In the age when life on earth was full, no one paid any special attention to worthy men, nor did they single out the man of ability. Rulers were simply the highest branches on the tree, and the people were like deer in the woods. They were honest and righteous without realizing that they were “doing their duty.” They loved each other and did not know that this was “love of neighbor.” They deceived no one yet they did not know that they were “men to be trusted.” They were reliable and did not know that this was “good faith.” They lived freely together giving and taking, and did not know that they were generous. For this reason their deeds have not been narrated. They made no history.

From the Way of Chuang Tzu by Thomas Merton

If you want a description of our primordial Eden before the fall, I’d gander that this comes close. That history is so unlike the paradise described here is precisely what’s so interesting about it! What epic story could be told without a compelling villain? What would there be to talk about if everyone did as they ought? What satisfying conclusion can be had if there’s no conflict to overcome? It’s unthinkable!

One of the best essays I’ve ever read (George Orwell’s “Can Socialists Be Happy?”) noted that we have many vivid descriptions of what Hell is like in our literature. It’s the sort of stuff that makes your skin crawl at the mere thought. However, less vivid are our descriptions of Heaven, which don’t seem to affect us as deeply as those we have of Hell. And one might fathom a few reasons for why this is.

One might suggest that this is because Hell (and the fear of God’s wrath) is merely a way for religious institutions to control their subordinate flock. I’d be mistaken not to acknowledge that religious imagery hasn’t been used in this way, but I also believe that this is being uncharitable. I say this because if one were to experiment with these definitions, I think you’ll find there is something about it that defies description whereas we are perfectly able to speak to the horrors that would await the damned. In other words, one’s intent in describing something is a completely separate matter from our ability to describe it. Far easier is it to grant the stick as a disincentive than it is to grow and harvest a carrot as an incentive.

So I believe it is more than that. Paradise defies description because there isn’t much to talk about when you get there. All needs and wants are entirely satisfied. There is nothing more to be done, no distinctions between good and bad to be drawn, no argument to be had. This is why, in Chuang Tzu’s Eden, there is no history. On the other hand, in history, which is littered with its share of heroes and villains, there are many more stories to tell.

What do I find interesting about this line of thought? It is the idea that the task of the good men and women of history is to render history obsolete. This is, in fact, the task of any good person, who seeks to fulfill some task. Our pursuit of the good, if successful, is bound to render “pursuit” itself unnecessary. Perhaps that’s why it’s called “utopia,” which means “nowhere”: it is a place that, if it existed, needn’t bother having a name at all.