The main part of the Archive Project I want to focus on is the idea of perceived utopias and dystopias along with the idea that the two are closers to each other than their definitions allow. Both of this is posable because of people who created the definitions to utopias and dystopias as well as what they believe they are. People within the same society tend to have the ideas as to what is good or bad, however there are those who are outcasts and do not agree with the masses. People see the world from where they are and unless they are put somewhere else their perspective will not change. Some people are born into lives of luxury while others are born into poverty and in some cases it is not possible for them to leave from that place. Caste systems are an example of this, people born into them are not allowed to move up or down from their starting point even if they have talent or skill. Now this is dilemma, those on the top of the society are living like kings while all others are in worsening conditions the further down they go. So is this a utopia and dystopia? For the top it is a utopia but for the bottom most it is a dystopia, now the middle or second to the top may be in a bit of a grey area. Even with a caste system some people do better than others, you can have a poor king while having a rich merchant. So how does that change things? A king with no money while living and seeing the wealth around him and with others may come to see the world he lives in as a hell. A similar problem was faced by the high class Roman families that held power for many years, they were out of resources from years of keeping everything within the families and needed new blood and money. So the Romans allowed the marriage of wealthy plebeians into the high families of patricians after the plebeians attend rights within Rome otherwise they would have no power in high society. And yet in India the caste system remains, and over the years people have accepted it as a way of life because of religion and tradition. Now India as a state has grown over time and has become powerful but is it a utopia. Some enjoy massive wealth to the point of seeing a gold car as something of old news and massive city have been built in the desert and near the coast. But many have not been benefiting from the wealth being spent and made in this growth. There is an old system of economics called trickle down that would in cases work but in practice it stops at a certain point not far from where it started. So once more to perspective, from the view of most nations of the free world the caste system is wrong and an out dated model, this view is also shared by the current Indian government but the steps taken to reduce it have not led to it being removed. So it is seen as a system that leads to problems, hate, crime, violence and other negatives, so in many cases this is seen as a dystopia. This example can be seen in Brave New World and Metropolis, with the latter leading to a revolt versus the system. Yet much like In Brave New World and Metropolis the people at the top care little for those below as long as they work and do what they wish. However there is a positive side to this system as well, you can never fall out of your cast, the poor king will still be where he is and will never bow to the rich merchant. There is a safety net for each caste, you cannot fall down but you also can not move up. Under socialism everyone should be equal but the problem is people are not equal, everyone is different in some way and some people need more than others. Also people are not saints, and will always want more, have envy, hate, desire and other things that will make them want to get out of the box they are put in. Also how can you pay a doctor the same you pay a teacher or construction worker? They have different fields, time spent learning, ability and importance. But under socialism they all derive the same, the same house, car, food, and anything else that they get. However this is a theory, in practice it has led to terrible things like the USSR and China. The people were put on the same level but that was not the middle ground between rich and poor but simply poor. Many who were well off had their homes taken, their cars, land and everything else they had to given out equally to the people, the problem was most of the goods were given to those in power, they now lived the life of luxury that the kings before them had lived in. At the same time they also realized why the kings before them could not satisfy the people, there was just not enough for everyone. Russia was too big to feed everyone who lived within it with crops and food from fertile regions, so they started to kill their own people, take land and used the lives of those who believed in them as suicide squads to get it done.
People create the world we live in they often make one where they benefit more than others if possible, particularly if they get to rule this world they make. That is why the words utopias and dystopias were made by Sir Thomas More and J. S. Mill, to use them to describe what path the rulers of the world are taking, either one that leads to a better place or one that will lead to a place that no one should be in.
Now the idea of a utopia was coined from the Greek by Sir Thomas More for his 1516 book of the same name and it means no-place vs a good place as most people use it today which would be a Eutopia. Also the term dystopia coined as an antonym for Utopia by J. S. Mill to describe something “too bad to be practicable” vs something “too good to be practicable”. So by definition neither of these two worlds are possible to exist, at least to a point. It is not possible to have a complete world of no wrongs as much as it is not possible to have a world full of wrongs. Both would stop functioning after time when they reach a point of critical mass. Then there is the fact that both of these ideas are that, ideas made by people and people are different, change, create, destroy and die. Over time things change, what was not possible to be 60 years ago is now part of daily life and now there is something new that is not posable. People’s view of what is bad or good changes based on many factors and that is what is then used to define a utopia or dystopia, because there is no real example of them in the real world, to a point. Some people get born into a world of money and luxury and do not have day to day worries for most of their lives and to many who are not in that position they see It as a dream, a utopia if you will. However that is not truly the case, true they do not worry about living day to day, paycheck to paycheck, but they worry about stocks, inheritance, siblings, ransoms, blackmail and other thins that the masses no do dream off. Each world that a person occupies is their reality and that dictates what they see as a good place or bad place to be. In reality utopias and dystopias are mixed together, one day you are above others living a good life and the next day everything you had can be pulled from under you and you live in a bad time. Utopias and dystopias are opposites of each other, particularly if kept separate from one another, however elements from each are possible to be seen because of way the world works and how works capture that aspect to make the world believable. There will always be a top and a bottom to a society, the difference is what the gap between them is and how many are in each group.
What is a utopia and dystopia?
How people define them and how people are defined by them
Why they exist as an idea
What they show about society over the years thought media
How the idea has evolved
What is there to learn from utopia or dystopia?
People define what is a utopia and dystopia
People have perspectives on what they believe is a utopia and dystopia
Utopia and dystopia are extremes but at the same can be a part of the same society at the same time
Utopia and dystopia can be broken down to a personal level and that can be in flux
Once more I tried to make a good set up for the Proposal and it came out with writing about history and the current world. Because that is the main point of Science Fiction writing to show the real world what may happen, to warn, to teach, to make people think about ideas and make them question things. Everyone writes about what they believe is important, what they see as growing problem. For years it was the fear of technology taking over the world, this lead to movies, books, talks and even steps at making technology more user dependent. However the development of AI is still underway and there are whole systems that have no user input for long periods of time where they run themselves. And this is the big problem for me, I go very wide with what I write, I my mind this is all attached in some way or another. I jump off one point to make another because it pops into my head and then I go off and write about that losing my first claim in the process and all sense of structure. However that is mainly because I do not write proposals, do recall ever having to write one before and because of that I have been mainly going at this like an essay yet without the structure because it is not an essay but I do not know how to make it a proposal and fit all the information I had and gained with research. The main problem is still formatting into a packing that will make people understand what I am trying to say without the need of me to be there to explain it alongside what I write. Also I feel that the wording I am using is a bit off and that my idea is not being convoyed the way I want it to be.
Where the term Utopia and dystopia where made and why. Early works of the genre and later works like we have read as well as media. How everyday use of the word has changed what it is versus the first meaning set. How people have used the themes to show possible worlds both good and bad based on a single idea or invention. How posable it is to have them in the real world as well as how it depended on the people you ask. The effect that it has had on people over the years as an idea as well as media. How people see what is a utopia and dystopia easier in works verses the little bit of it in everyday life. The realizing that works written many years ago match several trends today and the foresight of those works.