Customer Reviews

More: Utopia

5 star:		(23)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Thomas More, executed by Henry VIII (one of his best friends) for treason, led an illustrious career of politics and letters. Under his friend the King, he served in many capacities - Speaker of the House of Commons, Master of Requests, Privy Councillor, etc. - culminating with the trust of the position of Lord Chancellor, a position in those days matching the prominence (if not the definition) of Prime Minister in these days. More's strong integrity and resolute mind caught the attention of scholars, political and church leaders internationally; it was this same integrity that most likely was his undoing, refusing to assent to the King's divorce and severance of ties binding the English Church with the Roman overlordship of the Pope. Indeed, More was, if not the actual ghostwriter, then certainly an inspiration and editorial aide to the document produced by King Henry VIII against the continental protestants, earning for Henry (and his heirs ever after) the title of Defender of the Faith (historical irony is that this title, most likely not intended to be hereditary, now declares the defense of a faith separated from the one for which the title was bestowed).

While an Ambassador to Flanders, More spent spare time writing this book, 'Utopia'. The very title is a still a by-word in the English language (as well as others) of a state of bliss and peace; it is often used with the context of being unrealistic. 'Utopia' is More's response to and development from Plato's 'Republic', in that it is a framework for a perfect society, or at least perfect according to More's ideas of the time. Penned originally in Latin, 'Utopia' has been translated widely; one of the better translations is by H.V.S. Ogden, in 1949, still reprinted in various editions to this day. Originally published in Latin in 1516, the first English version appeared in 1551, some 16 years after More's death.

-----------
Utopia
-----------

Thomas More writes this as if he were traveling, and meets his friend Peter Giles, who introduces him to Raphael Hythloday, a scholar/traveler with tales to tell.

Hythloday made friends with a prince who outfitted him for a journey. He traveled through deserts and fertile lands. He proceeds to give an account to Giles and More. In an ironic twist, given More's own attachment to Henry VIII, Hythloday states that he doesn't give his information in advice of kings or princes, for to be beholden to them is not a wise thing. He quotes Plato, in saying that unless kings were themselves philosophers, they should never appreciate philosophers.

More argues for public service, which Hythloday rejects as something that other place-seekers will use to bolster their own positions. Then Hythloday makes the startling pronouncement with regard to how a society should be constituted: 'As long as there is property, and while money is the standard of all things, I cannot think that a nation can be governed either justly or happily; not justly, because the best things will fall to the share of the worst men; nor happily, because all things will be divided among a few (and even these are not in all respects happy), the rest being left to the absolutely miserable.'

Hythloday proceeds to give an account of the life of Utopia, where, he says, there are so few laws and so much liberty and equality that virtue is always rewarded, and each person has what he or she needs. He talks about this under the following headings:

Of Their Towns, Particularly of Amaurot
Of Their Magistrates
Of Their Trades, and Manner of Life
Of Their Traffic
Of the Travelling of the Utopians
Of Their Slaves, and of Their Marriages
Of Their Military Discipline
Of the Religions of the Utopians

'Utopia' is a radical document. It anticipates the modern idea of communism, with private property at a minimum; it is generations ahead in the idea of equality of the sexes and freedom of religion. This may seem a remarkable statement from someone who will go to his death supporting the Roman hierarchy, but in historical irony, had religious freedom been respected in England at the time, More would have had nothing to fear.

'Utopia' was a place of education and free inquiry. Again, More's own life models this - travelers from as far away as Constantinople and Venice, visiting More's home in Chelsea, remarked on the incredible sense of knowledge and respect for reason and learning, not just for the men, but also for the women of the household (More's own daughter once impressed Henry VIII with her Latin training so much he was at pains to find something at which he excelled that he could best her at).

At different points throughout the text, More (speaking through Hythloday) jabs in witty and insightful manner the habits of the day - that kings are often more concerned to fill their own coffers than increasing the general wealth of the nation; that courts are designed to be self-serving and self-perpetuating; that liberties are curtailed not for just and reasonable causes, but often for petty personal reasons.

Some of the ideas, however, are not as modern or enlightened as they might seem at first glance. Utopians' freedom of religion exists only in very narrow bounds of reason - they are all monotheists, and while they might identify this deity with the sun or moon or a good person who died long ago, they are not permitted to speak or attempt to convert others to this idea, without risking bondage or death. Not too Utopian after all...

-------

More was beatified by Leo XIII in 1886 and canonised by Pius XI in 1935 (it is significant to note that Anglican-Roman relations were at a strained point during these times, and the raising of an English saint who rejected the Anglican construct served at least minor political points, something More would have been able to appreciate, if not approve). The official feast day is July 9.

Maybe the ideals of a Utopian Society wouldn't work in modern times but it's fun to think about. In Utopia everything is equal and everything is fair. Although the society sounds ideal, it also makes a person realize why they wouldn't want to live like that. The book introduces ideas that are still unbelievable almost 500 years later.

This book is foundational. I mean that in every sense of the word. This book has been applied in so many ways to so many organizations, so many lives, so many countries, and even religions. To read this book is to look through the eyes of hundreds upon hundreds of historical figures that have existed since it was written in 1516.

I think it's safe to say that everyone, at some point in their lives, has sat down and thought about "Utopia." I know I did. You think, "Well, if everyone worked equal amounts and everyone shared equal amounts, there would be plenty of things for everyone, and everyone would be happy." This book takes that idea and stretches it to it's greatest extremes, incorporating politics, military strategies, religions, lifestyles... Everything that makes up a country. It really sounds like it could work... Except for the fact that humans are human.

And More goes into that. With every new idea he proposes, he is already responding to your counter-statements by explaining how the people in Utopia act a certain way, believe a certain way, or he'll take another key element of the Utopian system and use that in his defense as well. He knows that humans are flawed in many ways, but Utopia is all about perfection... And so therefore the Utopians are perfect. In the book he says, "They never find fault about other ways of life, or boast about their own." (122). Only in Utopia.

However, don't get the idea that the Utopian system is truly perfect, because it has its own contradictions. Reading through the book, I found at least 4 contradictions of itself, but I think More did this on purpose. He knows this place can never exist, and it seems like he threw a few loopholes in there to remind the reader of that.

Another thing that is really enlightening about this book is the first half of it, and how it ties in to modern American life. To me, it is clearly obvious that America was partly based on it. I've talked to people that don't feel similarly, but if you read through it and think about how much it parallels modern life in America, it really stands out. I still believe that the Founding Forefathers of America all had copies of this book at their sides while deciding how this new country should be run. Read it and you'll understand.

Another great thing about reading this book is the insane amount of great quotes there are. More has a wonderful talent of saying what's obvious about the world, but saying it in a way that's terrifically accurate and concise... Making you think, "Man, that's EXACTLY how it is! If people only knew..." I have something on every other page highlighted in my copy of this book. Literally. Sometimes more frequent than that.

Overall, I give this book the highest reccommendation possible. Read it with an open mind, a highlighter in hand, and a place to jot down notes nearby. Once you start reading, you have a flood of epiphanies coming to you, and it's nice to be able to look back on them and think you're smart :). Prepare to be enlightened, because this is one of the best eye-openers you could possibly find.

There is a lot of discussion about this book, as there should be. What did More intend when he wrote it, is it a satire or a vision of the perfect society, all are questions people try to ask in their reviews of this volume. Having read this book twice, both times for college courses, I can tell you that the Dover Thrift edition is wonderful, the book is wonderful, the price it right, and you need to read this book. Afterwards, I encourage you to join the debate, something all books strive to do, and greats ones excel at.

Like Plato, Thomas More presents his social philosophy in the form of a dialogue. Besides being sexist, anti-Semitic, and anti-indigenous, his communist Utopia is appalling in the harshness of its laws. From beginning to end he speaks of little else than the minor infractions that condemn one to servitude. Hapless citizens do not enjoy freedom of speech, religion, choice of employment, or mobility. The senators and priests are basically tyrants: the former can arbitrarily choose whatever punishments they see fitting, and the latter are immune to punishment. Yet More considers the citizens happy because they perform only necessary work, fear no hunger, and are protected from their own inclination to sin.

As a society entirely without currency, Utopia could have been far more satirical and insightful. The one part I really liked was when More said that only chamber pots and slave chains should be made out of gold.

More's conception of pride is poorly defined. On the one hand, he thinks that lust for private property, cash, and beautiful clothes generates greed, anxiety, and an idle upper class that is the root of injustice; on the other hand, Utopia's system of moral rewards and punishments inculcates a certain kind of pride. Why is it an evil wish to desire fine clothing, yet right and reasonable to desire public titles, proper marriages, and decent cremations?

The Utopians fight only defensive wars, for which they hire soldiers from other countries, who clearly deserve to die anyway because of their greed. If the Utopians are forced to fight, entire family units must go to the front, because it would be shameful for a spouse or child to survive a fallen hero. The terminally ill are persuaded to end their own lives. Reluctance to die indicates a guilty conscience, and these will be buried dishonorably, as do unapproved suicides.

According to More, in the real 16th-century England, women contribute exactly zero useful labor; this is to be rectified. In Utopia, women may marry at 18 and men at 22, and husbands rule over their wives. The fiances should view each other naked. After all, "men will refuse to buy a colt, unless they take off its saddle and harness." They should not, however, touch either other. Premarital sex should be "severely punished," including forbidding the guilty parties from ever obtaining a legal marriage. After marriage, extramarital sex is punished by enslavement, and a second offense by death. Should the spouse of an adulterer not desire a divorce, he or she is permitted to share the penalty of enslavement.

Meals are eaten in the town hall, because, More assumes, no one enjoys cooking for themselves. Men and women sit in separate areas so that the women, perpetually pregnant, may excuse themselves to the nursery to play with babies if they do not feel well. Travelers are denied meals unless they work for it; a relative's permission is required to walk around the district and a senator's permission to leave the city.

Though superstitions may differ, all Utopians must share a fundamental belief in Heaven and Hell. People who don't believe in Hell are undoubtedly disposed to crime; although you can't force them to change their opinion, you can forbid them to speak. On the other hand, people who speak about hell with too much zeal and enthusiasm are exiled for causing social unrest. One must have precisely the right quantity of theology. Yet if the fear of God and Hell is the path to virtue, why does Utopia need so many civic penalties? And if those civic penalties are in place and functioning, why is religious fear necessary?

More did not carefully consider the contradictions and gray area in his theory. Overall, his Utopia amounts to a regimented, communist slave-state with a penal code harsher than Leviticus. It ignores basic human psychology, creativity, and dignity. One wonders if he welcomed his 1535 beheading for religious and political dissent as an act of utopian justice.

"Utopia", written in 1516 by Thomas More, is probably one of the most important books ever written. Why?. Simply because it influenced many people, and motivated many events: it made a difference...

"Utopia" means, literally, "no place". The word didn't exist until More coined it in this book. He wanted to make a critic regarding the English society of his time, but needed to cloak it under a "fictional" mantle due to censure. Displeasing the king was very dangerous in More's time...

What is this short novel about?. Well, More introduces us to an imaginary character, Raphael Hythloday, a traveler that has visited a distant country: Utopia. After meeting More, Raphael tells him about the country he visited, and afterwards More writes a book about what he was told.

To begin with, in that country community is more important that private aims, and that fact permeates all social and political life. There is no private propriety of the means of production, and everything belongs to everybody. Work is obligatory to all healthy men and women, and those who want to do nothing are punished with forced labor. There is no money, but everybody has what is needed to live well, although frugally. Thanks to the fact labor is well distributed, leisure time is available to all. As a result, men and women (equals in this society) can dedicate time to cultivate their minds...

Other important points that should be highlighted regarding Utopia, especially because they contrast strongly with the situation of More's England, are that in this country all religions are allowed, and that there isn't an autocratic rule (a democratically elected assembly and different local governments are elected). All in all, equality prevails, and thanks to the above mentioned arrangements harmony is achieved.

"Utopia" was written a few years later that Machiavelli's "The Prince", but the differences between the two books are incredible. In "Utopia" instead of praising the power of princes More wanted to show clearly all that was wrong in English society because it was governed by a bad ruler. He didn't tell others to face reality: he asked them to criticize it, in order to improve it later. Thus, Moro established the essential traits of what was later known as the "utopian method": to describe in other situation, with a prejudice of optimism, all that that we don't like in our society.

With "Utopia" Moro created a new way to mobilize energies, and showed options that had remained hidden from the eyes of those who weren't happy with their societies. Behind the name of "fiction", he gave politics new intruments of discussion, and opened to it novel ways of considering reality, in the light of what could/should be.

There is no politics without the idea that something better can be achieved, without the kind of imagination that allows us to think that something better is possible. Moro made that evident... I think that that is more than enough to strongly recommend this book to you :)

Belen Alcat

It's unfortunate that it seems as if most of these reviews were written by people whose only knowledge of More has come from the (mostly incorrect) opinions they have formed after reading this book. I don't think one can truly understand its import until he or she understands where Moore is at this point in his life and what he previously wrote ("Life of Pico", for example) and what he wrote later (while in prison, perhaps). No, he wasn't expressing his views through Raphael. In fact, it's clear that Raphael is an opinionated fibber (i.e., he discovered Utopia after Vespucci's fourth voyage? There were only three and Morus knows it...) and his account is purposefully filled with contradictions. There's more to it! More is raising issues, trying to make the careful reader think (and shame on some of the other reviewers for not being careful readers). And once you've read this book, read enough More (ha!) to understand what was going on in the bigger scheme of things, such as More's relationship with the other Renaissance humanists of his time and Henry VIII.

Incredibly fast shipping! I received my package two days later in the mail with a personal 'thank you' letter and a beautiful bookmark! Will definitely be buying from here again! A wonderful seller :)

Please, please understand: Utopia is not Thomas Moore's philosophy or dream of perfect world, or something unbearably cruel that he believed was right in real time. Utopia is SATIRE. Entirely satire. Political lampooning.
It is unsettling to read reviews by people who have completely missed this, which is precisely the kind of thing Moore was satirizing.
Read it for the brilliant piece that it is - do not take it literally for heaven's sake!
This is akin to taking Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" seriously, and failing to see the social and political satire - Swift proposes eating Irish children to stop the overpopulation. Satire!

Throughout the history of the world people have always dreamed of a better life. Though the views of a perfect world are dependent on an individual, Thomas More in his most famous work, Utopia, attempted to show the imaginary state that would be "ideal" for everyone. Or so it seems...Utopia, meaning in Latin "in no place", was written entirely in satire. More purposely filled Utopia with contradictions. While there were many colorful depictions of the imaginary Utopia, More also told exactly why Utopia could only exist where it had already been introduced: nowhere. That being said, Thomas More did accomplish many intriguing arguments against capital punishment- stated through the eyes of Hythloday. Overall the book was beautifully written, but un-careful readers' heads will spin, as the book is full of paradoxes