1984 is relevant not because it currently fits our world appropriately, but because it's where we'll end up if we're not careful. For western countries, it's less a reflection and more a warning. And the use of phrases like 'alternative facts' and 'the president's executive powers will not be questioned' are chilling for anyone who's read the book.
I'll say that the form of containment echoed in Brave New World is a seemingly viable route a government could take to reaching the power echoed in 1984. A climate of distraction and passivity is ripe for governments to slowly edge their way into more power without the larger population really caring or noticing it happen (both sides!). Once governments acquire enough power, they can then start implementing the oppression found in 1984 without question.
Obviously that's a long way off, and Brave New World seems more immediately relatable, but that doesn't mean 1984 isn't relevant and isn't worth keeping our sights on. The current US government is literally in the process of discrediting and trying to sway the fundamental checks and balances of the country.
1984 is a great book and it brought about some really interesting talking points. But the two books are totally different--1984 warns of an external oppression, whereas Brave New World people love their oppression; Big Brother is not needed to strip them of their history, autonomy or maturity. In 1984 we see a top-bottom structure of control that leads to society's demise, while in Brave New World it's a bottom-top structure.
I share your sentiment that 1984 is a warning, but Brave New World is literally, "this is what is happening right now." Brave New World almost serves a different purpose now, because it's not even a warning anymore, it's more like...we need to course-correct ourselves otherwise this book becomes a prophecy and we're fucked.
Orwell and Huxley feared totally different things; Orwell feared books would be banned, Huxley, there would be no reason to ban a book as nobody would care enough to read them. Orwell was scared of information deprivation, Huxley that information would be so readily available that we would be reduced to passivism and egoism. Orwell thought that the truth would be taken from us, while Huxley thought nobody would care about the truth as there was a sea of truths. Orwell--a captive culture; Huxley--a trivial culture. I believe it was Huxley himself who said: 1984 believes that what we hate will ruin us, while Brave New World believes that what we love with ruin us.
Well, that's the thing we have to keep faith in, that the Founding Father's democratic design will keep the President in check.
Edit: I guess where our disagreement may be is that it seems like the general consensus is more scared of a 1984 future than a Brave New World future; while I think both are equally as scary and due to the relevance of Brave New World to our current culture, I think it's even scarier. In other words, a 1984 future won't ruin us anymore or less than a Brave New World future, we don't need to fear a Brave New World transitioning to 1984, we need to fear and prevent both futures equally.
I agree. Brave New World has this mass consumption and hedonism that just fit the current world better.
For 1984, you can look for North Korea for a better comparison. I would say the best comparison even cos no other communist countries come close to that.
Yeah, while a great book, I think 1984 is simply more popular because of its more direct approach to a dark-future. Brave New World takes the totally opposite approach and because of that, doesn't pander to our primal nature of being fearful and anxious.
Just added that the OP, as well, to make it more clear.
