Review of “Eyeless in Gaza” by Aldous Huxley

This was a difficult review.

Gaza is never mentioned in the book, but apparently (according to ChatGPT) it is taken from rom Milton’s Samson Agonistes. How appropriate. I never read Milton, but its fundamental influence supports the theory that this book is a pseudo-autobiography. I admit to bias when I saw Huxley’s picture, in his thirties (maybe?) on the back cover. He looks like the central character … let’s get to it.

This is a troubling story about a young man who is a member of the British elite in the 1930s. Anthony Beavis is an intellectual who finds hedonistic pleasure in reading and seducing women. He is not pleased with his lifestyle, but it satisfies his urges, so he sees no reason to change. The conflict arises as he recognizes the dissatisfaction he feels from this lifestyle. That’s where the story begins to fall apart.

The story of Anthony’s self-realization is one of disillusionment in his social status. The story is told, not in actions, but rather by inaction. He can never act, not because he doesn’t know the proper response to events, but because he is encased in concrete — social and personal. The entire novel is about his struggle with recognizing other people as being human and not objects to be avoided or exploited. This makes the author’s job more difficult because he must try to change Anthony without invoking supernatural effects.

He fails in this primary objective, in my humble opinion. The protagonist (Anthony) never truly confronts the obvious problems with his social behavior.

Anthony himself says that divine intervention caused him to meet Dr. James Miller, a physician who just happened to be approaching the hamlet where Mark was dying of gangrene. I have seen this kind of writing time and again. How do I transform this incorrigible person into the saint I want them to be? No problem. Invoke a miracle. Voila! Anthony is a new man, except …

The story ends with the same old Anthony, but with a slight adjustment: he is willing to risk his life for something he doesn’t really believe in.

The grammar is okay but relies, to an excessive level, on commas. I think Huxley lost track of some of his prepositionally dominated sentences. I’ve seen that before.

This is a story that follows a meandering path through the past to lead to a present that is no different from the past. Maybe that was the author’s intent. We struggle with our thoughts but fail to control them, barely managing, if we’re lucky, to nudge them in a slightly different direction.

I recommend this novel to anyone who has ever wondered if other people are as confused and misinformed as them.