Juxtaposition characters in The Chrysalids is focused on David and his father. In the novel David’s father is very set on morals of society and religion, whereas David has morals on how he reacts to the society itself. Both David and his father know the outcomes when one who is a “mutant” is discovered, and yet Davids father continues to be a strong character that agrees with the society’s rules and the consequences, while David changes when he understands the harm that can fall upon Sophie.
David’s father is so extreme about the rules that he went to killing the neighbours cat when he discovered it was tailess and believed it was disapproved by the government. However after finding out he was wrong and the cat was approved he had to pay up for the destruction of the cat. David’s father also has no problem banishing his sister-in-law Harriet because of her slightly mutated baby. This selfish attitude from David’s father led to the suicide of Harriet. David’s father is very predictable as he does things by the book and will stop at nothing to make sure there are no “mutants” or “mutated crops.” He has no sympathy for those that have “mutations.”
David is very different from his father. When he meets Sophie his view changes on his society and he discovers for himself the harm it has on the people he loves. David is very much against the views of his society after knowing Sophie and learning that he himself can think “thought-shapes.”
Whyndham shows the different views of people that live within the same society and how they deal with it by their actions.
The juxtaposistion between father and son seems to be a somwhat similar theme in both of our novels. In both the father is a more realistic character that tries to just keep with the times. And the son is more open, almost rebellios figure that wants to change the word.
By: greer9807 on June 10, 2009
at 7:48 am
I think that the juxtaposistion between father and son seems to be a common theme in our two novels. In both the father is a realistic and logical man who tries to keep with the times, ie following your laws,and in mine the his rules of the road. But the sons are more rebelious. They try to change the world for the better. They see the problms with the world and think that they can change them
By: greer9807 on June 10, 2009
at 7:53 am
sorry about the double post, i was having some comp trouble
By: greer9807 on June 10, 2009
at 7:54 am
How do you think this all ties to “A Clockworks Orange?” A comment theme throughout almost all novels that include a youth, is that the youth is the rebellious one. THe epitome of youthful rebellion is “The Lord of the Flies,” for without authority figures the young boys become savages. Hence it would be totally unsterotypical for the youth of, “The Chrysalids” not be be the ones urging on a revolution .
By: nathare on June 10, 2009
at 2:43 pm
A connection between characters is not what I’m here to comment about, but I’m commenting on the father who strictly follows the rules. Brainwashing seems to frequently appear in my novel (Handmaid’s Tale) just the same as it appears in yours. The father goes off to killing a ‘mutant’ cat and are all of the people slowly becoming brainwashed into following these rules? In Handmaid’s Tale, if a women is not able to reproduce, they are killed so I guess if you were to connect these two novels in some way, the women in Handmaid’s Tale are seen as being mutant (if that makes any sense at all haha!)
It would have been interesting to read this novel along with Handmaid’s Tale because there are probably many more things to connect to as well.
By: agxo on June 11, 2009
at 4:07 pm
What is everyone’s problem with brainwashing? As I expressed before, the characters are happy, the government/controlling force is happy, and society in general has never been more stable. Had it not been for the bias view of the narrator in Anthem, and apparently in A Handmaid’s Tale, these works would classify as Utopic pieces. So what if a few of our feline friends take one for the team? The majority of society will benefit from this.
By: danielwisnicki on June 11, 2009
at 6:42 pm
its because one of the characteristics that people use to define themselves is free will and in braiwashing you are taking away ones free will.. This is seen in anthym, apparently handmaids and even cloackwork orange, thus making it dystopic. Most people concider their free will something that is very important to them whether they are happy or not. At least they have the choice and they are resposible for their situation
By: greer9807 on June 11, 2009
at 7:10 pm
By feline friends, Daniel, do you mean lambs to the slaughter?
Is it about I or We?
You seem to propound the tabula rasa, who is the blank slate. Should I be filled with the We or the I from birth? Should this be my choice?
Within the tabula rasa theorists are you on more of the nature or nurture side? (I had thought nature but now…I’m not sure)
Or should I take one for the team genially?
By: Mrs De Jong on June 14, 2009
at 10:41 am