Jesus E. Garcia

May 9^th, 2019

Speculation in Utopian/Dystopian Literature

Our three post-midterm novels differ from our pre-midterm novels in many obvious ways. Nonetheless, they still serve some of the same purposes. Utopian novels such as Ecotopia and Herland quickly seem to give a sermonic or educational feel, while novels such as The Handmaid’s Tale, The Dispossessed, and Oryx and Crake feel a lot more riveting or entertaining. Utopian and dystopian literature, whether it is the classic or the more contemporary kind, is a form of speculative fiction in which we are transported to a different world with different rules where we can get an idea of what life could be like with a few changes. Speculative fiction allows the writer the freedom to create a world that is completely different from the world that we currently live in without any of the repercussions that may accompany such changes. It can be used to make a suggestion and offer advice, or, at the same time, it can be used to issue a warning. Through speculative fiction, not only are we able to attempt to predict the outcomes of a different world, but also we are able to consider the extreme ramifications that a small change can cause. What’s important to note is that despite the changes made to utopian/dystopian literature over the years and despite it becoming more entertaining as opposed to sermonic, both forms of the work serve to achieve the same speculative goal.

Herland and Ecotopia are similar in their sermonistic approach to bringing forth speculative ideas. In fact, they are so similar that they seem to almost be exact patterns of one another, except with only a few minor differences. For the purpose of this argument, I will mention the differences only briefly as the similarities are what is important so that we can compare each of these stories to their more contemporary counterparts. The most obvious differences are in the visitors to the newfound utopias and in the residents of them as well. In Ecotopia, we have William Weston who is a reporter attempting to gather information on the utopia. In Herland, there are three men who choose to explore the utopia only to soon find themselves prisoners within it. The similarities, however, are most important in realizing that despite the differences that have come to the genre, it still serves the same purpose. In Ecotopia and Herland alike, the utopia emphasizes community, sustainability, and the decentralization of power. In these utopias everything belongs to everybody and nothing belongs to only one person. The individual is non-existent. Ecotopia and Herland are speculative in that they attempt to give the reader an idea of what the world would be like without capitalism and greed.

The Dispossessed by Ursula K. Le Guin is different from Ecotopia and Herland not only in its ability to entertain but also in the speculation it attempts to make. In the novel, our main character, Shevek, visits a world completely dissimilar to his. It’s important to note that he is discouraged from leaving Anarresti, but he nonetheless feels obligated to leave. This novel exemplifies the old cliché of the grass not always being greener on the other side. It perfectly embodies the idea that one person’s utopia can be a dystopia to somebody else. It also proposes an idea that a utopia is not really ever possible. Despite the people who attempt to discourage Shevek from leaving Anarresti, he is still open to life on Urras. When he arrives, he is treated like a king; however, he soon realizes that it is impossible for everybody on Urras to live as lavishly as him. He seeks to find the more impoverished people of Urras and finds that they are in much worse circumstances than the rest of the people he has meant until that point. Greed is so rampant in Urras that he later realizes his theory is under threat of being stolen upon completion. Despite all of the bad he witnesses in Urras, he also realizes that his lack of individuality in Anarresti was also equally as restricting. Therefore, the speculation is that there is no true utopia because of the subjective nature of human beings. One person may prefer individual freedom, while another may prefer communal living.

The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood offers us a completely unique speculation through a much more entertaining plot when compared to Ecotopia or Herland. This novel focuses on the restrictive nature of living under an authoritarian rule, and the consequences that come with the loss of individualism. Margaret Atwood emphasizes the importance of individuality by demonstrating the detrimental effects that not acting on one’s true feelings can have on a human being. For example, when Offred is forced to have sex with The Commander it goes against everything that her self tells her. She does not wish to have sex with him and this is made very apparent especially in the scene where she has sex with Nick shortly after she does with The Commander. When she is with The Commander she has to fake arousal as to not upset him as opposed to the true feelings of attraction that she has for Nick. Even someone as powerful as The Commander, who should be thriving wholly in an oppressive society such as the one created in this novel, chooses to break the law so that he may develop a deeper connection with the woman that he is forced to have sex with. Margaret Atwood brings to light the feelings within us that cannot be seen, changed, or controlled. She suggests that even in a community driven utopia, individuality will always find its way out of people.

In Oryx and Crake, Atwood gives us an entirely new speculation as to what the future may hold for us if we continue on the path that we are on. In the novel, she demonstrates the dangers of scientific progress, and also shows how one person with so much power can be detrimental to the world. The former is demonstrated in the progress that science has made within the story. It is, after all, science that brings about the fall of humanity. Many of the characters in the novel act unethically in the name of science. Crake, for example, conducts genetic experiments on the Crakers and he introduces a terrible virus into the human population. The companies in the story release viruses into the population so that new cures can be developed and sold for profit. The story deals with an abuse of power by the people dedicated to science, and it completely undermines the humanities. This is evident in the differences between the school that Crake goes to and the school that Jimmy attends. The speculation is that science gives an opportunity for people who are dedicated to it to play god. It gives all the power to those who are invested in the subject while it leaves those who are uninvolved at the mercy of those who are knowledgeable.

The speculations described are ones involved with the possible future of our world should we take certain measures or actions. Utopian and dystopian literature is considered speculative fiction because it explores the possibilities for the future if we focus entirely on communal living, if we focus on sustainability, if we give all the power to science, or if we give all the power to the wealthy. Although utopian and dystopian literature has changed over the years to become more entertaining, its principal purpose has not been forgotten or left behind—the principal purpose being to instruct and to theorize on the possibilities of a different world.

Utopian/Dystopian Literature in the Graduate Classroom

There are a few reasons why utopian and dystopian fiction proves to be excellent material for graduate study. It’s important to emphasize the idea that utopian and dystopian literature is a form of speculative fiction. This means that the work focuses on a distant future where things have changed drastically due to something that we may already be doing. For example, in Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood, we are immersed into a world where science has practically wiped out the entire human population. Through this plot, the reader is able to speculate and recognize the ideas that are already in play that can lead us to this future. Here, a student can agree or disagree with the text. Students can also speculate as to possible countermeasures for such a possibility. They can suggest benefits that are not emphasized within the text. Furthermore, this type of speculation gives room for classroom discussion and cooperation. In a graduate class especially, student discussion is essential to the learning environment. It’s also interesting to note that most protagonists within utopias or dystopias are learners themselves. They are forced into a society that is strange and new and are often forced to learn about it.

In the article, Education and Utopia: Robert Owen and Charles Fourier, David Leopold mentions, “the aims of education, and the appropriate means of realising those aims, have been a persistent, if not universal, concern of Utopian authors” (619). Immediately, it is made clear that the intent behind utopian and dystopian literature is to teach. Authors such as Margaret Atwood consider trends for current society, and they imagine a future where these trends have escalated drastically or even simply continued. However, let’s consider a classic text for the basis of the first point in this argument: Ecotopia. Some of the ideas that are still currently in play within our society that could encourage a society such as Ecotopia are the overuse of natural resources, the destruction of the natural world, and the ever-growing issue with waste. All three of these issues are addressed in Ecotopia and suggestions are made within the novel as to how all of them can be solved. The story suggests the dangers of continuing on the path we are on and demonstrates possible countermeasures for a future where all of our natural resources are used up, the natural world has been eliminated, and waste is rampant everywhere. These are issues of our time and the text makes that clear despite being a work of speculative fiction.

In The Dispossessed, Ursula K. Le Guin demonstrates two distinct worlds, and all the while she makes it clear that she does not side with either. What is important is not that she takes a side, but that she demonstrates both sides of the spectrum so that the reader can then choose for her or his self. One of the worlds represented in the novel is that of extreme communal living where nothing belongs to one single person. The other is that of individuality where each person is responsible for his or her self. Le Guin makes it clear that neither is the Utopia and even suggests the impossibility of a true Utopia. Nonetheless, it is educational because it allows the readers to decide which world they would rather live on. This novel is excellent for graduate classroom instruction because there is so much room for interpretation. By giving the reader two distinct worlds to choose from, Le Guin leaves room for so much discussion between readers. One reader of the book can suggest that they believe individuality is key to a fulfilled life, while another can suggest that a more altruistic or communal approach is the key. Neither of them needs to be right, but it is the ability of this novel to promote critical thinking and discussion that makes it excellent material for post-graduate education.

Utopian and dystopian literature not only makes possible classroom discussion but also argument against or in response to the author’s points. By this point it is apparent that utopian and dystopian literature are intended to shed light on issues of our time. It is through reading these different novels that we can ponder different solutions to the issues in question. For example, we can ask ourselves how we can prevent a future in which capitalistic greed and scientific advancement have killed thousands of people. We can suggest restrictions on the experiments that are being conducted in our age. Also, we can place restrictions on the overselling of essential vaccinations or medications. There is a likelihood that people in positions of power are going to take advantage of the less fortunate, but in a democracy there are ways that that can be controlled. Utopias and dystopias bring to light issues of our time that many of us generally would never consider. This is why utopian and dystopian literature can prove extremely beneficial in an academic setting, particularly in graduate study.

Most utopian and dystopian protagonists are themselves learners as well. This is another indication that this form of speculative fiction is intended to educate and not simply entertain. In Ecotopia, the protagonist is a reporter intent on giving the utopia its proper portrayal and also in re-establishing friendly ties with it. In dystopias the learner is a bit different. It is never as apparent as it is in utopias such as Ecotopia or Herland. For example, in The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Atwood, our heroine is forced to learn how important individuality actually is through being made to live in an oppressive world where she is forced to act against her every internal feeling. However, she is a learner just the same as is William Weston or any of our utopian heroes.

Utopian literature demonstrates the possibilities of a better world, while dystopian literature shows us the consequences of continuing in our same path. Either way, each of these different genres focuses on the education of the reader. They focus on teaching us a better way of doing things through showing us worlds in which countermeasures have been taken, and they focus on showing us the dangers of not taking action. Utopian/dystopian literature can prove to be an exceptional resource for the graduate classroom because it inspires critical thinking, sheds light on the issues of our time, promotes classroom discussion, and provides the reader with a relatable learner to associate with.    

Works Cited

Leopold, David. "Education and Utopia: Robert Owen and Charles Fourier." Oxford Review of Education, vol. 37, no. 5, 2011, pp. 619-635.

Dystopias in Opposition to Utopian Vision

In Oryx and Crake: Disproving Utopia, Lori Wheeler demonstrates a sort of mix between the genres dystopia and utopia within the novel. She suggests that Margaret Atwood demonstrates in this novel a sort of blend between the two genres, as opposed to sticking to simply one. Wheeler mentions speculative fiction but goes on to suggest that the novel is a blend between the genres utopia and dystopia, never pointing out that both the genres are a form of speculative fiction in themselves. She mentions this idea that utopias are dystopias waiting to happen; however, this doesn’t truly get to the bottom of classifying them each as a different sub-genre in their own respect. At no point in the novel does it seem like the characters are living within a utopia. It could be inferred that Crake is making an attempt at creating his own utopia, but never do we witness a utopia somehow transform into a dystopia. It seems to be a failed attempt at anything approaching a utopia, as opposed to a utopia turned dystopia. What it seems to suggest is that an attempt from a single human being at creating what he or she believes to be a utopia can turn out really bad.

What I see in the novel Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood is not necessarily a utopia that has suddenly turned into a dystopia. Instead I see a suggestion that any one person’s attempt at a utopia is rather selfish because of how it may affect all the rest of the people around him or her. This brings up the idea that one man’s utopia is another’s dystopia. For example, although to some communal living may sound like a real treat, to others it may sound like a perfect opportunity for lazy people to get by without doing as much work as the others. It is a sort of playing god by the character involved. In a utopia, one single person establishes the guidelines, and they must be abided by in order for the utopia to flourish. For example, Crake feels that the world would benefit from a huge de-population so he takes it upon himself to commit mass genocide.

Patrick Graham recognizes the strongest aspect of utopian fiction as having an “overall aim to promote ideas of how to make society better.” This is made clear through many novels that are classified as such. Take for example, Herland, Ecotopia, or even Utopia. However, what one fails to recognize in these attempts is that it is rather grandiose to suggest that one person’s view of the world is better than say anybody else’s. Of course, I am not suggesting that the utopian novel’s legitimacy is undermined in any way, shape, or form; however, it is important to note that there is a significant difference between dystopia and utopia. Utopian novels bring up some ideas that may benefit society within texts so that they are not forced on societies and do not intrude on anybody’s life. Dystopian novels, however, seem to represent the selfishness of utopian creation, pointing out the drastic effects that one person’s suggestions for the rest of humanity can have. Dystopian thinking is in opposition to utopian and that is clear in every representation. I believe that utopia is a fiction entirely, while dystopias are a realistic representation of what utopian thinking can cause.

In The Dispossessed we are demonstrated to opposing worlds, and we are given a clear suggestion that neither is perfect. Ultimately it is left for the reader to choose, which appears to be the way that it should be. John Sissons mentions, “Ursula Le Guin’s The Dispossessed is a story about characters that act as real people might. The vision of utopia she expresses on the moon Annares is contrasted closely with the society on its parent planet Urras, which is vastly different.” The worlds are different purposely. One emphasizes communal living and the restriction of personal property, while the other focuses on more individualistic forms of living. It is extremely important to note that our main character is never completely persuaded into choosing one as better than the other. This is so that the reader can realize that we are not wrong to prefer communal living to individualism or vise versa. This novel is one of my favorites because it establishes an excellent point that neither is the correct way of life, and that to value one over the other subjectively is not incorrect. It is okay for each of us to have our own perspectives on the matter, and it is also okay for us to disagree with one another.

What I would like to suggest is that to force one ideology on another human being seems kind of selfish. I think that it is important to consider the benefits of any sort of living; however, no form of living should ever be imposed on any group of people by a single person. Through utopian fiction we can recognize certain ways of life that may be beneficial to us and the world we live in, and through dystopian fiction we can recognize the consequences that may arise from the aforementioned ways of life. What to one may seem like a utopia may always seem like a dystopia to another. This is the point that I have left this course with.