What do you think?
Rate this book
Searching for Utopia: The History of an Idea by Gregory Claeys
From classical times to the present day, this highly illustrated book surveys the enduring human need to imagine and construct ideal worlds. Gregory Claeys, a leading scholar in the field, surveys the influence of the idea of utopia on history, literature, art, architecture and religious and political thought, and covers the most significant utopias throughout history, whether envisaged or actually attempted. Complete with a wealth of photographs, paintings, engravings, maps, documents, posters and film stills, the book is a compelling exploration of the rich diversity of the utopian imagination.
Hardcover
First published February 14, 2011
25 people are currently reading
385 people want to read
About the author
Gregory Claeys
95 books26 followersGregory Claeys was born in France and educated in Canada and the United Kingdom. He has taught in Germany and the United States and is now Professor of the History of Political Thought at Royal Holloway, University of London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
June 30, 2018
I found this book while keyword searching ‘utopia’ in the library catalogue, as it’s one of my interests. When I got round to actually reading it, the experience was both frustrating and thought-provoking. To begin with the latter, I liked the way that Claeys dealt with defining utopia as a concept. Indeed, I’m inclined to consider the first chapter the strongest of the book and the last the weakest. In the first few pages, the problem of definition is helpfully discussed:
What this discussion of definition doesn’t engage with, presumably because the author professes a distrust of postmodernism, is that utopia and dystopia are relative. A better theoretical society requires some existing society as a point of comparison. Thus some older utopias seem tiresomely sexist, while older dystopias are quaintly lacking in ubiquitous corporate and state surveillance. Lazy dystopias in popular culture are usually some variation on 'white man experiences current conditions of the poor in a failed state' (cf the film Elysium). Nonetheless, it’s a tricky challenge and the book’s definition broadly works. I liked the distinction drawn between reactionary and progressive utopias, either harking back to prelapsarian simplicity or anticipating a novel future.
I appreciated the history of utopian literature from Ancient Greek to early modern times. This brought out its religious links quite effectively, albeit not in great depth - the whole book is only 214 pages. The many colour illustrations are also rather fun. The inclusion of inset boxes with extremely brief biographies was not at all to my taste, though. It breaks up the text, which made for a lack of flow while reading, and gives an undesirable air of textbook. The biographical notes themselves are so short that they could easily have been incorporated into the main narrative. It was a weird choice not to. While I’m discussing my more superficial issues with the book, I must mention my cringing when Claeys used the words ‘utopic’, ‘utopically’, and ‘utopist’. These all have a revoltingly medical sound and are utterly unnecessary; why not just use ‘utopian’?
On a more fundamental level, I found that when the book reached the 18th century confusion and other weaknesses started to creep in. The structure of the book became somewhat muddled, jumping backward in time after reaching the 20th century at the end of a chapter. The analysis of the French Revolution was reductive and oversimplified. I also felt that the shift from discussion of theoretical to concrete manifestations of utopia wasn’t handled smoothly. Admittedly, a much longer book would be needed to do the topic any kind of justice. Still, I feel like it would have been better to go into depth on the literature of utopia, rather than trying to cover attempts at implementation. While these obviously had considerable impact on what was then written on the topic, evaluating the historical impact of communism in a measly chapter is practically meaningless.
Moreover, this evaluation was awkwardly juxtaposed with a selection of 20th century dystopian literature, without a clear enough definition of dystopia for my taste. I am firmly of the belief that post- and apocalyptic literature should be distinguished from dystopian, as they are doing different things. Utopias and dystopias can be static or dynamic, yet their central purpose is to illuminate or satirise current society and culture by systematically exploring a better or worse vision. Post- and apocalyptic literature is not about social structures, it’s about collapse, usually into individualistic survivalism. This may seem like pedantry, but isn’t that what ‘the history of an idea’ requires? I also found Claeys’ selection of 20th and 21st century utopian and dystopian writing partial, somewhat inevitably. (The same issue arose when I read Four Futures: Life After Capitalism.) In particular, it seems bizarre that he didn’t mention Iain M. Banks's post-scarcity utopia in the Culture novels. The Player of Games is the best (of those I’ve read) for illuminating the culture and society of a communist world ruled by benevolent AIs.
The final chapter was especially frustrating, as it failed to engage on more than a superficial level with questions of how utopian thought manifests in the 21st century. The possibility of utopian literature exploring a future beyond capitalism wasn’t mentioned, as if Claeys thought only dystopias are written nowadays. I’ll admit that dystopian novels are plentiful and utopian writing scarce, but it still exists. There was also an odd implication that utopian thought could only emerge from the West, despite this deconstruction of empire:
Again, this isn’t really elaborated upon and a summary does insufficient justice to the topic. I think this book needed a narrower scope, in time (up to the end of the 18th century, maybe) and/or subject (theoretical utopian writing only). As it is, 'Searching for Utopia' reads like its trying to be an introductory textbook and not really getting away with it. The final discursive chapter is strangely rambling and adds little to what came before. Although I found parts informative and liked most of the pretty pictures, overall it wasn’t a satisfying experience. My search for books about utopia continues.
Incidentally, this is the 100th book I’ve read in the first six months of 2018. Although that wasn’t a target, the round number is very pleasing.
For the term ‘utopia’ to be meaningful, it cannot embrace every aspiration to social improvement. [...] Neither can utopia be reduced to psychological impulse, dream, fantasy, projection, desire, or wish, although these may underpin its creation or discovery. [...] To provide a workable definition of ‘utopia’, then, is challenging. [...] One way of doing so is to postulate that more’s seminal text ‘Utopia’ offers a quasi-realistic account of a vastly improved society. Human nature here is not perfect, for crime still exists. Yet a more collectivist system of laws, manners, and mutual consent ensures a vastly happier and better-ordered commonwealth. We can work outwards, then, from this ‘realistic’ core definition, which seemingly places less strain on human capability and credibility, to more elusive, dreamier, less likely scenarios of greater virtue, order, and pleasure...
What this discussion of definition doesn’t engage with, presumably because the author professes a distrust of postmodernism, is that utopia and dystopia are relative. A better theoretical society requires some existing society as a point of comparison. Thus some older utopias seem tiresomely sexist, while older dystopias are quaintly lacking in ubiquitous corporate and state surveillance. Lazy dystopias in popular culture are usually some variation on 'white man experiences current conditions of the poor in a failed state' (cf the film Elysium). Nonetheless, it’s a tricky challenge and the book’s definition broadly works. I liked the distinction drawn between reactionary and progressive utopias, either harking back to prelapsarian simplicity or anticipating a novel future.
I appreciated the history of utopian literature from Ancient Greek to early modern times. This brought out its religious links quite effectively, albeit not in great depth - the whole book is only 214 pages. The many colour illustrations are also rather fun. The inclusion of inset boxes with extremely brief biographies was not at all to my taste, though. It breaks up the text, which made for a lack of flow while reading, and gives an undesirable air of textbook. The biographical notes themselves are so short that they could easily have been incorporated into the main narrative. It was a weird choice not to. While I’m discussing my more superficial issues with the book, I must mention my cringing when Claeys used the words ‘utopic’, ‘utopically’, and ‘utopist’. These all have a revoltingly medical sound and are utterly unnecessary; why not just use ‘utopian’?
On a more fundamental level, I found that when the book reached the 18th century confusion and other weaknesses started to creep in. The structure of the book became somewhat muddled, jumping backward in time after reaching the 20th century at the end of a chapter. The analysis of the French Revolution was reductive and oversimplified. I also felt that the shift from discussion of theoretical to concrete manifestations of utopia wasn’t handled smoothly. Admittedly, a much longer book would be needed to do the topic any kind of justice. Still, I feel like it would have been better to go into depth on the literature of utopia, rather than trying to cover attempts at implementation. While these obviously had considerable impact on what was then written on the topic, evaluating the historical impact of communism in a measly chapter is practically meaningless.
Moreover, this evaluation was awkwardly juxtaposed with a selection of 20th century dystopian literature, without a clear enough definition of dystopia for my taste. I am firmly of the belief that post- and apocalyptic literature should be distinguished from dystopian, as they are doing different things. Utopias and dystopias can be static or dynamic, yet their central purpose is to illuminate or satirise current society and culture by systematically exploring a better or worse vision. Post- and apocalyptic literature is not about social structures, it’s about collapse, usually into individualistic survivalism. This may seem like pedantry, but isn’t that what ‘the history of an idea’ requires? I also found Claeys’ selection of 20th and 21st century utopian and dystopian writing partial, somewhat inevitably. (The same issue arose when I read Four Futures: Life After Capitalism.) In particular, it seems bizarre that he didn’t mention Iain M. Banks's post-scarcity utopia in the Culture novels. The Player of Games is the best (of those I’ve read) for illuminating the culture and society of a communist world ruled by benevolent AIs.
The final chapter was especially frustrating, as it failed to engage on more than a superficial level with questions of how utopian thought manifests in the 21st century. The possibility of utopian literature exploring a future beyond capitalism wasn’t mentioned, as if Claeys thought only dystopias are written nowadays. I’ll admit that dystopian novels are plentiful and utopian writing scarce, but it still exists. There was also an odd implication that utopian thought could only emerge from the West, despite this deconstruction of empire:
We lament the fifty-five thousand dead of the Reign of Terror in France, the twenty million or so killed by Stalin, and the seventy million victims of Mao. But we more rarely recall the one hundred million or so who died under European imperialism in the 19th century alone, and the similar numbers that died during the conquest of the Americas. The great European empires were ‘utopias’ to their designers - extravagant dreams of national and personal glory, imposing order on vast populations of unwashed, heathen savages, but they were also dystopias to those who had no wish to be ‘civilised’ so violently.
Again, this isn’t really elaborated upon and a summary does insufficient justice to the topic. I think this book needed a narrower scope, in time (up to the end of the 18th century, maybe) and/or subject (theoretical utopian writing only). As it is, 'Searching for Utopia' reads like its trying to be an introductory textbook and not really getting away with it. The final discursive chapter is strangely rambling and adds little to what came before. Although I found parts informative and liked most of the pretty pictures, overall it wasn’t a satisfying experience. My search for books about utopia continues.
Incidentally, this is the 100th book I’ve read in the first six months of 2018. Although that wasn’t a target, the round number is very pleasing.
December 27, 2021
fiquei presa nesse livro durante muito tempo.
ainda não sei dizer se foi uma experiência boa de leitura, mas foi bastante inspirador e me levou por caminhos que eu não tinha percorrido ainda.
ainda não sei dizer se foi uma experiência boa de leitura, mas foi bastante inspirador e me levou por caminhos que eu não tinha percorrido ainda.
September 13, 2020
Two things bugged me while reading. First is the books anthropocentrism. It may well be argued that the utopia itself is a human invention, however, does a book about utopia should only cover human utopias? Second is the definition of utopia. If the net we cast goes as wide as to cover the Wizard of Oz or Gulliver's Travels, what is then left out of it? What a utopia is not if it entails fantasy as well?
Other than these, it is a solid account of all human beings' efforts to construct an ideal society, which is impossible because of its relativity, whether through religion, ethics and/or income equality. I especially liked the Ideal Cities chapter.
Other than these, it is a solid account of all human beings' efforts to construct an ideal society, which is impossible because of its relativity, whether through religion, ethics and/or income equality. I especially liked the Ideal Cities chapter.
May 9, 2020
It's definitely a nice overview of different utopias, but the what is tiring as a reader is the list-like fashion that the subject is dealt with. The author is just so excited to go on to the next example, and then the next example, and then the next. There is very little depth of the idea itself and how it has been developed. There is no clear line of thought or argument throughout. Good for a quick first glance at the subject perhaps.
August 25, 2023
best book I’ve read in months cheers Greg
November 22, 2020
There's not much narrative in this history, as it reads more like a chronological catalogue of all the works that fall under the author's definition of "Utopia", which according to him is a narrative that tries to show a realistic way towards crafting a better society. The introduction and conclusion are where his voice shines the most, while in-between, he serves more as a tour guide towards the history of what utopian literature has been, throughout the millennia.
While there isn't a very strong emotional narrative here to hook the reader throughout, the book more than makes up for it with a comprehensive, if shallow, look at an idea that's popped up again and again over the centuries, which is impressive in terms of scope alone.
While there isn't a very strong emotional narrative here to hook the reader throughout, the book more than makes up for it with a comprehensive, if shallow, look at an idea that's popped up again and again over the centuries, which is impressive in terms of scope alone.
November 22, 2020
I expected a deeper look into utopian ideas, whereas it was more of an overview tome. A bit like a lecture at the university with all this information you need to memorize for the exam, but not too much analysis. But in the end, it does give you a better idea of the history of the utopian genre.
June 18, 2021
Picking up a theme that runs through the history of politics, philosophy, and literature appears as a very intriguing concept to me. In this small book, Gregory Claeys draws his attention to utopia - the no-place manifesting the perfect society. Claeys account of this simple yet profound idea runs from ancient thinkers to recent Science Fiction movies. This scope is impressive but -crucially - I missed the argument. Instead of focussing on certain key texts and analyzing their historical backgrounds and impacts, it read more like an enumeration of every source Claeys was able to research. The grey boxes containing additional information about the author are oftentimes not necessary to understand the bigger picture. Further, each chapter elaborates on a 'historical era' of imagining utopia. However, the various authors in these themes frequently overlap, giving rise to a repetitive reading experience. Only the conclusion offers a glimpse of some argument with Claeys advocating the need to create our own utopias. Yet, this claim is only loosely connected to the preceding 180 pages and thus questions their validity. Why do we need to know the History of an Idea, when it is independently reinvented in the present? Claeys fails to answer this key question.
Ideas related to utopia in the past are profound, surprisingly diverse, and deeply intriguing. They tell a lot about historical circumstances and how to imagine the future. Therefore, Searching for Utopia: The History of an Idea seemed full of potential for me but failed to deliver. It still provides a thoroughly researched overview of key texts and concise biographies of authors. Yet, the questions about legitimacy and imagination of modern utopias are left open and provide an intellectual niche to be filled with novel, creative and clever answers.
Ideas related to utopia in the past are profound, surprisingly diverse, and deeply intriguing. They tell a lot about historical circumstances and how to imagine the future. Therefore, Searching for Utopia: The History of an Idea seemed full of potential for me but failed to deliver. It still provides a thoroughly researched overview of key texts and concise biographies of authors. Yet, the questions about legitimacy and imagination of modern utopias are left open and provide an intellectual niche to be filled with novel, creative and clever answers.
December 1, 2020
First and foremost, I am deeply impressed by the big picture and wide knowledge the author shows.
He defines Utopia as a space, where harmony, peace, pleasure, and desirable things are pursued through communitarian ties, just regulations, and equal (not necessarily egalitarian but most of them are) distribution of property.
Utopia, differed from religious paradise, is a place between possible and impossible. It is possible as it's portrayed to exist sometime and somewhere. In hidden island or historical golden age. However, its essence and manifestos are entwined with religion and ideologies.
The overall structure of the book can be catalogued roughly in chronological order:
1. the pre-modern Utopic illusion:
Nostalgic backward looking: Golden age, Arcadia, shepherds of Hellenistic time, Eden, from which humans are expelled.
A pliable place: Ship wreck or fleeing voyage to a new wonderland. Like Gulliver's Travels and Thomas More's Utopia (Sorry it takes a while to distinguish between this philosophical lawyer and another romantic poet) He very thoroughly cites Chinese Tao Hua Yuan. I would say it's a very fair non-western case.
However, we see deviations from this positive portrayal. Oriental world of moral decay, monstrous islands which is fatal to pioneers, in which foreshadow the imperialism- well I don't agree with this presentism, stating everything as tilting to our notorious 19th century. Dehumanizing your enemy and brutally taking over their territory is a human species' motif. Nonetheless, we did sense vibe of modern colonization in Thomas More's most famous novel: the ideal community forcing displacement and expansion from their original birthplace, in order to mitigate population density.
2. In the mid of modernization, progression and reaction
Enlightenment, French Revolution, and American Revolution, and urbanization-
Hey! My favourite era! My dear Lord!
So, enlightenment, or much earlier, during Medieval age and early Renaissance. science is already worshiped. e.g. Alchemy and elixir. The technological progress to promote human welfare and aid longevity-overcome the mortality-very desirable.
American revolution is a watershed of Utopian history, which more or less is ironically entwined with Religion. The school of Millionaire predicts a holy nation reborning from degeneration of old continent. Here comes great U.S.A.
However, the blood-shedding French Revolution, the mad scientist Frankenstein, the grey, gloomy and killing smog of Victorian England- the dystopia side is revealed. The building of human- the pursuit of a idealistic world- will human lose their grip?
The last dark cloud looming over the flat plain of modernity is social Darwinism. The racial depiction of future, half sarcastic and half solemn, echoes with the Nietzsche's misconception of Superman. No further explanations is needed here.
The reaction is equally nostalgic, with Morris' presenting handmade workshops and pastoral life. But forget not, it's the age when Socialism is breed. The old egalitarian community of More is practiced by Owen. The mass production and concentration of workers in the factory actually provide an excellent ground for communitarian experiment. A Gemeinshaft (for god sake why i am using German) is built on the standardizing capitalism streamline. For god's sake, this is too ironical.
3. The last knell of this drive to hell
Science-fiction is another form of utopia: it corresponds to the pattern: the technological progress, a new human society, the great discovery through inter-stellar voyage.
Dystopia novels bloom after Stalin and Hitler show the catastrophic combine of totalitarian regime and modern technology. The hair, the 10-meter long hair in Holocaust. What's worse? Apocalyptic Nuclear war？
But do not dystopia and utopia come more and more closer? The permeation of power penetrated into the most micro level. Think of the genetic engineering, the ecological disasters, and every new inventions that keep baffling us. Is Mary Shelley's Monster giggling behind the curtains of our ignorance and arrogance?
I raise my counter-argument: Carnage, atrocities, and crimes stain every page of human history. This seigneurial account is rarely reflected in dystopic laments. Why? Cuz native Indians, slaves, serfs have no voice and ink in this elitism search for nowhere. We are, as intellectuals, fear our priviliges being deprived and desire a new society where our liberties can be fully stretched. Those who are experiencing a real dystopic non-romantic reality without extrications stay silent. But yes, things are different, so are disasters. We shall always keep a vigilent eye to any new progress, as our record is not innocent at all.
4. Cul-de-sac Post-modern
We believe not in the past glory, nor in the future progress. We eye the world with suspicion, and react with hedonistic pursuit of pleasure. We seek communities in temporary utopian spaces: concerts and churches, (perhaps party rally) It's the closest place we can approach a dream society.
1. escapism: from daily sorrows
2. infantilisms: to revive the entertainment of childhood- to seek pleasure from magic and non-scientific stories
3. Reconstruct social bonds under anomie and atomism.
I dont find the conclusion good. It's provocative and inspiring as it relates the lack of utopia to the identity politics and all sorts of modern symptoms. While criticizing our surrender to consumerism entertainment.
He proposes a "non-utopian utopia" to be desired. We can, rationally, reasonably, and critically accept a “harmless version” of utopia. If that will direct us to improve the society.
Sorry. this notion is utopic enough. A image of what the future sounds eerily authoritarian. You can say we shall be moral and have hope.
Is he positing a way too broad definition on this vaguely defined, fluid, and largely literary concept? I would say yes. The idea of utopia is linguistical, psychological and political. I would love to see more deciphers from these three areas, combining with the relevant methodologies. It's a shame that the author fails to do so. The mechanism is not mentioned. It appears to me a descriptive dictionary. The author put a over emphasize on religion (especially Christian religion) But misses the famous community which is also entitled "earthly heaven"-our dear, ever-lasting nationalism! It's almost a manifestation of utopic thought.
All in all, i would love to see more how these ideas are interactive with reality. But I understand it's called a history of idea. It's just not meta-physical to me.
He defines Utopia as a space, where harmony, peace, pleasure, and desirable things are pursued through communitarian ties, just regulations, and equal (not necessarily egalitarian but most of them are) distribution of property.
Utopia, differed from religious paradise, is a place between possible and impossible. It is possible as it's portrayed to exist sometime and somewhere. In hidden island or historical golden age. However, its essence and manifestos are entwined with religion and ideologies.
The overall structure of the book can be catalogued roughly in chronological order:
1. the pre-modern Utopic illusion:
Nostalgic backward looking: Golden age, Arcadia, shepherds of Hellenistic time, Eden, from which humans are expelled.
A pliable place: Ship wreck or fleeing voyage to a new wonderland. Like Gulliver's Travels and Thomas More's Utopia (Sorry it takes a while to distinguish between this philosophical lawyer and another romantic poet) He very thoroughly cites Chinese Tao Hua Yuan. I would say it's a very fair non-western case.
However, we see deviations from this positive portrayal. Oriental world of moral decay, monstrous islands which is fatal to pioneers, in which foreshadow the imperialism- well I don't agree with this presentism, stating everything as tilting to our notorious 19th century. Dehumanizing your enemy and brutally taking over their territory is a human species' motif. Nonetheless, we did sense vibe of modern colonization in Thomas More's most famous novel: the ideal community forcing displacement and expansion from their original birthplace, in order to mitigate population density.
2. In the mid of modernization, progression and reaction
Enlightenment, French Revolution, and American Revolution, and urbanization-
Hey! My favourite era! My dear Lord!
So, enlightenment, or much earlier, during Medieval age and early Renaissance. science is already worshiped. e.g. Alchemy and elixir. The technological progress to promote human welfare and aid longevity-overcome the mortality-very desirable.
American revolution is a watershed of Utopian history, which more or less is ironically entwined with Religion. The school of Millionaire predicts a holy nation reborning from degeneration of old continent. Here comes great U.S.A.
However, the blood-shedding French Revolution, the mad scientist Frankenstein, the grey, gloomy and killing smog of Victorian England- the dystopia side is revealed. The building of human- the pursuit of a idealistic world- will human lose their grip?
The last dark cloud looming over the flat plain of modernity is social Darwinism. The racial depiction of future, half sarcastic and half solemn, echoes with the Nietzsche's misconception of Superman. No further explanations is needed here.
The reaction is equally nostalgic, with Morris' presenting handmade workshops and pastoral life. But forget not, it's the age when Socialism is breed. The old egalitarian community of More is practiced by Owen. The mass production and concentration of workers in the factory actually provide an excellent ground for communitarian experiment. A Gemeinshaft (for god sake why i am using German) is built on the standardizing capitalism streamline. For god's sake, this is too ironical.
3. The last knell of this drive to hell
Science-fiction is another form of utopia: it corresponds to the pattern: the technological progress, a new human society, the great discovery through inter-stellar voyage.
Dystopia novels bloom after Stalin and Hitler show the catastrophic combine of totalitarian regime and modern technology. The hair, the 10-meter long hair in Holocaust. What's worse? Apocalyptic Nuclear war？
But do not dystopia and utopia come more and more closer? The permeation of power penetrated into the most micro level. Think of the genetic engineering, the ecological disasters, and every new inventions that keep baffling us. Is Mary Shelley's Monster giggling behind the curtains of our ignorance and arrogance?
I raise my counter-argument: Carnage, atrocities, and crimes stain every page of human history. This seigneurial account is rarely reflected in dystopic laments. Why? Cuz native Indians, slaves, serfs have no voice and ink in this elitism search for nowhere. We are, as intellectuals, fear our priviliges being deprived and desire a new society where our liberties can be fully stretched. Those who are experiencing a real dystopic non-romantic reality without extrications stay silent. But yes, things are different, so are disasters. We shall always keep a vigilent eye to any new progress, as our record is not innocent at all.
4. Cul-de-sac Post-modern
We believe not in the past glory, nor in the future progress. We eye the world with suspicion, and react with hedonistic pursuit of pleasure. We seek communities in temporary utopian spaces: concerts and churches, (perhaps party rally) It's the closest place we can approach a dream society.
1. escapism: from daily sorrows
2. infantilisms: to revive the entertainment of childhood- to seek pleasure from magic and non-scientific stories
3. Reconstruct social bonds under anomie and atomism.
I dont find the conclusion good. It's provocative and inspiring as it relates the lack of utopia to the identity politics and all sorts of modern symptoms. While criticizing our surrender to consumerism entertainment.
He proposes a "non-utopian utopia" to be desired. We can, rationally, reasonably, and critically accept a “harmless version” of utopia. If that will direct us to improve the society.
Sorry. this notion is utopic enough. A image of what the future sounds eerily authoritarian. You can say we shall be moral and have hope.
Is he positing a way too broad definition on this vaguely defined, fluid, and largely literary concept? I would say yes. The idea of utopia is linguistical, psychological and political. I would love to see more deciphers from these three areas, combining with the relevant methodologies. It's a shame that the author fails to do so. The mechanism is not mentioned. It appears to me a descriptive dictionary. The author put a over emphasize on religion (especially Christian religion) But misses the famous community which is also entitled "earthly heaven"-our dear, ever-lasting nationalism! It's almost a manifestation of utopic thought.
All in all, i would love to see more how these ideas are interactive with reality. But I understand it's called a history of idea. It's just not meta-physical to me.
August 8, 2021
I have been reading utopian/dystopian books for a while and inevitably come to my own conclusions.
My overall thoughts are that the European medieval Christian world believed the world was so bad that utopia could only exist after you were dead and offered their own solution which was to give a glimpse in the churches and cathedrals built at the time. This dream was them privatised to use a modern term by Henry VIII (and others) and utopia now could only be glimpsed in the houses of the rich. It was not a shared solution but those excluded but fortunate enough could work their way into small corners of the vision. This in turn gave way to a more inclusive vision of utopia principally given by the guilt of some of the fortunate with a conscience by the right to vote, workers rights and the building of social housing which gave common people (respectful deserving at least) their chance. This was of course destroyed when social housing became a dumping ground for the undeserving and now workers rights are receding.
However the dream has been preserved and now utopia is to be found and glimpses seen in magazines, books, films and TV of our modern culture. Which if you think about it is where we were 1000 years ago!
Of course little to non of this is in this book. He does mention Science Fiction which is often utopian/dystopian (the two seldom far from each other) and does mention Ursula K. Le Guin where I do share common thoughts but fails to mention my favorite utopian of Iain M. Banks's 'Culture' which is where my own preference for utopia lie.
My overall thoughts are that the European medieval Christian world believed the world was so bad that utopia could only exist after you were dead and offered their own solution which was to give a glimpse in the churches and cathedrals built at the time. This dream was them privatised to use a modern term by Henry VIII (and others) and utopia now could only be glimpsed in the houses of the rich. It was not a shared solution but those excluded but fortunate enough could work their way into small corners of the vision. This in turn gave way to a more inclusive vision of utopia principally given by the guilt of some of the fortunate with a conscience by the right to vote, workers rights and the building of social housing which gave common people (respectful deserving at least) their chance. This was of course destroyed when social housing became a dumping ground for the undeserving and now workers rights are receding.
However the dream has been preserved and now utopia is to be found and glimpses seen in magazines, books, films and TV of our modern culture. Which if you think about it is where we were 1000 years ago!
Of course little to non of this is in this book. He does mention Science Fiction which is often utopian/dystopian (the two seldom far from each other) and does mention Ursula K. Le Guin where I do share common thoughts but fails to mention my favorite utopian of Iain M. Banks's 'Culture' which is where my own preference for utopia lie.
November 4, 2025
Their are a few chapters worth rereading, otherwise it reads like a list of utopian fiction. so cool to have it all put into perspective though. I would have liked some more analysis. Fantastic introduction, and less so the conclusion
April 11, 2022
A very basic introduction - not bad for what it is, but nothing very groundbreaking.
July 17, 2024
A breezy trot through a *lot* of ideas or events that can, in some way, be tied to the idea of 'Utopia,' but not exactly the history of the idea of Utopia--minimal begriffsgeschichte here.
August 9, 2011
As utopias, prometendo libertação das dores contemporâneas, contêm em si uma forte semente totalitária. Uma utopia social implica sempre um consenso entre os indivíduos para que ajam de formas semelhantes e se conformem a um ideal comum, o que dá a estas ideias um carácter paradoxal: propostas libertadoras de constrangimentos das realidades contemporâneas que implicam submissão.
Claeys traça em Searching for Utopia uma história alargada desta ideia transversal à humanidade, centrando-se por necessidade (a existência de uma forte tradição literária) no pensamento ocidental. O autor procura ser abrangente, focando as evoluções das utopias desde a tradição greco-romana das eras de ouro, olhando para ideários não ocidentais, e mostrando um desenvolvimento explosivo de ideias utópicas desde que a idade da razão suplantou a tradição judaico-cristã no pensamento. É a partir daqui que o conceito se expande para propostas imediatas, que muitas vezes foram tentadas na prática, dando à utopia um carácter interventivo que não estava presente em eras anteriores, onde se ficava por nostalgia por eras passadas ou aspiração espiritual a um mundo imaterial pós-vida.
O autor olha com atenção para as utopias científicas, quer as decorrentes da história da ciência quer os voos imaginários da ficção científica, e mostra o que pode acontecer de errado quando uma ideia utópica toma conta de uma nação através de retratos críticos do sangue escorrido nas implementações de utopias comunistas.
Este livro encerra-se numa nota deprimente, nesta era em convulsão em que perante os enormes desafios sociais e ambientais e uma descrença nas utopias anda no ar um ideário de desespero perante a potencial desagregação da civilização humana. No entanto, se há algo que as utopias nos ensinam é a ter fé na possibilidade de um futuro, apesar de as tentativas de o prever geralmente não corresponderem ao que a passagem do tempo nos traz.
Claeys traça em Searching for Utopia uma história alargada desta ideia transversal à humanidade, centrando-se por necessidade (a existência de uma forte tradição literária) no pensamento ocidental. O autor procura ser abrangente, focando as evoluções das utopias desde a tradição greco-romana das eras de ouro, olhando para ideários não ocidentais, e mostrando um desenvolvimento explosivo de ideias utópicas desde que a idade da razão suplantou a tradição judaico-cristã no pensamento. É a partir daqui que o conceito se expande para propostas imediatas, que muitas vezes foram tentadas na prática, dando à utopia um carácter interventivo que não estava presente em eras anteriores, onde se ficava por nostalgia por eras passadas ou aspiração espiritual a um mundo imaterial pós-vida.
O autor olha com atenção para as utopias científicas, quer as decorrentes da história da ciência quer os voos imaginários da ficção científica, e mostra o que pode acontecer de errado quando uma ideia utópica toma conta de uma nação através de retratos críticos do sangue escorrido nas implementações de utopias comunistas.
Este livro encerra-se numa nota deprimente, nesta era em convulsão em que perante os enormes desafios sociais e ambientais e uma descrença nas utopias anda no ar um ideário de desespero perante a potencial desagregação da civilização humana. No entanto, se há algo que as utopias nos ensinam é a ter fé na possibilidade de um futuro, apesar de as tentativas de o prever geralmente não corresponderem ao que a passagem do tempo nos traz.
February 3, 2016
Following on from my enjoyment of fiction, particularly We by Zamyatin, Brave New World and 1984; I read this for inspiration for a literary bibliography. The book is well researched, mostly a philosophical analysis, but sure enough within the text gave me ideas of which other fictional works I would like. Although it could be improved with a complete bibliographical list of fictional works at the back, nonetheless it covered pretty much what I wanted and expected.
July 14, 2021
Hot garbage! Makes unsupported claims throughout the book, barely references, and is just regurgitating his own worldview throughout the entirety of the book. I have no doubt that Claeys is well-read, and is even knowledgeable on the history of utopia, but the book is more Claeys's thoughts on utopia vs. the history of the idea.
September 12, 2021
Ok this is not a novel so can be heavy going at times but is essential reading for anyone taking on Utopian fiction at degree level or above. Explains the history of the utopian ideal, analysing where it failed and where it succeeded with detail examples and a comprehensive reading list for future/further studies.
November 28, 2023
An ultimately disappointing historical overview of utopian literature. It remains quite interesting until it reaches the 20th century, at which point becomes an embarrassingly shallow account of utopian science fiction and thought produced then (Star Trek is entirely missing, for instance, no mention of Marcuse and other utopian thinkers of the 1960s...)
December 2, 2023
When utopia exists as an ideal, it gives us the courage and confidence to survive, and when utopia becomes a practice of rules, it robs us of our freedoms and rights, and as Kress puts it, "too much Spartan might and too little revelry, too much celibacy and too little celebration, too much work and too little play." I don't think I'm willing to pay that price.
December 30, 2013
Kind of your standard museum book; beautifully designed, wonderfully laid out with images and paintings. Claeys does a fine job discussing utopia as a concept and how it has been treated, and in the tail end of the book goes into it's opposites. I enjoyed it, but it belongs on a coffee table.
December 21, 2015
A gloriuosly illustrated historical overview of the idea and attempted practice of Utopianism. With many topics discussed, but not in much detail, and informative biographical snippet sidebars, this book is a fine jumping off point for those interested in further exploring Utopia.
October 19, 2020
Nice literature review of Utopian art and thinking throughout the ages. Will be a good thing to have on my bookshelf for pulling other books off of the shelf on certain themes or thoughts I might have on the topic.
January 12, 2024
If nothing else, a great bibliography.
Want to read
November 15, 2016As individuals, we all labor to "feather our nest" and in special interest groups and in various ages of the past there have been efforts expended to nurture the ideal of everything working in harmony; Utopian. This book looks good.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews