members into “full-blown human beings”:
What are boys and girls for in America? Answer: for mass consumption. (…) Whereas in Russia there’s a different answer. Boys and girls are for strengthening the national state. (…) And in China it’s the same, but a good deal more so. What are boys and girls for there? For cannon fodder, industry fodder, agriculture fodder, road-building fodder.
…I close the book with a sad smile and I realize that one day I will probably forget all about Will Farnaby, and Robert MacPhail and Murugan and the Rani, but I will never forget the utopic society of Pala, which really believed that Shiva-Nataraja would forever dance for them, while stamping on Muyalaka, to free them of the world’s malignity.
June 14, 2017
As relevant today as it was when it was written. This book digs deep into the battle for indigenous rights and corporate plunder.
February 21, 2016
I was happily reading this book and then going along feeling like I was on an Island. It was warm and sunny. The natives were friendly for the most part and all spoke English. And then it happened...
Aldous Huxley. There's a message in all of his books and I already knew the message for this one: which society is better? Modern technology or a more primitive and laid back approach? Some combination of the 2?
Reading it came like a slap from the grave. Aldous called our health care "50% terrific and 50% nonexistent." In 1962! I quote "Alpha Plus for patching you up when you start to fall apart; but Delta Minus for keeping you healthy."
He even states that things are this way because doctors get paid more for cures and not prevention! Why hasn't this been fixed if mere authors knew about it in 1962?
Needless to say the best society is taking the best of modern technology but leaving the materialism and adding individual treatment for the greater good. Utopia yes, but utterly unattainable.
Aldous Huxley. There's a message in all of his books and I already knew the message for this one: which society is better? Modern technology or a more primitive and laid back approach? Some combination of the 2?
Reading it came like a slap from the grave. Aldous called our health care "50% terrific and 50% nonexistent." In 1962! I quote "Alpha Plus for patching you up when you start to fall apart; but Delta Minus for keeping you healthy."
He even states that things are this way because doctors get paid more for cures and not prevention! Why hasn't this been fixed if mere authors knew about it in 1962?
Needless to say the best society is taking the best of modern technology but leaving the materialism and adding individual treatment for the greater good. Utopia yes, but utterly unattainable.
January 11, 2019
Will Farnaby, periodista, luego de sobrevivir a un naufragio consigue arribar, malherido, a la isla de Pala. Pala es una "utópica" isla donde descubre una sociedad pletórica de libertad y perfección (Al menos en términos de los que Huxley consideraría como tal, supongo) Es obvio que la historia, plagada de abrumadores y enredados diálogos filosóficos, no es más que una excusa para que el autor exponga su percepción de la "felicidad" humana en base a cierta confusa espiritualidad junto a extrañas iluminaciones y su rechazo hacia ideologías como el comunismo, religiones en general y cualquier cosa que se asemeje a totalitarismos o tiranías.
Aves parlantes, sexo tántrico y drogas alucinógenas, todo muy Huxley en sus últimos años. Una crítica social apabullante que algunos, como no, podrán encontrar inspiradora.
Aves parlantes, sexo tántrico y drogas alucinógenas, todo muy Huxley en sus últimos años. Una crítica social apabullante que algunos, como no, podrán encontrar inspiradora.
August 19, 2021
Let's get the obvious out of the way first. Did i read this for the plot? Absolutely not. The premise is literally "a guy is stranded on an island and while recoving, he gets a full tour of their lives, economy and, philosophies."
Is the writing great? Not really. Brave New World was definitely better.
But then why did I read it? I don't know.
I wanted to see what else Huxley has up his sleeves - and I was surprised. So while I struggled through a lot of this and kept checking my pages to see if I was finished yet. There are a few things this book discusses I want to add my two cents to, so there are now SPOILERS coming.
Is the writing great? Not really. Brave New World was definitely better.
But then why did I read it? I don't know.
I wanted to see what else Huxley has up his sleeves - and I was surprised. So while I struggled through a lot of this and kept checking my pages to see if I was finished yet. There are a few things this book discusses I want to add my two cents to, so there are now SPOILERS coming.
September 8, 2019
I read this Huxley book about a year ago and was just thinking about it recently. It is in some way a novel, but only in a vague approximation of what you'd expect of one. There isn't a whole lot of plot and what slim plot line there is seems mainly to exist as a broad enclosure or framework for Huxley's philosophical ideas. The peaceful island of Pala seems like a utopia and the people who live there have built up a perfect kind of pacifist existence, whereby they live in total isolation from the rest of the world in their own little peace and love bubble. Huxley, through very long dialogues between the characters, espouses his own philosophy of life which seems to be mainly concerned with mindfulness and being in the moment and peaceful living. These conversations are mainly really interesting but can get a bit tedious if you're not in the right mood for them. There is a bit of hallucinatory drug taking thrown in as well for good measure as a further way for the characters to seek enlightenment and quite a bit of touring about the island, finding out about what makes it so special and seemingly better than the outside world...
If you are after a riveting page turner with twists and turns, eroticism, adventure and general rambunctiousness, then this won't be floating your boat, but if you're in the mood for a slow, thoughtful sort of book where the ideas are put above plot and the characters are even secondary as well, then you might like this idealistic, intriguing and meditative last work by Aldous Huxley.
Read
January 25, 2019
“Lenin used to say that electricity plus socialism equals communism. Our equations are rather different.
Electricity minus heavy industry plus birth control equals democracy and plenty.
Electricity plus heavy industry minus birth control equals misery, totalitarianism and war.”
Aldous Huxley’s Pala is a beautiful Solarpunk country. I would love to read stories of it’s people, their lives, their dramas.
But that’s not this book.
This is a story of beauty about to be raped.
I’m not in the mood for that.
DNF 47% No Rating
June 14, 2007
All about Soma which is like all about this totally cool combo of prozac and more psychoactively intense "medications" . . . read it in the passenger seat of a VW Golf driving back east from California after high-school graduation during the First Bush's reign of terror. Think I finished it by Cheyenne. Way enjoyable.
May 21, 2020
Como história, este livro é uma seca: enormes diálogos que mais não são do que um pretexto para o autor expor as suas ideias daquilo que seria um mundo ideal, protagonizados por personagens com muito pouca densidade.
A Ilha é um romance filosófico, que provavelmente teria resultado melhor como um ensaio.
Ainda assim, não deixam de ter interesse alguns dos temas / problemas explorados (educação, sobrepopulação, industrialização, mindfulness) e das soluções encontradas, algumas delas não tão utópicas como isso.
A Ilha é um romance filosófico, que provavelmente teria resultado melhor como um ensaio.
Ainda assim, não deixam de ter interesse alguns dos temas / problemas explorados (educação, sobrepopulação, industrialização, mindfulness) e das soluções encontradas, algumas delas não tão utópicas como isso.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 2,630 reviews