A few thoughts about eutopias—you took a somewhat more ambitious approach than Steigler did in “The Gentle Seduction”—that one is about a highly transhumanist future, but it’s almost entirely about a solitary character. It’s much harder to talk about social arrangements than it is to talk about individuals.
Eutopia might be excellent for the vast majority, and still not so good for a few. Delany’s “The Star Pit” and Trouble on Triton are about characters in pretty good societies who just aren’t very good at living with people, but aren’t temperamentally suited to living alone. Russ’ “Nobody’s Home” is about the plight of someone who’s of what would now be considered average or a little better than average intelligence, but who’s living in a society where everyone else is a great deal more intelligent.
Learn from her errors: her story is published herewith as a caution to all citizens. Had she
sought help when she showed the signs of early madness, the uncontrolled brooding, the first small
crimes, society would have been spared much labor, And much pain.
Learn from her errors: all her mad rebellion bought was that pain.
Learn from her errors: in the design of the social contracts, in our agreement to them, are the
tools to keep us all on a calm and healthy path. Society is perfectable: it is a simple matter of
codifying it to meet every human need.
This just leaves both my egomaniacal side and my terminal value of liberty whimpering, and deciding to override everything else. I reflected on it calmly for a few minutes and came to the conclusion that I’d likely be driven to murder-suicide if implanted there in my current state.
it doesn’t (at least for me) give a feeling for why people might like living there
It’s an interesting story, but not for the way it addresses utopia—it doesn’t (at least for me) give a feeling for why people might like living there. Instead, it’s presented as scary authoritarianism.
What I like about it is the way it undercuts “ignore all barriers” romanticism.
It might relate to a notion I’ve been playing with—that one of the reasons people like systems with a lot of punishment is that they’re afraid that effective methods of getting people to do what you want are too controlling. They want to leave room for rebellion.
A few thoughts about eutopias—you took a somewhat more ambitious approach than Steigler did in “The Gentle Seduction”—that one is about a highly transhumanist future, but it’s almost entirely about a solitary character. It’s much harder to talk about social arrangements than it is to talk about individuals.
Eutopia might be excellent for the vast majority, and still not so good for a few. Delany’s “The Star Pit” and Trouble on Triton are about characters in pretty good societies who just aren’t very good at living with people, but aren’t temperamentally suited to living alone. Russ’ “Nobody’s Home” is about the plight of someone who’s of what would now be considered average or a little better than average intelligence, but who’s living in a society where everyone else is a great deal more intelligent.
On that note… have you ever read the short story “A Defense of the Social Contracts” by Martha Soukup?
This just leaves both my egomaniacal side and my terminal value of liberty whimpering, and deciding to override everything else. I reflected on it calmly for a few minutes and came to the conclusion that I’d likely be driven to murder-suicide if implanted there in my current state.
Aren’t you, errr, understating?
I’ve read it now.
It’s an interesting story, but not for the way it addresses utopia—it doesn’t (at least for me) give a feeling for why people might like living there. Instead, it’s presented as scary authoritarianism.
What I like about it is the way it undercuts “ignore all barriers” romanticism.
It might relate to a notion I’ve been playing with—that one of the reasons people like systems with a lot of punishment is that they’re afraid that effective methods of getting people to do what you want are too controlling. They want to leave room for rebellion.