Why?

“I wish that there was more.”  This is what Lincoln says when he is being evaluated for unusual behavior.  He is frustrated by the lack of stimulus, the lack of knowledge, the lack of fulfillment in his life.  He has become curious about the outside world and restless in the one he has called home for so long.

Isn’t this a statement that has been repeated time and again ever since we began this course?  We as the readers look at these “Utopias” and say to ourselves, “I wish there was more.”  And don’t the protagonists in the Utopian literature we have been reading say the same thing?  Utopia isn’t fulfilling.  It isn’t real.  It isn’t life.

In The Island, it’s plain to see that the agnates or clones are unhappy.  Day after day, their meals are dictated, their proximity is monitored, and their individuality is essentially snuffed out completely.  The only thing that is keeping these “humans” alive and (theoretically) away from a rebellion is the promise of the island.

Lincoln challenges that system though.  Its remarkable how one man with inside knowledge can cause the collapse of an entire society, a system that has been years in the making.  All it took was one man to ask the simple question: why?

On a completely unrelated note, I personally thought that the movie was…meh.  The beginning was really interesting until I figured out what was going on.  The concept and the idea of the movie was good, but the execution was not so good.  By the time the movie ended, I was so fed up with intense action sequences, you have no idea.  It seemed to me that Michael Bay just added the action to see how long he could make the movie.

"Muuuurdeeerr"

What the what?! Minority Report was…I don’t even know.  Mind blowing? I guess that’s an appropriate phrase to use.  I persuaded my boyfriend to watch this movie with me, and from the second it started we kept looking at each other like, “what is going on? I’m so confused.”

The thing about this movie that impressed me the most was the whole concept of Pre-crime.  The concept and the execution of the entire operation was fascinating.  The concept of Pre-Cogs is what blew my mind the most.  Up until the second half of the movie, I had no idea what those human-like creatures lying in a weird pool were all about.  Once it was explained that the Pre-Cogs could see the future, things definitely started to become clearer.

I found the overall approach to the film extremely interesting as well.  This isn't a utopian film per say, it’s more of a dystopia that is trying its hardest to become a utopia.  It shows the social dreaming aspect, and control, and eventually the downfall of this potential society.  It’s a utopia in the making that failed to succeed.

At the beginning of the movie, I was convinced that this futuristic Maryland/D.C. was relatively normal and 

similar to how we live today.  The houses and the people looked pretty normal.  But the farther along into the movie, things began to look more futuristic.  The cars, the buildings, and the technology all began to show how futuristic the society really is. 

It’s obvious that people in this society use technology to control the world, people, and the future.  I don’t know how I feel about this idea.  Yes, they are preventing murders from happening, but they are also meddling with a person’s fate.  It’s sort of entering a moral grey area, but it’s a valid thing to take into consideration. 

Adding to this point, I thought it was interesting that religion (Christianity to be exact) still exists in this society.  How can someone support Pre-crime while believing that God is the ultimate controller of fate?  This seemed incredibly odd to me.

While watching the scene when John (Tom Cruise) goes to the “jail” to investigate the murder of Anne Lively, I couldn’t help but notice that the jail looked really similar to the Panopticon that Dr. Mitchell-Buck showed us in class.  I guess it would be a useful setup, having the guards stationed in the middle of the room to make it easier to watch the (coma-induced?) prisoners. 

Overall, Minority Report was a pretty disturbingly awesome movie that rendered me mentally and emotionally exhausted by the end.  

Brave New Gattaca

So I don’t know about you guys, but Gattaca reminded me a lot of Brave New World.  From the very beginning of the movie, I kept jotting down things that made me think of Huxley’s Utopia.

Towards the very beginning of the movie, when Vincent is vacuuming his keyboard, he says to his supervisor “Cleanliness is next to godliness.”  That common idiom immediately made me think of Brave New World and the ridiculous slogans they used to brainwash their citizens, one of them being “cleanliness is next to 

Fordliness.”

 The scene where Vincent’s parents are consulting the local geneticist to “create” their second child reminded me of the test tube children of Brave New World.  The object of both worlds is to create a society, through generations of genetically modified people, that is comprised of perfect people.  The only difference is that, in Gattaca, the family dynamic still remains.  Children (at least Vincent) are brought up in families with a mother, father, and siblings.  In Brave New World, there is no family structure or nurturing environment.  Children are trained to join the army of perfect people.

Gattaca’s society is said to have “discrimination down to a science.”  A caste system, or something similar to it, is also a main focus in Brave New World.  With the Alphas, Betas, and Epsilons, everyone is segregated based on their predetermined fate.

The fact that Jerome kills himself at the end of Gattaca is what fully convinced me that the movie is eerily similar to Brave New World.  Watching Jerome enter the incinerator and close the door is too similar to John’s body hanging from a rope in his home.  It seems there is always a person who can’t handle the imperfection of the “Utopian” world they live in and feel the need to take their life.  It’s a sad ending, but it drives home the point that the world is one that isn’t worth living in.

I thought it was cleaver how the screenwriters took the definition of Utopia (social dreaming) and embodied it in a character.  Vincent’s dream of someday flying into space is the concept of “social dreaming” taken to a personal level.  Vincent’s idea of Utopia is to become an astronaut, and his dream eventually comes true.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

This post is a little after the fact, but after reading through some of the past blogs, I came upon one that really struck a chord with me.  It was about Brave New World and the effect that technology had on their society.  They had made some pretty drastic advances in technology, but was it worth it? Did it really create a society that was worth living in?

In Brave New World, technology had taken over the society and was driving the human population.  The most notable technological advance was their ultimate control over the humans being brought into the word.  Growing the people in test tubes and then brainwashing them from the second they are “born” to be submissive to the government is the greatest feat of science that I’ve ever heard of.  Having the capability to control that many people is remarkably scary.

I honestly can’t think of one instance in which science and technology have been used for good in this book.  Sure, everyone is happy and healthy, but that is by Mustapha Mond’s terms.  They are humans who are living nonhuman lives, and both Bernard and John make that known to us.  Technology has ruined their lives, whether they truly know it or not.

So has technology ruined the world we live in?

There are obviously two sides to this answer.  I think everyone can agree that our technological advances have helped our society a lot.  We can connect with people from all over the world with just a click of a button and travel with ease to almost anywhere.

But the negative, at least in everyday life, seem to outweigh the positive.  Cell phones, iPods, and computers have completely engulfed our society, especially our generation.  These devices are great, but to an extent.  I see people walking down the street and running into things because they are so concentrated on their phone.  Suddenly, Facebook statuses have become more important than homework and Snapchatting a picture of your lunch is more important than talking to the friend sitting across from you.

I’m a server at a restaurant, and one of my biggest pet peeves is cell phones.  I will walk up to a table, and instead of my customers enjoying each other’s company with lively conversation, they are ALL staring at their cell phones. COME ON, PEOPLE!  You made a point to go to a restaurant with your family or friends; you could at least talk to them.  Is that so hard?

When technology starts to become an impediment to our interactions with others, then you know you’ve got a problem.

It’s gotten to the point where technology has begun to make us somewhat inhuman in our lack of social skills.  We could very well be on the fast track to becoming just like Huxley’s fictional society.  Technology is slowly making us humans who live nonhuman lives. 

Now that’s something to tweet about.

I Am Me

Herland is by far my favorite reading we’ve been assigned all semester.  Perhaps it’s the three fold perspective given to the reader or the fact that it is simply a revolutionary piece for its time; but either way, I enjoyed it. 

It’s never easy for me to be able to pinpoint my favorite line or scene in a book, but for Herland there is no question.  In chapter nine (page 88), when Van speaks about the “perfect system of child-rearing,” he makes a very important observation, one that changes the meaning of the book entirely.

“It was all theirs, waiting for them to learn, to love, to use, to serve; as our own little boys plan to be ‘a big soldier,’ or ‘a cowboy,’ or whatever pleases their fancy; and our little girls plan for the kind of home they mean to have, or how many children; these [Herland children] planned, freely and gaily with much happy chattering, of what they would do for the country when they were grown.

It was the eager happiness of the children and the young people which first made me see the folly of that common notion of ours…”

This one passage is what changed the whole course of the novel for me.  Herland isn’t simply the idea of an all-woman society.  It goes so much deeper than that; challenging the reader to think about our society and the way in which we assign gender roles. 

It’s so easy for us to look back at our childhood and see the blatant significance of gender in our daily lives.  In kindergarten, the boys would be off running around the playground imagining themselves to be cops, cowboys, Indians, pirates, anything that showed itself to have a masculine identity.  The girls would then be off cradling their baby dolls, playing house or dress up, fighting over who gets to play the mother role, essentially preparing themselves for a future responsibility that they think they must conform to. 

Our society has made gender such an apparent obsession, that we begin to lose sight of who we are as people in the midst of conformity.  That is exactly the point that Charlotte Perkins Gilman is trying to make.

In a society comprised of only women, the children aren’t faced with the assignment of gender roles.  Instead they grow up with the encouraged principle that they are all simply people, not women.  Instead of playing house, they play games that spark independent thinking and inspire them to be whoever they want to be and to strive to one day make a difference in their country.

It is a revolutionary thought for its time, a thought that Gilman wanted to plant in her reader’s head.  Herland isn’t considered Utopian because it’s run by women.  It’s Utopian because Herland citizens are freed from a gender role that has forced women into submission for centuries.  Herland is Gilman’s demand for change in America.

Utopia in Progress

After reading quotes from Winstanley and the perusing the Twin Oaks websites I couldn’t help but notice the similarities between the two when it came to work.  Both Winstanley and the Twin Oaks community place a large focus on the environment and the enjoyment of ones work.  Winstanley says:

“The earth was meant to be a common treasury for all, not a private treasury for some…Private property is the cause of all wars, bloodshed, theft and enslaving laws that hold the people under misery…Whensoever there is a people thus united by common community of livelihood into oneness it will become the strongest land in the world, for they will be as one man to defend their inheritance.”

Similar to Winstanley’s belief, the Twin Oaks community strives for sustainable culture, energy conservation, and alternative energy.  Along with their devotion to the environment, they also focus greatly on the working individual and cultivation of the land.  I find this to be a very important aspect of a successful community. 

The Twin Oaks view on work and labor is actually very similar to More’s view on labor as well.  They consider all work to be of the same value and a means of enjoyment and fulfillment.  I really appreciate the fact that they consider domestic chores to be a part of “real work”, and encourage people to work both income and non-income jobs, keeping the citizens from getting bored. 

I really appreciate this about the Twin Oaks community.  Especially in this day in age, when working has become a necessity for survival, focus on the worker’s well-being would make for a much happier community.  With this alone, Twin Oaks sounds like a community with very good intentions.  

I couldn't help but thinking, is this community really a healthy place to live and raise a family?  The flexibility with work is great, but how would the seclusion effect the people living in this community?  Time will only tell if Twin Oaks can prove itself to be as Utopian as they hope to be.

Rules are for Fools

While reading the Rule of Saint Benedict, I couldn't help but notice two things: 1) These people have way too many rules and 2) I would never ever want to be a Benedictine nun.  As I was reading through the “rule book”, I decided to make two columns; one with a list of things I did like about the society, and one with a list of things I didn't like about the society.  Here is what I found to be “yay” or “nay” about being a Benedictine nun/monk.

Yay! 

• ·         The Abbess leads her nuns by example.  She doesn't just talk the talk, but she walks the walk.  Makes for a good leader and a more receptive following.
• ·         The Abbess is required to teach her nuns according to their different personalities.  This is a good tactic when it comes to teaching in general.
• ·         When there is an issue within the monastery that needs to be confronted, the Abbot first asks the opinions of everyone before making a decision that may impact the monastery as a whole.  This gives the monks a voice within the community and can lead to a happy democracy if the Abbot actually listens.
• ·         Punishment for the nuns is based upon the severity of the fault.  If the fault is worthy of a harsh penalty, then the punishment will reflect that.  It’s only fair.  No one gets special treatment.
• ·         A monk who decides to leave the monastery is welcome back but must prove himself worthy to be back in the religious group.  This rule allows for some flexibility regarding your standing with the community but also reminds the monks that it is a privilege to be there.
• ·         The Cellarer must be just like everyone else.  He is a good example and acts like a father figure to the monks.  I like the idea that there is a guaranteed father figure within the group.  There is always someone to go to with your problems.
• ·         Good care is given to the sick within the community.  They are to be treated “like Christ”.
• ·         The nuns are allowed to drink wine! (in moderation of course)
• ·         Everything is done in moderation.  “Let all things be done in moderation, however, for the sake of the faint-hearted”.  There is no chance of becoming too enthralled in one activity or object, making for a well-rounded person.
• ·         The monk’s clothing is very practical.  They dress modestly and for the weather.  There isn't any competition or jealousy regarding who has the best clothing, eliminating that status quo.

Nay

• ·         In chapter 2.11 it says that the Abbess should treat all of the nuns equally, but she has the power to promote those who she thinks is better than others.  “Let her make no distinction of persons in the monastery.  Let her not love one more than another, unless it be one whom she finds better in good works or obedience”.  It’s incredibly contradictory and in no way the “Christian” thing to do.
• ·         Punishment is really harsh! Beating the nuns/monks with “rods”?! Physical beating is not the answer! Especially in a “Utopian” society.
• ·         The Abbess is entirely responsible for the spiritual well-being of her nuns.  That’s a lot of pressure for one person!  Spiritual health should be a personal affair, not something that is controlled and monitored by one person.
• ·         In chapter 4, under the list of “Instruments of Good Works”, the only one that I had a problem with was number 13.  “To love fasting”.  No one should “love” to fast.  It’s a sacrifice that you make in order to grow closer to God.  It shouldn't be an enjoyable process.  How can you have a Utopia when everyone is grumpy from being hungry, anyway?
• ·         How can anyone fulfill all of the things on the “Instruments of Good Works” list?  It’s a list of impossibilities that no one can accomplish.  The list is asking for impossible perfection in order to attain salvation.   
• ·         Monks are supposed to live in perpetual fear of God and to give up all of their free will in order to be at service to the Lord.  That doesn't sound like a very happy or fulfilling lifestyle to me. 
• ·         Humility is considered a major virtue, as it should be, but Monks are expected to consider themselves lower than all others, even though they are some of the closest beings to God spiritually.  That seems pretty detrimental to ones self-esteem, which is the farthest thing from Utopian.
• ·         Monks are meant to be in a constant state of guilt.  “Feeling the guilt of his sins at every moment, he should consider himself already present at the dread Judgment…”  What kind of life are you living if you are constantly feeling guilty for being human? To me, that is no way to live, and no way to obtain Utopia.

Basically, I found many things that I disagreed with in the Benedictine society.  There is no individuality and no real way to express who you are in this society.  This set of guidelines may work well for some, but not everyone is alike.  Not everyone in this society can easily conform to the rules set up by Saint 

Benedict, which ultimately makes this society the farthest thing from a Utopia.

In my opinion, a Utopia is a personal experience.  What is perfect for one person may not be perfect for another.  This society seems to be very dystopian.  It’s all about conformity and following strict rules that may not fit the lifestyle or the opinions of others.  A society should not have to follow a rule book in order to achieve a Utopian society. 

 

Religion: Why We Can't Have Nice Things

Who is God, and why do we rely upon him so heavily in order to get through our day? There are a lot of answers to this question.  Some would say He is the foundation of their faith; someone to emulate and fear, to challenge them to live their lives morally and spiritually.  Others would say God is the central focal point of their religion.  That’s all good and well, but what is religion exactly? For centuries it has been a means to love, hate, cherish and kill.  A way of dictating how we live, what we say, and how we view others.  From the Crusades to World War II, religion has made us blind to the humanity we all share.

The world would be a much better place if organized religion did not exist.

Fourteen years of Catholic School, and that’s the solution I have come up with. Ironic, isn't it?

I have probably spent the better half of 4 days mauling over the topic for this blog.  My original idea of ridding society of cultural ignorance was decent, but I wanted something that has personally hit home for me.  I sifted through a few thoughts, bounced around some ideas with family and friends, and still wasn't happy with what I had.  Until I came home this evening to my mom watching a movie that made my decision much easier. 

The movie:

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas.

Wow.

Right then and there I knew that regardless of my upbringing and my education, religion has been the culprit to the missing harmony in our world. 

For those of you who have not seen the movie I so fondly speak of, it is essentially a film about a German boy who happens to befriend a Jewish child living in a concentration camp during World War II.  Many a tear is jerked throughout the film which so gut-wrenchingly portrays the cruelty of the time.

I figure, ever since religion has formed, there have been reasons to hate one another.  People find themselves uncertain and afraid of other religions simply because they don’t have a good understanding of what that other religion is. Really, they are afraid of the unknown.  And how can we achieve a Utopian society this way?

And that is where I get to my point.

People are ignorant.  Plain and simple. I am by no means a cynic, but it really is the truth.  People grow up believing that the religion they practice is the RIGHT religion, and that all other religions, including the people who practice them, should be shunned, feared, and hated.  They don’t know any better. Our narrow-minded society has chosen to ignore the fact that we all believe pretty much the same thing:

That there is some sort of higher being that is greater than us.

Whether you call that being God, Allah or Brahma, we all believe that “he” exists.  It starts to become a problem when people begin to worship this higher being in different, often times very structured and rigorous ways.  The understanding that we all worship with a common purpose has been lost over centuries of fighting over who has the best religion. 

Because of this, religion simply wouldn't work in a Utopian society.  In a utopia, we as a society must strive to create a life for ourselves that improves our civilization in any way possible.  In the grand scheme of things, religion has been the roadblock preventing us from achieving this utopia.  The only way to accomplish this concept is to eliminate organized religion all together.

How would you enforce this concept, you ask? Ideally, I would make all organized religion illegal in a sense.  I would discourage the cult-like behavior that religion has become and encourage independent thinking and discovering one’s own spirituality without the forceful guidance of a religion.  Meditation, strong moral foundations, and personal spirituality would take the place of mindless worship. 

I think it sounds plausible.

I feel like every young person who has grown up in a religious household has experienced a religious existential crisis in some form or another.  You begin to reevaluate why you are going to church every Sunday, why you are a practicing a religion without getting much choice in the matter, and why society has made it okay to ostracize those who practice a different religion than you.

It really makes you think.

Our society would be a much happier, more Utopian, place if religion was disregarded and personal spirituality played a bigger part. 

All I’m saying is: lose religion, not faith.