I bet just about every review of this book starts with a sentence along the lines of “I am reading this because I read Brave New World . . .” Well, I am no different! Brave New World is one of my favorite (if not my most favorite) book, so I figured I would give another Huxley book a try.

I am giving this one 3 stars – not because it is good or because it is bad, but because it just is!

Island is a utopian manifesto thinly veiled behind a story on a fictional island of Pala. I have seen many say it is considered the flip-side novel of the dystopian society presented in Brave New World. I have always enjoyed the story in BNW through many readings. Island, however, is much more textbook – in fact, each scene has a different utopian ideal discussed with almost bullet point precision.

I felt like the ideas presented were interesting and many still relate today. I can’t say I agree or disagree with everything presented, but it definitely provides some food for thought. At the time of the release (1960s) many of the ideals discussed sound like they would directly appeal to the counter-culture opposing Vietnam War/Post WWII era thoughts on sex, religion, birth control, consumerism, politics, money, education, war, racism, drugs, health care, death, love, the afterlife, etc. While I was not alive during this time period, I can imagine a well-worn copy of this book in the back pocket of many of the protesters seen in iconic photos and videos from that time.

For me, I am glad I read it to see some more of Huxley’s work, but I don’t come away from it feeling like I read a novel. I would recommend it to you if you have an interest in a study on utopia vs dystopia. Also, if you like getting a perspective on some opposing viewpoints to where our world stood in the mid-20th Century, it doesn’t get much better than this.

Este prima lectura de la acest scriitor, trebuie sa va marturisesc ca mereu mi-a fost frica de cartile sale, mai exact de cea mai cunoscuta, "Minunata lume noua". Am ajuns prim aceasta circumstanta la "Insula" despre care am inteles ca este total diferita de restul, fiind si ultima carte a scriitorului, in perioada in care s-a apropiat foarte mult de spiritualitate si ezoterism.

Pornind de la ideea ca e un scriitor dificil, primele o suta de pagini mi s-au parut inofensive, banale si ordinare. Mi s-au parut... pentru ca de pe la jumatate mi-am dat seama ca nu-i pentru mine. Am impresia ca intriga cu petrolul, conspiratiile monarhiei se pierd usor spre final, lasand loc ultimului capitol atat de delirant.

De altfel, pe alocuri, ideile mi s-au parut destul de obositoare, cu fel de fel de simboluri de neinteles pentru mine.

Inteleg ca este o utopie, ceea ce in mare parte mie mi s-ar parea infricosatoare o astfel de lume, deci o incadrez intr-o distopie, dupa criteriile mele. Ma refer la aspectele care incurajeaza consumul de ciuperci halucinogene, sexualitatea libera, procreerea, etc.

Si, ca sa inchei in aceeasi maniera, declar ca nu-l voi mai citi pe acest scriitor, poate doar fortata.

Tiresome but worthwhile, Island is more sociological treatise than novel. Huxley wrote a guide to his ideal society: communal, pacifist, profoundly spiritual, a country that focuses on its citzens' well-being and happiness over environmental devastation and false corporate prosperity. Pala, Huxley's fictitious South Asian island nation, is the societal equivalent of an ecosystem, the complex networks of each community rely on mutual dependence, a form of structured anarchism. I was spellbound and nodded my head in agreement as speech after speech flowed implausibly from the mouths of the Palanese, from spirited young girls to spry old men.

Huxley adopts a thoroughly Buddhist lens which he peppers throughout his characters' constant pontifications. He takes a courageous stand against the creation of "Otherness" on which Western society thrives. Over pages of exposition and inquiry, Huxley lays out a worldview that is based on oneness, an absolute refusal to buy into dualism. Good and evil are part of life, and should be cherished. Compassion and bliss, pain and joy are all necessary, for only when one experiences true sorrow can one know bliss. Death is just as necessary as life. The ecosystem only works because of the endless cycle of birth, life, and death. Getting caught up in religious, political, or economic dogmatism only leads to strife and jealousy, endless war, and unfettered consumerism. State communism and capitalism are corrupt and incompatible with true happiness.

Respectful free love is encouraged and taught to young children as a way to sow joy and compassion into their inner minds. The stigmatization that comes with sex in the West is actively destroyed in Pala. And the family is a significantly more loosely defined concept. Each child is part of a Mutual Adoption Club (MAC), where they have several parents, siblings, cousins, and grandaparents, all of whom help out each other. Have a problem with your biological mom? Spend a few nights with your mom down the road, and when everyone has cooled down, come back with a clear head.

The idea of non-biological kinship networks fascinates me. As an only child, I never wanted a sibling, but always wished that my family was closer to our neighbors. Huxley is right when he maligns that the nuclear family in the West is sometimes a small prison. As we all know, escape from the family is just as important as quality time with mom and pop. As the sole kid, it was hard to escape the ever watchful eye and judgment of my doting parents. An MAC, the true expression of the French expression "vivre ensemble," would have been a godsend.

Equally as important for the Palanese is the balance of mind and body, the physical and the spiritual. From a young age, children are expected to perform community duties. Boys and girls are taught to let go of their anger by stamping on the ground and yelling and forgive rather than begrudge. The protagonist, Will, often makes sarcastic comments that the Palanese find distasteful. Bliss, beauty, and wonder are used sincerely, something that would never slide in the West. We thrive on irony and sarcasm to an unbearable extent.

Huxley's descriptions of moksha-medicine, the hallucinogen that Palanese use to tune their spiritual lives, are the polar opposite of his descriptions of drug use in Brave New World. Moksha creates both beauty and pain and leads Will to recognize the infinite multiplicity of every rock, tree, cloud, and person. Soma, the state-distributed drug used in BNW, creates only positive experiences, which is why the drug is so morally and intellectually deadly. Huxley's point in BNW is expanded in Island, where only by using moksha autonomously can one finally understand the oneness of things.

While Island portrays Pala in an overwhelmingly positive light, the specter of invasion by the neighboring authoritarian state of Rendang is inevitable. No one should be surprised by the book's conclusion after reading the first 50 pages, but it still existentially disturbed me. Even in Huxley's most positive moments, inevitable destruction looms. Is it worth trying to create a better, pacifist society knowing the invasion inevitably comes? Huxley cries "Yes!" As the Palanese say again and again, you must pay attention and savor, strive for a better life, even in the face of assured devastation.

Island is completely worth reading for its ideological wealth, even if it's sometimes a slog to get through. Pala seems like a fine place to me. Recommended.

Mr. Roarke and Tatto stand on a hillside waiting, and as they wait they discuss Aldous Huxley’s 1962 novel Island.

Roarke: You know it was Huxely’s final book.

Tattoo: Yes, and he returned to many of the themes that he had written about in his long and distinguished career, like population, ecology, religion and the state.

Roarke: Yes, and similar to his seminal work Brave New World, he explores the ideas of a utopia / dystopia but in this sense it is as a cynical journalist is shipwrecked on an otherwise idyllic setting in the South Pacific.

Tattoo: Yes, but even that fantasy island is beset with trouble in the form of encroachments by modern materialistic life as a young ruler is seduced by the dark side.

Roarke: I found many similarities with Ernest Callenbach’s 1975 novel Ecotopia and suspect that he was very much influenced by Huxley.

Tattoo: While this is in the form of a story about the shipwrecked writer, this is really just a vehicle whereby Huxley can discuss and expound upon ideas about a utopian society.

Roarke: Agreed, and while this was an illuminating essay, as a novel, it lacks a clear plot and also many of Huxley’s ideas are only loosely developed and countered with strawman arguments.

Tattoo: Still a worthwhile read, I always like Huxley’s writing style. Oh, look! The plane! The plane!

I was happily reading this book and then going along feeling like I was on an Island. It was warm and sunny. The natives were friendly for the most part and all spoke English. And then it happened...
Aldous Huxley. There's a message in all of his books and I already knew the message for this one: which society is better? Modern technology or a more primitive and laid back approach? Some combination of the 2?
Reading it came like a slap from the grave. Aldous called our health care "50% terrific and 50% nonexistent." In 1962! I quote "Alpha Plus for patching you up when you start to fall apart; but Delta Minus for keeping you healthy."
He even states that things are this way because doctors get paid more for cures and not prevention! Why hasn't this been fixed if mere authors knew about it in 1962?
Needless to say the best society is taking the best of modern technology but leaving the materialism and adding individual treatment for the greater good. Utopia yes, but utterly unattainable.

Let's get the obvious out of the way first. Did i read this for the plot? Absolutely not. The premise is literally "a guy is stranded on an island and while recoving, he gets a full tour of their lives, economy and, philosophies."
Is the writing great? Not really. Brave New World was definitely better.

But then why did I read it? I don't know.
I wanted to see what else Huxley has up his sleeves - and I was surprised. So while I struggled through a lot of this and kept checking my pages to see if I was finished yet. There are a few things this book discusses I want to add my two cents to, so there are now SPOILERS coming.

First of all, for being written in the 60's, I was surprised to see that Pala, who is the utopia Will Farnaby finds, is in the far east and most certainly not a White Island. There are several eastern influences (Sanskrit, Buddhism, Taoism, clothing, etc.) and there are several instances where Western society is named as a bad example. I found no racist tropes. (I might have missed some, but it has an overall positive view.)
My favourite part was probably the Mutual Adoption Club (MAC). In Pala, every person has their biological parents and then several more, including their children and so on. Everyone knows that saying "it takes a village to raise a child" and I absolutely believe this is true. The idea of having several parents a child can confer to and live with is ingenious. It means that the importance of parenting is not weighed down by a single person (usually the woman) and depending on the circumstances, they can turn to the person who is most likely to help them. And if there are troubles at home, everyone can cool off by keeping one's distance for a time.
Talking about children, this story has ACTUAL FREE BIRTH CONTROL. And it's not just free but also readily available for everyone. So they have fewer children in general (and fewer child deaths) and everyone is responsible when it comes to sex. Honestly, I was amazed.
And who knew that artificial insemination existed in 1962? I certainly didn't. This plays partly into the MAC, that family is not just genetics, and that parents sometimes decide to find a sperm donor for their next child. (What I was not much of a fan of the implication that they are "improving their genetics" and their IQs. Also, with most of them being half-siblings, they should seriously check their family trees.)
There is quite a bit of talk about the "mind-body" and the importance of doing things with both your body and your mind focused. I am not a very spiritual person but I agree that there is a psychological component when it comes to such things as healing, for example.
They also include this in their school system which was very focused on keeping in mind that people are diverse and there are very different ways of learning. I am unsure if their classes would actually be feasible but I enjoyed their philosophy on them and their general idea.
When it comes to putting people into classification and boxes (e.g. Peter Pans and Muscle People), I feel conflicted. I understand the reasoning behind it and all but in the end, I am unsure if you can always classify every single person. But with such a fluent system that they have, I am sure they can work around that.
When it comes to their work ethic, they have a very different stance than most countries. Basically, they say, the satisfaction of the people is worth more than maximum efficiency. This may sound like a wild concept but honestly, I wholeheartedly agree with it.

Will Farnaby, periodista, luego de sobrevivir a un naufragio consigue arribar, malherido, a la isla de Pala. Pala es una "utópica" isla donde descubre una sociedad pletórica de libertad y perfección (Al menos en términos de los que Huxley consideraría como tal, supongo) Es obvio que la historia, plagada de abrumadores y enredados diálogos filosóficos, no es más que una excusa para que el autor exponga su percepción de la "felicidad" humana en base a cierta confusa espiritualidad junto a extrañas iluminaciones y su rechazo hacia ideologías como el comunismo, religiones en general y cualquier cosa que se asemeje a totalitarismos o tiranías.

Aves parlantes, sexo tántrico y drogas alucinógenas, todo muy Huxley en sus últimos años. Una crítica social apabullante que algunos, como no, podrán encontrar inspiradora.

"L'Isola" a volte non è semplice da seguire, a metà strada tra un romanzo quasi privo di trama e un saggio sociologico su di un ipotetico sistema di vita alternativo utopico.

Narra di un uomo naufragato casualmente (forse) su di un'isola proibita dove viene soccorso dai suoi abitanti e vi trascorre alcuni giorni affascinato e incuriosito dal loro sistema sociale.
L'isola di Pala da un centinaio di anni basa l'educazione sociale dei suoi abitanti su un concetto pragmatico di buddismo, libertà di espressione e famiglia aperta, garantendo pace e felicità a tutti i suoi abitanti.

La narrazione procede molto lentamente, la trama è praticamente assente, i personaggi semplici mezzi per portare avanti i tanti dialoghi atti unicamente a descrivere le varie caratteristiche socio-politiche di questo sistema alternativo di vita. Tanti i concetti filosofici e psicologici che, seppur positivi, a volte si fatica a seguire.
Di Aldous Huxley avevo letto "Il Mondo Nuovo" che con "1984" di Orwell e "Faranheit 451"
di Bradbury reputo fondamentali esempi per la letteratura distopica ma "L'Isola" è forse un libro trascurabile pur avendo un messaggio positivo atto a far riflettere.

Well. Well. Well.

Well that got me round the awkward problem of how to begin this review. Island can hardly qualify as a novel, certainly not as a good one by normative criteria. Most of the book consists of one character, Will Farnaby, shipwrecked on the island paradise of Pala, having conversations with other 'characters' who to all intents and purposes could almost all have been the same person. For about half of the book Farnaby, who, with apologies for the technical details, seems to have busted his knee in the course of arriving on the Island, is having these conversations while laying on a hospital bed while various people come and see him. Obviously Farnaby is the representative troubled person from the real world alias the insane world - as in So Long and Thanks for all the Fish, or Dystopia, and since Pala represents Utopia, its denizens have to explain its Utopian qualities to him, as is traditional in utopian literature.

There is a plot. Farnaby is not on Pala accidentally. Naturally the purpose of a Utopia is either for the author to explode it - either to show us that it is dystopia or to show it is unsustainable in the face of the 'real' that is to say the author's beliefs about the worldworld. In this case the island paradise sits across the water from an expansionist militaristic state and on top of oil reserves - all this is revealed pretty early on. Indeed Farnaby is meant to be part of the conspiracy to end the Island's independence but naturally over the course of numerous conversations with the islanders he is converted, cured of the problems related to his 20th heritage and upbringing...however the clock is ticking. Although the book is strongly didactic I was surprised to find myself moved - not to the edge of my seat, the philosophy of the book teaches us not to be slaves to such transitory passions, but moved all the same.

Anyway we realise that this island has to be Utopia because the women wear very few clothes and everybody has plentiful and satisfying sex as well as psychedelic experiences for which the islanders are prepared through their education system.

'Wait a minute', you might say 'that reminds me of another book'...sex, drugs and clothes with zips - it can only be Brave New World. And indeed Island is more or less Brave New World pulled inside out. With the Farnaby character roughly equivalent to the Savage in the earlier book.

I think that is the interesting part of it, Aldous Huxley at age of writing Brave New World plus time and experience equals Island, can also be expressed as the hopes and fears of the 1920s and 30s that we see in We, Brave New World, and eventually in  1984 are not the hopes and fears of the 1950s and 60s which we see expressed in Island, and it struck me that Huxley's holistic vision in this book combining popular culture, ecology, education, a humane economy rather than homo economicus, health and spirituality is still contemporary if not so far mainstream  Farnaby discusses medicine with his nurse: "So you think our medicine's pretty primitive?" ..."It's fifty percent terrific and fifty percent non-existent. Marvellous antibiotics - but absolutely no methods for increasing resistance...Fantastic operations - but when it comes to teaching people the way of going through life without having to be chopped up, absolutely nothing...""But cure" said Will, "is so much more dramatic than prevention. And for the Doctors it's also a lot more profitable" (p.77) . Or indeed predicting the epidemic of chair related illnesses due to people not being physically active enough, Huxley's Utopia is built around the human and what the human needs to function healthily, while his earlier Dystopia was structured around a steady state economy - there the humans had to be shaped in the womb and thoroughly socially conditioned in order to be fit and appropriate economic actors.

A book is an invitation into an author's life and in this case we can transit from a mental world transfixed by industrialisation and maintaining consumption societies to one frightened of over population, and environmental destruction. Living the Good Life hangs in the background. For Young Huxley this was possible in the context of a universal totalitarian industrial society ruled by Philosopher Kings who could rescue independent souls and send them into exiles where they could be safe from consumer societies. While for Huxley the Elder the Good Life is inter-related with theology. If God is wholly other and good, then humanity must be bad and individuals will be self-torturing and intolerant, angry and exploitative (they will also beat their children, might well own slaves, but will be nice to their pets since like God they too are wholly other). On the other hand if humanity is part of the Divine, then the lion can lay down with the lamb without eating it. For Huxley the Good Life can become the good Society by teaching people tantric sex and providing them with contraceptives, while hypnosis allows for pain free births.

Huxley is strong on the Utopian tradition - so this society is on an island as per Gullivers Travels or Tommy More's book, or for that matter Plato's Atlantis, and Butler's Erewhon is referenced several times, the Utopian society is brought about by a philosopher king and his philosophical advisor, unfortunately the nature of monarchy is that it doesn't last and the heir to power in this generation is homosexual this is a book that is sx and sexuality positive only up to a point and obsessed with the neighbouring military dictator - who allows him to drive his car too fast, the Prince's mother is naturally overbearing  She reminded him of Joe Aldehyde. Joe was one of those happy tycoons who feel no qualms, but rejoice without inhibitions in their money and in all that their money will buy in the way of influence and power. And here - albeit clothed in white samite, mystic, wonderful - was another of Joe Aldehyde's breed; a female tycoon who had cornered the market, not in soya beans or copper, but in Pure Spirituality and the Ascended Masters, and was now happily running her hands over the exploit (p.59) , so far so Freudian or perhaps Jungian. Another sign maybe that we are at the dawn of the 1960s, NLP has just been invented, psychology is mainstream and eastern philosophies on the verge of fashionability, Mahayana Buddhism with a splash of Hinduism provides the cultural bedrock that the creators of the utopia work with.

Apparently Old Man Huxley is overshadowed by his younger self and our rampant consumer society keeps his Brave New World evergreen, but Island remains as its counterpoint.

Aesthetically, not his best work, but wonderful none the less. The book is basically just an essay on politics, science, philosophy, religion, society, man, and ultimately, Utopia, masked as a novel. This is a forewarning to those looking for deep characters or a driving plot. However, the debate set forth by Huxley is more than a little intriguing, and should definitely hold the attention of anyone who has dreamed of a better life for the world and the people in it. One of the biggest arguments presented in the book (one I happen to agree quite strongly with) is that each of the disciplines (in the Arts, Sciences, and Religions) of life fails, in its collective Ego, to understand that it alone is not the solution to life's problems, nor the answer to its most important questions. Life requires a healthy amalgam of all these areas.

This was Huxley's last book (published a year before his death), and it is quite beautiful to see that his parting thoughts were of that tiny shard of hope (and, dare I say, optimism) that Man can indeed achieve happiness.

Como história, este livro é uma seca: enormes diálogos que mais não são do que um pretexto para o autor expor as suas ideias daquilo que seria um mundo ideal, protagonizados por personagens com muito pouca densidade.

A Ilha é um romance filosófico, que provavelmente teria resultado melhor como um ensaio.

Ainda assim, não deixam de ter interesse alguns dos temas / problemas explorados (educação, sobrepopulação, industrialização, mindfulness) e das soluções encontradas, algumas delas não tão utópicas como isso.

Za razliku od Vrlog novog sveta koji je distopijska knjiga, Ostrvo/Otok je utopijska. Kroz njega nam Haksli predstavlja kako bi moglo da izgleda savremeno društvo u kojem su pomirene religija i nauka u korist njegovih ljudi.

Dosta kritike upućeno je ideološkim i naročito religioznim konceptima na kojima su vekovima vaspitavane generacije zapadnjaka. Priča je smeštena u izmišljenoj ostrvskoj državi Pali. Njeno stanovništvo, većinom budističko, prihvata sintezu religije i nauke radi srećnijeg života budućih naraštaja. Jedina pretnja njihovom sistemu je nafta, koje žele da se dokopaju određene grupacije, a u sklopu toga Haksli aludira i na tadašnje, a i sadašnje stanje u svetu u vezi sa tim dragocenim resursom. Odlični su opisi halucinacija nakon uzimanja psihoaktivnih gljiva, koje je i sam Haksli primenjivao na sebi.

U ovom romanu Haksli piše kako nešto može, nema samo kritike, već i konkretnih ideja kako čovek
može biti u ravnoteži sa drugima i samim sobom.