Thomas More is one of the figures of history of whom has interested me deeply. In reading his Utopia, I initially thought the book would lessen my interest in him, it being a bore, though it triumphed over my initial expectation. I say such, but really it neither enhanced nor damaged my previous interest in the man. Utopia is split into two books, the first being a discussion with Raphael, a traveller that More “interviews” whilst on business in Brussel’s about the flaws of the contextual Tudor English society under King Henry VIII at the time, exploring issues such as enclosing and the system of capital punishment. The second book then listed out the policies of the ‘Utopian’s’, a group of people who are presented by Raphael to live in the perfect society, hence coining the philosophical term of a ‘Utopia’. It explores the Utopians systems of currency (or interestingly lack of), religion, farming, military and justice system. Utopia is technically categorised as fiction, though I felt, with its philosophical focus, it read much more like a non-fiction book. It also often alludes and bases its ideas off of the works of Plato and Aristotle, and I feel as if I could’ve gained a lot more from More’s work having read Plato’s “The Republic” beforehand. However, to a modern reader the title of Utopia is deceiving. Whilst in the context of the time the society of the Utopians would be the idealistic societal system, it also incorporates the same societal norms of patriarchal gender systems, therefore not the Utopian society we would imagine today. Additionally, there is emphasis on having a lack of personal life, working for the good of the society and devoting all time to it, and laws against leaving the island without government permission. This led me to make connections to the later genre of the dystopia, the system of control looking more like the one in place in Orwell’s “1984”. Further, the Utopian’s employ many societal ideas that formed the basis of the communist manifesto, an ideology which appears Utopian and the basis of perfect society, however due to the nature of corruption in mankind has frequently been proven by history to fail. Ultimately, Utopia is philosophically very interesting in concept, though More’s ideas, or rather Raphael’s as asides by the author indicate his disapproval with some policies, are flawed in many areas. Further, in some areas it slightly drags and though interesting, isn’t the most engaging at all times.