Customer Reviews

Utopia: Thomas More

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

This book has been on my reading list for a while, and I finally grabbed a copy to read when I got my Kindle. Thomas More, as well as many other famous men, put to writing a vision of the ideal society. As with most visions of the ideal society, he had some good ideas that were eventually put in place, but he also had many impractical ideas that won't work just due to the nature of man. It was also interesting to see that he came from an era that accepted several social mores such as slavery that today we find unacceptable and were deemed good institutions in his ideal society.

I think my favorite part was the method the Utopians used to minimize the importance of gold, fine apparel, and money. Gold and jewelry were considered baubles only interesting to children. They marked their slaves by bedecking them with gold. He related a story of a foreign ambassador coming to visit the Utopians. They mistook the gold bedecked ambassador as the slave and the plainly clothed slave as the ambassador and treated each as such.

I highly recommend this relatively short book as a glance into how people in the Middle Ages viewed the ideal society and also as a legitimate look at ongoing social problems. More highlights pride as one of the biggest problems facing society. It appears to be a continuing issue.

The Yale edition (Miller's translation - $6.95) gives a bare list of events in More's life, but the short introduction mostly focuses on the syntax and rhetoric of the book; there's very little in it about the social and historical background. It omits the commendatory letters from various humanists, but includes both the opening letter to Giles from More, and the postscript letter to Giles from the 1517 edition (but not the Busleyden letter about Utopia as a real place that prompted it). (It also has the 1518 woodcut map of Utopia.) The sidenotes that Miller thinks are not mere section markers are placed in the footnotes.

The Hackett edition (Wooton's translation - also $6.95) has a pointed persuasively argued introduction focusing on the translator's own interpretation of the work; he relates it to More's life and the paradoxical double vision of Christian piety and ordinary social life also found in More's friend Erasmus's "The Sileni of Alicbiades," which is included. This edition puts the sidenotes in the margins, and also includes all the introductory and appended material by others, the 1516 map, the Utopian alphabet and the garden woodcut, and black and white illustrations of portraits of More, Erasmus and Gilles.

I haven't seen the other options.

The work begins with written correspondence between Thomas More and several people he had met on the continent: Peter Giles, town clerk of Antwerp, and Jerome Busleiden, counselor to Charles V. More chose these letters, which are communications between actual people, to further the plausibility of his fictional land. In the same spirit, these letters also include a specimen of the Utopian alphabet and its poetry. It is a great book that allows one to think about human nature. Utopia itself is an imaginary place that is nonexistent. Many have wondered over the years why More even wrote it. I forces one to consider that if the government of a place allows circumstances to occur that remove mans ability to take care of basic needs on a just and right way, should they be punished when they achieve it by breaking their laws?

This is an astonishing work - given that it was written five hundred years ago by Thomas More, a rich Catholic and later Lord Chancellor.

Thomas More begins his tale autobiographically and relates how he meets a traveler called Raphael who is highly educated in Greek language and literature (who is, in other words, a humanist). The rest of the short book consists mainly of Raphael's discourse about the island of Utopia, which is Greek for "no place" (though it might also be a pun for "good place").

Utopia is a country without private ownership and many other features that stood in stark contrast to More's England of the time - and, in fact, to the Catholic Church. In that way the book can be seen as a (sometimes tongue-in-cheek) critique of early 16th-century society. Utopia is truly "no place": a place that does not and will never exist. It is, instead, a literary device for More to challenge his own culture.

These challenges include the way slavery was conducted, the greedy obsession with gold and the oppression of the poor, the complicatedness of the judicial system, religious intolerance, etc. Coming from a rich Catholic lawyer, this truly is astonishing: a satire about the establishment written by someone inside the establishment itself.

Consider this description of religious tolerance, for instance:

"He judged it not fit to determine anything rashly; and seemed to doubt whether those different forms of religion might not all come from God, who might inspire man in a different manner, and be pleased with this variety; he therefore thought it indecent and foolish for any man to threaten and terrify another to make him believe what did not appear to him to be true. And supposing that only one religion was really true, and the rest false, he imagined that the native force of truth would at last break forth and shine bright, if supported only by the strength of argument, and attended to with a gentle and unprejudiced mind; while, on the other hand, if such debates were carried on with violence and tumults, as the most wicked are always the most obstinate, so the best and most holy religion might be choked with superstition, as corn is with briars and thorns; he therefore left men wholly to their liberty, that they might be free to believe as they should see cause."

It should be pointed out, however, that other high churchmen prior to More had voiced similar open-mindedness, such as Nikolaus von Kues (1401-1464). So perhaps such tolerant sentiments were not as astonishing at the time as we might think.

But the method More uses to convey his points is certainly very early for its type. I almost felt that the book anticipated Swift's "Gulliver's Travels," written a bit more than a century later, in which society is likewise being challenged by painting a picture of radically different places.

Which is not to say that "Utopia" is revolutionary on every point. At times the book does affirm a very strict morality, such as state-inflicted punishment for extramarital sex, and it certainly affirms religion as such and obedience to the priesthood. At other times, "Utopia" is quite amusing, such as the following passage about picking one's spouse, with which I shall close this review:

"In choosing their wives they use a method that would appear to us very absurd and ridiculous, but it is constantly observed among them, and is accounted perfectly consistent with wisdom. Before marriage some grave matron presents the bride, naked, whether she is a virgin or a widow, to the bridegroom, and after that some grave man presents the bridegroom, naked, to the bride.

"We, indeed, both laughed at this, and condemned it as very indecent. But they, on the other hand, wondered at the folly of the men of all other nations, who, if they are but to buy a horse of a small value, are so cautious that they will see every part of him, and take off both his saddle and all his other tackle, that there may be no secret ulcer hid under any of them, and that yet in the choice of a wife, on which depends the happiness or unhappiness of the rest of his life, a man should venture upon trust, and only see about a handsbreadth of the face, all the rest of the body being covered, under which may lie hid what may be contagious as well as loathsome.

"All men are not so wise as to choose a woman only for her good qualities, and even wise men consider the body as that which adds not a little to the mind, and it is certain there may be some such deformity covered with clothes as may totally alienate a man from his wife, when it is too late to part with her; if such a thing is discovered after marriage a man has no remedy but patience; they, therefore, think it is reasonable that there should be good provision made against such mischievous frauds."

You can't beat this kindle edition! It is FREE and is a great rendition of the book!!!

This was required reading for a graduate course in the Humanities. A great story and important historical work in literature. History of Utopia begins with Thomas More's book in 1516 he coins the phrase Utopia. Ideal societies have been around before like Garden of Eden, city on a hill. For Moore the idea of utopia was intended to be an ironic one. One of the problems you are faced with when reading his utopia is that you cannot really tell when he is serious and when he is being satirical. He writes on the border of the lyrical and satirical, you cannot really tell when he is trying to be funny or serious. The other problem is the Thomas More who speaks to us in the story is not the Thomas More who actually lived. He wrote himself into a character. He is intending it to be ironic. Utopia is Greek for "Good Place, and "no place." He is punning an ironic two-sided term he clearly intended irony when he wrote this text, which provided the foundation for a new genre for social representation. Now, according to Lewis Mumford, who wrote the book "The Story of Utopia" 1922, one of the first comprehensive studies of Utopian representation in Western Civilization, the word Utopia signifies human folly or human hope, the vain hope of perfection. The vain hope of remaking our own imperfect natures, so that we can establish the blissful harmonious communal life. On one hand, he is entirely playful and paradoxical. Thomas More could be bigoted (against Protestants), small minded, not a saint as portrayed. Among all the things, he was a great wit, great sense of humor. On the other hand, it seems that Utopia could be a reflection of his devout Catholicism. He has been represented as a Roman Catholic martyr. In which case you want to take him seriously, altering the model of menses a set of new aims for moral and social objectives. Of course, More's death is important to consider in this life he is glorified in the film, "A Man for All Seasons." He was a Renaissance man, he was a lawyer, statesman, Christian humanist a classical scholar an advocate for women's rights he was also Henry 8's Lord Chancellor.

In 1514, he was sent to Flanders to negotiate a wool treaty and while there, he meets and befriends Peter Giles who is the town clerk of Antwerp, and allegedly tells him "It is my intention to write a book about the way a country should be governed according to my principals. But, it is dangerous to write about those things in England while king Henry the 8 wrath is so easily encouraged, I could perhaps write that I met an old sailor in your house and introduce that man as a globetrotter, who had traveled all over the world and had seen places that we don't even know the existence of. What he had seen there was so unbelievable as compared to the life in Europe that the islands the countries he had visited would seem to belong to another world. Therefore, the title of my book will be "Utopia" a word that means "no where." That sailor will have traveled all over Europe and lived sometime in France Germany, and England. That is why he could compare the ideal community he got acquainted with in Utopia, to the ones he got to know in our countries, and that way I would keep myself out of the matter." After he returned to London, he wrote the fist chapter. Now, what would that tell us about the Utopian imagination, the creation the public presentation of a Utopia? Moore was beheaded in 1535; he would not recognize marriage to Ann Boleyn as lawful to the church. In 1534, Henry becomes head of the church, but Moore remains loyal to pope. In 1935, Moore is canonized. We have to take Moore's religion very seriously. Moore thought Protestants should be burned, he was greedy and proud, not a perfect man. Yet he had this wish for a Utopia.

All utopian fictional ideas of mythic proportion occupy kind of distant realm of the afterlife, myth, faith that unite all of these elements in a matter that is so rich and potentially illuminating and invaluable for scholars students that are interested in working across boundaries and in understanding and exploring the value of working across boundaries. Societies woven and inhabited by populations some of them very select, the exceptionally virtuous or blessed in some cases getting there requires a metaphysical transformation, in other cases it requires a harrowing journey that has to be understood as some ways metaphorical and some ways literal. There is always a sense that to reach Utopia requires a transformation of the human self how do we get away from our flaws, how do we get away from our seemingly inevitable and invariable nature of our being.

These places offer anecdotes to painful and tragic realities to human existence. They are historical in nature you cannot understand any utopia, whether it is represented in a sci-fi movie, or novel or feminist utopia; they must be placed in some kind of a historical context. A fascinating proposition to explore, all utopias all acts of the utopian imagination strike us as constituting in one manner or another statements, critiques or observations about the world we occupy at that given moment. Therefore, any utopia is a reflection and study of the world that we are occupying at that given moment and what we wish it were rather than what it is at that moment. Therefore, utopia is a deeply and inescapably a historical manner organizing the human imagination. I don't think any utopia works in a fixed and eternal way because for every generation and every age they have to imagine their own utopia. Of course utopian experiments were not just talking about fiction or wishing it were so, were talking about actual Soviet Revolution of 1917, were looking at movements looking to bring about radical profound social and political changes that are so deeply utopian in nature. So utopians are aesthetic, philosophical, sociological, they are imagined and fictional, but you can look a history and find attempts most of which failed to bring about these kind of communities that Emerson, Thoreau, these 19th century American egalitarian attempts to create the ideal agrarian society. 1960 hippies reawakening movement of going back to the natural and living off the land. Even today's green and ecological revolution you find in them utopian aspects that resonate so richly with the history of envisioning the ideal society, an ideal place.

Oscar Wilde once said "A map of the world that does not include Utopia, is not even worth glancing at for it leaves out the one country at which humanity has always landed, and when humanity lands there it looks out sees a better country set sail. Progress is the realization of utopias." So when we talk about utopias we are not only talking about a desire or a wish or a longing for perfection, we are talking about an order of progress, a way in which we intend to advance, a way in which we envision or imagine improvement and progress. A progress narrative, psychoanalysis is utopian. Freud's theory of psychoanalysis is a scientific expression of the utopian imagination. The idea that where id was, the ego shall be. The idea of a talking story, the idea that we can master our neurosis that we can harness them that we can move from unconscious behavior to conscious behavior. Marxism and all the grand philosophies of the 19th and 20th centuries are grand utopian narratives. Feminism is a grand utopian narrative in and of itself.

Recommended reading for anyone interested in history, psychology, philosophy, and literature.

This is fiction, but Thomas More (the author) is writing like it all actually happened. In the time of king Henry VIII of England, Thomas More (the character) runs across Raphael Hythloday, a traveller and philosopher. In their conversations, lots of genteel, long-winded language ensues and Raphael shares his tales of a far-off place. A place called Utopia. Note: I'm not sure how much the fictional Thomas More in the book is like the actual Thomas More who wrote himself into the book. It may be a situation like Stephen Colbert--he's a character and a person playing a character.


The real social critique begins when Peter Giles, a friend of Thomas More (the character), thinks Raphael is wise enough to go into service for a king. Thomas More agrees and says, "I perceive, Raphael, that you neither desire wealth nor greatness" but for the sake of other people's good, Thomas says Raphael should consider becoming a court counselor and encouraging some king to do good deeds. Raphael replies with a famous put-down, not for Thomas but for the kings Thomas mentions: "Most princes apply themselves more to affairs of war than to the useful arts of peace...they are generally more set on acquiring new kingdoms, right or wrong, than on governing well those they possess." Burn! By writing discourses between unfathomably polite guys, Thomas More (the author) is able to sneak in some really subversive criticisms of his government.

Also, through Raphael, Thomas More (the author) is calling out England for perversions of justice, saying how the death penalty for petty theft is both ridiculously severe and totally ineffective at halting crime, since the thieves are stealing out of utmost necessity. Until the necessity is removed, the stealing will continue. Raphael Hythloday protests social injustices like the mistreatment of disabled veterans, and the wastefulness of noblemen who support their idle entourages rather than giving to the poor and sick. There are really extensive discussions of whatever topic is at hand, where the characters address every possible objection to their points, but you get used to reading the exhaustive defenses after a while.

The island of Utopia itself doesn't get described in detail until a third of the way through, and it's sorta, kinda...okay, it's definitely a Communist state. Everything is harmoniously equal among the citizens of the island. The Utopians switch houses every ten years, so that nobody gets to thinking of one home as their property, and though everyone makes their own clothes, they all look the same and the fashion never changes. Some of this stuff sounds off-putting but potentially good for society, until you get to the really weird facts like how the Utopians ensure an equal population by taking kids from big families and handing them over to smaller families! This shows that even moderation and balance, when taken to an extreme, can get bizarre and cruel. Also, the Utopians keep slaves, so some atrocities aren't beyond them. A few of the Utopians' principles might make the world a better place, but only about 1/4th of them sound at all practical. Still, it's nice to read about somebody who's at least trying to figure out what might improve the state of humankind. Forgive me, Thomas More.

This was a great book. Even though it is translated from an old text it is easy and enjoyable to read. The free kindle version is void of the annoying typos that can be found in some of the other free books. The only gripe I have with the format is that clear paragraph breaks are far and few between, this may be partly due to the original text's construction, but you can tell some of it is due to the digitization. I like to have clear breaks where I can pause reading, and that was hard to find sometimes but not impossible. Otherwise it's a great book and a very good copy!

Kindle users beware!!! I purchased this for my Kindle and was sadly disappointed to discover that this was in fact not the book Utopia just a synopsis and review of the society Utopia.

Really makes you question what a Utopia society should and would look like. (Although it is clear that Utopia isn't a Utopia).

First book I have read of Sir Thomas More and was disappointed. Wasn't sure whether he was being serious about the concept of Utopia, or simply allowing the reader to realize, through his examples, how impossible it would be to implement. One of the major points More makes is, in Utopia, gold, silver, jewelry and clothing finery would be disregarded as unimportant and without value (teaching children this lesson by having them wear necklaces of pearl, which would be ridiculed by elders). Conflicts between various States would be handled by the leaders of Utopia hiring mercenaries. How would these mercenaries be paid....with gold, silver, etc. Well, if the mercenaries were attracted to the value of gold/silver, etc., why wouldn't they just turn upon the people of Utopia, who didn't want to fight anyway, and take the gold? Many other simplistic examples unravel upon thinking through the absolute lack of feasible application in the 'real' world.