Munira Omari

July 6, 2013

Personal Interests in Experimental Communities

When the summer semester started, I was excited and eager to learn more about the topic at hand. The presentations we presented in class helped speed up the learning process. I reviewed many articles that supported my first research post “Freedom or Control: Limiting the Population in Utopias” and found interesting information on the subject. However, moving toward the end of the semester, I was fascinated by the different experimental communities we had and have to this day. The idea of having experimental utopias throughout history is fascinating.  And one of the most shocking utopian communities, I had the pleasure of presenting, is the Oneida Community. In this essay, I will expand my knowledge and interest in utopian communities by reviewing historical examples of experimental utopias in the 19^th century.

 In the beginning, I have always been fascinated by psychology. And what interests me about the topic of utopia is the psychological state of the founders of these utopian communities. Did they start it because they just wanted to or because they wanted a better place? For one, there is Noyes who started this communal community. It was based on the sharing of spouses—a first for me. There were plenty of illogical and immoral rules in that community that led to its fall. However, returning back to the reason Noyes started this community is that he was upset because his wife had left him to be with another man, and that was what started a 30-year lasting community. On the other hand, when we review a sample text of a true utopian novel, for instance, Herland, it started out because of there existed no men in their island as a result of war. Thus, a reason for survival was in need. So, they created a utopian society with women and learnt how to impregnate themselves with thought, which leads to the subject of love and sexual relationships in texts and experimental utopias in accordance to objective 3.

An important example of rules of utopia in accordance to objective 3d is the love and sexual relationship in utopian communities (experimental and literary). The Oneida community is one.  Noyes follows the rules of selflessness that utopian communities have in common; however, he does it for his own pleasure. It might be that being selfless is an acceptable rule because if a community does not work together and share things, it can cause the downfall of the community. However, what Noyes has indicated about his community was an animalistic craving that is not associated with humans. The Shakers, a utopian community during the 19^th century, had total opposite views of sexual contact. They did not approve of it and if they wanted children, they needed to adopt. In these two societies, the social structures do exist; however, they seemed to focus on the community as a whole and not as an individual, this in my opinion is not a basis for a perfect utopia.  On the contrary of utopian literature, sexual desire was not the main things that were discussed, except in Ecotopia. Thus the sexual desire in both fictional and real utopias was controlled by the rules of the community. And I believe that this control was a sexual one for the Shakers; however, the Oneida community did not control their desire; they controlled their population.

In addition, loss of individuality was a necessary part in order to join a utopia; and it is seen in many utopian texts we have read, for example, Utopia and Herland; this is based on objectives 3, specifically 3c. And I think this is an important ideal because it is based on the sharing and the elimination of greed that could potentially corrupt that utopian community and transform it into a dystopia. However, I as an American citizen we have the concept of “The American Dream”, which each individual seeks can be considered a utopian ideal; however, no sharing is involved. I find it difficult to share all my possessions with a group of people I can’t trust. It is the communal aspect that I find difficult to understand.

Another aspect of utopian ideals seen in both experimental and literary is the nonexistent individual.  I had mentioned this in my midterm and I found it to be something interesting. In utopian societies, a person is not given the chance to follow any ambition they choose. The leaders of the society would have to follow the rules, even if they disagreed. For example, Prometheus, in Anthem is chosen to become a sweeper despite his love for reading and learning. In the Oneida community, they had to follow the rules or the community. If they did not, they were subjected to humiliation and insult from the other community members.  I do not know if the lack of individuality is an important means for the survival of these communities; however, I believe that a utopian society must encourage individuality because that is what makes a community stand out. This also applies to the sexual relationship in the Oneida community, in which the young girls and boys do not choose their adult partners. They are chosen by the adults in the community. This in itself is an example of the loss of individuality in experimental communities.

 I believe that America is a utopian community. It has its faults, but what community does not? I am a strong believer in individualism and the United States is a firm believer in that as well. It is now the strongest country in the world because it represents freedom and justice for all. It is true that it has and will continue to have strict rules involving many aspects. However, these laws are for the protection and the survival of the country. One question remains unanswered for me and I believe that I have found the answer to it by looking at my own back yard. Why utopias don’t work? Well, because utopias try to control communities in every aspect, to the point of sometimes suffocating them. However, giving a little freedom is something worth providing. And if done with wisdom, it can potentially be a strong utopian community.