A Short History of Utopian Studies.2009
A Short History of Utopian Studies.2009
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
SF-TH Inc is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Science Fiction Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
Peter Fitting
century). In the 1950s, such Utopian scholars as Glen Negley and J.Max Patrick
were dismissive of the role of science fiction in Utopian literature, although
Utopian and dystopian currentshave always been importantto science fiction.1By
the 1970s, however, therewas a revival of Utopianwriting inEnglish, particularly
in theUnited States, most of itpublished as science fiction andmuch of itwritten
by sf writers.2
finding a differentway of organizing social reality seems more vital than ever,
and to thatend Iwill offerhere a brief review of the constitution and development
of Utopia as a field of study.4
As Lucian Holscher argued in 1990:
The creation of the literary generic concept "utopia" is a complex process which
has until today eluded complete explanation. A reconstruction demands
distinguishing between the formation of the literary genre itself and the adaptation
of the term "Utopie" to it. (7)
More's Utopia (1516), for instance, but at what moment did commentators
acknowledge itas part of a genre? Similarly, there are numerous studies of the
Imaginary Voyage, but at what point were narratives of the discovery and
description of a Utopian land acknowledged as a specific genre itsown right?
2. Prehistory: The Origins of Utopian Studies. There are some obvious places
to look for acknowledgments of Utopia as a genre, firstof all in introductions and
prefaces toworks thatwe now consider Utopias. In the 36 volumes of the late
eighteenth-century anthology of imaginary voyages edited by Charles-Georges
Thomas Gamier?"Les Voyages imaginaires, Songes, Visions et Romans
cabalistiques" (Imaginary Voyages, Dreams, Visions, and Cabalistic Novels,
1787-89)?the term "utopia" does not appear. Instead, the editor calls Ludvig
Holberg's The Voyage ofNiels Klim to theWorld Underground an "allegory"
(Vol 19, xv); while in the preface to Denis Veiras's 1681 Histoire des
Sevarambes (History of theSevarambes), Gamier labels thatwork an "imaginary
voyage," classing it "among our best philosophical and moral novels"
("Avertissement," vol 5, vii). Veiras's own introduction to his Utopia, however,
begins with an interestingcaution:
Those who have read Plato's or
the Utopia
Republic of Thomas More or
Chancellor Bacon's New Atlantis, which are
in fact nothing more than the
probable future state of society or course of historical events, either near at hand
or in remote ages.
4. Those which, merely for the sake of amusement, or sometimes for the purpose
of travestying the wonderful adventures related by actual travelers in remote
regions, profess to recount travels or adventures in imaginary countries or
inaccessible worlds, in which generally the most extravagant fancy runs riot.
(Presley, "Bibliography of Utopias and Imaginary Travels and Histories," qtd. in
Gove 76)
unconsciously, to make them real; they breathe a spirit which gives hope, and
encourages action. (268)
that there are three aspects of utopianism that should be distinguished from one
another and clearly defined: the literary (to which could be added other artistic
representations and imaginings of alternatives), the communitarian, and Utopian
social theory ("Three Faces" 4).
Certainly these differentaspects of utopianism seem at times tobe linked, and
one might summarize thatcomplex interrelationshipas theformulation of Utopian
ideas and projects, as well as theirexpression in literatureand attempts to realize
these ideals concretely. Critics have examined, for instance, how much Cabet's
or Fourier's Utopian schemes were realized in theirrespective colonies (Nauvoo,
La Reunion, etc.); or how much this or that literaryutopia is the expression or
manifestation of particular Utopian ideals or theories. But Sargent's tripartite
distinction is an essential step in the renewal and progress of Utopian studies, an
essential part of the clearing of the underbrush inwhat Darko Suvin famously
called a "genological jungle."
The crucial first step in themodern study of utopia was, of course, the
definitional one. Important initial work was undertaken by Darko Suvin and
Lyman Tower Sargent in particular, both of whose definitions were based on a
careful survey of existing definitions. Darko Suvin's formulation is themost
comprehensive in itsreview of earlier definitions, although hemakes no reference
per se to the political features of the utopia; instead he "confine[s] [his]
consideration [to] utopia as a literary genre" (38; emphasis in original). He
defends this decision by arguing that "In the last twentyyears [i.e., since 1953],
at least in literarycriticism and theory, the premise has become acceptable that
utopia is firstof all a literarygenre or fiction" (46). Here is Suvin's definition:
Utopia is the verbal construction of a particular quasi-human community where
sociopolitical institutions, norms, and individual relationships are organized
Sargent basically accepts Suvin's definition (with a few small cavils), but his
"Three Faces" is addressed to the entire field of Utopian studies insofar as itgoes
beyond the literary to clarify and distinguish two other essential areas of the
Utopian: communitarianism and Utopian social theory. Sargent defines
communitarianism in terms of "intentional societies": "A group of five or more
adults and theirchildren, ifany, who come frommore than one nuclear family
and who have chosen to live together to enhance their shared values or for some
other mutually agreed upon purpose" ("Three Faces" 15). This aspect of
utopianism is themost straightforward(although it sets the threshold fora Utopian
community somewhat lower thanwhat we might expect). As Sargent points out,
existing definitions of communitarianism have usually been based on the study
of a specific community, "butmost are too specific to include what we know to
be the range of institutions actually established. They generally assume a
particular model to be the only model" ("Three Faces" 14).Moreover, because
such communities almost always have written rules or are based on
specific
there is usually a connection between them and the literary as
writings, utopia,
Sargent has argued elsewhere.11
following thework of Ernst Bloch, the Utopian impulse can seemingly be found
everywhere, including inmost literaryworks. Unfortunately this sometimes leads
scholars tomove from pointing out the Utopian impulse in a particular work to
claiming on thisbasis that thework is a Utopia. The overly loose designation of
works as Utopias is far too common?hence the usefulness, ifnot the necessity,
of clear distinctions and definitions.
Sargent suggests two other areas for study, in the form of some further
clarifications and precisions in defining the literaryUtopia. In thefirst place, he
makes an interestingdistinction (one thathas been virtually ignored) between
what he calls "body" and "city" Utopias. The former are sometimes overlooked
insofar as they are "achieved without human effort," in contrast to the "city
Utopia," which is "the Utopia of human contrivance" ("Three Faces" 10-11).
he attempts to clarify some terminological confusion by distinguishing
Secondly,
between "eutopia," "utopia," "dystopia," and "anti-utopia." The latter two terms
in particular are sometimes used and given a of meanings.
synonymously variety
Here are his definitions:
Utopianism?social dreaming.
Utopia?a non-existent society described in considerable detail and normally
located in time and space.
Dystopia or negative
Utopia?a non-existent society described in considerable
detail and located in time and space that the author intended a
normally
contemporaneous reader to view as considerably worse than the society inwhich
that reader lived.
satire?a non-existent society described in considerable detail and
Utopian
normally located in time and space that the author intended a contemporaneous
reader to view as a criticism of that contemporary society.
Anti-utopia?a non-existent society described in considerable detail and normally
located in time and space that the author intended a contemporaneous reader to
view as a criticism of utopianism or of some particular eutopia.
Critical non-existent society described in considerable detail and
utopia?a
normally located in time and space that the author intended a contemporaneous
reader to view as better than contemporary society but with difficult problems that
the described society may or may not be able to solve and which takes a critical
view of the Utopian genre. ("Three Faces" 9)
4. The Dystopian Turn. While it is the revival of Utopian writing in the 1970s
that led to an equivalent revival in Utopian studies, thefirsthalf of the twentieth
centurywas dominated by what Tom Moylan calls the "literaryutopia's shadow"
(Scraps 111)?the dystopia and the anti-utopia. In this context it is important to
mention not only the renewal of interest in thedystopia in the 1980s (as theworld
became increasingly less Utopian), but also the awareness, among a number of sf
critics writing before the resurgence of Utopian studies, of a strong pessimistic
current in science fiction that reflected a larger resistance to technological
advances and the better future implied in some of the genre's inventions and
visions (a reaction to the new reality of the Soviet Union as much as?in post
war writing?to the consequences of the use of the atom bomb against Japan).
This can be seen in the focus?and the titles?of a number of important studies
of science fiction written before the 1970s: Kingsley Amis's New Maps ofHell
(1960), Chad Walsh's From Utopia toNightmare (1962), and Mark Hillegas's
The Future as Nightmare (1967).
The reexamination of the dystopia and the concept of the "critical dystopia"
has been associated with thework of Raffaella Baccolini and Tom Moylan, who
co-edited an important collection, Dark Horizons: Science Fiction and The
Dystopian Imagination (2003). In his earlier Scraps of theUntainted Sky: Science
Fiction, Utopia, Dystopia (2000), Moylan writes: "Moving beyond the engaged
utopianism of the 1970s and against the fashionable temptation to despair in the
early 1980s, several sfwriters turned to dystopian strategies as a way to come to
termswith thechanging, and enclosing, social reality" (186). He cites Baccolini's
definition of the critical dystopia "as texts that 'maintain a Utopian core' and yet
help 'to deconstruct tradition and reconstruct alternatives'" (188).13
Another area of recent research is the exploration and of Utopian
discovery
literatureand traditionsoutside theChristianWest (which was theprimary focus
of Utopian studies until the 1970s), in conjunction with attempts to understand
utopianism in terms of historical moments and countries. Lyman Tower Sargent's
bibliographical work on English-language Utopias led him to the discovery that
such production was not uniform in the differentEnglish-speaking countries;
from country-specific bibliographies, he has begun to look into the question of
utopianism and national identity.14
Another form of questioning and rethinkingutopia is tobe found in thework
of Fredric Jameson. In a sense, the entire history of Utopian studies flows from
or is built on the linkbetween ideas and theirexpression in literatureas much as
upon attempts to put these ideas into practice. Jameson does not question this
connection; rather,he questions the assumption?if not the conviction?that the
literaryUtopia ismeant to be a representation of what the better society would
look like: "at best Utopia can serve the negative purpose of making us more
aware of our mental and ideological imprisonment ... [and] therefore the best
Utopias are those that fail themost comprehensively" (xiii):
[I]t is a mistake to approach Utopias with positive expectations, as though they
offered visions of happy worlds, spaces of fulfillment and cooperation,
society characterizes liberal political theory from Locke to Rawls, rather than the
As can be seen from thisbrief sketch, the studyof utopia has flourished in the
last decades of the twentieth century. It has gone well beyond the question of
definitions and the establishment of a canon (or of the study of an author, or new
interpretationsofMore's Utopia or Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four)', italso tries
to understand Utopia's relationships to itsmore negative cousins?dystopia and
anti-utopia?and itasks questions about why theywax and wane, and why they
prosper at particular moments and in particular countries.
NOTES
I would like to thank Lyman Tower Sargent for his advice and encouragement.
1. "The once and often suggestive field of Utopian fantasy has been exploited, perhaps
under the comic-book definition, into a bastard literary device known as 'science fiction.'
This product bears about the same resemblance to Utopian speculation that the tales of
Horatio Alger bore to the economic theories of Adam Smith" (Negley and Patrick 588).
2. There is not space in this essay to examine the specific relationship of these two
genres. Darko Suvin has that, speaking, Utopia is not a genre but the
argued "precisely
sociopolitical subgenre of science fiction. Paradoxically, it can be seen as such only now
that SF has expanded into itsmodern phase, 'looking backward' from its englobing of
Utopia" (61; emphasis in original). Lyman Tower Sargent disagrees, admitting thatwhile
in "the current situation many Utopias are published as science fiction, both historically
and with utopianism treated as here, Utopias are clearly the primary root" ("Three Faces"
11). For more on this debate, see Moylan's Scraps of the Untainted Sky (77).
3.1 will raise the question of the relationship between historical events and literary
later in this essay. For a brief overview of this Utopian revival, see my "'So We All
Utopias
Became Mothers': New Roles forMen in Recent Utopian Fiction." See also Moylan's
Demand the Impossible.
4. In defining a field such as Utopian Studies, there is a very useful precedent in the
July 1999 special issue of SFS on "A History of Science FictionCriticism," particularly
Arthur B. Evans's "The Origins of Science Fiction Criticism: From Kepler toWells" and
"The Tradition of Science Fiction 1926-1980." For
Gary Westfahl's Popular Criticism,
this essay, I have relied on three important contributions to the history of Utopian studies:
Lucian Holscher's "Utopie" (originallypublished inGerman in 1990), Tom Moylan's
Scraps of the Untained Sky (2000), particularly chapter 3, and Lyman Tower Sargent's
essay, "The Three Faces of Utopia" (first published in 1967). See also Peter
pioneering
Stillman's "Recent Studies in the History of Utopian Thought" and Toby Widdicombe's
Lucian Holscher's "Utopie." Widdicombe describes his own account as a "review" (and
description) of twenty "early histories of utopianism," rather than a study per se, while
Holscher more explicitly studies the emergence of the concept of utopia as an object of
pubished in Utopian Studies over the past decade: "Australian Utopian Literature: An
Annotated, Chronological Bibliography, 1667-1999," "Utopian Literature in English
Canada: An Annotated, Chronological Bibliography, 1852-1999," and "Utopianism and
the Creation of New Zealand National Identity."
<http://gallica.bnf.fr/>.
Gove, Philip Babcock. The Imaginary Voyage inProse Fiction. New York: Columbia UP,
1941.
Hertzler, Joyce. The History of Utopian Thought. 1923. New York: Cooper Square, 1965.
Hillegas, Mark. The Future as Nightmare: H.G. Wells and the Anti-Utopians. New York:
OxfordUP, 1967.
Holscher, Lucian. "Utopie." 1990. Trans. Kirsten Petrak. Utopian Studies 7.2 (1996): 1
65.
Jameson, Fredric. Archaeologies of the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other
Science Fictions. London: Verso, 2005.
Kessler, Carol Farley. "Bibliography of Utopian Fiction by United States Women, 1836
1988." Utopian Studies 1.1 (1990): 1-58.
*Levitas, Ruth. The Concept of Utopia. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse UP, 1990.
Moylan, Tom. Demand the Impossible: Science Fiction and the Utopian Imagination.
New York: Methuen, 1986.
-. CO:
Scraps of the Untainted Sky: Science Fiction, Utopia, Dystopia. Boulder,
Westview, 2000.
Negley, Glen, and J.Max Patrick, eds. The Quest for Utopia: An Anthology of Imaginary
Societies. New York: Henry Schuman, 1952.
*Parrinder, Patrick, ed. Learning from Other Worlds: Estrangement, Cognition, and the
Politics of Science Fiction and Utopia. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 2000.
*Pordzik, Ralph. The Quest for Postcolonial Utopia: A Comparative Introduction to the
Utopian Novel in the New English Literatures. New York: Peter Lang, 2001.
ABSTRACT
This article presents a brief review of the constitution and development of utopia as a field
of study, with an emphasis on the years
preceding its revival in the 1970s. The study
follows a similar trajectory to the one outlined in various articles in the special issue of
SFS devoted to the history of sf criticism (#78, July 1999)?a first of
growing awareness,
all, that there are similarities between certain works which lead to attempts to group
together such works as well as to identify what they have in common and to give this new
genre a name. In the case of utopia, awareness of a new genre can be traced to the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as writers imitate More's Utopia (1516), often taking
advantage of the imaginary voyage to imagine alternative societies. Until the nineteenth
century, however, most commentators continued to use such terms as "political,"
or "philosophical" to refer to literary Utopias, and it was
"allegorical," only in the
nineteenth century thatwe can observe the emergence of the term utopia to designate these
works. The next step (in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries) was to try to
develop a canon of these works, one which, until the 1950s, often explicitly excluded
science fiction. The study of utopia took on new life the upsurge in Utopian
following
writing at the beginning of the 1970s.