Utopian Nature

    I have been familiar with the idea of “utopia” without having read up on it, until now. Harvey explores how Utopia is synonymous with the city:

“In their early incarnations, utopias were usually given a distinctively urban form and most of what passes for urban and city planning in the broadest sense has been infected (some would prefer ‘inspired’) by utopian modes of thought.” (p. 156)

This seems obvious, but I wasn’t sure how. Why is the philosophical manifestation of Utopia typically the city? Upon further reflection, I considered a rural Utopia: welcome isolation, space to breathe, and enveloped by nature. I realized that the individually-constructed autonomy of a rural Utopia stands in direct contrast of the fundamental idea: Utopia is built by the collective community for the collective community. The autonomy and individualism of the country is more comparable to the American Dream, in ways (using this logic, are the American Dream and conceptual Utopia mutually exclusive/do they directly conflict?).

    “In Bacon’s New Atlantis . . . the King decides that society has achieved such a state of perfection that no further social change is needed.” (p. 160) This line brought into question the political nature of Utopia. Perhaps due to my own biases, I assumed Utopia to be of an inherently progressive/liberal nature: the culmination of perfect social harmony (I suppose that conservatives value this as well). Peace and love, man. But in the idea of achieving Utopia, progress is no longer needed and therefore reaches a state of conservatism. Is Utopia advocated by a certain philosophy of thought on the political spectrum? Or perhaps this notion is too complicated that it transcends black and white categorization?