重新思考乌托邦和乌托邦主义

IF 0.4 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Utopian Studies Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.5325/utopianstudies.34.1.0137
William James Metcalf
{"title":"重新思考乌托邦和乌托邦主义","authors":"William James Metcalf","doi":"10.5325/utopianstudies.34.1.0137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the field of utopian studies, Lyman Tower Sargent is well known and respected globally. His new book, Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism, is well written, witty, and persuasively argued, reflecting on, and updating, his life’s work. It includes several previously published pieces, such as Sargent’s oft-cited “The Three Faces of Utopianism Revisited” (1994), along with his current thinking across the broad field of utopian studies.Sargent admits to naiveté when, as a young scholar in the 1960s, he set out to write a “history of utopian literature”—probably thinking it wouldn’t take long! This field, he soon found, ever expands the more one looks. Sargent continues to look for, and discover, examples from around the world—many of which he has made available online in Utopian Literature in English: An Annotated Bibliography from 1516 to the Present.1 But now, at eighty-two years of age, he accepts that this project will require “quite a few lifetimes, lifetimes that are not available to me, so I hope that others will take up these topics” (349).Sargent thinks utopianism is best understood as “social dreaming—the dreams and nightmares that concern the ways in which groups of people arrange their lives and which usually involve a radically different society” (7). Utopia, he points out, “expresses deep-seated needs, desires and hopes” (42). This, he asserts, is a universal phenomenon—part of being human—certainly not confined to the Western Christian tradition, as some scholars have argued.We must be careful, Sargent warns, not to equate utopia with perfection; utopias are about betterment, not perfection. He argues that equating utopia with perfection is a ruse employed “by those opposed to the idea that human beings can bring about significant social change and is intended to undermine that possibility” (323). Sargent argues that all humans “need the idea that a better life is possible” (325) and this is what utopianism provides.As someone who has spent much of my professional life studying intentional communities, I have always recognized that almost all such groups have an underlying utopian impulse. So I came to utopianism research as a subset of intentional communities research. Sargent, on the other hand, sees “communitarianism as a sub-category of utopianism” (85). He acknowledges that intentional community members are “trying to find better ways of living together, making decisions about all important aspects of life, whether it is political, economic, religious, or sexual. . . . They are actually doing with their own lives what literary utopias describe in words” (93). Perhaps our different paths are a bit like asking whether the chicken or egg came first?Sargent quite correctly observes that many intentional community members reject the label of “utopian” because they confuse it with the naïve, and unobtainable notion of perfection—and I have often observed the same. Nevertheless Sargent asserts “that continued utopian thinking is essential to the overcoming of the dystopian reality of . . . the last century” (178). This, he argues, is why intentional communities are important test sites for enacting utopian dreams.In discussing dystopia, Sargent points out how utopian aspirations occasionally lead to the creation of dystopias. “The hopes of communism became the dystopia of Stalinism. . . . The utopian dreams of Pol Pot became the dystopia of Kampuchea” (172). “Utopian visions from Lenin to the Taliban that purported to have the potential of producing an enhanced life have been hijacked and turned into dystopias” (175). While acknowledging that some colonization schemes, particularly for New Zealand and South Australia, had a utopian angle, nevertheless those schemes generally created dystopia for the Indigenous peoples. “The original inhabitants’” idea of the good life “inconveniently did not include having their land stolen, being enslaved, and being slaughtered” (262).That reminds us that utopianism, like beauty, lies in the eye of the beholder. Sargent offers a wonderful personal example, “my utopia would include a strong right to die” whenever and however he chooses (240). While this might seem odd to younger readers, being of a similar age to Sargent, I agree 110%. “We must choose Utopia,” Sargent concludes; “We must choose the belief that the world can be radically improved; we must dream socially; and we must allow our social dreams to affect our lives. The choice for Utopia is a choice that the world can be radically improved” (195–96). That said, Sargent sagaciously reminds us that one must never assume that one’s own utopia can or should be universally applied. We must modestly “accept that we may be wrong; that there are utopian dreams as good as, perhaps even better than ours, which means that we have to do the hard mental and emotional work of evaluating our own visions as well as those of others. Being a utopian is not easy, but that is when it is most necessary” (351).Anyone seriously interested in utopian (and communal) studies should read Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism. It will become one of the seminal texts in the broad field of utopian studies.","PeriodicalId":44751,"journal":{"name":"Utopian Studies","volume":"201 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism\",\"authors\":\"William James Metcalf\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/utopianstudies.34.1.0137\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the field of utopian studies, Lyman Tower Sargent is well known and respected globally. His new book, Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism, is well written, witty, and persuasively argued, reflecting on, and updating, his life’s work. It includes several previously published pieces, such as Sargent’s oft-cited “The Three Faces of Utopianism Revisited” (1994), along with his current thinking across the broad field of utopian studies.Sargent admits to naiveté when, as a young scholar in the 1960s, he set out to write a “history of utopian literature”—probably thinking it wouldn’t take long! This field, he soon found, ever expands the more one looks. Sargent continues to look for, and discover, examples from around the world—many of which he has made available online in Utopian Literature in English: An Annotated Bibliography from 1516 to the Present.1 But now, at eighty-two years of age, he accepts that this project will require “quite a few lifetimes, lifetimes that are not available to me, so I hope that others will take up these topics” (349).Sargent thinks utopianism is best understood as “social dreaming—the dreams and nightmares that concern the ways in which groups of people arrange their lives and which usually involve a radically different society” (7). Utopia, he points out, “expresses deep-seated needs, desires and hopes” (42). This, he asserts, is a universal phenomenon—part of being human—certainly not confined to the Western Christian tradition, as some scholars have argued.We must be careful, Sargent warns, not to equate utopia with perfection; utopias are about betterment, not perfection. He argues that equating utopia with perfection is a ruse employed “by those opposed to the idea that human beings can bring about significant social change and is intended to undermine that possibility” (323). Sargent argues that all humans “need the idea that a better life is possible” (325) and this is what utopianism provides.As someone who has spent much of my professional life studying intentional communities, I have always recognized that almost all such groups have an underlying utopian impulse. So I came to utopianism research as a subset of intentional communities research. Sargent, on the other hand, sees “communitarianism as a sub-category of utopianism” (85). He acknowledges that intentional community members are “trying to find better ways of living together, making decisions about all important aspects of life, whether it is political, economic, religious, or sexual. . . . They are actually doing with their own lives what literary utopias describe in words” (93). Perhaps our different paths are a bit like asking whether the chicken or egg came first?Sargent quite correctly observes that many intentional community members reject the label of “utopian” because they confuse it with the naïve, and unobtainable notion of perfection—and I have often observed the same. Nevertheless Sargent asserts “that continued utopian thinking is essential to the overcoming of the dystopian reality of . . . the last century” (178). This, he argues, is why intentional communities are important test sites for enacting utopian dreams.In discussing dystopia, Sargent points out how utopian aspirations occasionally lead to the creation of dystopias. “The hopes of communism became the dystopia of Stalinism. . . . The utopian dreams of Pol Pot became the dystopia of Kampuchea” (172). “Utopian visions from Lenin to the Taliban that purported to have the potential of producing an enhanced life have been hijacked and turned into dystopias” (175). While acknowledging that some colonization schemes, particularly for New Zealand and South Australia, had a utopian angle, nevertheless those schemes generally created dystopia for the Indigenous peoples. “The original inhabitants’” idea of the good life “inconveniently did not include having their land stolen, being enslaved, and being slaughtered” (262).That reminds us that utopianism, like beauty, lies in the eye of the beholder. Sargent offers a wonderful personal example, “my utopia would include a strong right to die” whenever and however he chooses (240). While this might seem odd to younger readers, being of a similar age to Sargent, I agree 110%. “We must choose Utopia,” Sargent concludes; “We must choose the belief that the world can be radically improved; we must dream socially; and we must allow our social dreams to affect our lives. The choice for Utopia is a choice that the world can be radically improved” (195–96). That said, Sargent sagaciously reminds us that one must never assume that one’s own utopia can or should be universally applied. We must modestly “accept that we may be wrong; that there are utopian dreams as good as, perhaps even better than ours, which means that we have to do the hard mental and emotional work of evaluating our own visions as well as those of others. Being a utopian is not easy, but that is when it is most necessary” (351).Anyone seriously interested in utopian (and communal) studies should read Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism. It will become one of the seminal texts in the broad field of utopian studies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44751,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Utopian Studies\",\"volume\":\"201 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Utopian Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/utopianstudies.34.1.0137\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Utopian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/utopianstudies.34.1.0137","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在乌托邦研究领域,莱曼·塔·萨金特享誉全球。他的新书《重新思考乌托邦和乌托邦主义》写得很好,机智,有说服力的论证,反思和更新了他一生的工作。它包括了一些以前发表的作品,比如萨金特经常被引用的《乌托邦主义的三面》(1994),以及他目前在乌托邦研究的广泛领域的思考。萨金特承认,在20世纪60年代,作为一名年轻的学者,他开始写一部“乌托邦文学史”——可能是认为这不会花很长时间!他很快发现,这个领域越看越广阔。萨金特继续寻找和发现世界各地的例子,其中许多他已经在网上提供了英语乌托邦文学:1516年至今的注释书目。但是现在,在82岁的时候,他接受了这个项目将需要“相当多的今生,我无法获得的今生,所以我希望其他人能接受这些话题”(349)。萨金特认为,乌托邦主义最好被理解为“社会梦想——关于一群人安排生活的方式的梦想和噩梦,通常涉及一个完全不同的社会”(7)。他指出,乌托邦“表达了深层次的需求、欲望和希望”(42)。他断言,这是一种普遍现象——是人类的一部分——当然不像一些学者所争论的那样局限于西方基督教传统。萨金特警告说,我们必须小心,不要把乌托邦等同于完美;乌托邦是关于改善,而不是完美。他认为,将乌托邦等同于完美是“那些反对人类能够带来重大社会变革的人所使用的一种诡计,目的是破坏这种可能性”(323)。萨金特认为,所有人“都需要一个更好的生活是可能的想法”(325),这就是乌托邦主义所提供的。作为一个花了大量时间研究意向社区的人,我一直认为,几乎所有这样的群体都有一种潜在的乌托邦冲动。所以我开始研究乌托邦主义是作为意向社区研究的一个子集。另一方面,萨金特认为“社群主义是乌托邦主义的一个子范畴”(85)。他承认,有意识的社区成员正在“努力寻找更好的共同生活方式,对生活的所有重要方面做出决定,无论是政治、经济、宗教还是性. . . .他们实际上在用自己的生活做着文学乌托邦用语言描述的事情”(93)。也许我们不同的人生道路有点像先有鸡还是先有蛋?萨金特非常正确地观察到,许多有意识的社区成员拒绝接受“乌托邦”的标签,因为他们把它与naïve和无法实现的完美概念混为一谈——我也经常观察到同样的情况。尽管如此,萨金特断言“持续的乌托邦思想对于克服……的反乌托邦现实至关重要。”上个世纪”(178)。他认为,这就是为什么意向社区是实现乌托邦梦想的重要试验场。在讨论反乌托邦时,萨金特指出了乌托邦的愿望如何偶尔导致反乌托邦的产生。“共产主义的希望变成了斯大林主义的反乌托邦. . . .波尔布特的乌托邦梦想变成了柬埔寨的反乌托邦”(172)。“从列宁到塔利班的乌托邦愿景,声称有潜力创造更好的生活,却被劫持并变成了反乌托邦”(175)。虽然承认一些殖民计划,特别是对新西兰和南澳大利亚的殖民计划,有乌托邦的角度,但这些计划通常为土著人民创造了反乌托邦。“原始居民对美好生活的想法”并不包括他们的土地被窃取、被奴役和被屠杀”(262)。这提醒我们,乌托邦主义就像美一样,存在于观察者的眼中。萨金特提供了一个很好的个人例子,“我的乌托邦将包括一个强大的死亡权利”,无论何时,无论如何,他选择(240)。虽然这对年轻读者来说可能有点奇怪,因为我和萨金特年龄相仿,但我百分之百同意。“我们必须选择乌托邦,”萨金特总结道;“我们必须选择这样的信念:世界可以得到根本改善;我们必须有社会性的梦想;我们必须让我们的社会梦想影响我们的生活。选择乌托邦就是选择世界可以从根本上得到改善”(195-96)。话虽如此,萨金特睿智地提醒我们,永远不要假设自己的乌托邦能够或应该普遍适用。我们必须谦虚地承认我们可能是错的;有些乌托邦的梦想和我们的一样好,甚至可能比我们的更好,这意味着我们必须做艰苦的精神和情感工作来评估我们自己和他人的愿景。成为一个乌托邦主义者并不容易,但这是最必要的”(351)。 任何对乌托邦(和社区)研究真正感兴趣的人都应该阅读《重新思考乌托邦》和《乌托邦主义》。它将成为广泛的乌托邦研究领域的开创性文本之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism
In the field of utopian studies, Lyman Tower Sargent is well known and respected globally. His new book, Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism, is well written, witty, and persuasively argued, reflecting on, and updating, his life’s work. It includes several previously published pieces, such as Sargent’s oft-cited “The Three Faces of Utopianism Revisited” (1994), along with his current thinking across the broad field of utopian studies.Sargent admits to naiveté when, as a young scholar in the 1960s, he set out to write a “history of utopian literature”—probably thinking it wouldn’t take long! This field, he soon found, ever expands the more one looks. Sargent continues to look for, and discover, examples from around the world—many of which he has made available online in Utopian Literature in English: An Annotated Bibliography from 1516 to the Present.1 But now, at eighty-two years of age, he accepts that this project will require “quite a few lifetimes, lifetimes that are not available to me, so I hope that others will take up these topics” (349).Sargent thinks utopianism is best understood as “social dreaming—the dreams and nightmares that concern the ways in which groups of people arrange their lives and which usually involve a radically different society” (7). Utopia, he points out, “expresses deep-seated needs, desires and hopes” (42). This, he asserts, is a universal phenomenon—part of being human—certainly not confined to the Western Christian tradition, as some scholars have argued.We must be careful, Sargent warns, not to equate utopia with perfection; utopias are about betterment, not perfection. He argues that equating utopia with perfection is a ruse employed “by those opposed to the idea that human beings can bring about significant social change and is intended to undermine that possibility” (323). Sargent argues that all humans “need the idea that a better life is possible” (325) and this is what utopianism provides.As someone who has spent much of my professional life studying intentional communities, I have always recognized that almost all such groups have an underlying utopian impulse. So I came to utopianism research as a subset of intentional communities research. Sargent, on the other hand, sees “communitarianism as a sub-category of utopianism” (85). He acknowledges that intentional community members are “trying to find better ways of living together, making decisions about all important aspects of life, whether it is political, economic, religious, or sexual. . . . They are actually doing with their own lives what literary utopias describe in words” (93). Perhaps our different paths are a bit like asking whether the chicken or egg came first?Sargent quite correctly observes that many intentional community members reject the label of “utopian” because they confuse it with the naïve, and unobtainable notion of perfection—and I have often observed the same. Nevertheless Sargent asserts “that continued utopian thinking is essential to the overcoming of the dystopian reality of . . . the last century” (178). This, he argues, is why intentional communities are important test sites for enacting utopian dreams.In discussing dystopia, Sargent points out how utopian aspirations occasionally lead to the creation of dystopias. “The hopes of communism became the dystopia of Stalinism. . . . The utopian dreams of Pol Pot became the dystopia of Kampuchea” (172). “Utopian visions from Lenin to the Taliban that purported to have the potential of producing an enhanced life have been hijacked and turned into dystopias” (175). While acknowledging that some colonization schemes, particularly for New Zealand and South Australia, had a utopian angle, nevertheless those schemes generally created dystopia for the Indigenous peoples. “The original inhabitants’” idea of the good life “inconveniently did not include having their land stolen, being enslaved, and being slaughtered” (262).That reminds us that utopianism, like beauty, lies in the eye of the beholder. Sargent offers a wonderful personal example, “my utopia would include a strong right to die” whenever and however he chooses (240). While this might seem odd to younger readers, being of a similar age to Sargent, I agree 110%. “We must choose Utopia,” Sargent concludes; “We must choose the belief that the world can be radically improved; we must dream socially; and we must allow our social dreams to affect our lives. The choice for Utopia is a choice that the world can be radically improved” (195–96). That said, Sargent sagaciously reminds us that one must never assume that one’s own utopia can or should be universally applied. We must modestly “accept that we may be wrong; that there are utopian dreams as good as, perhaps even better than ours, which means that we have to do the hard mental and emotional work of evaluating our own visions as well as those of others. Being a utopian is not easy, but that is when it is most necessary” (351).Anyone seriously interested in utopian (and communal) studies should read Rethinking Utopia and Utopianism. It will become one of the seminal texts in the broad field of utopian studies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Utopian Studies
Utopian Studies HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊最新文献
The Future of the Book: Images of Reading in the American Utopian Novel Response 2: “Pessimism of the Intellect, Optimism of the Will” Indian Science Fiction: Patterns, History and Hybridity The Past and Future of Utopian Studies Response 1: Acting Up in Utopia
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1