Utopia in the 16th Century
How did Thomas More's Utopia set the standard for Utopian creation?
How did More's assumption of Utopia as "no-place" allow future
Utopians to have relative freedom in content and purpose of their Utopias?
“[T]here have always been the poetical thinkers and philosophical dreamers,
who, when troubled by the social evils around them, or roused to indignation
and pity by the crying injustice of the ruling classes, and the hopeless condition
of the poor, respectively, have given vent to their feelings”
-Moritz Kaufmann 1878
The Island of Utopia (FIgure 7)
In the early 16th century, Sir Thomas More began his own poetical thinking and philosophical dreaming in an England that lacked security, social compassion, and sustainability. In More’s England, the Tudor reign was increasingly preoccupied with royal matters, which ultimately left the English citizenry exploited for royal benefit. Aside from the financial difficulties that plagued the island nation, the English also were suffering from the repercussions and the oppressive nature of a bloody religious battle that raged among Catholic, Anglican, and separatist Protestant sects. Agriculture, too, was a pressing matter in More’s time; the Black Plague had ravaged the English population, killing many among the agricultural class. The English system of enclosure, which restricted use and availability of arable lands, further negatively affected the few knowledgeable producers that remained.
In response to these pressing political and social troubles, More created his Utopia. Set apart from the rest of the world, isolated not only in space but also in practice, More’s Utopia attempted to shed light on English issues by inverting their historically conflict-causing practices. Utopia’s inversions “aimed at social improvements and reforms” (Kaufmann 2) by implementing social and political structures that eradicated the sources of England’s difficulties. In Utopia, More inverted England’s political hierarchy so that power can from the people up. Democracy in Utopia encouraged participatory politics and alleviated the English issue of political oppression and royal abuse of power. Communal ownership was the foundation of societal structuring in Utopia and thus showed how private property, entailments, and landholdings created disadvantages not only for the agricultural class but also limited the possibilities of production. |
Responding to the issue of religious violence and discontent at home More created the practice of religious tolerance. A devotee himself, More recognized the moral advantage of religious training—using “certain religious principles to supplement the operations of reason” (More Location1620)—In Utopia however, there are no punishments for religious difference, and toleration is mandatory, avoiding religious persecution and enabling one religion to rise above others as superior helps to maintain social cohesion and harmony. Barbara Goodwin and Keith Taylor explain the consistent use of religious deference and teaching as it is “often able to serve the crucial function of creating positive commitment to a socialist movement” (Goodwin and Taylor 139). More’s Utopia can be considered “the most significant literary landmark” (Goodwin and Taylor 147). Not only did More coin the Utopian term but he also set a standard structure for how Utopias were created in the future. More’s text set the stage for future Utopias in that imagined societies that could not exist in reality, at the time, could provide a heuristic with which the ills of contemporary societies could be viewed. Many future Utopias would follow More’s pattern in criticizing existing social conditions, while others would be influenced by More’s spatial and complete creation of an alternate society. Whatever future Utopians would implement in their schemes they are all influenced in some regard by Sir Thomas More’s originating work. |
With communal ownership and obligatory participation, society can “provide a competency of means for the enjoyment of all, and [sic] exact at the same time a corresponding exertion from all members of society” (Kaufmann 2). The common ownership and production within More’s Utopia would influence almost all Utopias of the future and the concept of sharing and the collective good would be consistently enforced as well. Utopians always had “plenty to spare for their neighbours” (More Location 1253); never providing for some that which they could not provide for the many.