"Brave new World" is a youth work.. extreme solutions like the death as another tragedy plunged into despair, owing to the fact that they cannot reach a messured use of the Logos ( as could do the dwelers of the Isle, where the economy "should become descentralized", as the proposal of Henry George; and the kropotkian and cooperative politic. Science and Hi-Tech emploied as the Sabath.. created for the Humankind, and not as now where the humans have to enslave and adapt to them. )

Religion would be the conscious and inteligent research of the inmanent Tao-Logos , and life filosophy should be some kind of High Utilitarianism , and filosophy of the hapiness depending on the Last Aim.

Lets see in three main characters differents points of view :

John the Savage :although having studied Shakespeare, has any knowledge of the socities. He can be a good Orator.. more than his capabilities, but his lack is the reflexion skill. He is another piece of an exhibition.

Bernard Marx and Helmholtz Watson: H.Watson is the result of a mental excess , this excess in benefic of his own bussiness can move the person away from the society and imprision him in a artificial powerless deafness. On the other side is Bernard : a defect on his appearence produces in him a mental excess.

The dialectic aspect of this work is around these characters, the other are only like mannequins that contribute to the novel as archetypes ( Lenina as a sexual object - Freudian desire to the limit- , DHC and his followres, Linda..as the anti Maria..). But as we can see, the three are quite rare people out of the social landscape of the present-future. Some of them for their lacks and other for some excesses.

Its curious that the reader feels identified with the point of Bernard since the begining of the book, and how step by step we realice of what a nasty person is.. so mean as us. I mean, reader finds an heroic main character, in oposition to his social world , the prototipe of the romanthic heroe. But as time goes on and we start knowing the real grounds of B.Marx.. and we become conscious of that he has the same "drives" for the same actions as us.. we begin to get more distance betwen us and him. The more human Bernard appears.. the more difference appears. It is paradoxical. So at the first cos he seems the powerfuler figure, and a frustrated person ,we get and agree with an horible vision of the New World.. when he speaks to the people as fresh meet. But afterwards cheating with the reader ( as J.Swift in Gulliver ) he lets his classical hero fall until get converted into a beated dog claiming from the ground... and leaving us in the doubt about the strength of his arguments. Knowing not what to think about a so dark future in its brightness...

His friend H.Watson, is too perfect.. as an Alpha plus, and turns himself into a wretch. He is a being dragging his feets out into a cave and try to keep his identity.. But, what kind of identity? Who is him actually? The fact of doubting about his identity is like doing that about his ideas.. and, is posible through the hole of a cavern to contemplate the horizon? H. Watson goes out of the shadows of his enviroment, but instead of aim to the light, he goes into another cave. His blindness as Huxley wrote is "artificial and impotent".

The Savage, we could think that he is like us, cos he has been born from a mother and his mind is not the result of the science but nature.. but the fact is that he hasnt any kind of cognition about the social structures.. so sadly his opinion is so relevant as the one of a I bc. roman in Usa.

In the other hand, may be everything is not so bad.. to live ejoying what u are.. and indeed we are so condicionated as them.. as Socrates : stupids are the happpiest ones.