Literature Analysis: Brave New World Characterization

1.  There are examples of direct and indirect characterization for both the protagonists in Brave New World.  Bernard is initially directly characterized as being of unimpressive stature and a little bizarre when it came to social norms.  This is indirectly backed up later in the story as Bernard becomes irrationally angry at the fact that he is of similar height to those of lower castes.  A majority of Bernard's characterization comes from the reactions of others.  For example, among Bernard's colleagues there is a reoccurring rumor that alcohol was added to Bernard's vial while decanting, accounting for his diminutive size.  This rumor indirectly characterizes both his physical figure and his interactions (or lack of) with his peers.  John, the Savage, is described directly at first, mostly due to the fact that he stands out from the other Native Americans in his "village".  Later, more is learned about his character during his interactions with Lenina and his own reactions to what Lenina considers normal.

2.  No, there is no distinct change in syntax or diction when Huxley focuses on character.  The entire story is told in the same cold, almost clinically bleak style.  This is likely due to the ongoing theme that there is no such thing as individual (the idea that everybody belongs to everybody else).  Characters are described mostly within the bounds of their place in society, or in the case of the protagonists, how they stand out from society.  There is a notable exception at the end of the book, as Huxley characterizes John.  The diction and syntax become flurried, focusing more on his zealous beliefs than his concrete interactions with the world.

3.  The protagonist changes midway through the story from Bernard to John, the Savage.  Bernard is static and round.  His character changes very little over the course of the story.  From beginning to end, he is consistently dissatisfied with his lot in life, but unable to stand up for himself.  However, he is a multifaceted character.  Part of him loves the persecution.  He takes pride in the fact that he has seemingly transcended the society he criticizes.  Another part of him is too cowardly to take action.  While he willingly basks in the glory of rebellion, when retribution comes he shrinks back into an obsequious husk.  Even though he does not change, he is hardly defined by any one characteristic.  John, on the other hand, is quite dynamic, albeit mostly in consideration of the "brave new world".  He grew up isolated from his peers because of his English heritage, but remained optimistic through the struggles.  Upon being introduced to the fabled "brave new world" he had heard so many stories of, his dreams are crushed.  Unable to continue living in a rampantly immoral world, he practically goes insane with asceticism.

4.  In the case of Bernard, I felt more like I was reading a character than meeting one.  While his plight was pitiable, the situations he found himself in and the ways he dealt with them were so contrasting with what I am familiar with that it made him difficult to believe.  John, on the other hand, has ideals much closer to our time's.  While his actual reaction may have been extreme, it was very much like a "sane man in an insane world" type of situation, which made his character more life-like.  For example, when Bernard is confronted with an uncomfortable situation, he either becomes despondent and irritated, or does something completely outside the realms of our reality.  John's visceral initial reactions to the "brave new world" are comparatively easy to relate to.