Huxley

This reading was a bit interesting for me. I will admit that I did have a hard time following the text at some points, but otherwise was thought-inspiring in its own way. The number of metaphors within the text is astounding, and oftentimes I had to take a step back and ponder what I had just read. While I have never been under the influence of such substances, I was given a sort of first-hand look at the effects of such a drug. One particular passage of interest to me was “To see ourselves as others see usis a most salutary gift. Hardly less important is the capacity to see others as they see themselves. But what if these others belong to a different species and inhabit a radically alien universe? For example, how can the sane get to know what it actually feels like to be mad?"(Huxley, 13) It is in these lines that Huxley challenges us to define reality, when (no pun intended) in reality, such a definition is nigh impossible. There is also a sense of spite in some of his words, as he appears to mock the ignorance of the “civilized” human at some points, including his comment that such individuals, saying that, “We cover our anterior nakedness with some philosophy—Christian, Marxian, Freudo-Physicalist—but abaft we remain uncovered, at the mercy of all the winds of circumstance.” (Huxley, 72) This clearly is a shot at the skepticisms of such a text as this. In a world full of conformity and political misdirection, Huxley encourages us to look within ourselves and within various arts in our world (including music and portraits) and finding a deeper meaning than what is considered scientific fact.

Heaven and Hell was a little more difficult to comprehend than Doors of Perception (once again, I have never been under such influence as mescalin and the like, yet I understand altered perceptions thanks to my skill as a writer). Mainly, it compares views of various paintings that often involve various vices to achieve different states of their visionary heaven or hell, such as intoxication, drugs, and lust. However, oftentimes by undergoing such a vice, enlightenment can occur. It involves not looking at the whole picture, but rather the fine details, as he gives several examples of physicists and astronomers. He then makes a comparison, writing that “Something analogous happens to the myopic artist and the happy lover. In the nuptial embrace personality is melted down; the individual (it is the recurrent theme of Lawrence’s poems and novels) ceases to be himself and becomes a part of the vast impersonal universe.” (Huxley, 130) He goes on to discuss that of the artist and his portrayal of “‘mere things,’” (Huxley, 130) that continues to emphasize that we must look beyond pre-fabricated perceptions crafted by society and find our own meaning through observation.

As another note, I find it ironic that the more I type about the part of the book I don’t understand too well, the more clearly I can comprehend it. Go figure.

All in all, it was a pleasant read. I did a little research on Huxley’s other work and I’d be interested to see what other forms of perception he might elaborate on, such as in his Brave New World.