5 ms·

> Progress in the arts is very limited and, as soon as the technique of artistic expression is perfected, ceases altogether to exist. Every artists starts from

> Progress in the arts is very limited and, as soon as the technique of artistic expression is perfected, ceases altogether to exist. Every artists starts from the beginning and depends for success on his personal talents alone. It's curious that Huxley says that about the arts, and something entirely different about science > Uninheritable progress, due to tradition, has genuinely taken place in the realism of science and technology, where each worker stands on the shoulders of his predecessors.

mbg721 5y ago
It sounds like he's saying that art (religion also) is dependent on fashion, taste, and interpretation, but science isn't. I'm sure that was a popular view 20 years before the implications of eugenics became unavoidably visible.
- verisimi 5y ago
  Do you realise that he, his brother, his grandfather (TH), the Darwin family, Wallaces, etc were eugenicists? He is from a rich upper class family that believed it was their right to plan the world, and that there were too many of us then! This category of elites didn't go away, or stop planning, or change their views. They just created better governance structures, eg the UN. We are the carbon they want to decrease.
  - n4r9 5y ago
    That's intriguing and surprising. I've always thought BNW was kind of a challenging dystopia, but didn't know that bit of background. I googled around and found a couple of quotes from the book Eugenics, Race and Intelligence in Education: "Returning to the theme of ‘eugenic utopias’, and moving on to the work of Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), it might at first seem that Huxley’s Brave New World does not really belong in this section, since it has become, together with George Orwell’s 1949 classic Nineteen Eighty-Four, one of the twin pillars of the anti-utopian tradition in English Literature and a ‘byword’ for all that is most repellent and ‘nightmarish’ in the world of the future. Yet it is not clear that Huxley himself viewed his vision of the world to come in quite that way." p 55 "In January 1932, shortly before the publication of Brave New World, Huxley gave a talk on BBC Radio in which he discussed the beneficial potential of eugenics as an instrument of political control, and expressed a readiness to sanction eugenic measures as a means of arresting ‘the rapid deterioration of the whole West European stock’. Yet in his 1946 Foreword to Brave New World, Huxley made no reference to the appeal which eugenics had held for him in the early 1930s." p 56 It sounds like he had a chequered relationship with the idea. He certainly thought it had dangerous potential if BNW is anything to go by.
    - verisimi 5y ago
      I don't think he had a chequered relationship with the idea at all. He just became more circumspect about expressing it. The ruling elite or sysadmins were and still are fully on board with eugenics. If you approach Aldous with the idea that 'the lady doth protest too much' you will take a different reading. My view is that BNW (like 1984 - Eton-educated Orwell/Blair was another, and HG Wells) had a particular role to play. BNW was put out there to acclimatise us to their idea of the future, so when it comes around we don't respond with revulsion, as we have somewhat accepted the idea. These books were 'the plan' (as understood back then) rather than a dystopian vision. They recognise that it is dystopian for us, providing those dystopian ideas ahead of time is part of that management so we don't respond in a threatening way. Like farmers with their cattle, they have to manage the herd carefully, but, as unpleasant as it may be for them, still they have to manage things as they see fit. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs! You might even extend your cynicism to the present day, and wonder whether the current actions play a role in their planning. Hmm. Aldous of course was a contributor to the Eschalen institute and other think tanks. His brother Julian founded Unesco.
      - natmaka 5y ago
        A. Huxley explored many concepts and ways, I'm not sure he was trying to enforce anything or manipulate anyone. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_(Huxley_novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_(Huxley_novel)
  - scoopertrooper 5y ago
    > the Darwin family I can't speak for the entire clan, but Darwin and his family were generally not eugenists and were instead strong abolitionists. https://medium.com/science-and-philosophy/charles-darwin-on-racism-slavery-and-eugenics-cb6416b8277c https://medium.com/science-and-philosophy/charles-darwin-on-...
- mikeiz404 5y ago
  I took his point to mean that scientific progress is recursive in a way; each new technology or improvement of a theoretical model enables the next person to build on that progress (assuming the direction they are heading is generally correct). Where as in say art because, arguably and to a point, it’s value is dependent on the culture of the time and cultures change it does not experience this sort of long term compounding. I believe, as I am not an artist or have much experience in that domain, the tools to make art can and have improved but not in the same way as say the jump from industrial revolution to semiconductor for example (maybe photoshop, illustrator, and the like are the exception for digital art).

mbg721 5y ago

It sounds like he's saying that art (religion also) is dependent on fashion, taste, and interpretation, but science isn't. I'm sure that was a popular view 20 years before the implications of eugenics became unavoidably visible.

verisimi 5y ago
Do you realise that he, his brother, his grandfather (TH), the Darwin family, Wallaces, etc were eugenicists? He is from a rich upper class family that believed it was their right to plan the world, and that there were too many of us then! This category of elites didn't go away, or stop planning, or change their views. They just created better governance structures, eg the UN. We are the carbon they want to decrease.
- n4r9 5y ago
  That's intriguing and surprising. I've always thought BNW was kind of a challenging dystopia, but didn't know that bit of background. I googled around and found a couple of quotes from the book Eugenics, Race and Intelligence in Education: "Returning to the theme of ‘eugenic utopias’, and moving on to the work of Aldous Huxley (1894–1963), it might at first seem that Huxley’s Brave New World does not really belong in this section, since it has become, together with George Orwell’s 1949 classic Nineteen Eighty-Four, one of the twin pillars of the anti-utopian tradition in English Literature and a ‘byword’ for all that is most repellent and ‘nightmarish’ in the world of the future. Yet it is not clear that Huxley himself viewed his vision of the world to come in quite that way." p 55 "In January 1932, shortly before the publication of Brave New World, Huxley gave a talk on BBC Radio in which he discussed the beneficial potential of eugenics as an instrument of political control, and expressed a readiness to sanction eugenic measures as a means of arresting ‘the rapid deterioration of the whole West European stock’. Yet in his 1946 Foreword to Brave New World, Huxley made no reference to the appeal which eugenics had held for him in the early 1930s." p 56 It sounds like he had a chequered relationship with the idea. He certainly thought it had dangerous potential if BNW is anything to go by.
  - verisimi 5y ago
    I don't think he had a chequered relationship with the idea at all. He just became more circumspect about expressing it. The ruling elite or sysadmins were and still are fully on board with eugenics. If you approach Aldous with the idea that 'the lady doth protest too much' you will take a different reading. My view is that BNW (like 1984 - Eton-educated Orwell/Blair was another, and HG Wells) had a particular role to play. BNW was put out there to acclimatise us to their idea of the future, so when it comes around we don't respond with revulsion, as we have somewhat accepted the idea. These books were 'the plan' (as understood back then) rather than a dystopian vision. They recognise that it is dystopian for us, providing those dystopian ideas ahead of time is part of that management so we don't respond in a threatening way. Like farmers with their cattle, they have to manage the herd carefully, but, as unpleasant as it may be for them, still they have to manage things as they see fit. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs! You might even extend your cynicism to the present day, and wonder whether the current actions play a role in their planning. Hmm. Aldous of course was a contributor to the Eschalen institute and other think tanks. His brother Julian founded Unesco.
    - natmaka 5y ago
      A. Huxley explored many concepts and ways, I'm not sure he was trying to enforce anything or manipulate anyone. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_(Huxley_novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_(Huxley_novel)
- scoopertrooper 5y ago
  > the Darwin family I can't speak for the entire clan, but Darwin and his family were generally not eugenists and were instead strong abolitionists. https://medium.com/science-and-philosophy/charles-darwin-on-racism-slavery-and-eugenics-cb6416b8277c https://medium.com/science-and-philosophy/charles-darwin-on-...
mikeiz404 5y ago
I took his point to mean that scientific progress is recursive in a way; each new technology or improvement of a theoretical model enables the next person to build on that progress (assuming the direction they are heading is generally correct). Where as in say art because, arguably and to a point, it’s value is dependent on the culture of the time and cultures change it does not experience this sort of long term compounding. I believe, as I am not an artist or have much experience in that domain, the tools to make art can and have improved but not in the same way as say the jump from industrial revolution to semiconductor for example (maybe photoshop, illustrator, and the like are the exception for digital art).