Jacoby, Picture Imperfect (ii) (2005)

Chapters 2-4 & Epilogue

In Chapter 2, Jacoby argues that violence comes not from utopia, but from the end of utopia. With this, he attempts to show through situated and biographical readings of the 'anti-utopians' in Western philosophy, how their refusal of utopia stemmed from the political collapses of their time. Beginning with More's own turn from Utopia to potential totalitarian beliefs. Jacoby argues that it is 'with More, or through More, we can see the emergence of modern anti-utopianism' (48). However, Jacoby is adamant to insist that More's changing opinion of utopia was deeply embedded in the political climate of the times, namely the religious and political changes occurring in the 16th Century Reformation which argues Jacoby, led to More feeling 'a sense of betrayed utopian hopes' (49). Jacoby goes on to suggest that it is this quality of living through a dream 'gone amuck' (50) that is an important aspect of the anti-utopians. Jacoby then turns to what he describes as a 'liberal anti-utopian consensus' (50) typified by the writings of Popper, Talman, Arendt, and Berlin. Tracing through what Jacoby identifies as their similarities (from dates of birth to experiences of war, communism), Jacoby highlights how their experiences of communism forever tainted how they saw fascism, 'the latter was viewed through the lens of the former' (52). What Jacoby seems to be suggesting in this chapter then is that anti-utopianism stems from disappointment in the outcome of utopia. These writers turn from utopia from a disappointment, and assume that utopia becomes exhausted by the failure of communism.

In Chapters 3 and 4, Jacoby attempts to outline what an iconoclastic utopianism might mean through turning to Judaism. 'The Jewish tradition gave rise to what might be called an iconoclastic utopianism - an anti-utopian utopianism that resisted blueprints' (85). These chapters do not seem particularly important to read too closely at this point, suffice it to say that he wants to argue for the sustaining impulse to dream the future as stemming from a refusal to picture what it might exactly look like. He also makes it clear in this chapter that he sees utopianism as essential: 'a world without utopian longings is forlorn. For society as well as for the individual, it means to journey without a compass' (143).

In the Epilogue, he attempts to tease out the contradition in utopia between present-day struggle and future dreaming. Jacoby argues that utopia necessarily tries to keep a distance from the day-to-day otherwise 'it would forfeit its own commitment to a realm beyond the immediate choices' (145). However, he also says that the opposite is also true, that utopianism 'emerges out of and returns to contemporary political realities' (146). He argues that this is the defining contradiction of the utopian project, 'it partakes at once of the limited choices of the day and the unlimited possibilities of the morrow. It straddles two time zones: the one we inhabit now and the one that might exist in the future' (146). He connects this to the style of More's Utopia, as it is written in two books. Jacoby highlights that we need to find a way to connect utopian thinking with the everyday and he seems to suggest starting from the negative. We may not know what the 'end of racism' will look like, but we know we want it to end, 'utopian wishes need to be situated against something' (148). Jacoby argues that while utopian wishes may indeed be dependent on a negation, they go beyond this negation to keep 'an ear, if not an eye, on the future' (149).