Don't Dys My Topia

Okay, so let's say there's a future. Often, this future is 15 minutes away. Sometimes, further. In fantasy lit, you're in the past (often some ancient cycle), so replace awesome technology with awesome magic.

Under these circumstances, depending on your lit style, the story will either be full of hardship like Star Wars or full of adventure, like Star Trek.

Mentalist acer has asked of me to cite references to Utopian worlds in popular media, versus the dominate dystopian societies you often find at the butt end of world war III, or some zombie plague, perhaps genetic manipulation of Rosanne Barrs..err dinosaurs, you catch the drift.

Some scientist, mad or not, invents a ridiculously awesome piece of tech that sparks controversy in some future. Again, replace "tech" with "magic spell" if it's fantasy, mix in a little bit of both if it's Shadowrun. Add the dullest parts of both with George Lucas' ego for Star Wars.

The central themes of Dystopian and Utopian settings cannot exist without using said tech or magic as a backdrop, even if reduced to line noise like in Aliens. Else, we could theoretically already be on the verge of collapse in the now and not even know it.

Even The Matrix trilogy, which I think has the best line to sum up this issue, shifts the scene to an H.R. Geiger approved mess of tubes and blocks upon blocks of baby batteries. It's Soylent Green with a Lawnmower Man complex. Add some religious themes to appease the American audience, and you my friend have solid gold toilets.

Why do these movies, novels, stories, concept albums, comics,  video games, and television shows all exhibit such a stark reality?

In the Matrix the machines tried to implement a "utopia," but it failed because the human neuropathy couldn't adapt to a world where stress did not exist. A likely story!

But the truth is--like all good fiction--it's representational of real world modern day perception.

In fact, I've been here with you before--I've told you that as your species exists today it cannot achieve a Utopian world. It isn't because of Satan, more so it's just "your nature," but thats skirting the issue still.

So lets peal back the human conscious and prod away at some cultural nerve centers.

These two videos, musical in nature, compact a lot of "wisdom," as malformed it may be, that retaliates against a culture where several ministers were outed as frauds, not to mention the Catholic church debacle.

"Get Your Gunn" is even more blatantly sprinkled with pop cult trivia, harking back to Dr. David Gunn who was murdered by an evangelical pro-life activist.

This is media that made millions in the nineties, because it was a reflection of the times--dark, dreary, in your face. It was the flip of the mainstream line up of Boy Bands and Madonna-esque Disney Factory turn outs growing up and discovering pandering to the audience really works when you have female parts.

This is music that defined a generation coming off it's high after the Wall fell. New paranoia was spawned in the middle east shortly thereafter as mounting tensions were caused by the once US-backed Saddam.

And Jerry Springer, The Simpsons, Beavis and Butthead, all would define the first part of the decade, before becoming cult classics and spoofed by popular culture every once so often.

While this is all a generalization (many of you have different cultures and time frames to cull from) the 90s it's self was largely inertia from the 80s before it. Even Star Trek was back on the air, having re-launched in '87, it held two running franchises at a time for the bulk of that decade.

Star Trek, while not everyman's favorite show, is representational of the politics and gadget fashion of the period more than science fact.

Deep Space Nine ended with war. Post 9/11, Enterprise had a whole season where the main enemy was a species that had different subsets and of anatomy and culture called the Xindi. But they were all following the direction of a higher authority, who told them the Federation would one day destroy the Xindi home world.

To make the obvious clear: This is a set up to mirror international and middle eastern relations underneath all the alien makeup and laser beams.

And this little collection of ramblings is just a sampling of the media throughout the last twenty years. I write about what is current not because there aren't classics--but because the media you consume today makes most sense to you.

I mean, your grandmother never giggled at the line "gay old time" in the Flintstone's theme song, did she?

And M.C. Hammer was super fly.

Somethings, like the perfect world, where everyone eats fluffy cotton candy gum drop food pills and war has become a "thing of the past" just doesn't exist.

That said, it isn't that peace describes boring. News headlines often exacerbate a situation, because "great journalism" leads to great ratings. With each new step forward into new heights of knowledge there's always that nagging feeling in the back of your collective unconscious. Endless possibilities offer endless morbid notions of what not to do.

A prime example is the real-world fact that you're more inclined to tell others if something sucks rather than if it rocked your socks. People are more passionate about that which they seek justice for. So, "think of the children!"

Morality plays.

So what constitutes a Utopia, at least in a literary sense? The problem with the word, is that your slice of paradise would be different with someone elses.

In reality, books I really love and too often name drop, are utopia to me. But it's still a world of violence, sex, drugs, and rock and roll. It's just decentralized and sped-up even past todays standards. 15 microseconds of fame is all you get.

Utopia, as the word was coined--referred to the title of a book, and to an island where there was perfect socio-economical-politico balance. As opposed to the lack of balance today.

Again, however, you cannot please all the people all the time, and it's rather easy for a reader to believe a small island nation could work it's self out in such a manner. (For the opposite, see Somalia...) But if you wish to apply such ideals scaled globally, one would argue, the sheer difference in culture would clash.

Not to mention the threat of a one world government. Which, is a threat in it's self---no matter how seemingly benign.

As a species you're supposed to be working towards less governance and more freedom.

In Utopias, usually you have some tech replace all the menial labor intensive work Average Joe doesn't want to be bothered with, freeing up humanity to pursue other goals. But there's always a trade off--a world like this couldn't have the same economic principles you share today.

More often than not, things go wrong. (See Bioshock 1, 2)

Which lead to dystopia.

(It really says a lot about a species half convinced it won't survive without competitive qualities.)

even the progenitor of the term, the book about an island named Utopia, could actually be described as satire in some circles.Written by Thomas Moore and published in 1516, the full name would roughly translate in english to "A Truly Golden Little Book, No Less Beneficial Than Entertaining, of the Best State of a Republic, and of the New Island Utopia" was some 500 years into the future socio-politically.

There were female priests, and either sex could marry. In 1516 theocracy was the opaque rule of the land, and priests marrying was a controversial concept in it's self. Then there's the ease of divorce, and euthanasia. Plus toleration of different religions. (This guy was a devout Catholic hailing from London.)

Remember...Utopia supposedly represented the "perfect" socio-politico-legal system.

But as always, trade offs.

The people of Utopia were communal, living off the land. Westeners may be quick to call it Communism, but it was written in a period where monastic life was a great way to secure food and a place to sleep.

Isn't it funny how five hundred years later, we're still tackling much of the same issues?

Even today your species doesn't agree across the board whether or not females are able to carry out religious duties. Personally, I find that suspect. You may not. But don't be offended by my wackiness, I'm an outside observer trying to make heads and tails of your cultures.

Right about now, I'm sure you're salivating to know what I would perceive to be a Utopia more in-depth. Okay, truthfully, I just can't pass up the chance. But bare with me, because I don't ever believe humanity will have a period where it won't want to better it's self.

the perfect society, one must perceive the society they are in now to be defective. The issue here is that (and I'm guilty of this, too, at times--although I hope its becoming less) it's easy to put on blinders and pursue with passion to seek balance for what you may feel are injustices to humanity.

But remember...you can't please all the people, all the time, right?

I'm not going to use that excuse, actually. I'll just frame the house, you can furnish it.

All through out my work at Generique(label)Media I've littered content with references to fear. Fear is ultimately the drive for many reactions, even if it's the United States Government threatening Wikileaks on dubious legal grounds. (Ohh, I dropped it..)

Why am I stating this?

Because I've got to ask you, what do you fear? What is it in your cerebral cortex that compels you to enter the rat race and be content?

Reply below. Discuss below. And, as a matter of fact, I'll elaborate on a world-line I've visited to get the gears going on how things "might" be different. Now, this can be tainted. But its a reflection of a society, not me.

I'll bet many of you are going "what rat race, all is well in Kansas!"

And that's a completely valid notion. I've always stressed the fact I'll never be able to agree with someone a hundred percent of the time, but I'll endorse their right to say it. You can't have free speech if it bans shit you don't want to hear, read, or explain to your children what a wardrobe malfunction is.

I'm an anarchist. It's an often misused word, tragically upheld in some youth subcultures but taken to a rebellious streak. Lets get one thing clear--I'm pro-democracy. I'm just not sure a representational democracy will ever be stable in the long term. (Refer to Rome.)

Through my travels in space-time, I've personally glimpsed a world 15 minutes from now. It may not be yours, but thats really up to humanity as a whole, isn't it?

This world-line is decentralized. There are no boarders, but there are many gated communities with privatized fire and security [Ed. note: don't confuse security with police, consider also biological and ecological issues.]. All across the world, there's a "Common Economic Protocol"- it's the legal document everyone generally agrees to go by when dealing with outsiders. (There will be negligence, but that's par for the course.)

They aren't strictly bound to currency because the food supply is local. Trade pacts are encouraged, and help keep a population from becoming too reliable on one strain of crop. Plus, you get to share new techniques.

Power is decentralized--solar paneling is a must where it's sensible, and they're much more effective and becoming ever more at a far quicker rate than here. There are plenty of options-- even using methane from sewage.

You see, this society is more geared towards certain goals. Mainly, mastering matter and form while working endlessly on space projects. Longevity of the human race is the key--but the standards of freedom and democracy will be preserved, too, at all costs.

Awhile back, civil engineers and economists began to ask why people would expend so much energy selling a name brand product manufactured say...in China, to Americans. Or why should the Chinese get the same product, assembled in America? Then they discovered and tracked all kinds of oddities--and granted, while these supply chains worked, they only worked for the bottom line.

Taking a magnifying glass to society, they began to meet in the open and discuss with the public across the world what the "ideal" conditions for a living environment would be for them.

That is...what was the ratio of needs and wants that needed to be inked down, and replicated for maximum benefit. They took a look at what politics was usually about--and every war, even religious ones, were all based on the fear of sharing resources.

Decentralized resources, then, where levels of food, water, and nutrients were standardized. Over time, different colonies began to focus on projects as a whole. If one person in Sao Paulo was interested and useful to work in Los Angeles, it would only make sense to ship'em off in trade with another person (or family).

But fear not, your living quarters need not be bland and monocultured. You're living in a world where low powered technology permeates the scene, allowing displays of digitally rendered customization to be splattered anywhere you want--$40 Target art aside.

This world is about cellular living. They are democratic as a whole, public forum and opinion the only way to create and review laws or doctrines. There are no parties here, no monolithic capitals--not even a cloak of laser satellites to fend off from nuclear attack.

In this world-line, people didn't figure out these concepts over night. There was blood shed and instability until the majority of the world agreed with the Common Economic Protocol.

And at the end of the day--what that doctrine stated--was that everyone had a right to live, have food, water, and shelter. It guaranteed that the individual rights were greater than the governments, and so, again, often public forum is used even in international relations.

They never would have bothered, though, if it weren't for the misuse of power by their dully elective representatives in the first place.

Now to be honest, I didn't stick around forever. So how this faired long term, I can't tell you. Certainly there was more to it than this, but you get the gist.

What's your take?