Lesson 5 Quiz!

Question 1 does not refer to a passage and is independent.

Question 2 does not refer to a passage and is independent.

Question 3 does not refer to a passage and is independent.

Question 4 does not refer to a passage and is independent.

Question 5 does not refer to a passage and is independent.

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

According to the author, the “post-utopian genre” is characterized by:

A. a rejection of Christianity and its teachings.

B. a rejection of the view that the course of history is inevitable.

C. the prediction that environmental degradation will lead to the collapse of civilization.

D. a belief that human equality is impossible to achieve.

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

(CMP) In the discussion of the scene from George Orwell’s novel 1984 (paragraph 2), what does the term “New Men” most probably refer to?

A. The rulers of the totalitarian society of Oceania.

B. Those whose human nature has been reshaped by the Party.

C. Those who have no convictions about morality.

D. People with views similar to those expressed by Winston Smith

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

(RWT) Christopher Schmidt’s point that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” (paragraph 1) seems to challenge the author’s statement that:

A. every utopia may be understood as a dystopia and vice-versa.

B. history possesses an inherent drive towards perfection.

C. most recent media is post-utopian in nature.

D. the collapse of communism has left global capitalism without any significant rivals.

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

The author implies that most recent media depicting the future:

A. does NOT presuppose a teleological view of history, one which inevitably culminates in paradise or apocalypse.

B. offers a vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world.

C. may be understood as either utopian or dystopian.

D. portrays the collapse of communism and other 20th-century ideologies.

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

Assume that a recently published novel depicts a future in which environmentalist groups take up arms in order to defend the world’s rainforests against deforestation and resource extraction. The passage author would likely consider this novel to be:

A. utopian.

B. dystopian.

C. both utopian and dystopian, since every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa.

D. post-utopian

 

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

(RBT) The views attributed by the passage author to the character O’Brien from 1984 are most like those likely to be held by:

A. a philosopher who believes that human behavior is shaped by social conditioning rather than free will.

B. a king who agrees to share power with a group of elected officials.

C. a dictator who disseminates propaganda and false messaging in order to build public support for a war.

D. a politician who makes false but sweet-sounding promises to win an election.

Passage

In everyday speech, dystopia has come to be used as a synonym for “something bad happening sometime in the future”. In his 2014 discussion of dystopian movies, Christopher Schmidt notes that “the recent uptick in dystopian portrayals seems more urgent and more extreme” and suggests that it relates to the threat of climate change and environmental degradation. Utopia, on the other hand, posits that history possesses an inherent drive toward perfection. In other words, it sees history not merely as linear but specifically as dynamic, teleological and future-oriented. Dystopia is utopia’s double, its dark twin, its mirror reflection. As Krishan Kumar pointed out in his magisterial study Utopia and Anti-Utopia in Modern Times (1987), utopia and dystopia are two sides of the same structural and ideological phenomenon: modern dystopia is predicated “on the very terms of modern utopia”. Utopia and dystopia share a dynamic, future-oriented modality involving a meaningful change, whether this change is seen positively or negatively. As Ruth Levitas explains in her gloss on Kumar, “utopia is about hoping for a transformed future…while fearing the worst”. In other words, both utopia and dystopia presuppose a teleological narrative of history which culminates in either paradise or apocalypse. In either case, the future is indeed transformed.

The utopian/dystopian scenario in Western culture derives from the Christian apocalyptic narrative, in which history inexorably builds up toward a radical culmination of the Tribulations followed by the Millennium. Norman Cohn in The Pursuit of the Millennium was the first to make the connection between revolutionary utopias and Christian mysticism. Recently John Gray argued that the utopian ideologies of the 20th century wrought so much havoc precisely because they faithfully followed the script of radical transformation inherited from the religious model of history: the “conviction that the crimes and follies of the past could be left behind in an all-encompassing transformation of human life was a secular reincarnation of early Christian beliefs”. Utopias, whatever their underlying ideological platform, are founded on “the belief that history must be understood not in terms of the causes of events but in terms of its purpose, which is the salvation of humanity”. And dystopias simply invert the logic of teleology: instead of heaven, history leads straight to hell. Stuck in the Tribulations, so to speak, dystopias nevertheless offer the same vision of a radically transformed social and ontological world as utopias. Indeed, depending on your point of view, every utopia may be read as a dystopia and vice versa. In the famous confrontation between Winston Smith and O’Brien in George Orwell’s 1984, the latter persuasively argues that the totalitarian society of Oceania is, in fact, the best of all possible worlds and when Smith objects, pointing to human nature as the bedrock of moral values, O’Brien forcefully demonstrates that the Party can mold and shape human nature just as easily as the larger social structure. The world of 1984 is the world of New Men, for whom Smith’s longings for love, privacy and freedom are simply incomprehensible.

Despite the historical importance of the utopian/dystopian genre, most recent media depicting the future – and indeed, most recent media portraying the present – belongs to a different genre, one that I call “post-utopian.” This term relates to the current geopolitical situation, in which the collapse of communism and other 20th-century utopian ideologies has left neo-liberalism and global capitalism without significant conceptual rivals. David Bell describes this situation as “the here-and-now of capital and the state: a world, in which, we are told, there is no longer any need for utopianism.” Post-utopia is thus what comes after the end of history, as described by Francis Fukuyama in his influential book The End of History, first published in 1992. Fukuyama’s book has been misunderstood as forecasting the end of the historical process, which is absurd. In fact, it posited the end of History with a capital H: that is, the notion that this process has an inbuilt salvational or destructive directionality. Events, even momentous events such as 9/11, will keep happening. What has ended, though, is the belief that these events are inescapably building up toward some preordained goal, whether it be a communist society of equality and plenty, or a total collapse of civilization.

---

Question

(RWT) In asserting that the concepts of utopia and dystopia in Western culture derive from Christian beliefs (paragraph 2), the author assumes that:

A. there are no utopian or dystopian stories in Western culture that predate Christianity

B. Christianity is the world’s most influential religion.

C. early utopian and dystopian thinkers in the West were deeply religious.

D.the earliest utopian and dystopian stories in Western culture were directly adapted from Biblical narratives.