Amusing Ourselves to Death

[Orwellian_Ghost]

"What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one. Orwell feared those who would deprive us of information. Huxley feared those who would give us so much that we would be reduced to passivity and egoism. Orwell feared that the truth would be concealed from us. Huxley feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance. Orwell feared we would become a captive culture. Huxley feared we would become a trivial culture, preoccupied with some equivalent of the feelies, the orgy porgy, and the centrifugal bumblepuppy. As Huxley remarked in Brave New World Revisited, the civil libertarians and rationalists who are ever on the alert to oppose tyranny "failed to take into account man's almost infinite appetite for distractions." In 1984, Orwell added, people are controlled by inflicting pain. In Brave New World, they are controlled by inflicting pleasure. In short, Orwell feared that what we hate will ruin us. Huxley feared that what we love will ruin us."

-Neil Postman

[mdmc]

1. nice

I couldn't have done better.... and God, I try.

[ananda]

2. Whoa!!

Huxley was a genius.. just right on.

[Spiffarino]

3. Keep talking

We need to hear the message, especially those of us who consider ourselves "enlightened."

[Orwellian_Ghost]

5. Well those are kind words

and the bit about the "enlightened" is really a hornet's nest that needs to be shaken.

[scarletwoman]

4. Wow. Excellent post! rec'd (nt)

[kath]

6. Quote in the OP is from Neil Postman's book "Amusing Ourselves to Death"

(from the introduction, IIRC). A very good and important book. Still in print, I believe. Highly recommend! (both the book and this thread, for calling it to DUers' attention)

[Ezlivin]

17. Also check out Postman's "Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology"

There can be no disputing that the computer has increased the power of large-scale organizations like the armed forces, or airline companies or banks or tax-collecting agencies. And it is equally clear that the computer is now indispensable to high-level researchers in physics and other natural sciences. But to what extent has computer technology been an advantage to the masses of people? To steelworkers, vegetable-store owners, teachers, garage mechanics, musicians, bricklayers, dentists, and most of the rest into whose lives the computer now intrudes? Their private matters have been made more accessible to powerful institutions. They are more easily tracked and controlled; are subjected to more examinations; are increasingly mystified by the decisions made about them; are often reduced to mere numerical objects. They are are inundated by junk mail. They are easy targets for advertising agencies and political organizations. The schools teach their children to operate computerized systems instead of teaching things that are more valuable to children. (Postman, "Technopoly", pp.10-11)

Neil Postman had great insight and I wish he was still alive to comment on this time in history. I'm sure his insights would be stingingly cogent.

[seemslikeadream]

7. ..

[Elidor]

8. We watched the tragedy unfold

We did as we were told
We bought and sold
It was the greatest show on earth
But then it was over

We ohhed and aahed
We drove our racing cars
We ate our last few jars of caviar
And somewhere out there in the stars
A keen-eyed look-out
Spied a flickering light
Our last hurrah

And when they found our shadows
Grouped around the TV sets
They ran down every lead
They repeated every test

They checked out all the data on their lists
And then the alien anthropologists
Admitted they were still perplexed
But on eliminating every other reason
For our sad demise
They logged the only explanation left:

This species has amused itself to death

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMijMWQlnUc

[EvolveOrConvolve]

9. Great post! But to be fair,

there are those of us who can watch football and still make enlightened decisions about our nation and it's direction.

[PATRICK]

21. And to be fair

Repression uses both methodologies in concert. There must always be fear and physical repression and secrecy on top of and beneath the submissive surface. Brave new World had the balance. The Soviet Union could not afford the expenses of a pleasure state. Supposedly "free" market capitalism can. Also, the crippling expenses of suppression overall degrade everything, not just liberties an' money is siphoned off toward the tyranny. Guess what happens when the distractions become too expensive? A shift has to be made back to fear.

The reason why both things work against us so easily guarantees that reform or revolt will never be permanent or safe. Everything must be kept open and the citizen- somehow- kept involved and undistracted.
While distraction elements seem softer and are part of civilization no matter what, the tight focus of the government and its power seems not only easier but cheaper to control and be really effective. Keeping the government really open with just "enough" vigilance and involvement is the imbalance we think we can live with- someday. We can see how that works in our own focus, a bit of time in campaigns and online bouncing off the Bush power walls, thinking we can achieve what exactly by winning some elections this fall? It is hope versus the hopelessness, or compartmentalized hope of the few dissatisfied in BNW or 1984. In the non-fictional world the mix is more complex and mammoth and ever more disturbing.

[NMMNG]

10. 1984/ Brave New World

Those are two of my favorite books ever, and two which I re-read every so often not only because I love classic lit, but because I have a particular fondness for utopian and dystopian tales. I'm amazed at the foresight that Orwell and Huxley both had. I'm also saddened at the lessons we could have learned from them and didn't.

Fahrenheit 451, another favorite of mine, falls into the same genre and is no less a warning to all who care to heed it.

[femrap]

11. My old high school still requires that

sophomores read '1984.' Imagine reading it now for the first time!!!

[NMMNG]

12. My copy is a "Commemorative 1984 edition"

I've had that since high school. Sophomore year, now that you mention it.

[femrap]

13. Cool! nt

[Orwellian_Ghost]

14. Pick a pair

[Solly Mack]

15. Now that's a big cuppa wake the fuck up coffee!

[blues90]

16. Reading these two books so long ago .

If you paid attention you really could see it coming . To me it meant never to get caught up in the surreal world man has created whether for our amuzement or for our distain or fears .

Sadly it's a pretty lonely place to be .

[Orwellian_Ghost]

18. Society of the Spectacle

Society of the Spectacle

Chapter 1 “Separation Perfected”
But certainly for the present age, which prefers the sign to the thing signified, the copy to the original, representation to reality, the appearance to the essence... illusion only is sacred, truth profane. Nay, sacredness is held to be enhanced in proportion as truth decreases and illusion increases, so that the highest degree of illusion comes to be the highest degree of sacredness.
Feuerbach, Preface to the second edition of The Essence of Christianity

1.
In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all of life presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation.


2.
The images detached from every aspect of life fuse in a common stream in which the unity of this life can no longer be reestablished. Reality considered partially unfolds, in its own general unity, as a pseudo-world apart, an object of mere contemplation. The specialization of images of the world is completed in the world of the autonomous image, where the liar has lied to himself. The spectacle in general, as the concrete inversion of life, is the autonomous movement of the non-living.

3.
The spectacle presents itself simultaneously as all of society, as part of society, and as instrument of unification. As a part of society it is specifically the sector which concentrates all gazing and all consciousness. Due to the very fact that this sector is separate, it is the common ground of the deceived gaze and of false consciousness, and the unification it achieves is nothing but an official language of generalized separation.

4.
The spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relation among people, mediated by images.

5.
The spectacle cannot be understood as an abuse of the world of vision, as a product of the techniques of mass dissemination of images. It is, rather, a Weltanschauung which has become actual, materially translated. It is a world vision which has become objectified.

...

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm

[bbgrunt]

19. thank you. Everyone should read Neil Postman's book.--

Amusing ourselves to death. We seem to be getting a big dose of both Orwell and Huxley.

[phantom power]

20. centrifugal bumblepuppy?

Whatever that is, I'm sure I want one.

[Perry Logan]

22. Orwell and Huxley: doubleplus ungood.

[Kurovski]

23. Non-stop coverage of a baseball star and steroid use...on now!!

FOX, CNN! Hurry!!

[Orwellian_Ghost]

24. Are you going to Disneyland?

[ProgressIn2008]

25. Huxley won, it would seem - though I imagine he'd be reluctant to take

a bow. Orwell said some remarkable things about the empovrishment of language that also apply, as well. Doubleplusgood post. Recommended.

[Swamp Rat]

26. Sounds about right to me.

panem et circenses

[shance]

27. Brilliant OG***** Thank you for posting this.

n/t

[Orwellian_Ghost]

28. Up and and round and round