What do you think?
Rate this book
After Many a Summer Dies the Swan
A Hollywood millionaire with a terror of death, whose personal physician happens to be working on a theory of longevity-these are the elements of Aldous Huxley's caustic and entertaining satire on man's desire to live indefinitely. With his customary wit and intellectual sophistication, Huxley pursues his characters in their quest for the eternal, finishing on a note of horror. "This is Mr. Huxley's Hollywood novel, and you might expect it to be fantastic, extravagant, crazy and preposterous. It is all that, and heaven and hell too....It is the kind of novel that he is particularly the master of, where the most extraordinary and fortuitous events are followed by contemplative little essays on the meaning of life....The story is outrageously good."― New York Times . "A highly sensational plot that will keep astonishing you to practically the final sentence."― The New Yorker . "Mr. Huxley's elegant mockery, his cruel aptness of phrase, the revelations and the ingenious surprises he springs on the reader are those of a master craftsman; Mr. Huxley is at the top of his form." ―London Times Literary Supplement .
368 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1939
About the author
Aldous Huxley
951 books12.3k followers
Brave New World
(1932), best-known work of British writer Aldous Leonard Huxley, paints a grim picture of a scientifically organized utopia.
This most prominent member of the famous Huxley family of England spent the part of his life from 1937 in Los Angeles in the United States until his death. Best known for his novels and wide-ranging output of essays, he also published short stories, poetry, travel writing, and film stories and scripts. Through novels and essays, Huxley functioned as an examiner and sometimes critic of social mores, norms and ideals. Spiritual subjects, such as parapsychology and philosophical mysticism, interested Huxley, a humanist, towards the end of his life. People widely acknowledged him as one of the pre-eminent intellectuals of his time before the end of his life.
This most prominent member of the famous Huxley family of England spent the part of his life from 1937 in Los Angeles in the United States until his death. Best known for his novels and wide-ranging output of essays, he also published short stories, poetry, travel writing, and film stories and scripts. Through novels and essays, Huxley functioned as an examiner and sometimes critic of social mores, norms and ideals. Spiritual subjects, such as parapsychology and philosophical mysticism, interested Huxley, a humanist, towards the end of his life. People widely acknowledged him as one of the pre-eminent intellectuals of his time before the end of his life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 258 reviews
January 26, 2023
They could make this into a movie.
May 5, 2022
A rollercoaster of conflicting philosophies, scenes and moods. Actually, hard to bear, except for those rare pages here and there that were genuinely hilarious. In my sincere opinion, there was something quite wrong with Huxley’s mental state when he wrote this novel. That could have been no problem, but it felt very uncomfortable to read his nearly breathless ramblings time and again for ten pages in a row. A 2* rating would have been fair as far as I am concerned, but I don’t want to show such disrespect to the author of Brave New World.
June 22, 2015
An interesting and enjoyable novel to read, no doubt! There is a story within the story. 'After Many a Summer Dies the Swan' unfurls another story in the guise of the holograph of the Fifth Earl: an 18th century English nobleman who, like the novel's protagonist, was equally interested in prolonging his life. But most enjoyable are the acerbic ruminations of the Fifth Earl on the follies of fellow human beings, their weaknesses and hypocrisies! The quaint manner in which the Fifth Earl expresses his wisdom, preoccupations, and world views, makes him the most endearing character of the novel. Huxley's take on life, nature of human existence and the pursuit of happiness is showcased here in a very elegant, worldly and entertaining fashion. I presume, only Huxley could have contrived a plot like this. His remarkable erudition, celebrated wit, learning and incisive intellect underpins the plot; they shape the entire narrative of the novel. The first hundred pages may appear a little dull, but it picks up from there, and the plot grips the reader until the last page. The most amusing character of the novel is certainly Dr. Obispo; however, in a subtle and very English way, Jeremy is no less interesting either, and perhaps the only person peopling the novel who has always been completely himself. I think the reader will come to appreciate this unpretentious character and his harmless pursuits.
When I purchased this paperback from Barnes and Noble I found it was the only copy on the shelf. My book is a 1993 Elephant Paperback (Chicago, Illinois) edition. I think this book is out of print now and is not readily available like Huxley's more famous works such as Brave New World or Point Counter Point. Those who like to read Huxley will certainly find this book very worthwhile. Highly recommended!
When I purchased this paperback from Barnes and Noble I found it was the only copy on the shelf. My book is a 1993 Elephant Paperback (Chicago, Illinois) edition. I think this book is out of print now and is not readily available like Huxley's more famous works such as Brave New World or Point Counter Point. Those who like to read Huxley will certainly find this book very worthwhile. Highly recommended!
January 13, 2022
The last enemy to be conquered is death. Or greed? Or capitalism? It remains to be seen...
January 9, 2014
As novels go, After Many A Summer by Aldous Huxley presents something of the unexpected. It’s a strange, rather perplexing experience. By the end, most readers will feel that what started as a novel somehow morphed into something different. What that something might be is probably a subject of debate. And exactly how of where the transformation took place will remain hard to define.
At the outset, any review of the book should state that this text is rather verbose, uses long sentences that tend to ramble, and presents paragraphs that can go on for pages. This is about as far as we could get from late twentieth century easy reading, though it was written only just before the Second World War. The narrative, if there is one, jumps from America to Britain, from the twentieth century to the end of the eighteenth, from third person reported events to the pages of a first person diary. Overall, the experience of reading After Many A Summer takes on a distinct feel of the random, rather than mere confusion.
Underlying the book’s progress is a search for an elixir of life. There’s a man of science and a doctor involved. There’s also the evidence provided by the memoirs of an eighteenth century diarist, an aristocrat who lived well into his nineties and chased skirt to the end. He develops - perhaps out of experience - a taste for fish entrails, specifically from the carp, and thus his writing influences the present, as twentieth century analysts believe that the fish innards might just have been the source of his longevity and preserved functions.
It would be wrong, however, to stress the word ‘plot’ in relation to After Many A Summer. It would also be stretching a reader’s imagination to claim it portrays characters. In essence, the book is only a novel because it lacks structure and because its author requires his musings to be voiced distantly by named protagonists, rather than by himself. Here Aldous Huxley subjects the reader to a string of almost random philosophical throwaways. Some of them descend to diatribe, but may - especially those that deal with the relationship between science and religion - are deeply thought provoking. Assembled, however, they do not constitute a novel and anyone who reads the book in search of linearity, literary tickling or elegance of expression will be deeply disappointed.
After Many A Summer is the kind of book that an interested reader might take up to read a page or two at a time. Since there is little thread to lose, it can be enjoyed in disconnected bites, the intervening estrangement allowing any ideas to ferment and settle. There are some real gems, but even these rarely elevate into the memorable.
Aldous Huxley’s book is very much of its time. The fall of Barcelona during the Spanish Civil War takes place as the story progresses, and it is used as a vehicle for musings on the rise of fascism, totalitarianism, religion and the generally irrational. Overall, however, the book is a demanding and only partially satisfying read, which, on completion, does not eventually satisfy. Though it’s certainly not the author’s masterpiece, it is worth a look for anyone who has already read Huxley’s better known works.
At the outset, any review of the book should state that this text is rather verbose, uses long sentences that tend to ramble, and presents paragraphs that can go on for pages. This is about as far as we could get from late twentieth century easy reading, though it was written only just before the Second World War. The narrative, if there is one, jumps from America to Britain, from the twentieth century to the end of the eighteenth, from third person reported events to the pages of a first person diary. Overall, the experience of reading After Many A Summer takes on a distinct feel of the random, rather than mere confusion.
Underlying the book’s progress is a search for an elixir of life. There’s a man of science and a doctor involved. There’s also the evidence provided by the memoirs of an eighteenth century diarist, an aristocrat who lived well into his nineties and chased skirt to the end. He develops - perhaps out of experience - a taste for fish entrails, specifically from the carp, and thus his writing influences the present, as twentieth century analysts believe that the fish innards might just have been the source of his longevity and preserved functions.
It would be wrong, however, to stress the word ‘plot’ in relation to After Many A Summer. It would also be stretching a reader’s imagination to claim it portrays characters. In essence, the book is only a novel because it lacks structure and because its author requires his musings to be voiced distantly by named protagonists, rather than by himself. Here Aldous Huxley subjects the reader to a string of almost random philosophical throwaways. Some of them descend to diatribe, but may - especially those that deal with the relationship between science and religion - are deeply thought provoking. Assembled, however, they do not constitute a novel and anyone who reads the book in search of linearity, literary tickling or elegance of expression will be deeply disappointed.
After Many A Summer is the kind of book that an interested reader might take up to read a page or two at a time. Since there is little thread to lose, it can be enjoyed in disconnected bites, the intervening estrangement allowing any ideas to ferment and settle. There are some real gems, but even these rarely elevate into the memorable.
Aldous Huxley’s book is very much of its time. The fall of Barcelona during the Spanish Civil War takes place as the story progresses, and it is used as a vehicle for musings on the rise of fascism, totalitarianism, religion and the generally irrational. Overall, however, the book is a demanding and only partially satisfying read, which, on completion, does not eventually satisfy. Though it’s certainly not the author’s masterpiece, it is worth a look for anyone who has already read Huxley’s better known works.
September 15, 2016
Written when Huxley left England and settled in Southern California, After A Many a Summer satirizes Los Angeles culture (money-driven excess, gimcrack reproductions of classical European art and architecture, only bigger) in a way that is quite like Evelyn Waugh's The Loved One (which actually came out 8 years later).
There are a number of stereotypes (grossly exploitative capitalist, his crassly shallow younger show-girl mistress, a gee-whiz young man of science) and a pair of Englishmen, one of whom represents the old world and its intellectual values, the other who espouses a sort of Fourierism, coupled with an extreme self-abnegating Christian mysticism bordering on Buddhism.
The narrative veers wildly between fast-moving satire and extremely long philosophical and aesthetic conversations which first seem like they must be intended to be some sort of satire as well but ultimately go on for long that you realize the writer is (somewhat awkwardly) presenting them seriously.
Several of Huxley's themes from other books recur - the mystic seeking, distrust of capitalism and technology (peas in a pod) and eugenics, the latter via an unexpected science fiction turn late in the book.
There are a number of stereotypes (grossly exploitative capitalist, his crassly shallow younger show-girl mistress, a gee-whiz young man of science) and a pair of Englishmen, one of whom represents the old world and its intellectual values, the other who espouses a sort of Fourierism, coupled with an extreme self-abnegating Christian mysticism bordering on Buddhism.
The narrative veers wildly between fast-moving satire and extremely long philosophical and aesthetic conversations which first seem like they must be intended to be some sort of satire as well but ultimately go on for long that you realize the writer is (somewhat awkwardly) presenting them seriously.
Several of Huxley's themes from other books recur - the mystic seeking, distrust of capitalism and technology (peas in a pod) and eugenics, the latter via an unexpected science fiction turn late in the book.
September 17, 2010
It was alright. the plot had great potential. and had nice build up, but Huxley diverted into some deeply philosophical mumbo-jumbo about 1/3rd of the way in and continued almost until the end. What could have been an exciting read goes wanting for plot treatment and a proper climax. potentially a great work of speculative fiction made mediocre by too much philosophizing. It would have been better of Huxley had designed the story itself to convey some of the ideas that he propounds (by means of long dialog) throughout his book. What could have been an awesome read ends with a barely audible pop. Read if ur interested in Huxley's philosophical views of life, death and a self sustaining utopic society. Yawn
December 7, 2011
Huxley's "Brave New World" was, to me, a controversial and provoking novel that had just the right amount of thrill and philosophy. "After Many a Summer Dies the Swan" shares the same characteristics, with perhaps a bigger portion of discussion essays. I understand why it took some readers months to finish; the amount of philosophical discussion is large and the topics Huxley raised in this book are abstract and complex. Ideas of eternality, the withdrawal of one's personality, time and evil, goodness and self-interest and the meaning of being 'human', are discussed at length throughout different parts of the book. The plotline is only a tool of getting these ideas across and each character serves as a messenger of Huxley's philosophical ideas.
For this reason, the book is a challenging read, not only because Huxley presents such abstract themes, but also due to the fact that when the plotline is going, the story is so fascinating and delicious that a pause for philosophy lessons is abrupt and delaying. In the end it is worth the wait; the delicious story reveals its outrageous and mocking ending in a surprise switch of pace to highlight the narcissism and stupidity of the superficial personality of a wealthy but ignorant man. Huxley's story telling skills are superb; he has the ability to weave many voices into one, many stories simultaneously ongoing, to create a big picture of the complexity and self-absorbness of human psychology. This was seen in chapter 6, when the characters had lunch together: Pete was observing Virginia quietly as he went on about the Spanish War, and Jeremy was observing Pete surreptitiously with great detail on his demeanor, vocabulary and tone, while Virginia also indulged in her own thoughts while appearing to be listening to Pete. The characters surrounded each other, all putting up a front much different from what thoughts were going on in their minds, eyeing each other and connecting on the outside. Later on when Virginia's relationship with Pete is further revealed, their behaviour in this scene is explained and the complexity breaks down, revealing their true personality and simplistic motives.
Throughout the book, as Pete becomes a more complicated thinker, Mr. Propter dives deeper into his analysis of philosophy and psychology and Jeremy Pordage discovers more about eternality, Mr. Stoyte, Dr. Obispo and Virginia start to strip down from their mysterious skin. These two opposing motion contrast each other greatly. At the beginning, Mr. Stoyte was quite a "mysterious" character, who befriends Mr. Propter whom he hates but likes at the same time, who devoted money to build a home for sick children, who pursues living eternally. On the outside he seems like a complicated person, but as the plot moved on, and when the ending came, he is revealed a simple-minded person who is so obsessed with living forever that he has no thought on the meaning of life whatsoever. Virginia, whose name I consider an irony, portrays similar intellectual emptiness. She embodies those who has little or no self-control, possessing a childish behaviour and blindly religious. Though her actions were not "evil", they were unsophisticated and shallow. Dr. Obispo is a man of intellect and deep thought and provides counter arguments against Mr. Propter to give meaningful debates, but his motives were simple and symbolizes the apathetic population of the society. Meanwhile, Pete, Mr. Propter and Jeremy engage in complex discussion. It is through these characters that Huxley presents his eloquent discussion on philosophy. Chapter by chapter, the essay-typed conversations between them develop and the multi-layered views on humans and life unravels. Each character represents a way of life and thinking.
Along with the portrayal of an array of personalities, Huxley provides deep discussion on a number of topics. One of my favorite topics was the role of literature: "the enormous defects of so-called good literature." Literature has always been hailed as the art of writing, a product of beauty and revelation, but in Mr. Propter's argument, it is "evil"; it helps "to perpetuate misery by explicitly or implicitly approving the thoughts and feelings and practices which could not fail to result in misery. And this approval was bestowed in the most magnificent and persuasive language. So that even when a tragedy ended badly, the reader was hypnotized by the eloquence of the piece into imagining that it was all somehow noble and worthwhile. Which, of course, it wasn't. Because, if you considered them dispassionately, nothing could be more silly and squalid than the themes of "Phedre," or "Othello," or "Wuthering Heights," or the "Agamemnon." But the treatment of these themes had been in the highest degree sublime and thrilling, so that the reader or the spectator was left with the conviction that, in spite of the catastrophe, all was really well with the world, the all too human world, which had produced it." True, the power of literature is immense and the motives of literature are hidden so tactfully by beauty. It is a dangerous tool; and that is why people study and write literature, because by understanding and being able to use this tool, great things happen, either catastrophes or miracles.
For this reason, the book is a challenging read, not only because Huxley presents such abstract themes, but also due to the fact that when the plotline is going, the story is so fascinating and delicious that a pause for philosophy lessons is abrupt and delaying. In the end it is worth the wait; the delicious story reveals its outrageous and mocking ending in a surprise switch of pace to highlight the narcissism and stupidity of the superficial personality of a wealthy but ignorant man. Huxley's story telling skills are superb; he has the ability to weave many voices into one, many stories simultaneously ongoing, to create a big picture of the complexity and self-absorbness of human psychology. This was seen in chapter 6, when the characters had lunch together: Pete was observing Virginia quietly as he went on about the Spanish War, and Jeremy was observing Pete surreptitiously with great detail on his demeanor, vocabulary and tone, while Virginia also indulged in her own thoughts while appearing to be listening to Pete. The characters surrounded each other, all putting up a front much different from what thoughts were going on in their minds, eyeing each other and connecting on the outside. Later on when Virginia's relationship with Pete is further revealed, their behaviour in this scene is explained and the complexity breaks down, revealing their true personality and simplistic motives.
Throughout the book, as Pete becomes a more complicated thinker, Mr. Propter dives deeper into his analysis of philosophy and psychology and Jeremy Pordage discovers more about eternality, Mr. Stoyte, Dr. Obispo and Virginia start to strip down from their mysterious skin. These two opposing motion contrast each other greatly. At the beginning, Mr. Stoyte was quite a "mysterious" character, who befriends Mr. Propter whom he hates but likes at the same time, who devoted money to build a home for sick children, who pursues living eternally. On the outside he seems like a complicated person, but as the plot moved on, and when the ending came, he is revealed a simple-minded person who is so obsessed with living forever that he has no thought on the meaning of life whatsoever. Virginia, whose name I consider an irony, portrays similar intellectual emptiness. She embodies those who has little or no self-control, possessing a childish behaviour and blindly religious. Though her actions were not "evil", they were unsophisticated and shallow. Dr. Obispo is a man of intellect and deep thought and provides counter arguments against Mr. Propter to give meaningful debates, but his motives were simple and symbolizes the apathetic population of the society. Meanwhile, Pete, Mr. Propter and Jeremy engage in complex discussion. It is through these characters that Huxley presents his eloquent discussion on philosophy. Chapter by chapter, the essay-typed conversations between them develop and the multi-layered views on humans and life unravels. Each character represents a way of life and thinking.
Along with the portrayal of an array of personalities, Huxley provides deep discussion on a number of topics. One of my favorite topics was the role of literature: "the enormous defects of so-called good literature." Literature has always been hailed as the art of writing, a product of beauty and revelation, but in Mr. Propter's argument, it is "evil"; it helps "to perpetuate misery by explicitly or implicitly approving the thoughts and feelings and practices which could not fail to result in misery. And this approval was bestowed in the most magnificent and persuasive language. So that even when a tragedy ended badly, the reader was hypnotized by the eloquence of the piece into imagining that it was all somehow noble and worthwhile. Which, of course, it wasn't. Because, if you considered them dispassionately, nothing could be more silly and squalid than the themes of "Phedre," or "Othello," or "Wuthering Heights," or the "Agamemnon." But the treatment of these themes had been in the highest degree sublime and thrilling, so that the reader or the spectator was left with the conviction that, in spite of the catastrophe, all was really well with the world, the all too human world, which had produced it." True, the power of literature is immense and the motives of literature are hidden so tactfully by beauty. It is a dangerous tool; and that is why people study and write literature, because by understanding and being able to use this tool, great things happen, either catastrophes or miracles.
January 9, 2011
This was one great short story and one great treatise on God and Man unfortunately compressed into one mediocre book. Huxley's reflections on the role of religion are certainly valid and worthy of their own cover; why squeeze them between the chapters of a pulp fiction short? The combination ruins the flow of both story lines and leaves the reader wondering why they didn't just skip to the end. A suggestion for the reader: if you want a smutty pulp short, skip any chapter involving Mr. Propter and read to the end. If you want philosophy, skip any chapter involving the Baby and read to the end of Part 2. If you want neither-skip it entirely.
April 14, 2015
I was a Huxley fan in my youth, with a shelf of all his works (mostly Granada? Picador? paperbacks, with some rotten old early 20th century hardbacks mixed in) as well as the Bedford and Dunaway biographies... So when I began re-reading this novel a few days ago, I was full of nostalgia. The polysyllabic vocabulary! The learned references! The irony!
Midway through, however, I ran out of steam. It's all talking heads, abstract philosophical polemics... Huxley was surely a brilliant humanist: the last Victorian, maybe. Surely one of the last polymaths... But he wasn't a good writer. Whatever it was that had me enchanted at age 20 is gone at age 53.
Midway through, however, I ran out of steam. It's all talking heads, abstract philosophical polemics... Huxley was surely a brilliant humanist: the last Victorian, maybe. Surely one of the last polymaths... But he wasn't a good writer. Whatever it was that had me enchanted at age 20 is gone at age 53.
March 25, 2019
Huxley wrote this book after defecting to the US from the UK in 1938 and this book was his first effort at writing of this experience. But that is only one aspect of the book. It is difficult to classify the novel. Is it a “serious” novel, whatever that is? A hilarious comedy? A shocking horror book? Science fiction? A political, philosophical or theological treatise? A show of English erudition? It is really all of the above.
Huxley was an English pacifist, the grandson of Thomas Henry Huxley who publicly defended the ideas of reclusive Charles Darwin and won the nickname of “Darwin’s Bulldog.” Growing up, Huxley was surrounded by science, especially biology, and this is evident in the novel.
The book begins as a theater of the absurd look at the California of 1938 from the incredulous English viewpoint, keying on the ludicrous billboard advertisements – from CLASSY EATS to BEVERLY PANTHEON, THE PERSONALITY CEMETERY to JESUS IS COMING SOON. As is clear throughout the book, the fear of senescence and death are central. Hyper-rich and education-poor Jo Stoyte has hired Oxford English scholar Jeremy Pordage to sort, classify and file the Hauberk Papers, literally crates of notes from the earldom of the Hauberk family dating back to the 17th century. Stoyte is very business-savvy, rich and has accumulated hundreds of works of art (even a Vermeer in the elevator) and the Hauberk Papers are just another addition to his voluminous but haphazard collection. Living at Stoyte’s castle are also young, innocent scientist Peter Boone researching longevity (Stoyte is scared to death of death), Virginia Maunciple (Stoyte’s dolly), Dr. Sigmund Obispo who is Stoyte’s live-in doctor. Living close-by is Stoyte’s childhood friend and Huxley’s philosophical mouthpiece, William Propter who extemporaneously expounds on his political, theological, etc. philosophies at several points.
The theme of the book is the fear of aging and death that obsesses Stoyte. Although he own the fabulous and infamous “Beverly Gardens Cemetery” he cannot face death or is probably inability to enjoy his sugar-baby intimately. So, he hires young, energetic, unsullied Peter Boone to FIND A WAY!! to live a lot longer and with a wire in his wick. How to live longer??? Stoyte knows that the carp he stole and live in his pond are over 200 years old. If a damned fish can live that long, why not Jo Stoyte??? One eventual clue is a well-known biological process – neotony.
The basic premise of the biological effect is “neotonization.” It is clear that humans are a bizarre ape, now classified as one of the African Great Apes. One process proposed for creating humans is the retention of childlike characteristics into adulthood. Thus, as adults, humans partially resemble the immature ape, while chimps and gorillas continue maturing into the expected adult ape. Would we live longer if we could find some magic secret of biology? If so, what would happen to us if we lived for 200 or 300 years?
Huxley was a genuine intellectual, not only knowing lots of “stuff” but also thoughtfully considering implications of this “stuff.” Huxley, through Bill Propter’s mouth, preaches of the evils of poverty, various government systems, and life in general. The diversion from the story to related but several long tangential philosophical discussions reminded me of a scene I made after church one Sunday at age 6. The minister asked how I liked the service. I told him that I liked the music but the advertisement was too long. Wrong move, of course.
This is a serious but long-neglected book by Huxley that links his “Brave New World” and “Ape and Essence“ books with his “Brave New World, Revisited.” It is not a long book, is filled with ironic humor to season the seriousness. And the end is a winner!
Huxley was an English pacifist, the grandson of Thomas Henry Huxley who publicly defended the ideas of reclusive Charles Darwin and won the nickname of “Darwin’s Bulldog.” Growing up, Huxley was surrounded by science, especially biology, and this is evident in the novel.
The book begins as a theater of the absurd look at the California of 1938 from the incredulous English viewpoint, keying on the ludicrous billboard advertisements – from CLASSY EATS to BEVERLY PANTHEON, THE PERSONALITY CEMETERY to JESUS IS COMING SOON. As is clear throughout the book, the fear of senescence and death are central. Hyper-rich and education-poor Jo Stoyte has hired Oxford English scholar Jeremy Pordage to sort, classify and file the Hauberk Papers, literally crates of notes from the earldom of the Hauberk family dating back to the 17th century. Stoyte is very business-savvy, rich and has accumulated hundreds of works of art (even a Vermeer in the elevator) and the Hauberk Papers are just another addition to his voluminous but haphazard collection. Living at Stoyte’s castle are also young, innocent scientist Peter Boone researching longevity (Stoyte is scared to death of death), Virginia Maunciple (Stoyte’s dolly), Dr. Sigmund Obispo who is Stoyte’s live-in doctor. Living close-by is Stoyte’s childhood friend and Huxley’s philosophical mouthpiece, William Propter who extemporaneously expounds on his political, theological, etc. philosophies at several points.
The theme of the book is the fear of aging and death that obsesses Stoyte. Although he own the fabulous and infamous “Beverly Gardens Cemetery” he cannot face death or is probably inability to enjoy his sugar-baby intimately. So, he hires young, energetic, unsullied Peter Boone to FIND A WAY!! to live a lot longer and with a wire in his wick. How to live longer??? Stoyte knows that the carp he stole and live in his pond are over 200 years old. If a damned fish can live that long, why not Jo Stoyte??? One eventual clue is a well-known biological process – neotony.
The basic premise of the biological effect is “neotonization.” It is clear that humans are a bizarre ape, now classified as one of the African Great Apes. One process proposed for creating humans is the retention of childlike characteristics into adulthood. Thus, as adults, humans partially resemble the immature ape, while chimps and gorillas continue maturing into the expected adult ape. Would we live longer if we could find some magic secret of biology? If so, what would happen to us if we lived for 200 or 300 years?
Huxley was a genuine intellectual, not only knowing lots of “stuff” but also thoughtfully considering implications of this “stuff.” Huxley, through Bill Propter’s mouth, preaches of the evils of poverty, various government systems, and life in general. The diversion from the story to related but several long tangential philosophical discussions reminded me of a scene I made after church one Sunday at age 6. The minister asked how I liked the service. I told him that I liked the music but the advertisement was too long. Wrong move, of course.
This is a serious but long-neglected book by Huxley that links his “Brave New World” and “Ape and Essence“ books with his “Brave New World, Revisited.” It is not a long book, is filled with ironic humor to season the seriousness. And the end is a winner!
September 8, 2023
Fenomenal tur de forță intelectuală! Copleșitor, intimidant, strivitor acest Huxley! Pentru cunoscători, doar.
October 6, 2012
All told, I believe it took me nearly 3 months to get through this book. While I am in agreement with Huxley's general way of thinking, I guess I should've known better than to pick up this book. I have trouble getting through books written before, definitely, WWII. I find the style of writing tedious and boring, overly descriptive of everything unimportant to the main plot.
This book, once I cut through all the excessively ponderous prose, boiled down to an observation piece about decadence, inane human drama, and the futile search for the fountain of youth. Along the way there was a lot of random tangents, none of which I seemed to have found particularly of note before about halfway through the book. Then Huxley starts launching into speeches, through the character of Propter, about socialism and how it would be much more helpful to the majority of people if only everyone got on board and weren't so damned greedy. One quote which made me think that the greedy/rich never change stood out to me: "Power and wealth increase in direct proportion to a man's distance from the material objects from which wealth and power are ultimately derived." So true, as much today as it was in the 30s when this was written.
Second to his speeches on greedy/money were the speeches on religion. The argument being made is long and convoluted, but I found it interesting that one of the characters seemed to be pushing the idea of Buddhism wrapped with some Christianity. It tied it back to the idea of socialism and everyone doing things not for the individual/greed, the main idea of Buddhism of letting go of materialism and selfishness in thought. "God is completely present only in the complete absence of what we call our humanity...But let eternity experience itself, God may be sufficiently often present in the absence of human desires and feelings and preoccupations: the result will be a transformation of that life which must be lived, in the intervals, upon the human level."
Surprisingly, near the end one of the topics brought up was sexuality and not just heterosexual, traditional gender-role discussion. The mention itself was actually about how abnormal human sexuality can be considered when compared to every other animal in the world. "They could only be judged in reference to ultimate aims of each individual and the results observed in each case. Thus, if an individual wanted to be well thought of in any given society, he or she could safely regard as 'normal' the type of sexual behavior currently tolerated by that local religion and approved of by the 'best people.' But there were some individuals who cared little for the judgement of an angry God or even of the best people. Their principal desire was for intense and reiterated stimulation of their sense and feelings. For these, it was obvious, 'normality' in sexual behaviour would be quite different from what it was for the more social-minded."
Between the parts on socialism, religion, and sexuality, I can only imagine who did or would've grabbed the pitchforks against Huxley. Here's more quotes I found of note:
-Man cannot live by bread alone; but if he chooses to nourish his mind on the wrong kind of spiritual food, he won't even get bread. He won't even get bread, because he'll be so busy killing or preparing to kill his neighbours in the name of God, or Country, or Social Justice that he won't be able to cultivate his fields.
-Allegedly quoting a 19th century Earl: My opinion of the Peerage and the landed Gentry is exceedingly low; but their own opinion of themselves must be even lower than mine. _They_ believe that the Ballot will rob them of their Power and Privileges, whereas _I_ am sure that, by the exercise of even such little Prudence and Cunning as parsimonious Nature has endowed them with, they can with ease maintain themselves in their present pre-eminence. This being so, let the Rabble amuse itself by voting. An Election is no more than a gratuitous Punch and Judy Show, offered by the Rulers in order to distract the attention of the Ruled. [Also very true, still so today.]
The end, though, got in a way really weird, but at the same time was pretty expected considering the lead-up in the background of the Stoyte story and his fear of getting old and dying. I don't even know what to say about it other than I was just glad it was over. It was like a horror story was written and then all of this philosophy got sandwiched into it and the author decided to go back to the horror story at the end and sort of gave it a Shelley ending. Bizarre. I don't know to whom I would recommend this book. :\
This book, once I cut through all the excessively ponderous prose, boiled down to an observation piece about decadence, inane human drama, and the futile search for the fountain of youth. Along the way there was a lot of random tangents, none of which I seemed to have found particularly of note before about halfway through the book. Then Huxley starts launching into speeches, through the character of Propter, about socialism and how it would be much more helpful to the majority of people if only everyone got on board and weren't so damned greedy. One quote which made me think that the greedy/rich never change stood out to me: "Power and wealth increase in direct proportion to a man's distance from the material objects from which wealth and power are ultimately derived." So true, as much today as it was in the 30s when this was written.
Second to his speeches on greedy/money were the speeches on religion. The argument being made is long and convoluted, but I found it interesting that one of the characters seemed to be pushing the idea of Buddhism wrapped with some Christianity. It tied it back to the idea of socialism and everyone doing things not for the individual/greed, the main idea of Buddhism of letting go of materialism and selfishness in thought. "God is completely present only in the complete absence of what we call our humanity...But let eternity experience itself, God may be sufficiently often present in the absence of human desires and feelings and preoccupations: the result will be a transformation of that life which must be lived, in the intervals, upon the human level."
Surprisingly, near the end one of the topics brought up was sexuality and not just heterosexual, traditional gender-role discussion. The mention itself was actually about how abnormal human sexuality can be considered when compared to every other animal in the world. "They could only be judged in reference to ultimate aims of each individual and the results observed in each case. Thus, if an individual wanted to be well thought of in any given society, he or she could safely regard as 'normal' the type of sexual behavior currently tolerated by that local religion and approved of by the 'best people.' But there were some individuals who cared little for the judgement of an angry God or even of the best people. Their principal desire was for intense and reiterated stimulation of their sense and feelings. For these, it was obvious, 'normality' in sexual behaviour would be quite different from what it was for the more social-minded."
Between the parts on socialism, religion, and sexuality, I can only imagine who did or would've grabbed the pitchforks against Huxley. Here's more quotes I found of note:
-Man cannot live by bread alone; but if he chooses to nourish his mind on the wrong kind of spiritual food, he won't even get bread. He won't even get bread, because he'll be so busy killing or preparing to kill his neighbours in the name of God, or Country, or Social Justice that he won't be able to cultivate his fields.
-Allegedly quoting a 19th century Earl: My opinion of the Peerage and the landed Gentry is exceedingly low; but their own opinion of themselves must be even lower than mine. _They_ believe that the Ballot will rob them of their Power and Privileges, whereas _I_ am sure that, by the exercise of even such little Prudence and Cunning as parsimonious Nature has endowed them with, they can with ease maintain themselves in their present pre-eminence. This being so, let the Rabble amuse itself by voting. An Election is no more than a gratuitous Punch and Judy Show, offered by the Rulers in order to distract the attention of the Ruled. [Also very true, still so today.]
The end, though, got in a way really weird, but at the same time was pretty expected considering the lead-up in the background of the Stoyte story and his fear of getting old and dying. I don't even know what to say about it other than I was just glad it was over. It was like a horror story was written and then all of this philosophy got sandwiched into it and the author decided to go back to the horror story at the end and sort of gave it a Shelley ending. Bizarre. I don't know to whom I would recommend this book. :\
January 12, 2020
"After Many A Summer Dies The Swan" is a novel by Aldous Huxley originally published in 1939. The title originally was" After Many a Summer" but it was changed when published in the USA. The novel's title is taken from Tennyson's poem" Tithonus", about a figure in Greek mythology to whom Aurora gave eternal life but not eternal youth. The title is taken from the fourth line of the poem:
"The woods decay, the woods decay and fall,
The vapours weep their burthen to the ground,
Man comes and tills the field and lies beneath,
And after many a summer dies the swan"
Huxley's novel tells the story of a Hollywood millionaire who fears his impending death. He really, really fears death and will go to just about any length to avoid it. The novel opens as Jeremy Pordage, an Englishman arrives in California and is greeted by “a coloured chauffeur in a grey uniform with a carnation in his button-hole."He is driven to the mansion of Jo Stoyte; the guy who's so afraid of dying. He has brought Pordage to Los Angeles to edit the records of an impoverished aristocratic British family. He is to catalog the almost legendary twenty-seven crates of "Hauberk Papers". Even with knowing this within the first few pages I still spent half the book wondering why this character was in the book, he seemed pointless. However, eventually it becomes clear why he is part of the story.
Jo Stoyte is a self-made millionaire living in Hollywood. He is an American businessman who owns just about everything. At one point we are told that he owns; Consul Oil, California Land and Minerals Corporation, Bank of the Pacific, a children's hospital and even a cemetery. His mansion has a large dining room, small dining room, library with no books, ballroom, morning room, chapel, billiard room, a dentist's office, an indoor swimming pool, you get the idea. His mistress is a young woman named Virginia Maunciple who he calls either "baby" or "the baby", which gets annoying. Virginia calls him Uncle Jo but really cares for him and not just as an old uncle. She is having an affair with Dr. Obispo, our next character.
Dr.Sigmund Obispo; Stoyte hires Dr Obispo and his assistant Peter to research the secrets to long life in carp, crocodiles, and parrots. Even though Stoyte doesn't like Dr. Obispo, no one would, he knows he can't afford to get rid of the doctor. Stoyte repeats to himself "God is love, there is no death",and thinks about the stroke he had and his body getting older, so he keeps the doctor there. He believes Dr. Obispo will be able to save him.
We also have Mr Propter, a professor who lives on a neighbouring estate. I would have really liked this book if I would have skipped the Mr. Propter chapters. I warn you right now that I hate philosophical discussions. I always feel like we're sitting around discussing things that there is no answer to no matter how long we talk and I hate it. So when Mr. Propter makes his appearance with words like:
"What is man? It was more than thirty years before, when he was writing his study of the Cardinal, that he had first read those words. They had impressed him even then by the splendour and precision of their eloquence."
I should have skipped it, but I never skip things so I read this:
"whatever the circumstances in which he finds himself, a human being always has omissions to make good, commissions whose effects must if possible be neutralized."
Actual good is outside time."
"Time is potential evil, and craving converts the potentiality into actual evil."
If I would re-read all the words of Mr. Propter again I could figure out what they all meant, but I don't care. I'm sure some of the family and friends I have could explain Mr. Propter to me, but I would warn them before they tried, I don't care.
However, moving past Mr. Propter I enjoyed the novel. I wanted to keep reading to see if Dr. Obispo found the secret to long life. I wanted to see if Jo Stoyte would still be alive at the end, I just wanted to know what happened next, especially after Jeremy Pordage finds in the Hauberk papers that the secret of long life just may be eating 6 ounces of raw fish guts a day. To see if it works, read the book. It only gets three stars from me because of Mr. Propter and his ramblings. On to the next book, happy reading.
"The woods decay, the woods decay and fall,
The vapours weep their burthen to the ground,
Man comes and tills the field and lies beneath,
And after many a summer dies the swan"
Huxley's novel tells the story of a Hollywood millionaire who fears his impending death. He really, really fears death and will go to just about any length to avoid it. The novel opens as Jeremy Pordage, an Englishman arrives in California and is greeted by “a coloured chauffeur in a grey uniform with a carnation in his button-hole."He is driven to the mansion of Jo Stoyte; the guy who's so afraid of dying. He has brought Pordage to Los Angeles to edit the records of an impoverished aristocratic British family. He is to catalog the almost legendary twenty-seven crates of "Hauberk Papers". Even with knowing this within the first few pages I still spent half the book wondering why this character was in the book, he seemed pointless. However, eventually it becomes clear why he is part of the story.
Jo Stoyte is a self-made millionaire living in Hollywood. He is an American businessman who owns just about everything. At one point we are told that he owns; Consul Oil, California Land and Minerals Corporation, Bank of the Pacific, a children's hospital and even a cemetery. His mansion has a large dining room, small dining room, library with no books, ballroom, morning room, chapel, billiard room, a dentist's office, an indoor swimming pool, you get the idea. His mistress is a young woman named Virginia Maunciple who he calls either "baby" or "the baby", which gets annoying. Virginia calls him Uncle Jo but really cares for him and not just as an old uncle. She is having an affair with Dr. Obispo, our next character.
Dr.Sigmund Obispo; Stoyte hires Dr Obispo and his assistant Peter to research the secrets to long life in carp, crocodiles, and parrots. Even though Stoyte doesn't like Dr. Obispo, no one would, he knows he can't afford to get rid of the doctor. Stoyte repeats to himself "God is love, there is no death",and thinks about the stroke he had and his body getting older, so he keeps the doctor there. He believes Dr. Obispo will be able to save him.
We also have Mr Propter, a professor who lives on a neighbouring estate. I would have really liked this book if I would have skipped the Mr. Propter chapters. I warn you right now that I hate philosophical discussions. I always feel like we're sitting around discussing things that there is no answer to no matter how long we talk and I hate it. So when Mr. Propter makes his appearance with words like:
"What is man? It was more than thirty years before, when he was writing his study of the Cardinal, that he had first read those words. They had impressed him even then by the splendour and precision of their eloquence."
I should have skipped it, but I never skip things so I read this:
"whatever the circumstances in which he finds himself, a human being always has omissions to make good, commissions whose effects must if possible be neutralized."
Actual good is outside time."
"Time is potential evil, and craving converts the potentiality into actual evil."
If I would re-read all the words of Mr. Propter again I could figure out what they all meant, but I don't care. I'm sure some of the family and friends I have could explain Mr. Propter to me, but I would warn them before they tried, I don't care.
However, moving past Mr. Propter I enjoyed the novel. I wanted to keep reading to see if Dr. Obispo found the secret to long life. I wanted to see if Jo Stoyte would still be alive at the end, I just wanted to know what happened next, especially after Jeremy Pordage finds in the Hauberk papers that the secret of long life just may be eating 6 ounces of raw fish guts a day. To see if it works, read the book. It only gets three stars from me because of Mr. Propter and his ramblings. On to the next book, happy reading.
September 11, 2010
Having read no Huxley other than "Brave New World", I took this one up solely on the assumption that Isherwood had included it in his "Single Man" for some good reason. And, of course, he did: themes of mortality and meaning are central here, too.
"After Many a Summer" is a mix of equal parts philosophical musing and straightforward comic novel. The latter -- the main thrust of the storyline, even specific settings, as well as Huxley's style here -- reminded me of nothing so much as Waugh's "The Loved One". Hardly surprising, given that both authors were contemporaneous Englishmen dropped into the nascent California Culture.
I enjoyed this book vastly more than I expected to; it leaves me wondering whether I'd better go read a little more Huxley after all!
"After Many a Summer" is a mix of equal parts philosophical musing and straightforward comic novel. The latter -- the main thrust of the storyline, even specific settings, as well as Huxley's style here -- reminded me of nothing so much as Waugh's "The Loved One". Hardly surprising, given that both authors were contemporaneous Englishmen dropped into the nascent California Culture.
I enjoyed this book vastly more than I expected to; it leaves me wondering whether I'd better go read a little more Huxley after all!
November 16, 2017
"And if we want to live under the first [Constitution], we've got to recreate something like the conditions under which the first was made," theorizes a character here, thus offering the best line of the book. This 'Mini-Mann's-Magic-Mountain' ("Swan" was published 15 years after "Magic" by the way ) spin has a guy arriving in Los Angeles (instead of Mann's Switzerland) who travels through L.A. and up to what is described as an ugly mess of a mansion (instead of Mann's sanitarium) which sounds like the one used in a number of 1950s and 60s B-level Vincent Price-type horror films (which for me were, and still are, a blast to watch). A set of misfits discuss BIG IDEAS such as immortality but on page 223 (of 356 pages), Huxley writes: "So that, taking all things into consideration, there was really no reason why anyone should do anything much about anything." Including, perhaps, turning the page? I did anyway but there really was no reason to read the last third of this book. Gotta appreciate Huxley's warning, and we can't disregard the author's stupendous, pretentious title, so two stars because at least the author recognized his own mostly pointless ramblings. Besides, after reading this year's award-winning "Lincoln in the Bardo" (which I generously rated 1 star), I'm finding it difficult to place other works at the same low level. Yes, absolutely, "After Many a Summer Dies the Swan" is masterpiece compared to recent award winning books like "Bardo" and "All the Light We Cannot C". I should know by now that fiction books with pretentious titles that don't have "Who is John Galt" as the opening line are best avoided.
March 23, 2013
There are certainly some interesting ideas in this book, and it takes an unexpected twist, but overall I'd have to say that it's not worth wading through. The book certainly shows its age. There is a great deal of pontificating (the interesting ideas already mentioned), and it frequently feels like you're attending a lecture rather than a novel with interactions among genuine characters.
Huxley uses this book to critique the excesses of American culture, so that was interesting--materialism, obsession with youth, etc. The central character strongly resembles William Randolph Hearst, much like Orson Welles' Citizen Kane.
Huxley uses this book to critique the excesses of American culture, so that was interesting--materialism, obsession with youth, etc. The central character strongly resembles William Randolph Hearst, much like Orson Welles' Citizen Kane.
September 17, 2017
Who would have known that After Many a Summer would bring a greater impact than Brave New World? Well, at least for me. It is a shame that Brave New World overshadowed it.
May 13, 2024
całkiem przyjemna satyra na amerykańskie społeczeństwo, popkulturę i kapitalizm, jeszcze więcej pikanterii całej historii dodaje fakt, że główni bohaterowie wzorowani byli na autentycznych postaciach. nie zabrakło oczywiście wielu wycieczek filozoficznych, ale taki już jest Huxley, jego powieści nie mają mieć wciągającej fabuły, mają przedstawiać światopogląd autora.
April 25, 2017
The first pair of chapters give a great description of Los Angeles; the quirkiness and the contrasts, giant billboards, architecture, landscape, the transients and the well-to-do, all an insight into what makes LA, LA, and perhaps could only be written by someone such as Huxley coming from a different country getting a fresh view to this new American city in the 1930s.
As always, Huxley is heavy on the philosophies and satire as he mocks the continual California search for youth with science and fad diets, yep they had them back then, and the bombastic veneer that can come from such things as exercising or wealth.
The identification of most of the characters Huxley is commenting upon would be lost on the contemporary reader, though one of the obvious would be publisher William Randolph Hearst and his San Simeon castle. Another is a local University President, though at the time a friend, Huxley skewers him mercilessly, a battering from which it is said the President never recovered from socially.
Other fascinating tidbits are found in characters working to get 'off the grid', experimenting on solar energy to get away fromutilities, this was written in the 1930s.
If you are, or still have a bit of, the angry young man, or woman in you, Huxley will fire up your feelings and thoughtson things.
As always, Huxley is heavy on the philosophies and satire as he mocks the continual California search for youth with science and fad diets, yep they had them back then, and the bombastic veneer that can come from such things as exercising or wealth.
The identification of most of the characters Huxley is commenting upon would be lost on the contemporary reader, though one of the obvious would be publisher William Randolph Hearst and his San Simeon castle. Another is a local University President, though at the time a friend, Huxley skewers him mercilessly, a battering from which it is said the President never recovered from socially.
Other fascinating tidbits are found in characters working to get 'off the grid', experimenting on solar energy to get away fromutilities, this was written in the 1930s.
If you are, or still have a bit of, the angry young man, or woman in you, Huxley will fire up your feelings and thoughtson things.
June 28, 2016
This book is worse than bad. It's bad in and of itself -- boring as hell, pretentious, with nonhuman characters (they're just walking philosophies, no flesh and blood) and a silly, unconnected end. But it's also bad because it makes me think Brave New World might not have been so great, either. And I (have) love(d) Brave New World for decades.
The only redeeming feature of this book is that my copy of it reminds me of my honeymoon in Mexico City when I picked it up. I could have left it unread for another 11 years without missing much.
The only redeeming feature of this book is that my copy of it reminds me of my honeymoon in Mexico City when I picked it up. I could have left it unread for another 11 years without missing much.
July 15, 2011
There were a lot of really great ideas in this novel, but I can't say that it was an enjoyable read necessarily. It felt in a lot of ways like rough draft. There were several plot elements that were introduced but never fleshed out, and others that were fleshed out in a less-than-satisfying manner. I'm glad that I read it, however, and I have a better understanding of Huxley as a writer now.
March 9, 2014
•
The human condition, self, philosophy, life and death…Huxley drones on in a novel that is purported to be connected to the life of William Randolph Hearst…there's very little to recommend the reading of this book…two stars only because it's Huxley…
•
October 21, 2015
Great title, shame about the novel. One of Huxley's later novels, and really shows his interest in mysticism. Mr Propter is a barely-concealed mouthpiece for Huxley's own ideas on the Purpose of Man, and his enormous monologues were rather trying.
October 26, 2008
One of my favorite books pretty much ever, it is also one of Huxley's most overlooked. While it is rather wordy and pretentious, I think that was kinda the point.
May 11, 2009
This book is a prime example of dogma dictating narrative. I cannot remember at which point I started skimming through Mr. Propter's pedantic discourses.
October 11, 2021
DNF @ 39%. I'm sorry but I really just don't care for this pretentious mess of a novel. On to something else!
August 19, 2019
Ambientado em Los Angeles nos anos 30, o livro é sobre um magnata do petróleo, Jo Stoyte, muito poderoso porém superficial que sonha com a única coisa que o dinheiro não pode comprar: a vida eterna. Ele contrata um pesquisador inglês chamado Jeremy para analisar alguns documentos antigos e também financia as pesquisas de longevidade de um médico, Dr. Obispo (que no final chegam a uma descoberta inacreditável). Ao longo do livro vamos conhecendo outros personagens e seus pontos de vista, como o amigo de escola de Jo, William Propter, um intelectual e pacifista que é pessimista em relação as vantagens da longevidade... enfim, o livro no começo não foi tão empolgante por isso demorei pra ler, mas da metade pro final não consegui largar mais.
Huxley demonstra como a busca por vida eterna é tão sem sentido quanto o acúmulo obsessivo de riquezas, o final do livro é chocante e esquisito mas amei demais !
Huxley demonstra como a busca por vida eterna é tão sem sentido quanto o acúmulo obsessivo de riquezas, o final do livro é chocante e esquisito mas amei demais !
December 23, 2019
I first read this as a teenager, aware that my absent father was a Huxley fan. Later I would I discover from him that it was my unknown grandfather that was the real fan, and his interest in Huxley was tied up with his religious upbringing. I've read all the novels now, and started to read them again a few years ago; Brave New World because it was the world's favourite Huxley novel; Eyeless in Gaza because it was my favourite Huxley novel - a book which actually made a change to my own thinking. The significance of Huxley for me is its possible to follow his intellectual development through his novels. A more straightforward way to enjoy this journey might be to read his essays. After rereading After Many A Summer I suspect I should have.
Halfway through 2019 I felt a real compulsion to reread this book. I seemed to remember that it actually had a story - something that usually takes a subordinate role in Huxley's novels; events are there to get the protagonist's musings from point A to point B. His only successful plot driven novel is The Genius and the Goddess which doesn't read like a Huxley novel at all. And yes, there are events here - at least, one of the main characters is murdered by another. Though it doesn't seem that events are driving character development or vice versa, what we have instead is Cluedo plus applied philosophy.
As Professor Plum and Colonel Mustard representative of social stereotypes, the characters gathered in Jo Stoyte's Gothic mansion are representative of certain appraoches to Life. I was reminded of Erich Fromm's theory of character orientation - the ways in which "people relate to the world by acquiring and using things (assimilation) and by relating to self and others (socialization)". I don't think Huxley is consciously using Fromm's orientations, but by describing the dominant forms of orientation Huxley found in the first half of the twentieth century, he creates a degree of overlap. The main characters and their orientations are:-
Jo Stoyte - the businessman, to live is to have
Jeremy Pordage - the scholar, to live is to know
Dr Obispo - the scientist, to live is to control
Virgina - the actress, to live is to receive
Pete - the revolutionary, to live is to aspire
Mr Propter - the saint, to live is to trandscend
The setup gives the opportunity for the characters to develop and express these orientations. This dominates the novel, and is occasionally boring. Events move unevenly from nothing happening to everything happening too suddenly. Having read this and Huxley's other novels, my presupposition is that Mr Propter's orientation is the one that is going to be shown as the productive one for humans to adopt, and all the others non-productive. Having re-read this, I'm not so sure.
What surprised me were the repeated attacks on Roman Catholicism: Jeremy Pordage's brother obscures his war guilt by converting to Roman Catholicism and cynically seeking forgiveness for his sins; Virginia secretly prayers to the Madonna in the hope of redemption; and most surprisingly of all, Mr Propter sees his charitable work as a means of sending its beneficieries in the right direction to the next world rather than improving their lives in this. The conclusion suggests we have to accept and make the best of our allotted span in the this world, not aim for eternity in the next.
This is not what I expected, Huxley is still to write The Perennial Philosophy which I thought advocates for Mr Propter's (and Thomas Aquinas's) orientation. Reading Mr Propter's views again, I'm not sure that Huxley is giving them unequivocal support. Or if I see holes in Propter's arguments it is not because Huxley sees those holes, but because I've read God is Not Great and Hitchens does see those holes. All this confusion has come about from trying to infer the author's views from reading his novels, rather than getting them straightforwardly from reading his essays.
One of the last books of Huxley's I read for the first time was Grey Eminence and this was I thought the departure point for me on Huxley's intellectual journey. In trying to write a Goodreads review for that biography of a Roman Catholic monk, mystic and war-criminal, I realised how profoundly confused I was about Huxley's position. I thought that his inability to reconcile the moral failings with the trandscendent successes of du Trembley, lead Huxley away from transcendental mysticism to hallucigenic drugs. But The Perennial Philosophy was published four years after Grey Eminence, and the problems with the transcendental orientation are already present in After Many A Summer.
Halfway through 2019 I felt a real compulsion to reread this book. I seemed to remember that it actually had a story - something that usually takes a subordinate role in Huxley's novels; events are there to get the protagonist's musings from point A to point B. His only successful plot driven novel is The Genius and the Goddess which doesn't read like a Huxley novel at all. And yes, there are events here - at least, one of the main characters is murdered by another. Though it doesn't seem that events are driving character development or vice versa, what we have instead is Cluedo plus applied philosophy.
As Professor Plum and Colonel Mustard representative of social stereotypes, the characters gathered in Jo Stoyte's Gothic mansion are representative of certain appraoches to Life. I was reminded of Erich Fromm's theory of character orientation - the ways in which "people relate to the world by acquiring and using things (assimilation) and by relating to self and others (socialization)". I don't think Huxley is consciously using Fromm's orientations, but by describing the dominant forms of orientation Huxley found in the first half of the twentieth century, he creates a degree of overlap. The main characters and their orientations are:-
Jo Stoyte - the businessman, to live is to have
Jeremy Pordage - the scholar, to live is to know
Dr Obispo - the scientist, to live is to control
Virgina - the actress, to live is to receive
Pete - the revolutionary, to live is to aspire
Mr Propter - the saint, to live is to trandscend
The setup gives the opportunity for the characters to develop and express these orientations. This dominates the novel, and is occasionally boring. Events move unevenly from nothing happening to everything happening too suddenly. Having read this and Huxley's other novels, my presupposition is that Mr Propter's orientation is the one that is going to be shown as the productive one for humans to adopt, and all the others non-productive. Having re-read this, I'm not so sure.
What surprised me were the repeated attacks on Roman Catholicism: Jeremy Pordage's brother obscures his war guilt by converting to Roman Catholicism and cynically seeking forgiveness for his sins; Virginia secretly prayers to the Madonna in the hope of redemption; and most surprisingly of all, Mr Propter sees his charitable work as a means of sending its beneficieries in the right direction to the next world rather than improving their lives in this. The conclusion suggests we have to accept and make the best of our allotted span in the this world, not aim for eternity in the next.
This is not what I expected, Huxley is still to write The Perennial Philosophy which I thought advocates for Mr Propter's (and Thomas Aquinas's) orientation. Reading Mr Propter's views again, I'm not sure that Huxley is giving them unequivocal support. Or if I see holes in Propter's arguments it is not because Huxley sees those holes, but because I've read God is Not Great and Hitchens does see those holes. All this confusion has come about from trying to infer the author's views from reading his novels, rather than getting them straightforwardly from reading his essays.
One of the last books of Huxley's I read for the first time was Grey Eminence and this was I thought the departure point for me on Huxley's intellectual journey. In trying to write a Goodreads review for that biography of a Roman Catholic monk, mystic and war-criminal, I realised how profoundly confused I was about Huxley's position. I thought that his inability to reconcile the moral failings with the trandscendent successes of du Trembley, lead Huxley away from transcendental mysticism to hallucigenic drugs. But The Perennial Philosophy was published four years after Grey Eminence, and the problems with the transcendental orientation are already present in After Many A Summer.
July 29, 2021
“His gravest offence had been to accept the world in which he found himself as normal, rational and right. Like all the others, he had allowed the advertisers to multiply his wants; he had learned to equate happiness with possessions, and prosperity with money to spend in a shop. Like all the others, he had abandoned any idea of subsistence farming to think exclusively in terms of a cash crop; and he had gone on thinking in those terms, even when the crop no longer gave him any cash.”
Displaying 1 - 30 of 258 reviews