Utopias

One book that almost ended up on the Long Reading List was Sir Thomas More's Utopia. So many teens are looking for the place where they will fit in, and so often that perfect place is no place, that it felt like it could be relevant. I decided that More's ideal would probably be different enough from a modern teen's ideal that it wouldn't be a huge help.

Having now read Utopia, I can see some correlations, but it fits in better with the context of my current reading. (I really believe I have a good book sense of what to read when.)

The first thing I noticed was the enforced lack of individuality. Everyone is happy in Utopia because their needs are met, but they only play one of two games, they eat all of their meals together, they all dress alike, and they regularly move homes so that nothing is really theirs. Knowing that More really loved the monastic lifestyle and only refrained from choosing it because of his desire for a family makes it all understandable, but still not desirable for someone who values choice. I had to wonder whether that sort of conformity was even necessary for a tranquil society.

That became more interesting in reading Why We Lost the ERA, when this came up:

"Rosabeth Moss Kanter's study of nineteenth-century communes found that when communes institutionalized exclusivity they were more likely to survive. The most successful communes discouraged relationships outside the group through geographic isolation, economic self-sufficiency, a special language and style of dress, and rules that controlled the members' and outsiders' movements across the boundaries of the community. Three-quarters of Kanter's successful communes did not recognize the traditional American patriotic holidays. Half read no outside newspapers. More than a quarter specifically characterized the outside world as wicked."

I had some thoughts about limiting news sources anyway, and that was the part that stuck out when I first read it. Reading it again, the same manner of dress becomes not only a matter of conformity within the community but a marker of opposition to the world outside the community. No wonder the outsiders start to look wicked.

Then I moved into my Native American Heritage Month reading, and also felt compelled to start The Invention of the White Race, which has been fitting in well. Here we keep finding colonial societies needed to eradicate more communal societies, not just in the Americas but also in the British Isles. Here the more communal societies are welcoming to outsiders, and build strength by marriage, adoption, and foster relationships. This time it is the capitalistic society feeling the need to eradicate perceived threats. There may be specific roles that are necessary, and I have been surprised by some of the strong Yurok class distinctions, but still, there are things that seem to work better without turning the entire society into a cloister.

I mention that because it seems like whether your revolution was socialist or fascist it often ends up with the same results. That includes putting a lot of people on the trash pile. There does seem to be a deep-rooted belief that rooting out differences is necessary, but I don't believe it.

Someone who is actively hurting people, or destroying crops, or burning things down - there may be necessary actions there. Wanting to wear black instead of grey, or purple stripes that clash with green checks - that is not a threat. Listening to punk rock instead of classical is not a threat. Collecting coins instead of playing video games is not a threat. Not unless you are really insecure, and then it's not about them.

I admit I don't fully understand the need to have other people be like you and do like you. I get that it's awesome to find people who like the same things, but part of what makes that awesome is because not everyone does. Then finding your matches is a treat.

I do have some thoughts about cultural expectations for tomorrow, but for now I suspect the most perfect place for teenagers is that place where they can be accepted.