For the many instances where New Criticisms proves its impracticality and uselessness, Psychological Criticism inversely thrives when applied to Brave New World. The reason Psychological Criticism works so well is because of the way the story emerges the reader into perspectives and experiences from numerous characters. Each of these characters is a piece, cut from a literary template that can be dissected in order to gain a psychological understanding for Aldous Husley’s life experiences. By analyzing the way different characters react to the same situation the reader gains a better comprehension for their personalities. A profound moment in the development of both Bernard Marx and Lenina Crowne is illustrated in a scene where they are
…show more content…
First off, by establishing the conditioned society and characters like Lenina as the ID, the reader would then assign Superego status to any world leader or directors. By default, and suitably at that, this would mean characters like Bernard and John fit the Ego label. Through conditioning, characters like Lenina draw parallels to the Fruedian ID since they react in manners that only satisfy their most primal urges. On the opposite end of the spectrum are Superego-world-controllers who deviously plot and scheme with new methods that will efficiently contain and control the societal ID they have created. In between this Freudian psychological limbo, the Ego in Bernard and John struggles with the pro’s and con’s on either side. The polarizing existences of the ID and Superego in Brave New World lead to the metaphorical and literal egodeaths of these two characters. As Bernard is never truly courageous enough to fight or suffer for the individuality he wanted, he loses out on the heroism of challenging the Superego and is shamefully exiled to Iceland. Lastly, John is brought to suicide. A true outsider, he hardly stood a chance in this context, mostly because he was incapable of understanding the powers of the Superego and the appeasement of the ID in this new …show more content…
Oddly enough however, both Reader Response and New Criticism are in agreement that “we cant know for sure what the author intended” (Lynn). Even so, where Reader Response Criticism thrives is in the assumption that “the text itself is meaningless unless a reader responds” (Lynn). Where New Criticism makes a point to confine your analysis by valuing a literary work for its artistic complexity, Reader Response Criticism invites me to “actively create (rather than discover) meanings in the text” (Lynn). All this considered, once I actively applied Reader Response Criticism to Brave New World, I found myself taking in the text with a more meaningful and personal
First off, by establishing the conditioned society and characters like Lenina as the ID, the reader would then assign Superego status to any world leader or directors. By default, and suitably at that, this would mean characters like Bernard and John fit the Ego label. Through conditioning, characters like Lenina draw parallels to the Fruedian ID since they react in manners that only satisfy their most primal urges. On the opposite end of the spectrum are Superego-world-controllers who deviously plot and scheme with new methods that will efficiently contain and control the societal ID they have created. In between this Freudian psychological limbo, the Ego in Bernard and John struggles with the pro’s and con’s on either side. The polarizing existences of the ID and Superego in Brave New World lead to the metaphorical and literal egodeaths of these two characters. As Bernard is never truly courageous enough to fight or suffer for the individuality he wanted, he loses out on the heroism of challenging the Superego and is shamefully exiled to Iceland. Lastly, John is brought to suicide. A true outsider, he hardly stood a chance in this context, mostly because he was incapable of understanding the powers of the Superego and the appeasement of the ID in this new …show more content…
Oddly enough however, both Reader Response and New Criticism are in agreement that “we cant know for sure what the author intended” (Lynn). Even so, where Reader Response Criticism thrives is in the assumption that “the text itself is meaningless unless a reader responds” (Lynn). Where New Criticism makes a point to confine your analysis by valuing a literary work for its artistic complexity, Reader Response Criticism invites me to “actively create (rather than discover) meanings in the text” (Lynn). All this considered, once I actively applied Reader Response Criticism to Brave New World, I found myself taking in the text with a more meaningful and personal