Ashley D. Wrenn

1 July 2015

Living in Balance: The Common Good Verses Individualism (Part 1)

          As I entered my first day in this class, the word “Utopia” meant something very different than what it now does. To me, a Utopia was a perfect place – a tropical island where all your troubles were non-existent. However, after three short weeks, I have come to realize that a Utopia is not the perfect place that I had dreamed up in my mind. After reading our class texts such as Utopia, Herland, and Anthem, as well as exploring previous seminar’s web highlights, it has become more and more clear to me that one of the unifying themes of a historical or literary utopia is the struggle between the whole society and the individual. The three midterms that I have reviewed all focus on the struggle of the individual in a “perfect” society, how the concept of a “Utopia” ends up being a goal that is striven for, but never ultimately achieved, and how the genre, as a whole, warrants inquiry from the reader to make changes in society as needed.

At first thought, the whole society is more important than one individual. We speak of ourselves in the masses (As Americans, Christians, women, men, mothers, fathers, etc.) and focus on the community as a whole being happy and healthy. We live in a world where majority rules. Sounds perfect, right? That is what I thought. As long as the individual does not lose his/her voice! For example, in Kristine Vermillion’s 2013 essay entitled, “A Collective of Individuals,” she addresses the society in Ayn Rand’s, Anthem as one that “failed to account for the fact that a society is made up of individual parts.” Vermillion goes on to conclude that a society that continues to push down the individual and discredits what he/she has to offer to society does nothing but regress. For example, in Anthem, “The Unmentionable Times” in comparison with the novel’s present day is a regression in regards to science and technology. Also, the society does not want to share knowledge with each other. This leads to people becoming more powerful than others. The emphasis on the community (seen with the use of collective pronouns throughout the dialogue) and lack of individualism leads to the creation of a dystopia that Equality 7-2521 tries to escape.

Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s utopian novel, Herland represents a less harsh society than that of Anthem. This utopian society is made up of only women whose ultimate goal in life is to become mothers. Unlike Anthem, they share knowledge with one another and want to do so. However, this may easily become a dystopia for women who do not want to become mothers and surely would be a dystopia for men! In Katie Parnian’s  2011 essay entitled, “The Perfect Utopia: a Contradiction in Terms,” she states, “one person’s utopia could easily be another’s dystopia in that the societal needs and desires are not similarly matched to every ideal system of perfection.” This is easily seen in Terry’s experience in Herland. He cannot adjust, nor does he desire to live there. However, we do see that assimilation can happen, as well. Ruth McDonald’s 2013 essay, entitled, “Utopia in the Balance: Engaging Utopian Ideals in the Community,” discusses the three men in Herland and how they either adjusted or failed to do so. McDonald refers to Van as a “bridge,” who is “able to refine his notions of manhood to accept and learn from their perspective.” I liked the way McDonald phrased this, and I have to agree. Individually, Van and Terry differ drastically from one another and their opinion of Herland does, as well. Societies will always have people who differ in opinion, but what matters is how society is able to ensure that all people have the opportunity to experience their idea of a perfect society.

All three of the essays that I have reviewed discuss the ability of Utopian texts to create the opportunity for readers to inquire into numerous ways to organize a society. As our class progresses, I am beginning to see the value of reading literary and historical utopian novels for the reason of making us, as readers, critically think about the world that we live in and seriously analyze what is working in our society, what is not, and how to adjust accordingly. These texts may not necessarily give us perfect ways to improve our world, but they should get the gears rolling, so to speak. In doing so, we are on a pursuit to create a fine balance that is needed to ensure that neither the individual, nor the community has too much power. This genre is meant to do more than just tell an interesting story of a land far, far, away. Where do we go from here? We learn from it, make changes where needed, and applaud ourselves for the things that we are doing well.

The common good is essential to consider when planning out a successful society. However, after taking into consideration the consequences of the loss of the individual voice, (as seen in Anthem), as well as how overwhelming an idealistic society can be (as seen in Herland), I have come to realize that one is not more important than the other. In order for a society to really work, it must have both. These essays have taught me that what matters most is a society’s ability to harmonize the two. Furthermore, I have learned that the value of the utopian/dystopian genre lays in our ability to become more aware of how our world works and how we can learn to live in balance.

Ashley D. Wrenn

1 July 2015

The Land of Milk and Honey? (Part 2)

          Upon entering this class, my familiarity with utopian literature was scarce. I had an idea of what a utopia was, but after spending a significant amount of time reading our class texts and participating in class discussion, my outlook on historical and literary utopias has certainly been enhanced. Before this class, I knew that Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games, was a dystopia, so I figured that a utopia was just the exact opposite - A world of happiness and peace, where no one had to worry about famine, disease, or war. Well, that sounds boring! In my mind, no conflict makes for a humdrum book. I definitely felt a little apprehensive about utopian literature and wondered (especially after reading Thomas More) if utopian literature was a genre I would ever really take an interest in. However, I have come to learn that it is and does so much more than what I previously thought.

          As we started our seminar with Thomas More’s Utopia, I have to say I was not intrigued by the very least. However, looking back, I deem it a necessary read in order to really understand the frameworks that a utopian society is built on, especially since Moore is responsible for coining the word “Utopia.” This text set the stage for the class and pinpointed some conventions of utopian texts that made it easier to identify with other texts moving on. Continuing through our class texts, they became not only more interesting, but I think that I enjoyed them more because I became familiar with what important  conventions made up a historical or literary utopia.

Per some of our class discussions, it has become a difficult task for me to formulate an accurate definition of the term, Utopia. Where do I begin? My version of a utopia may be very different from others. As we have discussed in class, my utopia may be someone else’s dystopia. How, then, do we define these terms? This is one of the challenges that a utopia poses. Literary utopias contain tract, dialogue, monologue, and exist in terms of a novel, or story. They inspire us to create historical utopias. Historical utopias, or actual intentional communities actually experiment with a real society and try to prosper. Thinking about these definitions, my personal definition of the term, “Utopia,” is not a place of perfection, but a goal that every society tries to reach. These fictional utopias and dystopias provide us with examples of what equality or inequality look like in a society and what consequences come with having either one or the other.

Now that I am more familiar with the conventions of utopian literature, I feel comfortable in that I can identify a couple that I feel are meaningful. Utopia, Herland, Anthem, and Ecotopia all share the convention of travel writing, or journaling. In Utopia, Raphael goes on a journey, then tells of his experience and provides a list of the do’s and don’ts in Utopia. In Herland, Van and his two friends, Jeff and Terry, journey to Herland. Van writes of his experience there and documents his findings in a journal. In Ecotopia, Weston, a reporter, travels to Ecotopia and also documents the do’s and don’ts in Ecotopia, as well as writes personal entries in his journal. All contain outsiders coming into the utopian society who tell of their experiences there. Anthem also contains narration from Equality 7-2521, but his perspective of society is negative and while the others like the societies they have discovered, Equality 7-2121 wants to break free.

Before a utopian society even begins, there are two conditions that have to be met: there has to be a place where a utopian community can form, and there has to be some sort of inequality in the existing society to draw people out. Once these conditions have been met, utopian conventions start to form. One of the requirements for a utopia that these texts pose is the need to be separate from society. In both Utopia and Herland, we see that these utopian societies are removed from the majority and are free to create the “ideal” community they so choose. In Moore’s Utopia, Raphael narrates his experience in a society called “Utopia” where its’ citizens worry not about any type of inequality. Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Herland offers the concept of an “ideal” community containing a society of parthenogenetic women who are separate from society and value every woman in their community equally. When reading these two utopian texts, the idea of a society where everything is perfect and everyone is valued equally sounds blissful. However, as we began to read Ayn Rand’s Anthem, I quickly realized that the land of milk and honey is too good to be true.

Dystopian literature, in my opinion, is much more interesting to read in that the reader is not bogged down with list, after list, after list of the “rules” that utopian societies have. We, as human beings, are far from perfect. I think that dystopian literature allows us to connect with its’ concepts and ideas more than utopian literature does. Anthem offers a completely different insight into the world of a “perfect” society and introduces the idea of a dystopian community. Where as in a utopian text, people are coming into a society and wanting to learn and document their findings, a dystopian text offers a dysfunctional world where the individual is already a part of the community and is ready to go against it. This dystopian novel, I believe, shows strongly the fallacies that a utopian society has. One of the conventions of a dystopian text that Anthem shows is the idea of the individual losing his/her voice. The narrator, Equality 7-2521 is nameless; identity-less. The dialogue throughout the text uses collective pronouns, completely taking way any individuality he, or anyone else has. He becomes lost in a society that has striven so much for sameness that it has become the individual’s nightmare. What started out as a need to create a utopian society to ensure equality turns into a dystopian society that receives compliance based on fear. 

A great example of a counterbalance of the collective verses the individual is the intentional community, Twin Oaks. I liked their concepts of the forty-two hour work week that includes household chores, freedom to come and go as they please, and their total tolerance for religious practices. Giving Twin Oaks members the security and feel of a community, while simultaneously still allowing them power over their own lives, creates a society where people feel good about where they live. In many communities, if an individual does not agree with one aspect of the majorities beliefs, they are rejected. Twin Oaks offers people complete acceptance and support in a world that can be harsh and judgmental. They offer a great example of what people, I think, are trying to accomplish by establishing intentional communities.

I feel that the back and forth, so to speak, between a utopia and a dystopia is unavoidable. To start, inequality draws people out of their society and fuels their want to create a utopian society where everyone is equal. However, once this utopian community has been established, individuality becomes hidden amongst the masses and creates a want for the individual to again, escape from their society and create their own “ideal” society. To me, this process is a continual cycle that is never-ending. What this concept means to me is that a “Utopia” can never really be achieved, but rather, something to be striven for. Maybe the authors of these texts never intended for them to work. Maybe they wanted future generations to always strive for improvement. In life, we are always trying to be better, whether it be a better person, student, athlete, etc. What would happen if we all reach our ultimate goal? Life would stop. I think that the purpose of these utopian/dystopian texts is to make us, as readers, think about the world around us, how to make it better, and recognize the things that we are doing well. They critique our modern society and inspire us to change. What matters most is what we do with these ideas past putting down the book.