Lenina's Single Response To Suffering

In today’s world one of the most important things is education and they way citizens’ think. One example, of a control method in both society’s is to control citizens’ consciousness and education. In the society of “Those Who Walk Away From Omelas” citizens have happy consciousness, but are educated of the child who has to suffer. Which makes citizens’ of Omelas feel bad because of the suffering the child has to experience. As stated in “Those Who Walk Away From Omelas” “The know that if the wretched one were not there sniveling in the dark, the one one, the flute-player could make no joyful music…”(3) This quote shows that the suffering that child goes through is for the benefit of the others of Omelas. In contrast to the “Brave New World”

Set at the end of the Cold War in East Germany, the movie Goodbye Lenin is the story of a young man, Alex, trying to protect his mother, Christiane, who just spent the last eight months in a coma. Christiane is a personification of the values and ideology of socialism. She carries them out in her interactions with society, and is very hopeful towards the success of the regime. During her absence, the fall of the Berlin Wall and of the German Democratic Republic leads to a radical and turbulent change in society: the fall of socialism and the triumph of capitalism. Because of the shocking effect of such information and the danger of another heart attack, Alex creates for Christiane an ideological form of socialism. Fundamental themes in the movie are the difference between ideal and reality of socialism, as well as the positive and negative aspects of the transition to free market capitalism. Such themes are carried out through a juxtaposition of an ideal society and its reality in the form of a constructed reality of socialism. This idealized version of socialism served as an oasis from the chaotic transition from a problematic socialist regime to free market capitalism.

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Anna Funder’s Stasiland explore the physical and psychological suffering one can endure from a totalitarian government. The objective of the totalitarian governments in the two novels was to implement pain and hardship as a means of controlling the masses. The Party in Orwell’s novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, implemented a dominance of physical suffering forcing different beliefs and betrayal. Whilst in Funder’s Stasiland, The German Democratic Republic achieved the same suffering by physical torture alongside psychological discomfort through death and separation from loved ones. These two applications of suffering are distant from one another, achieving different outcomes. Orwell presents a dark undesirable society where physical suffering is temporary, but the damages that are associated with it are permanent. Whilst, Funder portrays that the human spirit is not as strong as it was before the wall. The suffering implemented in both novels have a profound effect on the characters and influence future life decisions, precipitating permanent effects on one’s psychological mindset caused by the State.

Survival and preservation of humanity are among two important themes in Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Through the main protagonist, Ivan Denisovich Shukhov, the audience is transported into the reality of Stalinist repression. Throughout the novel, Solzhenitsyn makes it clear that freedom is not a cut and dry issue. Rather, when one is focused on survival and maintaining their dignity, some element(s) of freedom are still possible even during the most oppressive times.

It’s shocking how two people from different societies can be both similar and different at the same time. In Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, Linda and Lenina are two such characters. Each of them have their own characteristics which make them unique, but they also have separate characteristics. The three ways in which Lenina and Linda can be compared would be physically, intelligently, and emotionally.

The Lives of Others and Goodbye, Lenin are two movies cleverly depicted about the fall of Communism. One director chooses to portray humor as the base of his movie, while the other chooses a more dark and serious tone. Both directors clearly want their viewers to understand the seriousness of what the fall of the Berlin Wall meant and the importance of Germany’s East West unionization for the citizens of the GSD. However, a hidden truth in both movies is revealed. Truth about a culture that once existed, but has since been swept under the carpet of change. The late 80s brought on the fall of the Berlin Wall signifying the end of the Stalinist regimes that had once held so much power. Outlined below are two movies that, while so different in their delivery, end with the same clear message.

In the novels, Brave new world published by Aldous Huxley in 1932 and Three Day Road published by Joseph Boyden in 2005 two characters are changed drastically throughout the duration of the novels. Lenina in Brave new world changes from a submissive and promiscuous woman of the World State to an emotional woman, showing her the potential to defy her conditioning. Elijah in Three Day Road cracks under the pressure of the war and changes from a defiant boy to a menacing assassin. Both authors are using these novels to comment on how strongly we are influenced by the environment which surrounds us.

Chapters 7 and 8 foreshadow the the future of Lenina. In these chapters Lenina meets Linda a woman who used to be of an upper caste but was forced to stay at the reservation after discovering that she was pregnant. At first Lenina is disgusted calling Linda speaking in with derogatory terms such as “So fat. And all the lines in her face, the flabbiness, the wrinkles. And the sagging cheeks, with those purplish blotches…” (Huxley 121) But once Lenina is able to move past Lindas looks the two instantly hit it off, and talk of all the great times each had had as an upper caste woman, but the story of Linda eerily foreshadows the fate of Lenina. It can be assumed that what has happened to Linda will also happen to Lenina, as she is also of

Many of Man's struggles are usually the result of societal standards, control, and punishment. These struggles are present in both One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Crime & Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky. Through setting and internal monologue, both authors depict the effects of the brutalities of communism on Man's spirituality.

Soma, described by Mustapha Mond as ‘euphoric, narcotic, pleasantly hallucinant’, is a drug that took ‘six years [sic] [to be] produced commercially’. It offers the conditioned society hope by giving them a way to always be happy; ‘a gramme of soma’ can cure anything in their eyes, apart from a ‘glum Marx’ . However, in all actuality it doesn’t offer hope but rather gives the illusion of hope. Instead, it controls the population, enslaving them with happiness. In chapter seven, Lenina ‘[feels] in her pocket for

Lenin was able to consolidate Bolshevik rule in Russia by combining popular policies and repression: To what extent do you agree with this statement.

The conversation between Mustapha Mond, a “World Controller” and John, the “Savage” examines the sacrifices for stability in the society of the novel Brave New World. Mustapha Mond justifies the government’s restrictions by describing the apparent “happiness” of the public. Ultimately, he claims that they have achieved stability in that the public has no need for worries and in result must be happy. Similarly, Mustapha alludes to the fact that classic conditioning was used on the public to conform to the government’s laws, the reasoning for their lack of worries. He mentions the consumption and the public’s dependence of “soma”, a drug that causes lethargy and inhibits awareness, aiding to distract the unhappy. He scoffs at how ridiculous

In this paper, I plan to explain Dostoevsky’s criticism of Western Individualism. Dostoevsky’s first criticism resides in the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it, “which is presented by the character Alyosha (Dostoevsky 3). Allowing this character to discuss this topic, along with the commentary of Ivan, demonstrates their mindset to solely focus on their own lives, opposed to caring for others. This leads to them living for the now, and not focusing on how their decisions will affect their future or others. Dostoevsky disapproves of this notion because living by this mentality encourages the guidance of logic, which is dangerous because it could tell you to kill yourself. From Dostoevsky’s Eastern Orthodox background, he believes that the only way from living from this situation is to deny it. By denying this way of living, the focus toward life will not be directed toward yourself, but toward the way you can impact the environment around you. Ivan clearly does not believe in these values, due to his intentions to commit suicide at the age of thirty. As said before, living by the idea to “love life more than the meaning of it” leads to death, and Ivan indulges in this to the fullest (Dostoevsky 3).

only had the firm support of 15 of 25 members on the 15th of October.