"sometimes a word is put with a negative sign, when it is meant as if we had pronounced it affirmatively, if not more" John Smith (225) Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Thomas More's Utopia is a work that embodies and embraces ambiguity. Indeed, almost every aspect of the book is imbued with a range of interpretable and unclear meanings, from the complexities of its language (such as the alternative meanings of its title, which suggests both "good place" and "no place") to the presentation of seemingly paradoxical with a range of middle ground in between. One of More's most frequently used techniques for presenting ambiguous statements and ideas is the inclusion of lithotes, or double negatives. Perhaps the clearest example is in the phrase "no less useful than entertaining" (3) used to describe the purpose of the book in the opening statement. Many similar examples are scattered throughout the book, as in the description of the thief whose sentence is "no less" severe for theft than for murder (228), and in the utopian idea that there are no provisions "no less" for those who are now helpless but once worked versus those who still work (228). In these cases More distorts the language to imply but not to implicitly state his ideas. This leaves the reader somewhat uncertain as to how emphatic his claims are, and on the surface this gives the impression that More's reflections are open-minded and fairly non-polarised. But on a deeper level it is a rhetorically compelling technique that tends to guide the reader towards a one-sided interpretation despite the illusion of ambiguity. In the same way that a statement like “not rare” implies commonality, More's litotes imply more than they openly admit. This type of effect can be observed not only at the grammatical level, but also in larger and probably more significant dimensions of the book, up to its division into two parts. Parts One and Two of Utopia, with their contrasting arguments for practicality and idealism respectively, are, in a sense, two halves of a double negative. For this reason, the first part is both a prelude to the second book, in the sense that it introduces the contrasting identities of the two central characters, as well as the rhetorical way in which More will use a humanist argumentative style, but it is also a postscript in that it is the second part of a litote. The discourse between the person of Thomas More and the character of Raphael Hythloday that comprises the first book is essentially a one-sided discussion about possible ways to reform England. This focus on reform naturally tends towards an emphasis on problems, rather than ideals, in the form of Hythloday's character's biting criticism of contemporary English society. During his conversation with Hythloday, More's character occasionally tries to tie a practical anchor to Hythloday's comments in a menacing way that is absent in the second book, where naive idealism runs rampant and unbridled. In the first book, however, More argues that ideas are useless without action and, through his person, prescribes the realization of practical reforms through direct involvement of oneself in politics. Hythloday disagrees with More on the grounds that submission to authority is "utterly repellent to [his] spirit" (7), but nevertheless he is accustomed to exploring England's major problems from a point of quite practical view. These problems include the eradication of landowners, punishmentsexcessive and ineffective penalties, unequal distribution of wealth, hypocritical religious values ​​and idle nobility. The insightful and provocative points that Hythloday makes on these topics have an air of pure philosophy, full of persuasive.logic to influence the reader. The effectiveness of this argumentative style can be seen in examples such as his comment in denigrating the justice system that "when the punishment is the same, murder is safer, since you hide both crimes by killing the witness" (15 ) and other observations such as the following made regarding human nature, "it is impossible to make all institutions good unless you make all men good, and I do not expect to see that for a long time to come" (26). While these remain uncontested points of Utopia, Hythloday's most radical idea, the elimination of private property, is met with skepticism by More who is not seen again until he reappears briefly and somewhat diluted at the end of the book . This skepticism serves to provide a controversial point of view on the question of private property (which is actually the central theme of the text) and thus sets the stage for the second book, which is essentially Hythloday's counterargument to More's questioning tone. Thus, the first part of Utopia comprises mainly a practical analysis of England's problems, with a quick turn to speculation and idealism at the end. The second book can be interpreted as an idealistic guide to how we (or rather 16th century England) might be able to build a society close to perfection (or at least closer to perfection). The blueprint for how to do this is provided through the brilliant example of Utopia, and in the process all of Hythloday's previous practicality is thrown to the wind as he provides an imaginative account of the strange island and its people right up to the last minute. detail. He begins by telling us of a landmass comparable in size and with similar characteristics to England, but as his tale develops these similarities only serve to highlight fundamental social differences that have emerged despite the geographical and regional similarities between the island, the 'England and Europe in general. In describing the utopian lifestyle, More places a strong emphasis on features that specifically serve to oppose the undesirable elements of English society criticized in Part One. Currency is eliminated, and even despised, with gold transformed into chamber pots and chains for slaves, thus eliminating the wealth imbalance (47). There is no place for idle nobility in the system of government, which resembles Plato's idea of ​​the Republic as opposed to the English feudal system of which Hythloday is so critical. The justice system is lenient compared to the harsh sentences More describes in his home country. A work schedule of just a few hours a day with an emphasis on agriculture stands in stark contrast to the long, grueling hours of most English citizens. There is also a relatively high degree of religious tolerance, although one could argue that this only occurs on a superficial level because all utopians tend to believe in a suspiciously Christian God anyway. The kind of naive and impractical vision that More displays in creating this counter to English society is essentially that of a communist idealist. This is mostly fantasy that could not be realistically implemented in any European society of the time, mainly due to the European need for currency and trade. More admits this even before going into detail (via Hythloday) in the following passage of Book One: "However superior these institutions may be (and.