Thomas More’s Utopia explores the concept of an ideal society – a topic of discourse that continues back to classical philosophy, with Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics. Unlike his classical counterparts, More’s exploration of Utopia reveals a paradoxical side to idealist society. In the fictionalised discussion between More, Peter Giles and a traveller called Hythloday, Utopia is presented as an egalitarian society with peculiar authoritarian undertones.

Utopian citizens are granted a short six hour work day so as to minimise the exploitation of labour. And yet, underneath the facade of liberty, this Utopian workday requires that “free time not be wasted in roistering or sloth, but used properly in some chosen occupation” (p.52 More). The Utopian day is sectioned rigidly into activity permitted by the state. Could it be that the cost of existing in a perfect world is the loss of freedom and expressive humanity?

 

Jorge Luis Borges’ short story Utopia of a Tired Man, a time traveller born in 1897 finds himself in a Utopian world several hundred years in the future. He meets a man called Someone who, like More’s Hythloday, tells of the societal structure of Utopia. Facts no longer matter to Utopians, who are instead taught the skill of “doubt and the art of forgetting” (p.66, Borges). Birth is controlled and simultaneous suicide is being collectively considered. Borges’ world, which openly references More’s, is presented in a marvelously transient way; the characters’ abrupt conversations and emotionless responses to each other evoke a sense of despair and loss in the ‘perfect world.’ The reader floats between interactions without thorough attention to intermediate moments, as if large sections of the narrative have been blotted out. The tale ends with Someone dismantling his entire house and leaving to a crematorium to end his long Utopian life. Borges paints Utopia as an ethereal and somewhat uncanny place. 

What I observe in both Borges and More’s Utopias is a complex, almost dialectical relationship between perfection and humanity; the creation of an ideal state relies on authoritarian control and results in the sterilisation of human qualities (Human qualities, in this context, refers to the plethora of human activity that engages with expression and unpredictability, from art and friendship to emotional outbreaks and intuition). Such a clinical system is bound to a standard higher than human condition warrants, begging the question of whether perfection and humanity are simply incompatible.

The homogeneity of personality and neutralisation of human character in Utopia surely flaws the entire project. How can a sterile world be preferable over a world of mixed good and evil? How can a world without entropy be a world at all? Thus, Utopia is either imperfect by its inclusion of chaotic humanity or imperfect by the oppression of chaotic humanity. To this end, the Utopian state is paradoxically self-destructing: it is by no accident that More chose the Greek words ‘ou’ (not) and ‘topos’ (place) to denote the perfect state trapped in its own project of perfection, never to be realised. 

 

References:

More et al., 2002. Thomas More : Utopia / edited by George M. Logan and Robert M. Adams. Rev., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Borges, Jorge Luis: The Book of Sand. Penguin Books Ltd, Middlesex, England. 1979

 

How can the social effects of a pandemic be thought through with the concept of ‘utopia’ and ‘dystopia’?

Overwork, family and social stress, isolation, and a lack of work-life balance. These are just some of the consequences of the global Corona pandemic that have been affecting us humans in our everyday lives since 2020. But how can these consequences, implications and effects of a socio-material entity like “virus” be interpreted in terms of cultural, anthropological and literary theory and philosophy?

The aim of this small contribution is to show how the analytical perspectives on ‘utopia’ and ‘dystopia’ are fruitful approaches to analyze the narratives and discourses involved in speaking and thinking about these effects and the working powers of the Virus.

My point is not to focus on the health harms of people who suffered from corona, but to interpret the social organization of post-corona societies with a specific gaze.

Dystopia and Covid-19: Collective Feelings?

In order to be able to sharpen the term “dystopia”, it is necessary to distinguish it from the concert of ‘utopia’, by Thomas More (1516) meant a harmonious ideal state of the world and knowledge. If this circumstance is radically reversed, the dystopian reading can exaggerate human coexistence into a strongly asocial togetherness – a state of society that is frequently treated and usually criticized in fictional and artistic-aesthetic forms of expression (Pordzik 2002).

If one uses this concept of human coexistence and transfers it to the post-Corona situation in which we currently live, some ambivalences become clear: keeping one’s distance and wearing a mask is not a purely egoistic act, but is meant to protect ‘the other’ from society. Actors who do not take Corona seriously are therefore judged selfishness and a lack of sociality.

In addition, creative (digital) communication and interaction strategies were developed in the context of social distancing to strengthen social interaction. Nevertheless, due to a lack of resources and social connections, many fell into states of isolation that continue to have an impact today.

Even if the recovery of nature and the deceleration of capitalist structures could rather be described as a utopian moment, the social consequences of unpaid care work, burnout and work overload can be seen as a social dystopian model.

This is due to the fact that ideas of social coexistence and work in everyday life have been transformed after Corona: This is especially because economic dynamics and capitalist structures have merged even more with the social of our world after Corona.

Dystopian to utopian and back around? Conclusion and Outlook

This brief outline is intended to provide food for thought on how concepts that have endured for centuries, such as utopia and dystopia, can be used to interpret contemporary societies. I therefore combine fictional and literary theoretical perspectives with social, that is, empirical observations to analyze the narratives and discourses that make use of certain strategies. For only through this can we understand the complex reality of our life worlds.

Sources
George M. Logan, Robert M. Adams, Clarence H. Miller (Eds.): Thomas More: Utopia. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1995.
Ralph Pordzik: Utopie und Dystopie in den neuen englischen Literaturen. Winter, Heidelberg 2002.

For the younger generation, the last time you saw the word “utopia” was probably in a survival show called Girls Planet 999. However, the utopia we refer to today is a traditional philosophical concept.

1. What is Utopia?

“Utopia” was first proposed in 1516 by Thomas More in on the Best State of a Commonwealth and on the New Island of Utopia, or Utopia for short.

The Greek adverb ou-‘not’-with the noun topos-‘place’- and giving the resulting compound a Latin ending. (More et al., 2002, p.xi.)

In this highly attractive place, no one goes hungry or homeless, because Utopian regimes practiced a planned economy and advocated plain living, which makes  strikingly egalitarian. Instead, to ensure the livelihood of the citizens, both men and women must be engaged in agricultural labor 6 hours per day. Besides, their personal freedom is restricted in ways large and small. (more details…)

Dystopia took off when people realized that utopia had its flaws.

 

2. Flaw：Gender Inequality

Although Utopia is problematic in many ways, I want to focus on gender inequality.

Utopia advocates equality between men and women apparently, such as adhering to monogamy, however, wives still need to serve their husbands at home.

But to return to their manner of living in society: the
oldest man of every family, as has been already said, is
its governor; wives serve their husbands, and children
their parents, and always the younger serves the elder. (Stephen Duncombe, Thomas More’s Utopia, p.103)

Hence, Utopia is still a world based on patriarchy.

As mentioned previously, the author of Utopia states that each woman had to work, like each man. However, More’s starting point was for the country to have more labour to do production and not to keep idle people, rather than really regarding men and women as equal.

For example, some jobs that would have been considered inferior in the 16th century were reserved for women only.

All the uneasy and sordid services about these halls are performed by their slaves; but the dressing and cooking their meat, and the ordering their tables, belong only to the women, all those of every family taking it by turns. (Stephen Duncombe, Thomas More’s Utopia, p.106)

In 2007, the TV series adapted from the dystopia novel the Handmaid’s Tale became popular in the United States, making more people, particularly women, reflect on the meaning of survival and existential.

This video shows the life of women under totalitarian rule. The heroine has received such a decent education that she has experienced discontent, distress, unease, and in existential anxiety.

Fortunately, neither the real world nor the utopian world is that bad.

In fact, there are some constructive laws in Utopia can effectively relieve existential anxiety of female and contribute to gender equality.

For instance, both bride and groom are required to naked each other before marriage for premarital examination (Stephen Duncombe, Thomas More’s Utopia, pp.142-143).

 

3. Conclusion

It might have given way to a more just and egalitarian society, if the regime can make men and women equal and respect for human rights. More specifically, it formulates that the value of human existence is greater than the value that human can create.

Hopefully utopia will be transformed into a truly attractive and perfect world in the future.

 

Part of the lyrics of Utopia:

기대하고 있어 큰 소리로 외쳐 (I’m looking forward to it. Shout it out)
오랫동안 기다려왔던 빛을 향해서 (Towards the long-awaited light)
기다려 왔는걸 (I’ve been waiting)
저 높이 날아볼까 두 눈 앞에 펼쳐진 나의 (I’m gonna fly high)
Utopia (Utopia)

Reference:

More et al., 2002. Thomas More : Utopia / edited by George M. Logan and Robert M. Adams. Rev., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thomas More’s Utopia, 1516, Thomas More open|Utopia Edited and with an Introduction by Stephen Duncombe