Preeminent More scholar Clarence H. Miller does justice to the full range of More's rhetoric in this new translation. Professor Miller includes a helpful introduction that outlines some of the important problems and issues that Utopia raises, and also provides informative commentary to assist the reader throughout this challenging and rewarding exploration of the meaning of political community.

Book Description

"Utopia" means, literally, "no place". The word didn't exist until More coined it in this book. He wanted to make a critic regarding the English society of his time, but needed to cloak it under a "fictional" mantle due to censure. Displeasing the king was very dangerous in More's time...

What is this short novel about?. Well, More introduces us to an imaginary character, Raphael Hythloday, a traveler that has visited a distant country: Utopia. After meeting More, Raphael tells him about the country he visited, and afterwards More writes a book about what he was told.

To begin with, in that country community is more important that private aims, and that fact permeates all social and political life. There is no private propriety of the means of production, and everything belongs to everybody. Work is obligatory to all healthy men and women, and those who want to do nothing are punished with forced labor. There is no money, but everybody has what is needed to live well, although frugally. Thanks to the fact labor is well distributed, leisure time is available to all. As a result, men and women (equals in this society) can dedicate time to cultivate their minds...

Other important points that should be highlighted regarding Utopia, especially because they contrast strongly with the situation of More's England, are that in this country all religions are allowed, and that there isn't an autocratic rule (a democratically elected assembly and different local governments are elected). All in all, equality prevails, and thanks to the above mentioned arrangements harmony is achieved.

"Utopia" was written a few years later that Machiavelli's "The Prince", but the differences between the two books are incredible. In "Utopia" instead of praising the power of princes More wanted to show clearly all that was wrong in English society because it was governed by a bad ruler. He didn't tell others to face reality: he asked them to criticize it, in order to improve it later. Thus, Moro established the essential traits of what was later known as the "utopian method": to describe in other situation, with a prejudice of optimism, all that that we don't like in our society.

With "Utopia" Moro created a new way to mobilize energies, and showed options that had remained hidden from the eyes of those who weren't happy with their societies. Behind the name of "fiction", he gave politics new intruments of discussion, and opened to it novel ways of considering reality, in the light of what could/should be.

There is no politics without the idea that something better can be achieved, without the kind of imagination that allows us to think that something better is possible. Moro made that evident... I think that that is more than enough to strongly recommend this book to you :)

Belen Alcat


"In no place"   February 1, 2001
 73 out of 90 found this review helpful

As a social critique of Enlgish and European society, this book is very effective. It is also beautifully written. But it should not be read as the depiction of what society should be like. Thomas More, a wise and brave man executed by orders of Henry VIII, knew that Utopia shouldn't be taken very seriously, and that is exactly why he used the word Utopia to name his famous island. Utopia, in latin, means "in no place", that what can not exist. The problem is that this simple fact was not understood by many. And so, "utopianism" was born. The preposterous belief that there is a universal and definitive form of organization for human societies led to disasters like Nazism and Communism. By organizing everything perfectly (according to who?), these systems become the negation of the very essence of the human being: its innate imperfection and its need to be constantly changing, always on the move. It is simply impossible that some political, economic and social system resolves once and for all the troubles of humanity. Problems are exactly what make humans progress and reform constantly. Besides, the State has proven indispensable for survival, but also limited in what it can accomplish (in Utopia, the State provides everything for everybody). Stagnant societies degenerate and disappear, or remain to live from the charity of dynamic societies. Closed, perennial social systems, simply don't work: there is abundant proof in history, ancient or recent. "Utopia" is an excellent account of human shortcomings and a good tale, but it is not, nor was intended to be, a recipe with solutions for the world. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell have shown us what might happen in a supposed Utopia. The Communist world was worse. And Anthony Burgess clearly shows us in "A Clockwork Orange", that in "perfect" societies, the only way to practice freedom is violence. Let's not be perfect.


A Classical Masterpiece   October 1, 1999
 37 out of 45 found this review helpful

Utopia is a classic masterpiece that conveys More's vivid imagination of the Island of Utopia. Although most of the characters are fictional, it is intriguing to learn about the true values of European societies during the 16th century, when More actually wrote the book (although many scholars believe that the exact year was 1515). Truthfully, the book is quite easy to understand. All More tries to do is convey his own views of how society should be through Raphael. Moreover, the use of imagery in Book I is quite fascinating, including the constant references to Roman and Greek myths and beliefs. It is also quite remarkable to see that the story begins to be more and more interesting after More and Giles come back from dinner. To make a long story short, I think it is a great book because of the actual time it was written in since most pieces of literature written at that time were either lost or destroyed.


Disappointed with the Penguin edition   July 6, 2001
 25 out of 26 found this review helpful

I purchased the Penguin edition intially, so to have a compact copy of this essential work. However, I was thoroughly unimpressed with the edition. The translator, Turner, assumes very little of his reader and therefore "translates" some of More's most witty and erudite comments into bland, lifeless remarks. The most irriating example is that rather than keep the main character's name as Rafael Hythloday he has "translated" the name as "Rafael Nonsenso." Turner justifies this choice by saying that not many modern readers know classic Greek... true. But, it would have been better to footnote the original name and explain it's origin and meaning rather than translate the name into an obvious joke. By doing this Turner steals the very essence and beauty from the work. There are many other examples of Turner's tweaking that are maddening. However, I will say that the Introduction to the Penguin Utopia by Tucker is very nice. I especially enjoyed Tucker's discussion of "Utopian Literature." However, I recommend that you find the book in a library, photocopy the intro... and instead purchase the Hackett Publishing version (now available in paperback, I believe) which offers thorough and accessible footnotes to the text as well as a wonderful introduction.


A great work of truth that will change the way you think.   February 20, 1997
 19 out of 31 found this review helpful

After reading St. Thomas More's Utopia I cried. Not that it's tragic. Far from it. It's just that tere is so much beauty and sicerity in More's work. The book is just over 100 pages so it's short and to the point. This book has so much to say that everyone, sociologically inclined or not, should pick up a copy and be enlightened. My views on society and life in general have been greatly affected by More's writings. Utopia is the best book I have ever read