The Dispossessed, being the type of novel that it is, includes a plethora of ideas, some of which are very similar to those already explored in this class. LeGuin’s approach to several of these ideas are somewhat inconspicuous, as she adds new names and includes new situations to what she writes in order to make a more interesting story. However, it is clear that at points throughout the book that LeGuin is making references to historical happenings. Through these references, the reader can see the struggle and fight that is involved in Shevek’s life in the novel. This, perhaps more than anything else, begs a question that needs to be answered. Is utopia even plausible?
LeGuin constructs the two sister planets of Anarres and Urras in a clever fashion. Anarres, the planet to which the potential rebels were sent, is sparse, barren, and has little or nothing in the way of natural resources. However, the people live there, scraping up a meager existence, while those on Urras live a life of luxury and comfort. Additionally, it is interesting to note that Anarres does not technically have a government to control the planet. Rather, there is a sensation of fraternity and social equality and thus no need for a governing body. Those who live on Anarres use very careful, precise language. This gives light to the Pravic Theory, which states that language has the ability to shape culture and mold it into what the speaker desires. A prime example of this is when Shevek is told by an Anarres resident, “You can share the handkerchief I use.” Nowhere in this quote is a possessive noun used. Anarres, indeed, seems to be ruled by, to an extent, the proletariats. Anarres is, in effect, a socialist state. This is made more evident by the creation of beaurocracy and power forms. Few began to acquire power within Anarres, which holds the potential to upset what little those living on the planet hold dear. And if one would examine Urras in a similar way, one can derive that Urras, which is fruitful and full of resources and vibrant life, is more or less leaning towards a capitalist state. In essence, this is the Cold War.
Going on the idea that this novel is really an analogy for the Cold War of the mid to late 1900s, it becomes evident that LeGuin’s utopian novel is, in fact, saying something very different about utopias than other novels do. LeGuin appears to be delineating a setting, filled with inhabitants, who are not living perfect, happy lives. It appears to be just the opposite. Anarres is depicted as a harsh living environment, while Urras is shown as a vibrant center of life and happiness. While Urras may be somewhat close to a perfect utopia, it is clear that Anarres has significant problems. And since Anarres, which is such a significant part of the story, is not anywhere close to perfection, LeGuin is almost stating that utopias are impossible. She throws all notion of perfect existence out the window, along with hope of species unification and progress. Though LeGuin’s novel may be categorized as utopian, it would seem her universe is anything but.
The Dispossessed is indeed a thought-provoking novel. And though LeGuin seems to be saying that utopia is impossible, it is a notable source of utopian ideas. However, given the historical analogies that are used in the novel, coupled with the states of both sister planets, ultimately, after reading the book, there feels to be little hope for a perfect world. Or, perhaps another way to view the book is to say that utopia takes time, work, and dedication in order to take form. Maybe through this fashion, humanity can achieve utopia. Or perhaps humanity may return to its roots, put aside its differences, and live together in harmony. It is not impossible that this is what LeGuin means. After all, true voyage is return.
-Chris Zook
clairexu said,
December 3, 2007 at 1:15 am
In her novel The Dispossessed, Ursula Le Guin seems to convey the message that there is no such thing as utopia. The two worlds in the book, Anarres and Urras, are constructed as nearly complete opposites. While Anarres is classless, anarchist, and essentially socialist, Urras is capitalistic and the socially stratified.
Shevek, raised on the planet of Anarres, initially believes that Annares is indeed a utopian world. His original opinion of Urras is that it is a planet of strife of inequity, and he hopes that during his stay on the planet that he may enlighten its people so that they take up Anarres’s way of life. Once he arrives on Urras, however, he is immediately struck by the splendor of the planet. While all of the Anarresti must live in austerity and simplicity, some Urrasti live in splendor and extravagance. This experience shows Shevek that there can be a better way of life than the one he knows, thus demonstrating that Annares is far from a utopian world.
The extravagance and splendor of Urras comes at a price, however. Shevek soon sees the class he had been anticipating, the poor and oppressed. This class lives in destitute conditions, is overworked and underpaid, and when they stage a demonstration to protest their state, many of them are killed. Clearly, the world of Urras is no utopia either.
So can a utopia really exist? Neither of the two extremes in Anarres and Urras can seem to call themselves utopian societies. It seems that a community must settle for either total mediocrity, as with Anarres, or an skewed unbalance, such as Urras. It is impossible to make everyone happy, and thus it is impossible to create a utopia.
-Claire
jlashley said,
December 3, 2007 at 3:38 am
The discussions within class and on this blog have been almost like beating a dead horse. The same issues seem to arise within every utopian novel and similar questions are risen about the issues. The Dispossessed is no different. The planet Anarres is the prefect socialist state, with complete sharing and no government. The planet Urras is the prefect republic, with social classes and a structured economy. The question has been, from start to finish, “Is this utopia possible?” I think that we all understand at this point that any utopia is impossible. The simple fact remains that humans compete. And competing is the ultimate downfall of utopias because utopias are dependent upon cooperation and placing the society before oneself. I know that most everybody looks out for themselves and their immediate families first and then maybe the greater society. Any utopia is impossible. However, the ones created by LeGuinn are not really utopias because they are not prefect. Therefore, these societies could be attained using a little change to the way humans act. But please can we move past the is it plausible question because the resounding answer is NO.
nateemmons said,
December 3, 2007 at 4:14 am
I agree. It’s obvious that utopias can not and will not ever exist so bringing up this point over and over again after every piece of utopian literature is a waste of time, even michelle commented upon that a few times.
The interesting thing about this book, though, is that it follows Shevek’s search for two different utopias in parallel. It alternates between his search for a perfect society on Urras with his search for a perfect society on Anarres. His life on Anarres obviously preceded his travel to Urras so it’s interesting that the book was written in this back-and-forth style.
It shows how in each case, Shevek starts out very happy and optimistic about the world he lives in and slowly begins to learn about all of its flaws and shortcomings. Society on Antarres is oppressive because despite it’s individualistic anarchist ideals, the will of the group is still oppressive to individual people. Society on Urras, despite the fact that its upper class feels it to be a capitalist paradise, opresses the lower class of workers and creates class inequality. Neither societies are perfect and both ultimately end up disappointing Shevek.
I wonder if this is meant to be a criticism of democracy and capitalism vs. socialism, showing the flaws of each system… Did anyone else get this impression?
-Nate Emmons