Dismantling Utopia for the Reader: John the Savage as a Central Mediator of Utopian Discourse Proposed in The Tempest and Realized in Brave New World
Date
2015
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of English
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Open Access
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
In this essay, I explore the fragility of the utopian structure through the lens of Brave New World and The Tempest. The exploration starts with the essential notion that Brave New World is an ironic continuation of The Tempest. The Savage Reservation in Brave New World is the embodiment of Miranda’s utopian ideals while the Fordian Society is the realization of Gonzalo’s utopian ideals. This notion is perpetuated by the recognition of Miranda’s utopian ideals defined as a utopia of “presence” while Gonzalo’s utopia perpetuates a utopia of “absence”. With these utopian foundations, the centralized focus of the paper is the intermediary role of John the Savage in Brave New World. The main argument regards John the Savage as the central mediator in exposing the “falseness” of two utopian societies outlined above to the modern reader in a way that could not be realized in The Tempest. I will draw parallels between the outsider nature of Caliban the Savage and Miranda in the two proposed utopias and John the Savage in both utopias. The finalizing notion is that John the Savage through his resistant nature surpasses the knowledge of both of these characters, ultimately requiring his exit from both societies. By demonstrating John’s similarity to both characters of The Tempest as well as the modern reader, I will propose that the existence of John as a relatable character who spans two opposing worlds is the only way readers can evaluate a utopia as false or undesirable, a capability readers could not have in The Tempest.