Nathan Bransford - The Forums

All of this talk about dystopian fiction makes me wonder - are there any utopias out there?

I read one once, but I got bored and put it down after a couple of chapters. It was a full-fledged utopian society. I can't remember the name or the author. Wish I could find it, because I might find it more interesting now.

Anyone know of any utopias?

What about the original? UTOPIA (1516) by Sir Thomas Moore? And Star Trek? Etc. Etc. I defer to the all-knowing wisdom of Google and Wikipedia, and you should too, Mira!

To hold my interest, a book must have tension and conflict in it. In a true utopia, you likely won't see that. False utopias with dirty foundations, dystopias...full to the gills with tension and conflict.

You know, J.T., it didn't even occur to me to go to Google or Wikipedia. So, since you suggested it, I did.

What's interesting to me is that all the Utopias they mentioned were written a long time ago - like you pointed out, Utopia was written in the 1500s!

Compare that to Brave New World or 1984.

What they did list more recently were combination utopian/distopian fiction. That's interesting - a utopia under attack. I think Ursula Le Guin does alot of those. She plays with the concept of an ideal society and then questions whether it can survive given human nature and conflicting agendas.

There's some conflict for you HilaryJ. :)

I guess I find it interesting that people aren't problem solving. Okay - if you have a critique of current society and want to wake people up, okay. Good. But what about a better solution?

When I think of utopian fiction, I think of dystopia masquerading as utopia -- 'anti-utopia', like Lois Lowry's The Giver.

Mira wrote:What they did list more recently were combination utopian/distopian fiction. That's interesting - a utopia under attack. I think Ursula Le Guin does alot of those. She plays with the concept of an ideal society and then questions whether it can survive given human nature and conflicting agendas.

I like this idea, a lot. I'd read a story based on this.

Jim - me too.

I vaguely remember one of Ursula Le Guin's novels - I think it was the Eye of the Heron - where a group of pacifists dealt with another group from a penal colony. Don't remember if it was any good.

Well, if we can't think of any, we'll have to write one. :)

Hm.I can't think of any utopian books, or even if I would want to read them. Reading about perfection isn't interesting. . . unless something goes wrong. I'm interested to hear about whether there are any, though!

Hi Jessica - there are very few out there, that's for sure! Makes me want to write one.

Partly just to envision a Utopia. What would it look like......?

Mira wrote:Partly just to envision a Utopia. What would it look like......?

Like the inside of my eyelids? Oh, sorry, that's just me falling asleep. :) Count me with the previous comment on conflict, tension, struggle. Happy people in a happy land makes for some dull reading.

Lol. Oh ye of little faith.

I'm thinking about this, and I think the tension comes from the difference between a utopia and our current society.

Anyway, I don't know if I'm a good enough writer to do this, but it's on my radar. Sure is a literary gap here.

Mira wrote:Lol. Oh ye of little faith.

I'm thinking about this, and I think the tension comes from the difference between a utopia and our current society.

After four brain-burning days of illustrations (published novels and student work), I can say I am 100% convinced that tension comes from human emotion, never inherently from a situation or an action. The problem with utopian settings that really are utopian is that there is nothing for the reader to worry about. It is conceivable that even in a utopian society, interpersonal conflict would exist (love triangles spring to mind), but it removes the possibility of added tension of life going horribly wrong. The job. The environment. The economy. The pressures of an imperfect society. Readers, above all, must be made to worry for the characters they love. Taking away pressures is a big gamble. You would have to rely very heavily on just interpersonal conflict without the pressure cooker of an imperfect stage. (Been through this with an agent.)

But, hey, as a writing experiment...if you wanna...you wanna.

Mira wrote:Lol. Oh ye of little faith.

I'm thinking about this, and I think the tension comes from the difference between a utopia and our current society.

Anyway, I don't know if I'm a good enough writer to do this, but it's on my radar. Sure is a literary gap here.

I think that's a good idea. JT mentioned Star Trek, which basically does what you are saying. The Federation is pretty much utopian but there is the rest of the universe that they are dealing with. Lots of hostile civilizations in space!

Obviously, it wouldn't have to be in space. If there was a utopian city or country, they would still have to contend with the other cities or countries.

Sounds like a unique setting. If you pursue it, I'd be interested in hearing more. Good luck!

wilderness wrote:JT mentioned Star Trek, which basically does what you are saying. The Federation is pretty much utopian but there is the rest of the universe that they are dealing with.

Utopia versus non-utopia works fine (provided it's written well). It's the projects with just the utopia that are flirting with non-disaster.

wilderness - thanks so much. I really appreciate the encouragement. Truly. :)

Margo - sheesh. Stop raining on my parade. I'm going to get discouraged and give up. Then I'll have to express my creativity by shelling peas and making little picture designs with them, rather than writing my UTOPIA. Behold, sadness will abound, and the clouds will weep little tears. Is that what you want? To make the clouds weep little tears? I think not.

But going back to our argument, I will say one thing. That agent, whoever they are, is wrong. Most of YA, romance and a good deal of literary fiction is purely interpersonal, or even just internal conflict. The voice is the key. The voice is always the key. Story is secondary to voice.

As for Utopian fiction, you're sort of right. Conflict within the story and not just the situation would add interest. So, you could have conflict through the human condition - death, unrequited love, the shadow - jealousy, greed, misunderstandings. You could have threats to the Utopia from within the Utopia. Can it sustain itself given human failings? In terms of external pressure, you could have external conflict through the enviornment, for example, scarcity, natural disasters, etc. if you must have external pressure.

But I think you don't really need it. Coming up with a true Utopian vision - that would carry itself, if the voice was strong enough. It would be philosophy as much as anything else.

But anyway, I'm not a good enough writer to write this yet - I'm not evolved enough as a human to write this yet. I may never be, I don't know. In this lifetime anyway. But I really believe it could be done.

Mira wrote:Margo - sheesh. Stop raining on my parade. I'm going to get discouraged and give up. Then I'll have to express my creativity by shelling peas and making little picture designs with them, rather than writing my UTOPIA. Behold, sadness will abound, and the clouds will weep little tears. Is that what you want? To make the clouds weep little tears? I think not.

If you feel strongly about it despite criticism of the concept, then maybe you are the one to do it, in spades, and make a great success of it. I'm the first one to admit that I am ruthlessly commercial and craft-oriented, though none of my credits would back me up on that. So take that for what it may be worth, and throw a good parade.

Mira wrote: But going back to our argument, I will say one thing. That agent, whoever they are, is wrong. Most of YA, romance and a good deal of literary fiction is purely interpersonal, or even just internal conflict. The voice is the key. The voice is always the key. Story is secondary to voice.

Literary fiction is a law unto itself, so no argument there. And, indeed, there are many many genre books that involve only person-v-person conflict and purely personal stakes. I have a number of issues with that, but it would likely be better to just agree to disagree.