Synopsis
The literature under consideration is a review of the book Utopia authored by the famous Sir Saint Thomas More in which he presents to his audience an illustration of a politically and socially egalitarian culture. In this essay titled “Sir Thomas More’s Utopia and the Transformation of England from Absolute Monarchy to Egalitarian Society”, authors W. B. Gerard and Eric Sterling study the comparison presented by More in relation to the idealistic Utopian society and the monarchial English society of the then-contemporary Tudor England. They state that although Sir Thomas More’s treatise was based on a fictitious nation named Utopia and the 16th-century English society under the rule of King Henry VIII, his visionary perceptions are still as significant as they were during his era. Utopia is an unconventional amalgam of genres. It is an illustration of implausible travelogue, philosophical expanse, the satire of the then existent English social order, and most importantly a visualization of an idyllic and egalitarian society. More uses the speech of Raphael Hythloday’s in Book I to refer to the tribulations that encompass the English society, and in Book II, he highlights the Utopian culture and put side by side the political beliefs and social commandments of Utopia and that of England.
Is the title clear?
The article under consideration is titled “Sir Thomas More’s Utopia and the Transformation of England from Absolute Monarchy to Egalitarian Society”. The clarity of the title is quite evident as a reader gets an idea about the forthcoming matter of discussion in the exposition just by looking at the title of the dissertation. The article is based on Sir Saint Thomas More’s famous book Utopia. It deals with the evils of the monarchial rule in 16th century England under the regime of King Henry VIII and observes the comparison with the idealistic and communal Utopian society brought forth by the author. Thus, the subject of discussion is well represented by the one-liner heading.
What is the research question/thesis?
The matter of observance in this article is Sir Thomas More’s futurist perception of the social issues faced by the people in any existent culture or civilization. His fascinating endeavor to compare the tribulations in the English society with a fictitious nation named Utopia possessing an idealistic, egalitarian culture brings forth his concerns about these issues. The paper under contemplation highlights these concerns by reflecting on the juxtapositions presented in the book it reviews. It also brings out how relevant and reverberant Sir Thomas More’s ideas, perceptions, and thoughts are in even today’s contemporary 21st-century society.
What is the focus? Is the focus clear?
The article titled “Sir Thomas More’s Utopia and the Transformation of England from Absolute Monarchy to Egalitarian Society” does justice to the name it has adapted. The focus of the paper is primarily on the Utopian political and social framework, which brings out the perfection desired by the affiliates of any society. It contrasts these romantic features of the Utopian social order with the realistic evils and harms of the 16th century monarchial English society.
The focus of the article becomes clearer to the reader as he proceeds through the article and encounters actual comparisons between the Utopian and English societies. The reader identifies the troubles experienced by the poor of the 16th century English civilization and understands the idealistic view of the author by referring to the Utopian scheme of things.
Is the line of argumentation clear?
The authors of this article make an effort to bring out the reality, which was experienced by people of the English society under the command of King Henry VIII. The vast social gap between the rich, the poor is evidently brought out by citing examples from Sir Thomas More’s book called Utopia and constructing a well-developed discussion out of them. The realism in the issues discussed is augmented when contrasted with the egalitarian political and social structures of the fictitious Utopia. The level of reasoning presented by the authors of this article as well as that of Sir Thomas More makes the line of argumentation as it brings out the reality methodically.
Are paragraphs coherent, unified, and well developed?
The article is logically ordered and a well-developed dialogue is presented to the user. The authors make a transparent attempt to unify the parts of the discussion to bring out the quintessence of the article. However, I feel that the authors would have done more justice to this particularly well-written article had the introductory paragraph would have been more elucidating. Following is my effort to introduce the article.
Sir Thomas More’s Utopia, fascinating and unconventional literature, is an illustration of implausible travelogue, philosophical expanse, a satire of the then existent English social order, and most importantly a visualization of an idyllic and egalitarian society. More, having the first-hand experience in administrative operations, observed the shortcomings of the society with a keen eye and close proximity. With reference to his vision, this study focuses on the framework applied to the political and social dynamics of the 16th-century English society in contrast to the fictitious, idealistic, and egalitarian Utopian culture. Utopia represents a standard of idealism against which the realism involved the 16th century English culture is measured. More utilizes the voice of Raphael Hythloday to deal with the tribulations faced by the English society in Book I while in Book II he concentrates on bringing forth the comparison between the Utopian epitome of idealism and the real political and social philosophy of then-contemporary England. By putting side-by-side Utopian and English cultures, this study reflects on More’s structure. In particular, More’s contemplation of the Utopian scheme of things in terms of economic, political, and international affairs is reflected in this article. The essentiality of More’s visionary insight continues to prevail until this day.
Are sentences linked in an original way?
Technically, the authors have demonstrated excellent skills in their writing style. The link between sentences is plain and obvious. They are logically derived from sources originating in Sir Thomas’s book Utopia and perfectly analyze the content. However, as is the case with any literary document, it comes up with a few shortcomings, which too are dependent on the person reading the document. In some cases, I found that the links between the sentences could be made much more profound. In some cases after a sentence ends the reader is left guessing. This could have been done away with a few more explanations or else the subject should not have been mentioned. For example, on page 79, the article quotes, “Every person (and this includes women as well as men) learns a second trade, besides agriculture” (More, 1516/1992, pp. 36–37). In fact, the treatment of women in Utopia and in England parallels the treatment of the poor in these societies.” Here a disparity is found due to a mention of the second trade. In the following sentence, there is no effort to explain the relevance of the second trade, which confuses the reader to a certain extent.
Are sentences varied in length and complexity?
Sentences throughout most of the treatise are considerably long and the extensive use of punctuations increases the complexity of the sentences to a certain degree. For example, in the following sentence, the overuse of commas and semicolons makes it complex.
“The administration of justice is adapted for a host of factors rather than relying on the application of a basic, catch-all definition of a crime; this, in combination with the lack of a potentially tainting precedent, seems to guarantee the most appropriate punishment for each individual crime.” (Gerard, 75-89)
Nevertheless, the reader also encounters shorts sentences, which are quite easy to decipher as effortlessly understood. For example, “Representational government in Utopia is equally straightforward. Every year a syphogrant is elected by every 30 households.” (Gerard, 75-89)
Is the amount of detail sufficient?
The authors demonstrate a good understanding of the literature they review as their analysis provides sufficient amount of detail. For example, in the case of explaining the status of women in the society they explain how the women’s involvement in the Utopian workforce increases their status in the society. Why women in English societies are treated as second-class citizen is also explained aptly by referring to other relevant studies and analyzing the context to bring out the essence of the discussion.
How is the article organized? Is it well organized?
The article is extremely well organized. It first introduces the topic, clarifies More’s perception on various issues and then provides its own analysis relating to a certain context based on their own understanding as well as references to other relevant issues. This approach brings out a coherent, logical and ordered discussion, which makes sense to the reader.
How are sources quoted and documented? Is it acceptable?
Throughout the text, the reader encounters various excerpts from the book, which it reviews. It provides a reference for the analysis it provides and helps the reader relate to it. Also, while analyzing a certain context authors make extensive referrals to various other works by different authors and cite their sources properly. This helps establish a sense of validity of their argument, which is completely acceptable.
Work Cited
Gerard, W B & Eric Sterling; Sir Thomas More’s Utopia and the Transformation of England from Absolute Monarchy to Egalitarian Society; Contemporary Justice Review; Vol. 8, No. 1, 2005, pp. 75–89; (Taylor & Francis Group Ltd)