(Dis)utopian Landscapes: Baudrillard, Deleuze, and DeLillo

Muhsin Yanar
{"title":"(Dis)utopian Landscapes: Baudrillard, Deleuze, and DeLillo","authors":"Muhsin Yanar","doi":"10.30613/curesosc.1381692","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"What drives us to speculate, hypothesize, and fantasize about utopia and dystopia? The concepts of utopia (a good place) and dystopia (a bad place) might be arrived at and developed by one’s contact with the (constructed) reality and comprehension, yet frustration and discontent with it, and one’s pessimism and optimism over a better present and future contingent upon the place and time in which one exists. The former has a long history, whereas the latter is a work in progress. That is, one cannot simply distinguish between the two by asking whether the latter is primarily precautionary and reactive, cautioning us what not to do, whilst the former is proactive, pointing us in the right direction. Both the former and latter may have similar motives, namely, to demonstrate the dark characteristics of one society by comparing it with another, fictitious culture. Someone’s utopia might alternate dystopia, or many traditional utopias from the past include aspects that modern readers would identify as dystopian. On the other hand, one could argue that dystopia serves as the worst-case scenario, presenting a degraded, collapsing, and/or collapsed society, be it socio-culturally, economically, or technologically, worse than another, yet still hopeful for a drastic change for the better. Utopia could be received as the best-case scenario for people in a society considering its socio-political demise. Shortly, both utopian and dystopian scenarios would fit into an extended framework of contemplations on a catastrophe that would either signal a tremendous shift for the better or result in an apocalyptic nightmare. Drawing on the standpoints of Giles Deleuze and Jean Baudrillard and tracing Don DeLillo’s fiction, this paper seeks to explore the notion of dystopia, the future assumptions that dystopian fiction puts forward, and the challenges and issues it highlights, such as digital surveillance, technological control, the disappearance of individualism, uncertainty, and dread.","PeriodicalId":344498,"journal":{"name":"Current Research in Social Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Research in Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30613/curesosc.1381692","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

What drives us to speculate, hypothesize, and fantasize about utopia and dystopia? The concepts of utopia (a good place) and dystopia (a bad place) might be arrived at and developed by one’s contact with the (constructed) reality and comprehension, yet frustration and discontent with it, and one’s pessimism and optimism over a better present and future contingent upon the place and time in which one exists. The former has a long history, whereas the latter is a work in progress. That is, one cannot simply distinguish between the two by asking whether the latter is primarily precautionary and reactive, cautioning us what not to do, whilst the former is proactive, pointing us in the right direction. Both the former and latter may have similar motives, namely, to demonstrate the dark characteristics of one society by comparing it with another, fictitious culture. Someone’s utopia might alternate dystopia, or many traditional utopias from the past include aspects that modern readers would identify as dystopian. On the other hand, one could argue that dystopia serves as the worst-case scenario, presenting a degraded, collapsing, and/or collapsed society, be it socio-culturally, economically, or technologically, worse than another, yet still hopeful for a drastic change for the better. Utopia could be received as the best-case scenario for people in a society considering its socio-political demise. Shortly, both utopian and dystopian scenarios would fit into an extended framework of contemplations on a catastrophe that would either signal a tremendous shift for the better or result in an apocalyptic nightmare. Drawing on the standpoints of Giles Deleuze and Jean Baudrillard and tracing Don DeLillo’s fiction, this paper seeks to explore the notion of dystopia, the future assumptions that dystopian fiction puts forward, and the challenges and issues it highlights, such as digital surveillance, technological control, the disappearance of individualism, uncertainty, and dread.
(乌托邦景观(失)》:波德里亚、德勒兹和德里罗
是什么驱使我们对乌托邦和乌托邦进行猜测、假设和幻想?乌托邦(一个好地方)和乌托邦(一个坏地方)的概念可能是由人们对(建构的)现实的接触和理解、对现实的沮丧和不满,以及对所处地点和时间所决定的更美好的现在和未来的悲观和乐观而形成和发展起来的。前者由来已久,而后者则是一项正在进行的工作。也就是说,我们不能简单地通过询问后者是否主要是预防性的和被动的,告诫我们不应该做什么,而前者则是积极主动的,为我们指明正确的方向来区分两者。前者和后者的动机可能相似,即通过将一个社会与另一个虚构的文化进行比较,来展示这个社会的黑暗特征。有人的乌托邦可能是另一种乌托邦,或者说,过去的许多传统乌托邦都包含了现代读者会认为是乌托邦的内容。另一方面,人们也可以说乌托邦是最坏的情况,它展现了一个堕落、崩溃和/或坍塌的社会,无论是社会文化、经济还是技术方面,都比另一个社会更糟糕,但仍有希望发生翻天覆地的变化。乌托邦可以被理解为一个社会中的人们在考虑其社会政治消亡时的最佳选择。不久之后,乌托邦和乌托邦情景都将被纳入对一场灾难的思考的扩展框架,这场灾难要么预示着向好的方向发展的巨大转变,要么导致世界末日般的噩梦。本文借鉴吉尔斯-德勒兹(Giles Deleuze)和让-鲍德里亚(Jean Baudrillard)的观点,并追溯唐-德里罗(Don DeLillo)的小说,试图探讨乌托邦的概念、乌托邦小说提出的未来假设,以及它所强调的挑战和问题,如数字监控、技术控制、个人主义的消失、不确定性和恐惧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信