I quite liked the premise, liked what I read about William Morris, and was interested in reading more about the socialist utopia he's arguing for. Yet, I was disappointed by the book.

For one, the writing is bland and there is no story. This book is only about presenting the the author's ideals and is not an attempt at literature. I can accept that.

It does a poor job of presenting Morris' ideals though. We are in the future, everything is clean, everybody is happy, and there is no private property or government. Doesn't that raise a million questions? Apparently not for the hero of News from Nowhere. He arrives already convinced of most of the ideas, so he is not inquisitive at all. And when he is presented with how things work and he asks, "well, does that work out well?", the inhabitants of the utopia just point at the window, "see how happy everyone is? see how pretty the girls are? of course it works great!" If I were myself in that situation, the facts I can see for myself would naturally be quite convincing. But the reader is not magically transported into the utopia. So this kind of argument carries absolutely no weight. I don't know why it would even be included.

I expected good arguments for why a society built like the one described would work. I didn't get them. But even if I look past this, and just look at the core ideals, I'm dumbfounded. The solution to all problems, as described, is the abolishment of private property. And one of the most emphasized difference from reality is the lack of pollution. But it is eventually revealed that the lack of pollution is due to an abundant source of clean energy, the "force" they use to fire pottery and drive boats. I don't understand. Wouldn't 19th century capitalism have looked much better if they had abundant clean energy? In the end the utopia is based not on a social revolution, but on a technical one. And this is covered in just two or three sentences, and the utopian society generally doesn't care much about technological advancement.

Due to all these flaws I was disappointed in how the book presented its ideals, and the writing was quite tiresome as well. Perhaps someone who lives along the Thames would find the description of the landmarks more interesting. The one aspect I found interesting was how some 19th century zeitgeist was captured in the book. For example, in the utopia feminism would be recognized as a silly distraction, and women would happily return to subservient roles. And every woman would be pretty and continuously flirt with the main character.