Joan Gray

March 8, 2019

Utopia and Dystopia as a Satire

Prior to taking this course, I always had a very bad taste in my mouth of utopias; that they were unattainable, destroy your individuality, and altogether will never work. However, from the first few books we’ve read, I’ve decided, that I was wrong, thus far. What I do realize is that maybe western society has turned to utopias as a means for satirical measures towards our current way of living.

When one reads a utopia, we understand all that is wrong with our own society. However, I feel as though many readers grasp to utopian novels to instead reassure themselves. They think, ‘hmm this society rids itself of the individual’, so we clutch tightly onto our individual self and decide that, sure, utopias might work, if one destroys the individual, creates an entire new way of living, or has an entire group of people who don’t know anything different. They’re reading it all wrong, though. By learning of these utopian and dystopian societies, one learns more about our current world, and continues to attempt to grasp the extensive, maybe even inaccessible, understanding of humanity. Ultimately, do we realize that the narrator’s goal wasn’t to show you how great we have it, but to nudge us, as if to say, hey, wake up.

Loss of individuality is the commentary that we attempt to push out ‘the other.’ While reading Michaela Fox’s midterm titled, “One for All, and All for… None?” and Ruthi Engelke McDonald's midterm titled “Utopia in the Balance: Engaging Utopian Ideals in the Community,” I found that both women shared similar sentiments. While Fox argues that individuality is lost, as I have inferred, Ruthi agrees, and says it quite beautifully that “Two heads are better than one, but too many heads will argue. We seek organizations of like-minded individuals; we are able to live more comfortably, peacefully, and profitably when we are connected with our tribe. The problem ensues with the introduction of “the other.”” (Engelke). These ideas that are presented force me to revisit my idea of the loss of individuality, and by using Engeke's and Fox’s ideas, I start to realize that individuality is not lost, but utopian societies create the potentiality for many to be left out.

The question though, is why would western civilizations want this, if at all? In Umaymah Shahid’s Midterm, “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of the Utopian Genre,” she explains that she saw the “Utopian genre as proponents of activism and social change, inspiring readers by giving them an alternate world where problems in their societies do not exist” (Shahid). While Shahid presents an extremely interesting idea, I think what she means is that these problems that are presented within utopian texts don’t exist—yet. She discusses the all-important motif of not only loss of individuality, but the loss of the female voice within utopians, which is something I don’t think we have necessarily addressed much this semester. Her ideas beg me to question what the male narration says about the female voice today. I think this is exactly where my thinking of utopias and dystopias is headed—how are these texts satirizing our current society? How can I determine what would work, and what is just a jab at our current political or economic state?

I think that each of these midterms forced me to confront the reality that utopias don’t just contain a bunch of collective characters, but collective characters that force us to ask why. If all the characters are the same, and have little voice, what does it say about those that are currently voiceless within our current world? If the civilizations live isolated from the rest of society, what does it say about those in our world that attempt to ostracize the other? Undoubtedly, utopias, especially dystopias, play the role of questioning our society, even if the texts were long ago. 

The “Other” within Utopian Genre

My exploration of utopias, I think, is quite vast, as I don’t think it necessarily has to be a novel whose author set out to create a utopian society. I often tend to see most novels, even TV shows, as its own little utopia. Utopia’s attempt to ostracize certain groups, ground us in the collective spirit, and tend to just believe that their way is best.

It’s hard to just say that Utopia’s fall into these categorical elements, but even as I read a book like Things Fall Apart, by Chinua Achebe, do I start to believe it to be a utopian society? The Igbo culture is cut off from civilization, fears outsiders for their ultimate fear of misunderstanding, and has a society of people that don’t know what the outside world is like. Therefore, the definition of a utopian society starts to spin out of control, and I lose my grounding. Okonkwo in Achebe’s novel ends up hanging himself because he purely cannot adapt to any other form of society; he believed his to be his own utopia. Which also forces me to say that a utopia to one person, would be a dystopia to another. This then brings up the thought that utopias need to be, or as we’ve seen thus far, directed at a certain group of people. From most of the texts this semester, it seems to be that if utopias were to work, there needs to be a collective and an “other,” the two would need to be separated, and lastly accept that they were different. The problem then becomes the fact that the definition for a utopia would change based on who you are. Regardless of who you are, though, we can ground ourselves in the idea that one would always believe that the spirit of those who would belong in the society would need to have something in common. These ideas are linked to our objective 2b. What problems rise from a utopian story that minimizes conflict and maximizes equality and harmony? What genre variations derive from these problems with plot?

          These questions can all be seen through a close examination of Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “Herland,” Ayn Rand's “Anthem,” and “Ecotopia.” By examining the genre, we can possibly get closer to a definition of utopia, as we know it. To begin, the biggest struggle within the genre is the characterization of not the main characters, but those that belong to the given society.  In Gilman’s “Herland,” we get a first-person objective point of view from Van. While he tells his story of visiting Herland, we get to know more about Terry and Jeff, rather than the women within the society. We learn much about the basis of their society, but Gilman focuses little on the citizens themselves.

          Another convention of a utopia is the setting of the story. All the stories we have read, the societies have been cut off from society in some way. In “Ecotopia,” while not physically cut off, the citizens know little about the United States, and live within their own little fishbowl. Like Callenbach’s novel, Herland is so cut off from society that the men have to travel by multiple forms of transportation to reach the women. Lastly, it’s implied that because Equality 7-2521 breaks free from his society towards a location far outside the city, that his future utopian society (as he would know it), would also be cut off from the previous dystopia. Another convention that runs a thread through the three novels would be the narration, which was lightly touched on prior. Van and Weston both are intruders in the utopia they choose to uncover. They are pushed into a culturally shocking setting, and then can adapt, learn, and distinguish the society as a utopia. Equality 7-2521, while more so living as a societal member, he still feels like a stranger looking in because he struggles to adapt, follow the rules, and live as those do in his culture. He instead, by his opposing views, gives the reader an outside look at the society as he slowly seems to criticize it.

These distinguishing conventions seem to be the top three that run a thread through utopian literature. The question I am then forced to ask, is there a large difference between utopian and dystopian literature? Of course, the plot differs as the dystopian novels face a major conflict they must break free from. However, even the main characters who break free from their society end up being the stranger who then gives us the outside perspective of the society. Whereas those still living in the dystopian society might feel, to them, that they are living in the perfect world.  This then brings us to my original idea, that these novels tend to have an “other,” that either originally doesn’t belong and finds a way to belong, or that does belong and then realizes they don’t belong. Even Van, who does end up leaving “Herland,” makes it seem as though he will eventually return because he brings Moadine with him. Van on the other hand, originally thinks he will belong, realizes he does not, and then turns his back on their society altogether—making it his dystopia.

This then leads to me to my ultimate interest in the course: how do these societies affect those who do not belong? Do they not belong because that was the way the society was set up, or are they so vastly engrossed in their previous society or curiosities that it becomes their fault that they do not belong? I think this is why many of these utopian societies are looked down upon, because many wonder how they personally would fit in amongst these groups of people. Within my first research post, I found myself asking these similar questions. In the realm of a charter school, who gets left out? Who becomes the “other,” is it those within the school, or those that do not attend it? As we continue to read, I want to explore these ideas, and I find these all inherently linked to objective 3c: What social structures, units, or identities does utopia expose or frustrate? I want to continue to explore the idea of identity, and who belongs.

Lastly, I want to learn more about how the utopian genre is related to other genres. As I mentioned in the beginning of the essay, I was able to connect utopias to many different texts, and I want to try to see how far this hypothesis goes. Okonkwo, in “Things Fall Apart,” becomes an outsider, sees his changed society, and realizes that he is now the “other.” Just like Terry in “Herland,” he is ostracized because he no longer belongs like he was prior to an exile he faced. His civilization is so cut off, that when other cultures clash, calamity occurs. I would like to explore this hypothesis with different texts, especially as my working definition expands.

Works Cited

Fox, Michaela. One for All, and All for… None? Midterm Submission 2015. 1 July 2015.

Shahid, Umaymah. Utopias: What is the point? Midterm Submission 2015. 1 July 2015.

McDonald, Ruthi Engelke. Utopia in the Balance: Engaging Utopian Ideals in the Community. Midterm Submission 2013.