Samuel Butler, Erewhon. This hugely inventive 1872 satire by the author of the anti-Victorian novel The Way of All Flesh is perhaps more accurately described as ‘anti-utopian’, though it follows the utopian narrative structure. The fictional land of Erewhon – almost ‘nowhere’ backwards – is the setting for this novel. Among the things satirised by Butler in this book is the rise of the machines, which Butler argues will evolve at an ever-faster rate – along the lines of Darwinian evolution – until the machines eventually overtake humans.
Every individual is employed according to his classification — in an office, a factory, a hatchery, on a farm, or flying a helicopter taxi. A great variety of entertainment is provided for after-working hours — sports like electromagnetic golf, Riemann-surface tennis, and centrifugal bumble-puppy. There are lively nightclubs and "feelies," movies that provide accompanying scents and that also stimulate appropriate tactile sensations. Every evening seems to end with going to bed with someone of the opposite sex. Sexual relations are completely promiscuous. "Everyone belongs to everyone" is one of the clichés drummed into the consciousness through conditioning. There is no such thing as a marriage. Contraceptives are provided by the government to make sure that people will not interfere with the test tube method of producing children. Sex is purely for sport.
Of course! Eponymous founder of the genre; brilliant mixture of satire, political idealism, and obfuscation of the author's own views. More's book has been seen by some as an attempt to justify colonisation of the Americas, by others as a dreary state of Catholic dogma and by his champions as a proto-communistic vision. The book's very indeterminacy is testament to its constant inventiveness.
Considerable emphasis is given to scientific experimentation, aimed at improving industry, health, and general living conditions. To that end a great laboratory for the natural sciences is operated, and an exhibition hall of science, industry, and the arts offers educational opportunities through scale models of machinery and mural paintings similar to those in the City of the Sun.
A vision shows the player crumble before reaching the destination, but the player chooses to continue the journey into the remains of a once sprawling city at the base of the mountain. Eventually making it safely to the mountain, the traveler begins to climb it, struggling as they enter the colder climates and encounter deep snow and high winds. With the crevice still a fair distance away, the traveler falls and collapses in the snow. Six of the white-robed figures appear before the character and grant the traveler new energy, allowing the player to reach the summit of the mountain and walk into the crevice as the screen fills with white. The player is then shown the game's credits, playing over the ending cinematic scene. This scene shows a shooting star emanating from the crevice and traversing the path the traveler took through the ruins, and shows glimpses of other robed travelers heading towards the mountain. Eventually, the star comes to rest at the sand dune where the game began, and the player is given the option of starting the game again. As the credits end, the player is shown the PlayStation Network IDs of the other travelers who shared part of the trek.
These statements occur near the end of Book 1, which began, after some preliminaries, with a conversation about the justice of the death penalty for theft. (In an endnote on page 145, Miller tells of a report from 1587 that "in the reign of Henry VIII alone 72,000 thieves and vagabonds were hanged.") Hythloday believes that theft is a necessary consequence of personal property. Unstated but evident is that he believes also that personal property is not only a sufficient condition for theft (which makes theft a necessary consequence of it), but also a necessary condition for theft (which makes theft contingent upon it). Removing personal property, then, removes the possibility of theft, he believes: with the unexamined assumption that you cannot steal what you already own in common with everyone else. But of course you can: you take it and keep it for yourself so no one else can use it, taking what belongs to everyone, and not sharing it with anyone. Only the coercion of others, through established law or otherwise, can alter this. But then you are back to the existence of theft and social restraints to admonish and respond to it.