Alledaags Utopia. Wat tweeduizend jaar experimenteren ons kan leren over het goede leven

by Kristen R. Ghodsee, Jan Reyniers (Translator)

Om de samenleving van morgen te dromen zullen we buiten de lijntjes van het alledaagse moeten kleuren. De utopische feministische visies uit het verleden kunnen ons daarbij inspireren.


Oscar Wilde wist het al: ‘Een wereldkaart waarop Utopia niet voorkomt is de moeite van het bekijken niet waard.’ In haar nieuwe boek neemt Kristen Ghodsee je mee langs een stoet grotere en kleinere Utopia’s. Want de zoektocht naar andere manieren om huishouden, opvoeding, relaties, familie, wonen en bezit te organiseren is zo oud als de mensheid zelve. Zelfs Pythagoras – ja, die van de driehoek – had zes eeuwen voor Christus al een eigen commune waar mannen en vrouwen het werk eerlijk verdeelden. Om de samenleving van morgen te dromen zullen we buiten de lijntjes van het alledaagse moeten kleuren. De utopische feministische visies uit het verleden kunnen ons daarbij helpen en inspireren. Hun desem zit al in het klein verzet dat wereldwijd bloeit, van Deense cohousinggemeenschappen en matriarchale Colombiaanse ecodorpen tot de microdistricten in China. ‘Utopia is terug’, aldus een enthousiaste Thomas Piketty, ‘en je neemt het beter ernstig want de geschiedenis wordt gemaakt door dromers. Een must-read!’

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Politics, Sociology, Feminism, Utopia

400 pages, Paperback

First published May 18, 2023

About the author

Kristen R. Ghodsee an award-winning author and ethnographer. She is professor of Russian and East European Studies and a member of the Graduate Group in Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania. Her work has been translated into over twenty-five languages and has appeared in publications such as Foreign Affairs, Dissent, Jacobin, Ms. Magazine, The New Republic, Le Monde Diplomatique, The Washington Post, and The New York Times, She is the author of 12 books, and she is the host of the podcast, A.K. 47, which discusses the works of the Russian Bolshevik, Alexandra Kollontai. Her latest book is Everyday Utopia: What 2000 Years of Wild Experiments Can Teach Us About the Good Life, which appeared with Simon & Schuster in May 2023.

She loves popcorn, manual typewriters, and Bassett hounds.

Website: www.kristenghodsee.com
Podcast: ak47.buzzsprout.com

Reviews

[Marilyn Rumph · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was not what I expected, but I learned a lot. The author provides a deep history of utopias and utopian thinking. There is a lot of data given, but I really take that with a grain of salt. We don’t really know how we would behave given many of the conditions described in the book. The author is biased toward a feminist view of utopian culture. That’s not a problem for me, but just be aware. The author’s title can only be considered relevant if you think of it as her desire to try to get us to look at our everyday life and think about where utopian thinking could be applied. She discusses childcare, housing, education, family dynamics and violence, and capitalism. She brings up many different aspects of utopian living in history and in today’s intentional communities. She examines it all the history, current problems, and possible utopian solutions with the questioning mind of a feminist. In retrospect, I thought this would be a book that detailed stories of people who are successfully living in everyday utopias -- this is not that book, but more an academic review. I don’t think it lives up to the sub-title of wild experiments. You can make your own decision about that. I will purchase this book as I continue to think about what utopian living could look like in the future. Thank you to Net Galley and Simon & Schuster, Inc. for providing an arc in return for my honest review.

[Brian Griffith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ghodsee urges looking at how personal and family life could be better. She urges us to look beyond the nuclear family box of patrilineal, patrilocal tradition, for ways to generate more cooperation, from more people, on parenting and partnering. To generate food for thought she looks across history, giving an academic-style examination of possibilities. But sometimes she very personal. For example,

Rather than embrace the hegemonic realpolitik and greed-lionizing sensibilities of the 1980s, I carried on imagining the possibility of different worlds. I discovered that learning about other political and economic systems opened my mind to the possibility that the reality in which I lived was not the only one available. Once I started thinking about the world not as it was but as it might be, I could more clearly diagnose the problems with my own time and space--and mentally play with possible solutions.

There’s one other quote I’d like to share here, which exposes something of the challenge she’s trying to meet. Concerning “family values conservatives,” she notes that in 1979, Jeane Kirkpatrick, who became Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the U.N., wrote an article explaining why the USA supported traditional autocrats around the world. Here is a paragraph from that article, which was called “Dictatorships & Double Standards.”:

Traditional autocrats leave in place existing allocations of wealth, power, and other resources which in most traditional societies favor an affluent few and maintain masses in poverty. But they worship traditional gods and observe traditional taboos. They do not disturb the habitual rhythms of work and leisure, habitual places of residence, habitual patterns of family and personal relations. Because the miseries of traditional life are familiar, they are bearable to ordinary people, who, growing up in the society learn to cope, as children born to untouchables in India acquire the skills and attitudes necessary for survival in the miserable roles they are destined to fill.

[Carla · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wish I had made notes, because there is so much to say about this book and now I have to do it by memory (I had to return the book). Kristen Ghodsee discusses many topics that are so common, but looking deeper into them they demonstrate more options than we probably had thought ourselves. Topics like housing, family and raising children, education, owning 'things'. Some of them I had read about before (f.e. sharing economy, co-housing and I studied educational sciences), but there is so much more that Ghodsee offers us. The amount of research, literature, cases, is amazing. I felt some overlap between topics and I struggled sometimes reading, so not the full 5 stars, but a very interesting read, which gives much food for thought.

[Kate Lawrence · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a mind-expanding presentation of many outside-the-box ways of rethinking how we live: our family and community structures, our currently unsustainable consumption patterns, how we integrate work and raising children, the roles of women, and much more. The author believes our current time period, with its social instability and inequality, along with the climate crisis, is ripe for coming up with new solutions to old problems.
A well-researched and intriguing exploration of basic habits and structures that are deeply ingrained in our society, Everyday Utopia will stimulate much thoughtful discussion for book clubs, classrooms, and individuals. Thank you, Ms. Ghodsee!

[Luke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Everyone knows I’m a sucker for utopia- this was a really cool look at different visions and versions of people actually trying to make it happen. The chapter break up by topic was pretty cool and I loved the conversation on militant optimism. There’s a lot of info kind of dumped in parts but overall I think it’s the messaging here that’s far more important than the exact details of X groups decision making structure or what have you. I’d definitely recommend this to anyone who feels hopeless in the current climate/economic/military crisis!

[Suze Geuke · Rating 5 out of 5]

de voor mijn smaak iets te droogkloterige academische toon daargelaten (en het wordt ook door de pagina's heen wat... persoonlijker) is dit boek een joekel van een aanzwengeling tot alternatief wonen: waarom zouden we niet dromen en waarom zouden we niet delen?

auteur zet aan tot existentiële vraagstukken die me niet koud hebben gelaten over de stand van zaken wat betreft alles wat direct in je buurt staat. de vloer wordt aangeveegd met leven om te werken, huisjeboompjebeesje, gezinsstructuren, competitiviteit en linked-inhobbyisme.

met name het radicaal optimisme wat ze betoogt is erg aanstekelijk! hervonden hoop op een maakbare wereld! het persoonlijke is politiek bedrijven en we mogen dan wel denken geen deuk in een pakje boter te slaan, de boter wordt er in ieder geval veel romiger door!

duseuuuh als je me straks kwijt bent, ben ik voor een aanwakkerende sekte gezwicht.

[Sylvia · Rating 5 out of 5]

"Everyday Utopia" by Kristen R. Ghodsee is a thought-provoking exploration of the potential for creating a more equitable and just society. With a blend of historical analysis, personal anecdotes, and sociopolitical commentary, Ghodsee presents a compelling argument for reimagining our understanding of utopia and pursuing tangible change in our everyday lives.

One of the book's notable strengths is Ghodsee's ability to bridge theory and practice. Drawing on examples from both historical and contemporary contexts, the author demonstrates how utopian ideals have been manifested in various societies and movements. She emphasizes the importance of envisioning and striving for a better future, while acknowledging the limitations and challenges that come with such endeavors. Ghodsee's nuanced approach invites readers to critically examine their own assumptions and consider alternative paths towards social transformation.

Ghodsee's writing is accessible and engaging, making complex concepts and theories accessible to a wide range of readers. She combines academic research with personal stories and anecdotes, providing a human touch that helps to ground the book's ideas in real-world experiences. The author's passion for social justice and her compelling arguments make for a thought-provoking and immersive reading experience.

Moreover, "Everyday Utopia" is timely and relevant, addressing pressing issues such as inequality, climate change, and social justice. Ghodsee invites readers to envision a future that challenges the status quo and offers innovative solutions to systemic problems. Her analysis of the role of individuals and communities in effecting change serves as a call to action, inspiring readers to think critically about their own roles in shaping a more utopian society.

However, some readers may find that the book's breadth of topics and ideas can at times feel overwhelming. Ghodsee covers a wide range of subjects, and readers seeking a more in-depth exploration of specific concepts or case studies may feel the need for further exploration beyond the book's scope.

In conclusion, "Everyday Utopia" is a thought-provoking and insightful book that challenges readers to reconsider the possibilities of creating a more just and equitable society. Ghodsee's combination of historical analysis, personal narratives, and sociopolitical commentary offers a compelling vision of how individuals and communities can work towards a better future. If you're interested in exploring new perspectives on social justice and reimagining the potential for utopian ideals, this book is a valuable and inspiring read.

[Alex · Rating 3 out of 5]

This turned out to be a different book than I hoped it would be, and I was therefore left somewhat disappointed by it. Perhaps this is my fault, for not adjusting my expectations when it became clear what it _wasn't_, but I feel like it squandered its potential.

This is an effective and engaging introduction to the idea(s) of "utopianism" writ large. There's an expression "the fish are the last ones to notice the water," and it applies forcefully to so many of our assumptions about how the world is currently structured. Our social and political and economic systems feel inevitable, but they are anything but. That is the most powerful take-away of this book - not only are they not inevitable - they are indeed changeable, even if those systems seem intractable.

If there's one thing a reader should take from this book, it is that we should dream big, and question fundamental assumptions about how the world works and could work.

Most of the chapters are about various ways in which we could structure our lives more cooperatively, and expand our communities of love and care and notion of "family" and possessions to encompass a wider group of people. This is a deeply radical idea in the stubbornly individualistic and self-centered United States, and many if not most of the experiments that Ghodsee describes would be (and were) met with fierce resistance.

What I was hoping for with this book was a more systematic analysis of historical utopian experiments, with lessons about where they succeeded and where they failed. This was not that book. It was more of a broad survey. But it was a good overview of utopian ideas, which are sorely needed more than ever as face the interlocking crises of the Anthropocene.

(I learned about this book after hearing Kristen Ghodsee on Ezra Klein's podcast, and received an advanced reader's copy from NetGalley)

[Grace Heymsfield · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was really excited for this after listening to the authors Ezra Klein interview - wish the history of utopian experiments had been balanced a bit more with applications for ‘militant optimism’, but interesting read

[Ellen IJzerman (Prowisorio) · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ik neem twee quotes over uit het voorwoord, zodat ik daar tijdens het lezen en in ieder geval aan het eind van het boek aan herinnerd word, omdat ik daar rekening mee wil (en, let's be honest (ja, dat had ik ook in het Nederlands kunnen schrijven, maar inmiddels ben ik ervan overtuigd dat dit de wijze is waarop we tegenwoordig (moeten) communicaten?) moet houden bij het formuleren van mijn reactie op dit boek.

Allereerst de quote op blz. 11:

Ik hoop dat geïnteresseerde lezers geïnspireerd worden om dez ideeën verder te verkennen door de vele werken te raadplegen die in de eindnoten staan vermeld. En omdat ik dit boek zo internationaal mogelijk wilde maken, heb ik ervoor gekozen niet te overdrijven met voorbeelden uit de Verenigde Staten [Joechei] - zo wil ik niet te lang stilstaan bij de 'hippiecommunes' van de jaren zestig die elders al uitvoerig zijn besproken. In plaats daarvan belicht ik verschillende andere experimenten die relatief minder aandacht hebben gekregen.

en dan op blz. 12:

Maar samengenomen als een panorama van verschillende ideeën, in combinatie met enkele beschouwingen over de gemeenschappen die deze visies aanpassen aan de echte wereld van vandaag, denk ik dat ze ons kunnen helpen om na te denken over andere organisatievormen van ons leven en om diverse hedendaagse problemen aan te pakken waarmee we in de eenentwintigste eeuw worden geconfronteerd.

Duss.... daar gaan we!

De prachtige quote van Stephen Jay Gould, door Ghodsee op pagina 151 opgenomen, mag hier niet ontbreken:

Aan evolutiebioloog Stephen Jay Gould werd eens gevraagd hoe hij de uitzonderlijke intelligentie van Albert Einstein kon verklaren. Hij antwoordde: 'Op een of andere manier raken het gewicht en de kronkelingen van Einsteins hersenen mij minder dan de bijna zekerheid dat er mensen met hetzelfde talent hebben geleefd die gestorven zijn in katoenvelden en sweatshops.'

Maar de toevoeging van Ghodsee mag er ook zijn: En in keukens en crèches [...] omdat men al duizenden jaren lang de intelligentie van meisjes systematisch over het hoofd ziet.

Eindoordeel: Prima boek. Goed om al die met het badwater weggegooide goede ideeën op te vissen. Ik begrijp dat mensen moeite hebben om de ideeën die Ghodsee beschrijft en aanbeveelt te omarmen, omdat die zo ingaan tegen wat nu de status quo is vwb samenlevingsvormen en het verdoorgevoerde individualisme inclusief de daardoor enorm aangewakkerde concurrentie (vooral op materieel gebied) tussen de individuele leden van onze samenleving. Zelf heb ik al bv al talloze malen gedacht als ouders van hoogbegaafde kinderen (voor zover deze kinderen inderdaad hoogbegaafd zouden zijn....) klagen over te weinig aandacht voor hun nageslacht in het reguliere onderwijs, waarom het dan onacceptabel is dat deze onwijs intelligente kinderen de andere kinderen helpen bij het oppikken van de stof oid. Prima kans om je sociale vaardigheden verder te ontwikkelen en begrip voor en rekening met anderen te leren houden. Mens worden is niet alleen maar die talenten ontwikkelen die je geld opleveren, hoewel ik begrijp dat in de huidige omstandigheden, in de wijze waarop we onze samenleving nu vorm hebben gegeven, moeilijk tot onmogelijk is, daar die vaardigheden nergens als waardevol worden beschouwd en als zodanig weinig tot geen brood op de plank garanderen. Zou het niet heerlijk zijn als dat wel zo was? En dat je - wat je talenten ook zijn - altijd een plekje zou vinden waar je je veilig en gelukkig en gewaardeerd zou kunnen voelen? Volgens mij is Ghodsee daarnaar op zoek en dat zoeken ondersteun ik, want dat zoek ik ook.

Wellicht is de wal het schip al aan het keren op een aantal punten. In ieder geval op het gebied van huisvesting lijkt dat steeds meer te gebeuren. Zie hier (nos.nl) en ook mijn commentaar van 12 april hieronder om te ontdekken/bevestigd te krijgen hoe wet- en regelgeving het - vrijwel uitsluitend het niet-gefortuneerde deel van - onze bevolking zowat onmogelijk gemaakt heeft om samen een oplossing te vinden... Goed om al dat soort dingen terug te draaien en mensen de kans te geven *elkaar* te helpen zonder ze daar (oa) financieel voor te straffen (boodschappen aanvaarden als je in de bijstand zit, schande!!).
Jammer dat de nood eerst zo hoog moet oplopen voordat er gedacht wordt om er misschien toch iets aan te doen... en dat het nog steeds uitsluitend de grootverdieners zijn aan wiens eisen dit soort veranderingen moeten voldoen. Het doet me erg denken aan het gegeven dat bij het afschaffen van de slavernij degenen die daar fors van profiteerden vaak heel goed gecompenseerd werden, in tegenstelling tot de slaafgemaakten. Met nobelheid of zorg vanuit de politiek voor de burgers van het land dat hen op het pluche heeft gezet, heeft het vooralsnog weinig te maken (uitzonderingen daargelaten, natuurlijk). Cynisch? Ja. Maar ik kan niet anders, nu, in de huidige omstandigheden (juni 2024) als ik zie wie er op het pluche terecht gaan komen...

[Tom · Rating 1 out of 5]

Around a third of the way through her provocatively poor whistlestop tour of utopian experiments, Kristen R. Ghodsee shares a personal anecdote. At school, her class was made to read Kurt Vonnegut's short story "Harrison Bergeron." It's a short, satirical piece about a future United States where true equality has been achieved, through multiple constitutional amendments that ensure a lack of superiority across the population. A couple watch a ballet performance on television. The husband is of above-average intelligence, and so wears a radio transmitter against his ear which buzzes intermittently, to keep his thoughts disordered. The dancers on screen are variously clad in masks to hide their beauty, and weighed down with bags of seed to handicap their grace.

Ghodsee's teacher read this short story as a libertarian screed, and a just one: a Randian paean to individualism, and the attendant American dream. That Ghodsee swallows this reading uncritically, and then criticises the story for this reading — "Harrison Bergeron" was apparently entered into some Libertarian Hall of Fame or summat — is, I think, emblematic of the lack of curiosity and intellectual unseriousness that blights the entirety of Everyday Utopia. If you were given the chance, and perhaps approached Vonnegut in good faith, you might consider that the story is, in fact, an argument against individualism, and is instead satirising the vainglorious United States (he did that a lot y'know). Being so blinded by personal exceptionalism, the US government can only consider "equality" through contrived personal handicap, rather than the possibility that it's by living communally and collaboratively, pooling shared resources and skills that we can be emancipated from competition and envy. You might even thing that could be a springboard to further discussion of the communities and "radical alternatives" to traditional society Ghodsee is exploring, as well as the ways in which such experiments have failed in the US for the very reasons Vonnegut is smartly poking bleak fun at. So it goes!

Instead, we're subjected to a delirious sledgehammering of references and short summaries of attempts to reconfigure education, work, family dynamics and living situations, all of them coming with an abundance of qualitative data which tells us nothing of substance bar "some guys did some studies." Occassionally Ghodsee will throw in a personal anecdote to illustrate a concept, but they're almost always unhelpful; her sharing her closet with her teen daughter as an example of divesting from private property, her early experiences of girlbosses thanks to Princess Leia and Wonder Woman (with nary a mention of the latter's co-creator, and his interesting ideas of what a matriarchal BDSM-forward utopia looked like). She's also very Into Plato, and fails to consider any potential downsides to his "Philosopher-King" arrangement of society...weird...

There is little time spent, comparatively, to looking into any of these utopian scenarios in any great detail. It's impossible to gain any sense of purchase, or wonder of inspiration, from them. There is neither the time or space necessary for thought to be provoked; she's already hustling you onto the next destination, worried she won't be done in time for her next tour group.

Perhaps most dismaying of the whole endeavour is that, on occasion, these examples are granted some measure of qualitative reflection: she reports on the actual experience of those who lived amongst these radical communities. And often, it's bad! She briefly notes that some "kids who grew up in American cohousing communities complained about the lack of privacy, the constant gossip, the racial and economic homogenity." She admits that "some adults raised as children in kibbutzim later complained of feeling abandoned when they slept away from their parents, resulting in lasting trauma." Yet for each of these sops to the downside of these alternatives to living, she dismisses them with a insultingly pat "at the end of the day, there are upsides and downsides, and the stats don't lie!"

These are my very smart intellectual issues with Everyday Utopias. It's also true that I bounced off it hard for reasons of personal taste. I can't stand the faux-incredulity that many (writers and otherwise) adopt when talking about things which, while indeed galling, are also widely-known. I nearly threw my book across the room when Ghodsee was performatively aghast at the idea that those who construct property for private sale or rental may, in fact, stand to profit from doing so...it may even be their entire reason for doing it!!!!! WHOA!!!!!! [Milhouse looking glass meme]

A real missed opportunity, both as a popular book on utopias and as a good book generally. Soz!

[Sarah Zucca · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book was really underwhelming.
I finished it a month or so ago so this review is delayed and muddles. Thing is, muddled is a good way to describe this book actually. The author wanted her argument to be so true that she started to introduce fictional and traumatic examples to uphold her arguments. At one point she even gives credit to polygamist communes for living well together, very much undermining the abuse that went hand in hand with this to an extent.
I just think more powerful, real-life, first hand modern examples exist that she could’ve referenced instead.
To top it off, at the very end, she closed with a “la la you just gotta have faith” chunk and that really ruined it for me.
I learned a few interesting fun facts.
Wouldn’t recommend this book probably.

[Kami Briden · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book was incredibly challenging to get through. While thought-provoking and informative, Ghodsee’s analysis oversimplifies complex political and economic dynamics. It romanticizes socialist systems, completely downplaying the human rights issues and challenges associated with them.

[Andrés Zelada · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ensayo sobre distintas prácticas que han intentado o teorizado los seres humanos para romper con el orden patriarcal y, posteriormente, capitalista. Es decir, para crear la utopía.

Está bien para sacar ideas y como punto de partida para buscar más información, pero es superficial. Cada capítulo trata de un tema concreto (vivir en comunidad, criar en comunidad, compartir propiedades, ampliar el concepto de familia), pero todos ellos se resuelven en un listado de gente que ha hecho lo mismo, sin análisis de ningún tipo. El último capítulo es una apelación muy yanqui a la esperanza, que me dio bastante igual. Aun así, como digo, toda esta serie de ejemplos dan lugar a buscar más información y a pensar.

[Serena VCK · Rating 5 out of 5]

An inspiring book I would recommend for anyone skeptical about the default setting of the nuclear family, who is resisting the push into that lifestyle, and feels passionately about how damaging this epidemic of loneliness and isolation is. Reading this has helped me retain militant hope and optimism. Thanks Ghodsee!

[Amber Bosse · Rating 5 out of 5]

De wereld veranderen kan dus wel bij jezelf en de mensen om je heen beginnen!!! Veel geleerd over het patriarchaat, waarom we zoveel spullen kopen, en zo vaak eenzaam zijn, en wat anderen voor ons deden om een steentje in de doordraaiende machine te gooien

[Stacey Beasley · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a wonderful look at social groups who tried to organize themselves with a variety of values, beliefs and customs. I’ve had little exposure to communes, co-living, co-housing and others interesting living methods, so learning more is exactly what I found in this little gem. Sociology, psychology, economics, anthropology and history are all there in this wonderful inspiring book on the social construction of our reality.

[Kate · Rating 4 out of 5]

"We must imagine the future that we want, to think of it as a concrete goal, and consider the different pathways available to realize that future, no matter how outlandish or impossible this future might seem to us now. ...Change is always fueled by the perseverance of those who believe that we can do better. Hope is a muscle we must use."

A beautiful reminder of all the myriad of ways people have lived their life throughout geography and centuries and that so many different structures of work, family, and life are open to us than we often believe.

[Brandon Pomeroy · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a welcome modern addition to the utopian, anarcho-socialist literature. It’s optimistic and hopeful and touches on topics that would have been very difficult 50 years ago. Another author might have focused on Dorothy Day or Ebenezer Howard or Paul Goodman or any other number of forward and brave thinkers and made the same arguments. The world will never have too many books and authors like this.

[Gunnar Von · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderfully researched, written, and radically optimistic.

[Jon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wow, I really loved this! As I've gotten older and more politically-learned, and as the world itself descends further and further towards our feared dystopias, I've become really fascinated with portrayals of utopia instead. Imagining utopias as a community, when it happens, tends to focus more on the wide-reaching political and economic spheres, or maybe on environmentally-sustainable big changes to society. But as important as those public spheres are when imagining utopic possibilities, we shouldn't neglect re-imagining the private sphere too. This is a little harder to really think about and to change, since the private sphere feels so personal and also somehow timeless, immune to change either as a political impossibility or a staple of human nature.

Ghodsee takes on that challenge with Everyday Utopia, offering up a wide-ranging look at various utopic approaches to our personal lives, from famous thought-experiences and fictional utopic visions, to actual attempts, both past and present. She examines alternate possibilities to the way we approach such subjects as housing, romance, sex, relationships, friendships, child-rearing, education, and more.

For many years now I've been obsessed with the idea of recreating the "bash," a fictional utopic future of family life as imagined in Ada Palmer's epic sci-fi series Terra Ignota, in which a group of friends and family (usually maybe 6-12 people) all live together in a large house. As owning a house recedes further and further away as a possibility for many Americans, especially Millennials like myself and the younger generations, we've already started cohabitating with our friends. What if maintaining a network of good friends was valued just as much as marriage or children? What if, in this country that purports to encourage childbirth but offers almost nothing to ease the enormous burden of raising a child, we could form ways of living where many friends could collaboratively raise children together, or where everyone was enmeshed in a social world, facilitated by housing, where there's always many people ready to help take care of your kids?

That's just one of the personal examples of something I was already interested in; in this book Ghodsee takes a look at similar ideas, and much more. Many of the ideas she writes about sound interesting to me; I'd like to try some out, or at least encourage others who might be more suited to live that way. Even the ones that seem particularly implausible to me could very well benefit lots of people.

Ghodsee is a kindred spirit; we both believe that our political and personal futures are restrained by the boundaries of our imagination, and that the first step towards making a better world is thinking of all the ways the world could be better. She's also quick to point out the many forces of opposition that stand in the way of these utopic dreams: the main reason many of them haven't been more widely-enacted is precisely because they destabilize the regime of those in power. Contemporary capitalist and patriarchal society wants us in our little isolated breeding pairs, perpetually dissatisfied with our lives, forever reaching to earn more and buy more, forever just scraping by, uninterested in or unable to form wider networks of solidarity and community with the people around us.

I really loved this book; if the chance ever comes to try to enact some of these utopias, I'd love to take it; and even if that doesn't happen for me, I know it'll inspire my own creative, speculative fiction. And after all, many elements of our current world would have seemed like bizarre and impossible utopic dreams to our ancestors; who knows which of these many dreams will be the norm in our future?

[Rhys · Rating 5 out of 5]

I can't fully express what I thought this book was going to be - maybe just an historical overview and analysis of utopian communities. It is far more than that.

As someone who will admit to being both ignorant of and bearish on communism/full-blown socialism, this book expanded my worldview. I think it would do the book a disservice to pull out too many specific points the author makes (she has an excellent flow and rhythm to her analysis that culminate quite nicely in the take-aways near the end of the book), but I will highlight a few of my takeaways that I found quite interesting...

- The evidence that communal living/shared responsibility/some degree of nationalized childrearing is the key to women's "true liberation" from the expectations of home/society that subject her to an overwhelming portion of the care work society demands

- The point that "unmarried males wreaking havoc on society" going away once societies reduce the number of unmarried males may just mask the increase of violence within the home in the form of DV . Relatedly, but less revolutionary to me, how societal expectations of men being the sole earner or at least breadwinner of the household is damaging/limiting to the male psyche and may contribute to the socialization of violence

- The biological and anthropological evidence that monogamy/the nuclear family is not necessary the only "natural" system for humans (e.g. some different monkeys developed different systems including group mating so that males didn't know what babies were theirs and had less incentive to kill infants, choosing the biggest/strongest male to lessen the odds that their mate would be killed and their infants killed afterwards by the challenger to make them fertile again ---> which leads to far larger male-female size difference than is seen in humans)

- The detailed look into patrilocality, the practice of women joining their husband's family in name/location/law which cuts off women from their support systems/further reduces the odds that they might work successfully outside of the home

- The environmental imperative of sharing more (even at the expense of Western expected convenience) and de-emphasizing the single family house model

Edit 2/18: Wanted to also add the idea that dystopian novels might actually be propaganda against utopia/world changing endeavors - this was fascinating to me and I'll be thinking about it for awhile (as evidenced by remembering it today!)

Read it!

[Hazel Thayer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book offers an alternative view not (just) of how to govern a society, but how to live in it.

I was surprised at how much Ghodsee’s Everyday Utopia centered the family. I figured it would be about economics, politics, culture, our endless sequence of crises, but it was mainly about how we form and hold relationships with each other. Even in the final chapter, when referencing Star Trek’s sprawling utopian future, she calls for us to expand our circle of care rather than, I dunno, voting or unionizing like every other damned leftist book. But in this, Star Trek is a sort of good, sort of bad example, because while most of the Federation footsoldiers avoid the nuclear family — often avoid marriage, children and so on because their first (second) duty is to the ship — they become “forged family” or “brothers from the same canoe” as Ghodsee mentions happens. They are noncosanguinous(real word) kin. Which is exactly what she is calling for.

Because having wider familial and kin ties can be revolutionary and utopian. The main utopias, both imagined and real, she focuses on are communes. Communes are, essentially, extended families, that share both wealth and responsibilities in common. This makes it hard to have both systemic oppression, but also oppression of, say, men over their wives and children.

She also points out how feminism was often the main focus of early imaginations of utopias. In Plato’s Republic, More’s Utopia and more, women were imagined to be equal. This was radical. Maybe even dangerous. Is it even possible for women to be equal in the context of a nuclear family? (Ghodsee seems unsure.)

It’s cool that I’m reading this at a time when I’m very interested in the loneliness epidemic, and whether it’s even possible to solve in the context of neolib capitalism. The book argues that in solving that crisis, we create our post-capitalism utopias.

My communist friends will often advocate for things like mutual aid, supportive community, self-sufficiency etc, and I'm like yeah sure for sure, but how the hell are you gonna do that under Capitalism? And the answer is, do it anyway, however it works for you and the people around you. We build utopia by imagining it on a grand scale, then shrinking that down to whatever size is achievable for us, even if that's just us and our neighbors, us and our towns, us and our family. Maybe I've imagined other economic systems or whatever, but I've barely imagined alternatives to living alone, or to the way my community exists, or the nuclear family, or the boss/employee client/contractor work dynamic. Things on a smaller scale are easier to change, but harder to imagine alternatives to. At least, until I read this book!

[Shaun · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author, Kristen R. Ghodsee, is Professor and Chair of Russian and Eastern European Studies as well as a Member of the Graduate Group in Anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania. Her articles and essays have been translated into more than 25 languages and have appeared in publications such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, Ms. Magazine, Dissent, Foreign Affairs, Jacobin, the Baffler, the New Republic, Quartz, NBC Think, the Lancet, Project Syndicate, Le Monde Diplomatique, and Die Tageszeitung. She is the author of eleven (11) books including “Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism: And Other Arguments for Economic Independence,” which has been translated into fourteen (14) languages.

Ghodsee had held residential research fellowships at the Institute for Advanced Study (“IAS”) in Princeton, New Jersey; the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University; the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, DC,: the Aleksanteri institute of the University of Helsinki in Finland; the Center for History of Sciences PO in Paris, France, as well as the Freiburg Institute for Advanced Studies (“FRIAS”), the Imre Kertesz Kolleg of the Friedrich-Schiller-Universitat, and the Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research in Germany. In 2012, Ghodsee was awarded a John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship for her work in Anthropology and Cultural Studies.

Found Chapters 1 thru 4 and 6 thru 8 to be particularly well-written and interesting. Chapter Five was good, but hard “to imagine” ever coming to fruition. Overall, a good read well worth the time.

[Denisa-Maria Petris · Rating 2 out of 5]

a soft (and shallow) introduction to basically lots of political, social, economical, philosophical concepts that reside anywhere outside (and against) the capitalism-realism cage. being this all encompassing overview of alternatives to capitalism, patriarchy and the subsequent implications of the two, the book lacks nuance in many aspects and that's quite upsetting. i guess it's a good start for people who have just come across concepts such as marxism, anarchism, polyamory, anticolonialist and anticapitalist discourse and needs someone to gently and broadly explain the basics. i'm particularly uneasy about (1) how Ghodsee romaticizes kibbutz settlements without remotely mentioning that what she presents as this utopian collective is ultimately yet another display of Israeli settler colonialism and (2) the "apology of the rich" she makes in the last chapter where she presents these rather lazy arguments for how revolutionary change can (and should?) stem from the efforts of the privileged who are willing to renounce the privilege, rather than as a movement of the masses. the argument per-se is not only anti-marxist, but classist and resembles Aristotle's lousy edification of the potential for "contemplating truth"/producing knowledge and/or societal advancements of the elites that have the leisure time (i.e. privilege) necessary for contemplation. overall there's this feeling of the book trying to please both the socialists that read it and the almond moms that just want to unwind "learning about different cultures".

[Laura Birnbaum · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’m totally sold. Blow up the nuclear family!!

Even so, the first few chapters of this book don’t come together perfectly for me. Loosely organized by topic (education, cohousing, private property, etc) they veer between a 30,000 ft view and quick jumps into various historical experiments. Many of these were interesting enough that I googled them after, but I wished that she had spent more time on a few selected case studies.

But all this is just a warm up to the tour de force chapters on the nuclear family. By far the strongest argument in the book, Ghodsee easily convinced me that our current organization of family life is neither preordained or the means-tested best - it is merely one option (one that conveniently supports patriarchal power structures + the dismantling of the social safety net!). Social norms are constantly evolving!!

Great for thought experiments, group chat discussions, further research, and a dose of optimism.

[Jane Morrison · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5* - this wasn't the book I was expecting, I was looking for something inspiring but instead felt a bit dragged down by the outlining of what is so dire about our current way of life. The main focus was on rethinking the family model. I do enjoy considering radical alternatives to how we live, but I still found parts of this quite challenging and I had been hoping for something covering a broader range of topics. I also didn't feel particularly motivated by many of the alternative historic examples presented, some seemed highly problematic in different ways. Despite this, the book is incredibly interesting from a history, politics and feminist perspective. There were also some extremely positive ideas that I feel could be used to help children, parents and wider society too. I learned a lot about non status quo models of living from throughout the ages. I enjoyed reading something that made me question what I think and why.

[Yasmine · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Changing how we live our daily lives is a form of politics”

Utopians push the limits of what seems possible. This was a creative book that encouraged radical hope.

It focused on the downfalls of individualism, including our society’s emphasis on single family units of living. I was able to reimagine practical examples of community with my neighbors, extended family, and friends.

It was packed with great history lessons as well as present day examples - most of which I hadn’t heard of before, and I enjoyed. I especially enjoyed the chapters on possessions and unique living / housing arrangements.

(I listened via audiobook on/off over 6 months. At some points I think it could’ve been a bit shorter, but alas).

Also now I want to watch Star Trek now lol.

[Ryan O'Malley · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Although progress is made in fits and starts, social change does happen; utopian proposals for the private sphere that once stemed impossible-childcare, divorce, and same-sex marriage—are now relatively commonplace. Change is always fueled by the perseverance of those who believe that we can do better. Hope is a muscle we must use.”

I enjoyed this book a lot. While I certainly am not ready to even try a lot of this book I feel like it pushed me in a lot of ways. I feel it’s important for us all to have utopias in mind as a North Star. No matter how far off they may seem.

Certainly a lot of interesting points on the role of women and raising children.

[Donatella Gasparro · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ghodsee must be my favourite broad-audience, radical non-fiction writer. Her clarity and effectiveness in conveying complex theoretical ideas that are urgent for our times are truly unmatched - she's the ultimate primer to make your liberal friends into communists without them noticing. This book is a great pleasure, an encyclopedia of inspiration from the widest array of human ingenuity experiments with living together beyond private property (of things, partners, babies, homes...): even if you're familiar with the theme, you'll surely find something new here. Her militant optimism brightened my gloomiest train rides, and while thoroughly thought-provoking, the book is light, readable, and never boring. <3