A Helping Hand for the Children

Reading Collett’s article about Godwin’s utopian theory helped me to understand his novel better. By this I mean I understand why he created an immortal character, but comparing his theory with the novel leaves some questions. If reaching immortality somehow creates the perfect human, why does Reginald suffer from the same mistakes he made in his mortal life? How can immortality be the key to perfection? Godwin’s utopian theory seems out there when thinking about his Romanticism background. He believes humanity will reach a point where they no longer have to reproduce, but wouldn’t keeping the same people in a society limit that society? Romantics thought children represented “the possibility of social change” because new minds would have new ideas to share with the world (Collett 329). A “utopia” based on the same people would create a stagnant society. Though people can change, how long would it take immortals to change their habits to better the society?

Parts of Godwin’s theory do make sense to me and would have an impact on the society if people thought in the way he wanted. One point Collette presents is Godwin’s thoughts on society focuses locally rather than globally when making decisions for children. Godwin believed society viewed being “for the child” as being “’for’ a specific child…one’s own child, at the expense of all other children” (329). What Godwin establishes is the mentality that every parent is only looking out for their own child, instead of making decisions to help all children. Godwin is specifically referencing the government and how they make laws that help their own family. I like the point Godwin is making here because if the government made decisions to help the many instead of the few the world would be better off. I understand they can’t please everyone, but making an effort to help all children is the first step to the better society Godwin imagines.