MobileRead August 2014 Discussion: The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin (spoilers)

[WT Sharpe]

Whoops! I posted the September Nominations thread on time, but neglected to post this month's Discussion thread. Thanks, and a tip o' the hat to John F for the timely reminder via PM.

The time has come to discuss the August 2014 MobileRead Book Club selection, The Dispossessed by Ursula K Le Guin . What did you think?

[Greg Anos]

Well, I read this book in 1977. I read it again in two weeks ago. I don't expect to ever read it again. It's entertainment value is nil, from my perspective. It's only value is politcal fantization...

My comments on that are under separate post...

Jon, you didn't miss a thing.

[Greg Anos]

The Dispossessed...

This is going to be a highly political review of the book. That is unavoidable, because political structure and its results are the book. It had been given a scientific veneer, but this is a political Utopian novel.

It is a two-fold novel. First, it is a book about the political doctrine called Anarcho-Syndicalism. A gazetteer, so to speak. What is life like (at least as far as the author believes) under that political doctrine. There has been no actual polity under it to draw from.

Second, it is an answer novel. What is an answer novel? It is one writer's response to another author's book, show where the first writer got it wrong. There's nothing wrong with an answer novel, they can be as good as, (or even better) that the original novel, and the good ones can stand alone, without any knowledge of the first author's book. But they gain even greater resonance, when you understand the book that it is an answer to.

I've set the stage. The book The Dispossessed is an answer to, is Atlas Shrugged. Stop screaming at me, look at the similarities.

Both are about a physicist who is going to change the world (universe) with his creation.
Both are about how the existing political orders try to control and possess the knowledge. (Sabul in The Dispossessed, anyone?)
Both show how the system limits and controls the individual inside it. (Shevek notes “What good is it to live in an anarchist world if you can't be an anarchist...” or word to that effect.)

Now Le Guin is a much better writer, but then again English is her first language. She got fancy with her narrative structure, that's a matter of taste. On the other hand, Le Guin was not a person who had been personally stepped on by totalitarianism. Such occurrences tend to warp one's perspective...

In the end, the book shows you nothing more than political power structures. No other ideas, no effects of technology on the human (or other) species, nothing to make me think. (I'd already studied Anarcho-Sydicalism before I read the book, the book added nothing to my knowledge, other than human are a sorry species, and always will be. But we are survivors....usually from ourselves...)

[WT Sharpe]

I came to the end of the book feeling as if I'd come to the place I'd started on a long circular path. All along the way I kept waiting for the science fiction to begin. It never did. It was political. It was utopian.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

I came to the end of the book feeling as if I'd come to the place I'd started on a long circular path. All along the way I kept waiting for the science fiction to begin. It never did. It was political. It was utopian.

I tried to warn people about how bad this was going to be and did they listen? Nope, they went and voted for it just to spite me. They didn't spite me. I just feel sorry for the way the vote went. We had some good books there and the worst one got voted in.

Le Guin wrote one semi-decent book (Left Hand of Darkness) and because of that, many people think she's a good writer when most of her books are awful because of the way she writes and sometimes because of the subject matter.

I didn't read this one and I never will. Life is too short.

[John F]

My detailed analysis: it had some characters, they went on a journey, they had some problems; I liked it. I'll put the rest of the series on my TBR pile (and probably won't get to them for a while).

Interesting that it won a Hugo, yet the consensus here, so far, is that it wasn't all that good.

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I tried to warn people about how bad this was going to be and did they listen? Nope, they went and voted for it just to spite me. They didn't spite me. I just feel sorry for the way the vote went. We had some good books there and the worst one got voted in.

Le Guin wrote one semi-decent book (Left Hand of Darkness) and because of that, many people think she's a good writer when most of her books are awful because of the way she writes and sometimes because of the subject matter.

I didn't read this one and I never will. Life is too short.

Well said. I read your warning, just after I had registered. I knew you'd be right. If people that are more tolerable vis a vis books say don't touch it, then I believe them. I do have a curiosity about the book, but there are many others that I want to read first before going that way.

[Luffy]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

The Dispossessed...

This is going to be a highly political review of the book. That is unavoidable, because political structure and its results are the book. It had been given a scientific veneer, but this is a political Utopian novel.

It is a two-fold novel. First, it is a book about the political doctrine called Anarcho-Syndicalism. A gazetteer, so to speak. What is life like (at least as far as the author believes) under that political doctrine. There has been no actual polity under it to draw from.

Second, it is an answer novel. What is an answer novel? It is one writer's response to another author's book, show where the first writer got it wrong. There's nothing wrong with an answer novel, they can be as good as, (or even better) that the original novel, and the good ones can stand alone, without any knowledge of the first author's book. But they gain even greater resonance, when you understand the book that it is an answer to.

I've set the stage. The book The Dispossessed is an answer to, is Atlas Shrugged. Stop screaming at me, look at the similarities.

Both are about a physicist who is going to change the world (universe) with his creation.
Both are about how the existing political orders try to control and possess the knowledge. (Sabul in The Dispossessed, anyone?)
Both show how the system limits and controls the individual inside it. (Shevek notes “What good is it to live in an anarchist world if you can't be an anarchist...” or word to that effect.)

Now Le Guin is a much better writer, but then again English is her first language. She got fancy with her narrative structure, that's a matter of taste. On the other hand, Le Guin was not a person who had been personally stepped on by totalitarianism. Such occurrences tend to warp one's perspective...

In the end, the book shows you nothing more than political power structures. No other ideas, no effects of technology on the human (or other) species, nothing to make me think. (I'd already studied Anarcho-Sydicalism before I read the book, the book added nothing to my knowledge, other than human are a sorry species, and always will be. But we are survivors....usually from ourselves...)

This post I'm filing away in a corner of my brain when the latter will be numb enough to try reading The Dispossessed.

[caleb72]

Well, as nominator for this book I can't really claim to have voted for it to spite Jon. I've come to accept that his opinion and mine rarely meet and I did know in advance that he wouldn't approve of the choice, but this did not motivate me to nominate. The blame lies with my TBR pile for this year.

I'm quite a fan of Le Guin and her Hainish Cycle has been my biggest personal inspiration for writing (ie. the only idea I've had that I thought I might one day realise in prose was inspired by this "series" of books). I will agree with the criticism that it's not really science fiction. In fact, I find that she only uses science fiction as a setting more than anything else.

I really enjoyed this book. I knew nothing about it being an answer book and I've never read Atlas Shrugged. I've never studied Anarcho-Syndicalism either, so I have insufficient background there to provide in-depth critiques on that basis. However, I enjoyed looking at the struggles of the main character: denying, suspecting, rebelling against and then coming to accept the limitations of the political structure in which he exists. I liked the gallant attempt to go out and share his ideas with the universe and the pitfalls he faces in doing so on Urras.

I don't mind shameless pot shots at Capitalism because I don't particularly like it, but I prefer it to be a tempered view that shows the weakness of alternatives. As Ralph Sir Edward states: "...humans are a sorry species, and always will be."

I like that a utopian novel attempts to be ambiguous and I think this was - enough so for me. I prefer ambiguity in things like this as I don't really think anything is "the" answer to anything else. It's all about trying to realise ideals as best as you can and accepting that there are going to be contradictions and challenges. I particularly liked the personal aspect - the kinds of sacrifices you need to make personally when your society is your highest duty. This isn't unique to the utopia presented on Anarres; even Urras would have its fair share of this, but I like seeing the conflict between personal and public duty.

If I was going to criticise the book and Le Guin in general, I would say that I never find her particularly subtle. It's not necessarily a serious fault; all stories don't have to be enigmas. On the other hand, I do like to give points for clever writing, and I found this plot and its subtext to be quite straightforward.

One of the other things I'd mention is that Anarres reminded me quite a bit of the cloistered communities created by Stephenson in Anathem. I don't necessarily mean that both were exploring the same political themes, but that the society they created felt similar to me.

[treadlightly]

This book contained less plot than I am used to and more commentary, but I thought the exploration of different types of societies was interesting. The problems that she highlighted with the capitalist society are still pretty relevant 40 years later, hmm? I preferred this novel to The Left Hand of Darkness. I would have liked the story to continue past the landing on Anarres - was the Hainish man permitted past the wall?

[BenG]

It's not my favorite LeGuin (that would be The Lathe of Heaven) but it's worth reading and I'm happy I did.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I tried to warn people about how bad this was going to be and did they listen? Nope, they went and voted for it just to spite me.

I don't think it was spite. Most of your posts in the nomination thread were about this book. You were just giving it free publicity, like those people who picket movies

[BenG]

The ansible, the faster-than-light communications device that Shevek's physics made possible, was used in the other stories taking place in the Hainish universe. This was about the ansible's invention and so is the earliest Hainish novel chronologically.

Le Guin coined the word but it has been borrowed by writers such as Orson Scott Card, Vernor Vinge, Elizabeth Moon, and Dan Simmons for similar devices in their books. Card uses it in his Ender novels and gives a shout out to LeGuin. He writes about the word "ansible" was one that someone 'dug out of an old book somewhere', and it caught on.

[Synamon]

It was interesting to read a utopia, since these days dystopia is all the rage. I liked The Left Hand of Darkness and was expecting something similar, but Shevek's journey was very different.

I agree with caleb72 that ambiguity was what made this book work. The sacrifices in the book highlighted the differences in the two systems, on Urras entire peoples were sacrificed and on Anarres every person sacrificed parts of themselves. Of course, rewards were distributed the same way. Pick your poison.

I believe that there is usually more than one solution to any problem and this book showed how that can work. Within any political or economic system, if there is enough flexibility then there will be optimization and accommodations with similar results even if the systems are very different. Humans are very adaptable creatures.

Since both worlds were extreme I wouldn't want to live on either, but if forced to choose I'd have to take Anarres, since odds are against me being in the privileged class on Urras and equality would be preferable to servitude. I feel very lucky to have been born in this time and place and am aware of how different my life would be if I was born in Afghanistan or centuries ago.

All in all, an enlightening read, although I do admit some of the science gobbledygook and political speeches did drag.

[BenG]

Originally Posted by Synamon

I agree with caleb72 that ambiguity was what made this book work.

Even the subtitle, which I never noticed before, is "An Ambiguous Utopia."

[BenG]

Jo Walton's blog posts about "The Dispossessed".
here:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/12/rea...e-dispossessed
and here:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2008/08/dispossessed

The really clever thing about the structure is that by structuring the book as a spiral with events running the way they do, the structure of the book itself, the experience of reading it serves as an illustration of the cycles and spirals and sequences of time and space, and of Shevek’s theories. In the end when Shevek gives his theory to everyone, to all the worlds, and can therefore return to his own flawed utopia, he has widened the pattern, taken it out a step, it’s not just Urras and Anarres in their tidal dance, it’s the rest of the universe as well, and Shevek’s ansible will allow instant communication across the distances light crawls. He is freed to go home and to go on, and the book is freed to end with an opening out of possibilities.

And here she writes about Samuel Delany's Triton which was written in response to Le Guin's book:
http://www.tor.com/blogs/2008/08/triton