Within the narrative, the Utopians undergo a shock of recognition when the little expedition of Europeans lead to the introduction of Christianity and then modern technology. A utopia is by definition an ideal society and therefore does not need to change. In fact, by the strictest standards of logic, such a state cannot change, because it represents perfection — to change was not only introduce imperfection, it would betray a previously latent imperfection that allowed for the change. Paradoxically, no utopia can be perfected, because such a society--whether an imagined speculation or an existent state--must have been created by a fallible, limited human being
[...] 113) Utopia was not the solution to the problems of England, which were explicitly discussed in the first section of the book. Book Hytholoday's commentary on the problem of theft in England, sets the scene for entry into these debates. The context is one in which the enclosure of common land is having a profoundly alienating effect upon the income and stability of many livelihoods. Idle mercenaries added to this problem, as did rising food prices. Theft had become a social problem of some magnitude, and the penalty for theft was death. [...]
[...] As Gulliver describes more of the culture of the Houyhnhnms, the similarities to the simple-life utopia grow stronger. Although they use tools, have a very basic form of transport, and practice agriculture, they are still in the stone age technologically. And of course, clothing (which neither race wears; only Gulliver is clothed) is a source of confusion. The Houyhnhnm finds this most peculiar "for he could not understand why Nature should teach us to conceal what Nature had given neither himself nor Family were ashamed of any Parts of their Bodies." (Swift, p. [...]
[...] Patterns of Order and Utopia London: Palgrave Guy, J. Thomas More. London: Arnold Khanna, Lee Cullen. "Utopia: The Case for Openmindedness in the Commonwealth." Moreana, Nos. 31-2,1971, pp. 91-105. Kumar, Krishan. Utopia and Anti- Utopia in Modern Times. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Levitas, Ruth. The Concept of Utopia London: Philip Allan McCutcheon, Elizabeth. My Dear Peter: The Ars Poetic and Hermeneutics for More Utopia Angers: Moreana More, Thomas, Utopia and the Dialogue of Comfort. New York : E. P. Dutton & Co More, Thomas Utopia trans. [...]
[...] Even the title and nation name Utopia is conflation of two Greek words- eutopia, a "good place", and outopia, meaning "no place", thus embracing this ambiguity. It thus contains deliberate ambiguity: is utopia a good place or no place-and are these necessarily the same? More's joke, as Ruth Levitas says, "has left a lasting confusion around and one which constantly recurs like a familiar but nonetheless rather troublesome ghost." (pp. 3). Indeed, Morgan (1946) even claimed that More was offering up a realistic description of the Incas, and wasn't engaging in speculative world-building or social criticism at all. [...]
[...] Wives have to be subordinate to their husbands; this utopia is not a feminist's dream. Before festivals, wives have to kneel before their husbands, as do children before their parents, asking forgiveness for their faults and sins. There are slaves; More is not picturing their abolition even in Utopia. The magistrates could invade the privacy of all and have their eyes out for any deviations from the permissible. Hythloday noted that everyone worked when work was scheduled because no one escaped the watchful eyes of the magistrates. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
