Imagining Utopia in Ursula K. Le Guin's the Left Hand Of

CEU eTD Collection

BEYOND GENDER? BEYOND In partialIn fulfillment for the degree of Master of Arts Genderin Stud GUIN’S GUIN’S Submitted Centralto European University THE LEFT HAND OF DARKNESS HAND LEFT THE Department ofGender Studies Second Reader:

Supervisor: IMAGINING UTOPIA IN URSULA K. LE K. URSULA IN UTOPIA IMAGINING Budapest, Hungary ByTihana Bertek 2014

Jasmina Lukić

Eszter Timár

ies.

CEU eTD Collection ( without dualism progress. of force driving the androgyny of vision to inability useful relati present the of and critical difference sexual focusing In Abstract masculine/feminine my thesis my

nship with nship tool for tool n particular in

“ potentially

solve I analyz I

s ques oci

hierarch the myth or concept of concept or myth the and humanness and ety ” tioning our ideas about gender about ideas our tioning

) the problem of sex of problem the processual is which

e the novel the e in creatingin wholeness. and and n the on revolutionary genres, revolutionary y imagining

and

ersnain of representation

Her Her to

that The L The a

possible alternatives possible cknowle contribution it

a difference. ual e engenders , ft

androgyny non Hand of Darkness of Hand

dge provide provide - i essential

andro h itreedne f the of interdependence the and . contend, I

and argue that argue

a identity

, gyn ial, m neetdi Le in interested am I Finally, fecund ground for for ground fecund

and rejects the rejects and .

s I uggest y also

n te icsin o gender of discussions the and

is in lies ( because it is it because 1969 s look at look ci

that ence fiction ence ) by Ursula K. Le Guin Le K. Ursula by the even toda even

feminism idea of idea

attempt a an emblem of our of emblem an

feminist

w principles two

and o y ’ pposition

to rethink rethink to t conflicte utopia c c an be an G ritique uin , as ,

as as

’ d a s , ,

CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusion 3. 2. 1. Introduction Table of Contents Abstract Table ofContents

1.3 1.2 GenderingSurfingGenre, Wave theNew the 1.1 Mrs.Brown Spaceship: as Science Paraliterature onthe Fiction 3.10 “A Society of Eunuchs:” Sex, Progress3.10 “A Society Sex, ofEunuchs:” Utopia and LeIsIdealized3.9 Humanism: Guin's The Love3.8 Among theGlaciers 3.7 Strange Encounters,orAdventures inPerversion theOther3.6 We, Becoming Humans: AlientoOneself 3.5 HangingIs Deviants: Effeminate Feminine? outwith Androgyny 3.4 Men’sFreak Only Galactic 3.3 GenericDiscontinuities 3.2 TheLies UseFi inScience of 3.1 Situating 2.3 Androgyny asandDifference Appearance the(In)visibilityof 2.2 TheAndrogyny and Rise of Fall inthe 1970s 2.1 TheLove Origin of The LeftThe of Hand Darkness Theorizing Androgyny LikelyBedfellows: Utopia,and Science Fiction, Feminism “To Succeed by Failure:” Reinventing Utopia

......

...... The Left HandofDarknessThe Left

......

...... - ...... Show ction ......

......

...... re beyond Human Gender? ...... ii ......

......

62 60 57 55 53 49 46 43 38 35 32 29 29 26 18 16 14 10

ii 6 3 3 1

CEU eTD Collection feminism encounter and many more. withthe Other, the gender; rep sexuality, of between relationship performance and construction the stereotypes; and sexism as such issues th text” the of figures and operation formal the in produced oppositions, binary or antinomies, the in unknotted and organized provisionally is practice argues, Moylan Tom theory strategies, exclusionary theory feminist in developments fact, In resolved. dated feel not does novel Guin’s Le concept, feminist were gender peculiar physiognomy ofGethenians. the and gender of absence the over confusion own his by obstructed continually be to out turns task his However, union. the join worlds of novel, the In society. androgynous an depict to scie feminist first the of one is which Guin, Le K. Ursula author American Introduction at In my thesis I am going to analyze the novel the analyze to going am I thesis my In n h frt chapter first the In at ago, years 45 published was it though Even

means that f that means

does . ,

M lands on the planet Gethen with the aim of convincing the nations of this world to world this of nations the convincing of aim the with Gethen planet the on lands , and perhaps, at the same time, it responds to social anxieties m anxieties social to responds it time, same the at perhaps, and , y aim i gaining ground and androgyny was just coming into vogue as a potentially potentially a as vogue into coming just was androgyny and ground gaining

eminist utopian science fiction in particularin sciencefiction utopian eminist The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The s to point out some of outsome respective theshared issues inthesefields to point “[w]hat in history cannot yet be worked out in the realm of theory and theory of realm the in out worked be yet cannot history in “[w]hat

I or luiae h rltosi between relationship the illuminate

even transgenderism. Perhaps literature ages more slowly than than slowly more ages literature Perhaps transgenderism. even

outo ad aiy sca ad oiia ieult; the inequality; political and social family; and roduction ,

nldn gne promtvt, homophobi performativity, gender including

can be said to said be can 1

Genly Ai, Genly The more challenging than expected than challenging more a

nor have the issues it tackles have been been have tackles it issues the have nor

time when when time etHn f Darkness of Hand Left

(47). an have have provided the spacefor the provided

Envoy In cec fcin uoi, and utopia, fiction, science anticipate the framework of my thesis thesis my of framework the the the

of a of icsin of discussions n intergalactic union intergalactic n d nce fiction novels novels fiction nce

ore promptly. As promptly. ore some of th of some

(1969) by the the by (1969)

address since and sex a e later later e

show show

it and and ing

CEU eTD Collection utopia. of conception specific a to relates androgyny how explore to want a beings human different radically encountering of relevant. find I that issue another is imaginary, and boundary. human/alien the and sex gender,play into brings it how and novel the androgynyin of representation deconstructive a theexisting systemthat disrupts ofmeaning. and psychoanalytic a as not androgyny at look provide which of both interpretation, I Finally, androgyny. of discussion theoretical wider a of context the in novel Guin’s Le situate I whereby feminism, of wave o views conflicting the map to proceed I difference. sexual of nature the of understandings future affected androgyny of conception his how at look I beings, primordial of myth Plato’s from Starting topic. thesis my of understanding better a for challenge ofwhatassumptions normal, ouris acceptableand just. alternativ imagine can union their why In the second chapter I outline a number of theories of androgyny that I consid I that androgyny of theories of number a outline I chapter second the In The

hr catr s niey eoe t m raig f h novel. the of reading my to devoted entirely is chapter third s ae poiinl creative oppositional, are es, be seen as unsurprising, productive, productive, unsurprising, as seen be

The relationship between fiction and prediction, and the real the and prediction, and fiction between relationship The

and critical of the present society, and and society, present the of critical and nd the ethics of this encounter. this of ethics the nd Further, I Further,

a condition or an entity, but as a sign sign a as but entity, an or condition a o r even r n androgyny during the second second the during androgyny n will look at the (im)possibility the at look will

revolu temporality, progress and and progress temporality, I am interested in the the in interested am I tionary ual difference, ual :

a ll er helpful helpful er Finally, I Finally, of them them of CEU eTD Collection faster (110,113). subject?” no is if there universe, in the the all objects are good What . . in . vain are knowledge beautiful the all then moment, a for only if Brown, 2 i and representation the discusses 1 th in points example for fiction, realist sibling ugly wonder Guin Le other, to relation in fiction science of position the discusses she which Mrs and Fiction “Science 1.1 just. acceptable normal, is what of assumptions our challenging society, present the of critical they that in revolutionary potentially to hope I whereby iss the of some out works theoretical subjects these on scholarship disposal. my see might heterogen and vast incredibly

And her answer is yes, science fiction can produce rounded characters and b and characters rounded produce can fiction science yes, is answer her And Mrs. Brown is a reference to Virginia Woolf’s 1923 essay “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” in which she she which in Brown” Mrs. and Bennett “Mr. essay 1923 Woolf’s Virginia to reference a is Brown Mrs. n hs hpe I nevr o luiae h relatio the illuminate to endeavor I chapter this In wud ie o tr b rfrig o a to referring by start to like would I 1. M

rs. Brown on the Spaceship: Spaceship: onthe Brown rs. Likely Bedfellows: Science Fiction, Utopia, and Feminism m e

overly ambitious and finally unfeasible considering the amount of space I have at have I space of amount the considering unfeasible finally and ambitious overly

vast and contested field contested and vast h i ual t poue one ad eoal characters memorable and rounded produce to unable is who However s

since I do not find that to be crucial for my analysis. my for crucial be to that find not do I since whether S whether

demonstrate ues in these respective fields and fields respective these in ues

m aim my , .

. 2 mportance of characters in modernfiction. in mportanceofcharacters Brown” F can be considered literature considered be can F

In the following section following the In

r o otiue o o ee rfet pn te ot influential most the upon, reflect even or to, contribute to or e

ous why their union their why 1 here

–

(1975) of SF of

all imagine alternatives, imagine all Science Fiction asParal Fiction Science cec fcin uoi, n feminism and utopia, fiction, science is not to provide a wholesome overview of the the of overview wholesome a provide to not is n

and show why show and

absorbing from which from 3

can - than

s be seen as seen be

ih sis all ships, light I nship between three fields that are so so are that fields three between nship offer sa b Usl K L Gi en Guin Le K. Ursula by essay try to provide some basic orientation basic some provide to try

this chapter borrows its title its borrows chapter this , , as a non a as ,

a glimpse into the into glimpse a w

are hether un iterature e literary: “if we can’t catch can’t we “if literary: e surprising, oppositional, creative oppositional, the irony and imagination and and imagination and irony the - serious and marginalized and serious

it is it

I merely wish to point to wish merely I mo

re merely

literary ht e id in find we that productive, and and productive, –

ht h task the that

complexity literature’s , genres. ,

and in and

titled titled , and ,

Mrs. Mrs. and ,

CEU eTD Collection or happen, happened have not could for example,i genres other from distinguished According as aHe literary(270).form” continues, SF of opportunities historical “[t]he provided has that latter the of paralysis the precisely is it them. time same the at but them from borrowing genres, other on subsists can similarly Russ mode certai expect can one 2). Shaw sub parasitic small, a as ideal, elusive an to approximations opine t in genre a not arguably is definition workable a that expect to reason good writers. genre It elsewhere see has that world a of versionsalternate us giving of vocation the inherit to thereby‘paraliterary’ formthe allow to and art, high over censorship crippling a as functions which principle’ ‘reality tyrannical that ‘non officially [t]he litera “high and SF between relationship Discussingthe be be is s that

–

concluded stated

ht h “deiiin of “[d]efinitions the that

bsad er, o o speak to so genre, bastard a According to According

is “quite happy to extract its plot structuresgenre”anyextract plot is “quite( its available happyfrom to it o aul . Delany R. Samuel to ha n realist fiction by the authors of authors the by med to resist even imagined change (270). says s

not happened not that

- that SF “includes (or is parasitic upon . . .) non .) . . upon parasitic is (or “includes SF that serious’ or pulp character of SF is an indispensable feat indispensable an is SF of character pulp or serious’ n plot elements and specific tropes specific and elements plot n

SF is some kind of kind some is SF Mendelsohn Farah ; and in and ; he strict sense at all” (Clute and (Clute all” at sense strict he

the su The Encyclopedia of Science Fict Science of Encyclopedia The yet based on subjunctivity on based

science fiction science ) bjunctivity is cec fcin r nt o uh sre o logical of series a much so not are fiction science , (Ber

–

hs “paraliterary” this

it nardo and nardo ,

SF a poe t b priual futu fr feminist for fruitful particularly be to proven has a p 4 “is less a genre a less “is arasite

it is it this couldhave happened this of SF of

Murphy 13 Murphy

this has not has this ;

, a promiscuous, promiscuous, a will ever be established be ever will

the work’s relationship to reality to relationship work’s the –

ture,” Fredrick Jameson Fredrick ture,” than an ongoing discussion ongoing an than r “non or

Nicholls 593). Nicholls – - - er i tesle” qd in (qtd. themselves” in genre

14). a body of writing from which which from writing of body a happened ion -

But how But - serious” serious” that “[t]here is really no really is “[t]here that science fictio science ure in its capacity to relax relax to capacity its in ure

illegitimate genre illegitimate defining ; i ;

(although it (although n Patrick Parrinder Patrick , asks Russ, asks , fantasy is it , ” and that “SF that and ” form

itself against against itself 1,

claims n 3).

”

, can be be can

” (11). Joanna Joanna

might a . So .

that that that this can can

It a ,

CEU eTD Collection s of construction social as the ofgender absence resultant the and kemmer, 4 inthral 3 thought“revolutionary ofasliterature” (144). explo that mind” the of creations the in reconstructions ideational and imaginative its and world the between relationship “dialectical paradigm, imaginative “ world, new but active an by validated innovation relationship or phenomenon 375). (“Poetics”environment” “ he cognition,” and ( nonhumans” humanized Other or Unknown discusse In view, t this asfuture it of the temporal complex write one

an oml eie s n mgntv faeok lentv t te uhrs empirical author’s the to alternative framework imaginative an is device formal main Jean Baudrillard Baudrillard Jean In In In that In

The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The an engagement and ring possibilities for social change social for possibilities ring l to a wilda l to eaopoe o Sine Fiction Science of Metamorphoses s

and creative and the tension between reality and imagination, imagination, betweenandreality tension the respect eiul aot oehn ta de nt xs (16)? exist not does that something about seriously he “mighthe happen” slts n o a e variables few a or one isolates

speculation on speculation similarly similarly , the SF text can be perceived as a laboratory a as perceived be can text SF the , “ defamiliarize relationship between SF and reality and SF between relationship , writes

arguing approach writes that that writes reflection epe it peoples scientifically methodical cognition (66) cognition methodical scientifically my emphasis, my ae te necessa “the are , , the no the ,

ht S i a eeoe oyoo, a oxymoron, developed a is “SF that eitn fo te uhrs reality author’s the from deviating

Suvin othernessdifference and [

vum is the Gethenian body, subject to subject body, Gethenian the is vum s to “ is

” n se wa happens what sees and ,” ] on science fiction is fiction science

and restructure not located in the future, tothepresent.not located fact inthe refers butin reality: it is it reality:

ae S “more SF makes uses the concept of the conceptof the uses

(“Poetics”372) ” viii). viii).

(Annas 145 (Annas 17) t (1977), y n sfiin conditions sufficient and ry

5 “The presence and interaction of estrangement of interaction and presence “The

. . . .

not simply a simply not merely a reflection of our everyday universe, which is is which universe, everyday our of reflection a merely [ s ” (124). ” ] our experience of our own presen ourexperience ] our of he n prom a eprmn, uls an builds experiment, an performs and . - or : SF does not so much offer us images images us offer much so not does SF :

useful than ‘mainstream’ fiction for for fiction ‘mainstream’ than useful influential between what is familiar and what is whatand familiar is betweenwhat ,

and

Ans 143) (Annas novum mirroring mirroring exual difference. exual

also the reason why it it why reason the also

. the cyclical the in which the writer creates a creates writer the which in C

(64) ” Jameson Jameson ognition 4 F theorist SF

to designate adesignate to elsi irreality realistic of

; . fr SF], [for

alteration of somer and and somer of alteration the author’s world, world, author’s the It is precisely this this precisely is It it

for Suvin implies Suvin for suggests i s

ak Suvin Darko a ” novelty or or novelty “totalizing n their and

a t (286). can be can

with , more more 3

CEU eTD Collection How imagination. and reality between relationship the and general, in fantasy about 5 imagine otherwise and ourselves others and actual merely is what ofreality opposite the not reproduction sexual gender, of criticism and considerations feminist societies alternative (30). relations” social and power about conflict and contradictions”and that that explains Moylan di and gender that and reality” human ordinary can discourse, critical and theory like just ( place” takes theory where place a as narrative audience” possible largest the to comprehensible future different a making of means eligible most the as representations, literary and artistic especially modes, cultural out sought “have feminists Johns, Alessa writes Hollinger transformations social and cultural the undertaking in steps first for necessary platform a as it using SF, of potential 1.2

I should point out that Butler is not writing about science fiction in particular or even about literature here, but here, literature about even or particular in fiction science about writing not is Butler that out point should I Starting from the late 1960s, women writes have recognized and utilized t utilized and recognized have writes women 1960s, late the from Starting In fact, (science) fiction (science) fact, In Gendering the Genre the Gendering does recognize not ‘others’” its (Hollinger 129). suggests , patriarchy, and much more. much and patriarchy, , scussions on issues such as gender roles, androgyny, or heteronormativity. or androgyny, roles, gender as such issues on scussions

(128)

n differ and they ieay et cn rvd “mgnr rsltos o el social real to resolutions “imaginary provide can texts literary .

“Given the limited political, eco political, limited the “Given . . . [it]. . . prese ,

of Surfing the New Wave the Surfing 15. hrfr, i Therefore, (175). “ form “a significant part of the social process of discourse, debat process of thesocial of part significant “a form

[

contest] the late ‘60s and ’70 anticipated the theoretical discourse on on discourse theoretical the anticipated ’70 and ‘60s late the n hmn, cec fiction science humans, ent nt into a realm of possibility . . . Fantasy is what allows us to us allows what is Fantasy . . . possibility of realm a into nt

is part of the articulation of the possible; it moves usbeyond moves possible; articulationthe it the of of partis

the hegemonic representations of a patriarchal culture culture patriarchal a of representations hegemonic the ( Butler, Butler, It can be said that the power of f of power the that said be can It “defamiliarize certain taken certain “defamiliarize 6

“’ Bodies Undoing Undoing , olwn Bte, e cnie literary “consider we Butler, following f, feminist imaginative projects that are the the are that projects imaginative feminist

As a space for imagining new worlds, worlds, new imagining for space a As

135), we will see that feminist fiction, feminist that see will we 135), 28 nomic and social clout of feminists,” of clout social and nomic ity, social roles and oppression, oppression, and roles social ity, - 9 c ) . an 5

serve as a playground for for playground a as serve ever, I cannot help noticing noticing help cannot I ever, - for - granted aspects of of aspects granted antasy he revolutionary he , ”

s Veronica as

is that is Tom

“ is e, e, CEU eTD Collection (1814). recycled constantly and whichfrugally are ideas, on or stereotyped, usually market sf the of segment intellectual paper cheap on Fiction Science printed that were . . that . granted magazines for it taking pulp in mostly matters, published “political to attention little paid stories stories These pulp. wood treated chemically from manufactured fiction science 1930s’ early and 6 yetnot actualized. the ofpotentiality, that excluding or ignoring of tradition solid a with genre a into feminism of politics the “brought low than female of representation the have AsPamela been. explains, Annas been historically women had like much culture, high of stereotypes, domain the from excised and of marginalized use and misogyny its despite that, form a through and men between relations power of conceptions new exploring into Review Paris w riskier writing, literary more writing, experimental more of kinds all to open thrown getting fiction. science era pulp the of sexism and contrace the of approval Friedan’s feminis of wave second African

The term“ The riting . . . And of course, women were creeping in, infiltrating. Infesting the premises” ( premises” the Infesting infiltrating. in, creeping were women course, of And . . . riting t a i was It Feminist interventions Feminist values throu yourself and world the seeing means vision dual groups, oppressed For vision. dual technique: perceptual a groups socioeconomic oppressed with shares work to chosen have [t]

bot hough SF writers SF hough h she and Delany locate fantasy (not meant as a genre, but imagination) and science fiction in the realm realm the in fiction science and imagination) but genre, a as meant (not fantasy locate Delany and she h - American civil rights civil American

- ( quality, cliché quality, 144) pulp era” refers to magazines published between 1896 and the 1950s, but more specifically to moreto specifically but the and 1950s, 1896 between published magazines to refers era” pulp The Feminine Mystique Feminine The te otx o the of context the n

). The ). 1752). Today the term is “associated primarily with stories written, usually rapidly, for the least least the for rapidly, usually written, stories with primarily “associated is term the Today 1752). .

works

have often sounded often have - ridden ridden ptive pill ptive ( m

ehooia pors ws h ra egn o sca cag” ( change” social of engine real the was progress technological had thus transformed the genre on several levels: by condemning by levels: several on genre the transformed thus had of these authors these of (and male) (and marked in the US by such events as the publication of Betty Betty of publication the as events such by US the in marked

enterta - d counterculture movements counterculture d

oil oeet o te 90 ( 1960s the of movements social packed with adventure adventure with packed ) that )

(1963), the passing of the Equal Pay Act of 1963, and the and 1963, of Act Pay Equal the of passing the (1963), inment.

–

characters in SF in characters feminist SF authors started to reject the masculinism masculinism the reject to started authors SF feminist

and been and

challenged social inequality and went “ went and inequality social challenged 6

“The doors”, writes Ursula K. Le Guin, “were “were Guin, Le K. Ursula writes doors”, “The 7 Jenny Wolmark states that women writers have have writers women that states Wolmark Jenny

–

politically conservative, the form in which they which in form the conservative, politically but with little emphasis on character, which is is which character, on emphasis little with but ,

and

) by

and contemporaneous with the the with contemporaneous and

showing that SF can be more be can SF that showing h anti the

women” (Higgins 77) (Higgins women” gh two sets of opposed of sets two gh - a, a rights gay war, ’s contributions ’s nylpda of Encyclopedia further still still further

1920s’ 1920s’ The The ,

CEU eTD Collection himself.correct to a postscript added Otherwise general was who 7 il to of fiction science metaphors the use and women of position present the “take to able were authors these Time of Edge Darkness the in more a for allowed by marked also (Bernardo experience” human of depths the explored that themes adult of favor in space outer in cowboys and aliens, marauding travel, space of clichés for stories that “demanded Moorcock than subject: ourselves ( te objective or mechanical, or quantitative, in describable anything or classes, social of destiny the or robotics, of laws “ were writers sciences soft to hard from avant with wonder of sense and power (Merrick 241). nature and ‘gender’( of self/other dichotomies suggested by subject o matter the repudiated have they Moreover, 3). Shaw in (qtd. writers” women

Tiptree was the pseudonym of Alice Bradley Sheldon, whose real identity was not known for a long time and and time long a for known not was identity real whose Sheldon, Bradley Alice of pseudonym the was Tiptree This new This The termThe

most important most

(1975), Robert Silverberg wrote that the author of these stories cannot possibly be a woman. He later later He woman. a be possibly cannot stories these of author the that wrote Silverberg Robert (1975),

16) Jan Russ’s Joanna (1969), –

“n movement in SF in movement the object of research of object the

ly presumed to be male. In his introduction to Tiptree’s short story collection collection story short Tiptree’s to introduction his male.In be to presumed ly (1976)

no longer really longer no ew f SF (science and technology) is inherently masculine by unmasking a numberunmasking by masculine isinherently and technology) (science f SF a

w rniin rm hre fo shorter from transition luminate it” (Green and Lefanu, qtd. in Shaw 3). Shaw in qtd. Lefanu, and (Green it” luminate feminist ave

, and the short stories of James Tiptree Jr. Tiptree James of stories short the and , - depth representation of both char both of representation depth ” LeGuin,

evolved around the SF magazine magazine SF the around evolved and putting the characters, the putting and rms . . . Their subject is the subject, that which cannot be other other be cannot which that subject, the is subject Their . . . rms works

, called ,

[interested] [interested]

“Mrs Brown”“Mrs 105). h Fml Man Female The

– of the period are Ursula K. Le Guin’s Guin’s Le K. Ursula are period the of

as feminine as the - e Worlds New garde literary experimentation” literary garde New Wave, “sought to combine SF’s extrapolative SF’s combine to “sought Wave, New in the gadget, or the size of the universe, or the the or universe, the of size the or gadget, the in 8 rmats rmats

for example, the idea of science as masculine science example,as of theidea masculine for ) that inform the scientific culture scientific the inform that )

rte fr aaie t novels to magazines for written ( e mo be

1975 and not technology, center technology, not and acters and their alien worlds. Among worlds. alien their and acters New Worlds,New ) and e ieay n aadn h tired the abandon and literary re , ag Piercy’s Marge

Murphy 16). The 16). Murphy By taking up science fiction, science up taking By For example, For popular popular

(Higgins 74), (Higgins whose editor Michael Michael editor whose The Left Hand of Hand Left The Woman on the the on Woman Warm Worlds and and Worlds Warm belief that the the that belief - period

stage. stage. in general in Le Guin Guin Le mov

which which

was was The ing

CEU eTD Collection areas:interrelated r sole the hierarchy and love of gendersocial constructionand of forms alternative on and sexes (159) parenting” and the patterns, living relationships, of equality on based forms social “new (157). change” to open and being into come to “straining process, in (157) life” everyday of textures and forms the on instead focus which societies imaginary ambiguous and open more “to utopias planned alternate of inapolitics grounded hope”future ( non and and worlds other describe societ to forms these of potential generic the writers, of generation the authors these him, to According time. this during fiction utopian and science both to approach changed example deals with future the from person androgynous a writes at are women and men which in world dystopian a to men without world utopian depicts emoved In One of social ies . . . has been richly developed,” he developed,” richly been has . . . ies his

- wrd n hc pol hv ccia sxaiy n n gender; no and sexuality cyclical have people which in world a

site of reproduction and reproduction of site

oppressive social and sexual relationships and patterns of behavior of patterns and relationships sexual and social oppressive Mexican poor a bout of seven novels published inthe 1970s of seven novels

men altogether. altogether. men

structure short the the (im)possibility of

. we most important most

In order to resolve inequality, s inequality, resolve to order In

study of the New Wave (or (or Wave New the of study re interested re first,

might contribute to a more equal andfairworld equal contribute might toamore the Overall, t Overall, re are re

characteristics of in a woman’s

- imagining

basic living units units living basic mrcn woman American moth an an he ; attempt to

and innovations ering Tiptree’s

. In these works societies are construc are societies works these In .

a , voice in SF voice claims

some some world without exploitation without world 9 ome

“ present a present a the New Wavethe

, Peter Fitting provides a good overview of the Fittinggood overview, Peterofthe a provides 156 n w tpa fiction, utopian ew

of the New Wave New the of

(usually communal in character) in communal (usually , and their novels “ novels their and ,

have have authors short story short . -

7, There is an in an is There n mna hsia wo et an meets who hospital mental a in 178). .

eliminate society

have have

is the “The Women Men Don’t See” Don’t Men Women “The

that displace d . “[I]n the hands of a newer a hands newer . “[I]n of the

eet in terest gender,

shift from systematic and systematicand shift from is no longer is no are ” Moreover, we encounter we Moreover, portray non portray

as he calls it) on the the on it) calls he as

most evident in three in evident most d and how a change in in change a how and

women’s bodies women’s Russ Russ ,” while

interrogat

“imagin[ing] an “imagin[ing] based on based juxtaposes - ted as being being as ted hierarchical hierarchical others war; developed developed ing

Piercy Piercy

ave ave sex sex the the

as as a

CEU eTD Collection nature exact the on theoreticians between socio a be to utopia considers fact in 8 inanother timepossibilities and/or place. ( lack . . . society believe authors their what fiction in “supply[ing] 7 (Vieira alternatives possible or 6). (Vieira Furthermore, desirable is what of conception subjective a and ideology political prevailing ideal is what of idea the since society perfect the portray generically not Claeys Nevertheless, (147). disappear to going ever is society” ideal “common this that likely not is it associations,” multiple of weight the under collapses usually meaning its that much so imply to come has ‘utopia’ term “[t]he today though even that explains Claeys non a as utopia of meaning the and 1.3 fulfillment andinopposition and/or heterosexism to it attemptsprocreation” to tolimit (165) ab and talent ( relations patriarchal as

us 144) Russ everyone to open is activities of range full a Imagini

The rato t a to reaction a an “To Succeed by Failure:” Reinventing Failure:” by “To Succeed was coined by Thomas More Thomas by coined was

alternative word ng alternatives and reflecting on the present is where utopia and science fiction come together. Jameson Jameson together. come fiction science and utopia where is present the on reflecting and alternatives ng

– utopia u ility

- topia should not be taken literally, as a blueprint a as literally, taken be not should topia language sense of the term . . . as an idealized an as . . . term the of sense language n a a rtcl ol o rfetn o te rsn b epoig different exploring by present the on reflecting for tool critical a as and

)

o h ncer family nuclear the to ;

deficient

) comes from the Greek the from comes n third, and ; second, ;

present and an aspiration aspiration an and present

gender and the division of labor of division the and gender or

23; , - eult itself sexuality - existing place existing cnmc sub economic perfect

in his in of the relationship of these two genres. two ofthese relationship ofthe

les 150 Claeys

book in a given society is not universal but depend but universal not is society given a in

( οu , which is seen as the main unit for reproducing reproducing for unit main the as seen is which u i cnendol with only concerned is but ” - genre of science fiction (xiv), but there is no agreement agreement no is there but (xiv), fiction science of genre

10 (“not”) and (“not”) Utopia

(

Utopia Utopia outopia

s questioned is – ).

8 epe hoe ok codn to according work choose people

hs u Thus,

(1516) ) o overcome to

and a good place good a and topos ois a b see be can topias . More . ,

are no longer taken for granted for taken longer no are

f “ (“place”), meaning “no place,” place,” “no (“place”),meaning

uture or past, or non or past, or uture oh s n ne t human to index an as both or a model a or

created a tension between tension a created [s]

insists rbes by problems

n h here the in perfectability (eutopia) , but as but ,

that utopia “does utopia that n

s reactive as

- imagin and a str a . Gr . - interest, s existent

- on the the on egory now” now” ategy (149) ing . –

CEU eTD Collection revolutionary, fil always but complete, or realized “never is which processuality and fluidity for instead opt and them” generated that impulse utopian the negates that perfection to utopias] patriarchal (Jacobs pain” but hetero/ and fragmentation, contradiction, ambiguity, through stasis narrative overcome new The (22). Utopia 21). became constructioneveryday of inthe incorporated and life (Vieira thought Left New and ecological, feminist, by influenced always isprecisely imperfect, it keeps but and imperfectiongoing it makes that productive. it definite a andthepessimism impossible” (84). “ unresolvabl the of production ongoing and concrete be “must utopia that, of spite in But (290). otherness imagining to comes it when limits absolute own our on light sheds it because so” doing of impossibility effort “the that namely, itself; utopia of nature f by “succeed only start. the from it in inscribed utopia, of necessity structural the (11). way” unaccustomed and fresha in realities (11). inven the and solved be e ut mgn sm fr o gaiiain neet n hs ey ofotto with confrontation very this in inherent gratification of form some imagine must we Jameson describe Jameson The new utopianism of the 1960s and 1970s developed contemporaneously with and with contemporaneously developed 1970s and 1960s the of utopianism new The “create, in their very form, an experience of change recognizable in its complexity and its its and complexity its in recognizable change of experience an form, very their in “create,

Further, ide

al “[t]

“postdystopian utopias, or critical utopias, or open or utopias, critical or utopias, “postdystopian 110 model to be followed, but followed, be to model l[ing] thegap andl[ing] between exists what what 169). (Teslenko couldbe” here is here some affinity with affinity some here is here - iue (289) ailure” 1) s utopia s . tive ingenuity with which a series of so of series a which with ingenuity tive h n The

as e contradiction e w utopi ew a diagnostic intervention diagnostic a ,

eas i i the is it because

Therefore, utopia should not be shouldnot seenTherefore, as utopia s lo eit a eutv tnec [f traditional [of tendency reductive “a resist also as as

11 a desire which desire a is

. . . the outsider’s gift for seeing overfamiliar overfamiliar seeing for gift outsider’s the . . . Interestingly, Jameson considers considers Interestingly, Jameson its fundamental process, and, what is more, more, is what and, process, fundamental its to imagine utopia ends up betraying the the betraying up ends utopia imagine to

alr ta rvas oehn aot the about something reveals that failure ,

“ the identification of a problem to to problem a of identification the started operating at a micro at operating started can never achieve its goal its achieve never can lutions are proposed and tested and proposed are lutions As a matter of fact of matter a As - e nded utopias . . . [not only] [not . . . utopias nded

a frozen image or failure to be failureto , utopia can can utopia , thinking n ”

tropia - ; it is it ; – level level

was was

t he

,” ”

CEU eTD Collection least, at not, destiny; not as it treating biology, demystify They discourse. patriarchal “normal” the of critique open an as well as political, as personal the of recognition possibility a with subject Nevertheless, are that societies have) works poorly so women treated have genre the in works “classic imagination utopian of importance the emphasizes traditional utopias the than important and interesting more cr (46) pages” very its within it deconstructing to manages utopia critical the (51). received” preserves and bea radical createscan articulated action, neutralinwhichopposition and space problems light” critical more a in society utopian (35) society” present the changing manner,” that represent they history,but in moment current the with concerned 1960s the of fiction science cri the Imagination Utopian the and Fiction Science Impossible: the Demand itical utopia itical To describe the reinvented utopian genre, utopian reinvented the describe To The ia uoin oe ws ae osbe y h dvlpet i te ieay space literary the in developments the by possible made was novel utopian tical

opeetrt o nw tpaim and utopianism new of complementarity

and ( 44) .

s . it is in “t in is it N as as :

Furthermore, Even thoug Even a w eiit utop feminist ew s a rule a s . ain Teslenko Tatiana

infcnl bte ta or own our than better significantly he estranged vision of another society another of vision estranged he ,

they for a counter discourse counter a for h it is critical of both the historical situation and the genre itself, genre the and situation historical the both of critical is it h it . feature

e xlis ht b that explains He is self is

“ a and ian . ep h uoin mus aie y hlegn i and it challenging by alive impulse utopian the keep

The c The suggests - “a human subject in action” in subject human “a reflexive and and reflexive description of description and is not afraid not is and ritical utopia ritical cec fiction science . We can also speak of the return of the subject in in subject the of return the of speak also can We the , 12 Tom Moylan Tom

” (163) and (163) ”

oth “utopia and science fiction are most most are fiction science and “utopia oth new f resists closure, and closure, resists eminism eminism

o fmns i sie of spite in feminism for

, according to Moylan, to according , the

o poie utopian a provide nor utopias

t society o show o ” (175) ( (175) ” oes o not do novels use , more generally, they generally, more , ” that we can find “ find can we that ” s ad o miss to hard is s

the term “critical utopia “critical term the ae rvdd te female “the provided have , whose whose

which faults, inconsistencies and inconsistencies faults, much like science fiction science like much moment in an estranged estranged an in moment

(1986) “negates static ideals, static “negates quest is presented as presented is quest takes precedence takes necessarily

, he , .

“present[s] the “present[s]

n social in Alessa Johns Johns Alessa h fc that fact the the seeds for for seeds the dé

“ argues nouement. nouement. reflect the the reflect depict depict .

” that and

of of In in

CEU eTD Collection difficult fiction science and utopia, (2) fictions” speculative and Wheth thinking Utopian on influence primary a and today West compatibility: a to as and change of possibility the of sense a and injustice to resistance principles: active dialectically yet not a to path radical a up open and forwell theman as terms. political It can be inferred that inferred be can It both are “ both are er we choose we er ge that rgue (and quite unnecessary)

at onc at “[i]

. . . . . de, sget ht eiim s h piay tpa mvmn i the in movement Utopian primary the is feminism that suggest I ndeed, h rel the ”

e oppositional oppositional e

to T (165). hey

agree with this strong statement or not, the fact remains that feminism, that remains fact the not, or statement strong this with agree

tosi bten eiim n u and feminism between ationship both both [

offer had utopianism and feminism and utopianism ] to untangle

omd a formed possibilities and

realized future” (Moylan 50); (Moylan future” realized creative” fruitful fruitful

their mutual influences their

13 for transformation not only for the woman, but woman, the for only not transformation for

(Stimpson 2) (Stimpson marriage

wish “to break with the status quo status the with break “to wish

n hs eid and period, this in . Catherine Stimpso topian .

both ism

“ os beyond goes embody two large, two embody n goes far so t ol be would it

mere mere ;” .

CEU eTD Collection powers. ofshared world just a to lead would limits imaginable beyond sexes the of multiplication the that believes and (24) difference” Sciences 9 1970 in back Firestone Shulamith by articulated of means used. longer stress feminists cyborg fo impossible and (347) essential feminism” both remains sense, this in Gender, . . . identities gendered out, the issues discarded, theory? feminist from expunged history,and culture(Hargreaves the literary imagination” 3). of requirements various the to relation “in reproduced and produced repeatedly is it as seeing difficult and elusive be to proven androgynywhat is aboutmore us telling a such even But 73). Pacteau b or woman, a nor man a neither as or woman, a and man b of characteristics essential the

See In the most general way, the androgyne can be defined as “a person who unites certain of certain unites who person “a as defined be can androgyne the way, general most the In But why talk about this contested concept contested this about talk why But 2. , for example, Anne Fausto Anne example, for , []e rso o gne rmis nislby ikd o h afrain f particular of affirmation the to linked indissolubly remains gender of erosion “[t]he

that issues pertaining to androgyny continue to trouble us even us trouble to continue androgyny to pertaining issues that Theo (March/April 1993): 20 1993): (March/April –

finally,

abolishing difference or multiplying it in it multiplying or difference abolishing of sexual the idea of idea the Unfortunately, I do not do I Unfortunately,

Indeed, the desire for overcoming for desire the Indeed, rizing Androgyny . a I

my vn be even may t thorough reinvention thorough difference,genderand inequalityunresolved. remain

androgynypersist - - 24. She argues that hermaphrodites “challenge traditional beliefs about sexua about beliefs traditional “challenge hermaphrodites that argues She 24. Sterling, “The Five Sexes: Why Sexes: Five “The Sterling,

oth sexes, and who consequently, who and sexes, oth straightforward I wish to argue that even even that argue to wish I

have space here to here space have o i down pin to argued

not

to this day, and will continue to persist to continueday,this will to and of

that the androgyne has taken on a new life as a a as life new a on taken has androgyne the that

rather than what it it what than rather

the patriarchal myth patriarchal the today 14

n lrey notsal dfnto ed up ends definition incontestable largely and gender –

, despite the numerous attempts to do so do to attempts numerous the despite

after response to the binary model binary the to response – develop this argument this develop

Male and Female Are Not Enough Not Are Female and Male restraints biological and

it has been been has it s kept is isexual or asexual” (Busst, qtd. in qtd. (Busst, asexual” or isexual though though

. Historically, . androgynyhas

may be considered as both a a both as considered be may so ey uh alive much very

pronounced outdated and outdated pronounced the the desired if

term may have been been have may term FelskiAs Rita points the term itself term the

by ;

I for as long as as longas for second wave wave second only (whether by (whether 9 )

–

through , wish t wish ” as in is no is first The The o – r l

CEU eTD Collection sartorial, the with play who those of artifice the transsexuality. moretopical intothe merelyhastransformed alive; it much very is androgyny world into nature sexual sex of of signs gestural or morphological, transfiguration the female, and t light, a or signification, sex of signs the of commutability the with playing of transvestitism, of sense general more the in rather but sense, anatomical any hermaphroditic” and androgynous theatric In of trope privileged a as transsexuality left has it that gender of the outside about talk 10 was hand, society in change radical a to lead would embraced, non (i.e., androgyny other. each modify halves both which in relationship but hierarchy, a as not principles masculine the and feminine the Bazin Pacteau. Francette reading partly definition actual to respond we way the of issues approaches concept the of roles advances biotechnology as post

lack of different of lack For example, For The Transparency of Evil Evil of Transparency The My aim is not to propose a new definition of androgyny definition a propose new My to aim isnot humanist

ranssexuality ranssexuality (that is not to say that it will actually(that tosay not will is it that dothat)

al excess of its ambiguity” and that we have become become have we that and ambiguity” its of excess al be of androgyny in the novel are those of Nancy Topping Bazin and Alma Freeman Alma and Bazin Topping Nancy of those are novel the in androgyny of the the

male/female antinomies male/female gender guided

extremely

new t show o

in their book book their in an irresponsible, playful, non playful, anirresponsible, and iation between the sexual poles and privileging of privileging and poles sexual the between iation

, p , s ( ,

can be seen as seen be can

hc i i isl iceil in incredibly itself in is which , as I hope to show to hope I as , ost by the said interpretations. said the by (20). It follows that transsexuality, just like androgyny, can be described as a crisis of of crisis a as described be can androgyny, like just transsexuality, that follows It (20). sexuality, postgender discourses -

- male and male behind

gendered humanness) of all human beings human all of humanness) gendered insightful that ( ’s The Last Sex Last The the h ie o androgyny of idea the 19) en adilr bemoa Baudrillard Jean (1993) ”

and promis and and Freeman’s vision is akin to Le Guin’s Le to akin is vision Freeman’s and (18). Their work can be situated in the context of postmodernist discussions of of discussions postmodernist of context the in situated be can work Their (18).

reproduction, w reproduction, post

re an overarching metaphor metaphor overarching an . The third sex third The . (22, (22,

presentations of presentations for me because of the distinction she makes between visibility between makes she distinction the of because me for the de the - ,” female sexual horizon, horizon, sexual female 25)

as Felski Felski as : Feminism and Outlaw Bodies Outlaw and Feminism : . According to to According . t - hrough my hrough differentiation - es to es serious use of signs that ultimately leads to “ to leads ultimately thatsigns useof serious , and isprobably it ,

is “ is concludes

liberate us from b from us liberate holeness, and even immortality. Thus I hold that hold I Thus immortality. even and holeness, a The texts that I that texts The 15 virtual )

androgyny

reading of reading Baudrillard

teresting), serves as a repository for for repository a as serves . of sexual difference, as Rita Felski points out (341) out points Felski Rita as difference, sexual of

for 10 (337). “politically indifferent and undifferentiated beings, beings, undifferentiated and indifferent “politically

and and sex floating in an elliptical orbit around the planet the around orbit elliptical an in floating sex

s h fc ta tdy “ today that fact the ns

“the dissolution of once stable polarities of male of polarities stable once of dissolution “the and ethics and They a

It wou It re calling for “the third sex” third “the for calling re appearance appearance

, we are all already transs already all are we , safe to assume it will only will toassumeit increase safe n

Le Guin’s 1969 Guin’s Le is much more interesting than its its than interesting more much is o also posit a posit also u b but iological r to provide an extensive history extensive an r toprovide ld appear, then, that in the postmodern postmodern the in thatthen, appear, ld

have (1993) Marilouise and Arthur Kroker Kroker Arthur and Marilouise (1993) , . Pac .

which, if acknowledged and acknowledged if which, otiig h slc few select the outlining y as instead of of instead found most useful for my my for useful most found te

a creative and b and creative a

in that both understand both that in determinism au’s text, on the other the on text, au’s universal sexuality sexuality sexual indifference sexual being novel anxiety over over anxiety

that that (20 exual exual , which ,

underlying underlying

, 23 , and social social and

would exist would lost in the the in lost – alanced alanced )

. In that In . “ not in in not ,

will and the ” – .

CEU eTD Collection 12 11 men the and lesbians, became beings female double homosexuals, became reprod no was there that, (before reproduce can they so front the to genitals their moved also He strength. their reduce so and half in them slice to Zeus led which gods, the attack to scheming the and faces, two feet, four reproach”to bemerely of (Platoa 13 name th less no form in unity “a was two the of union the and women, men, human beings: spherical dual, of kinds three were there Aristophanes, recounts beginning, the In Plato’s in Aristophanes of speech the in presented is difference sexual of origin coincidencethat characterize ofall ofopposites things”72). theorigin (Brisson total the “expresse[d] it because role important an played androgyny hand, other the on myth, fro deviance a represented it fearedsince and marginalized was it tolerated,but somewhat was sexuality dual life, everyday In (7). life family undermined and impossible childr 2.1 own his preconceptions against stumbling keeps and aliens androgynous perceives novel the in her outsider by impressed was I appea as androgyny difference. of interpretation of (androgyne) invisibility and (hermaphrodite)

Terms malegenitalia. and female ofboth the possession to refer termto the uses Brisson Probably the most famous narrative about the primordial unity o unity primordial the about narrative famous most the Probably their examined carefully people Brisson, Luc relates antiquity, Roman and Greek In The Origin of Love of The Origin nfrsgs fda sexuality, dual of signs for en uction androgynous

–

the beings would simply rise from the earth). Formerly double male beings male double Formerly earth). the from rise simply would beings the

and and

herm

aphrodite

rest to correspond. They were very strong and fast and started and fast and strong very were They correspond. to rest an name, composed of both sexes . . . . . sexes both of composed name, an

are used interchangeably in different translations. translations. different in areusedinterchangeably 11 rance, which was which rance,

hetnn uainta aesxa reproduction sexual made that mutation threatening a 5). These creatures were round and and creatures were round 5). These 16 –

andr ogynes/hermaphrodites. useful to me to useful in whereas now it has comehas it now whereas f human beings and the the and beings human f

looking at the way the the way the at looking

- 12 women became became women ha m the norm. In norm. the m

The latter pairlatter The d Symposium.

four hands, hands, four CEU eTD Collection mediators. diviners and to related unity, but is primordial notsignify does which 14 141). (Plato relief” a and oftheirunion satiety some have might they females!] two of mention no [but male with met male “if pleasure: also was there so the not was reproduction Further, terms. equal on exist beings of types three 13 to today: postgenderism of demand main the is this level, some (on state this regained have a and origin of state lost a time same the at represents androgyny then fulfillment, achieve to hope can we that nature bisexual our of recognition sexe writes Brisson Aristophanes, for Thus immortality. from fall the and multiplicity of beginning the is (it neither asex fact in is sexes, both containing by being, dual The (82). sex” one but have we that finite are we because is “it immortality: ensures thus and fusion permanent signifies sexuality dual “simultaneous that argues similarly Brisson ofecstatic approximation theachievement of(44). unity not and betweenself distinction the undo to desire a duality, of elimination the for quest a is love sexual Evola, For (43). immortality of state the signifies it entity, complete a as moreover, dual; not divided absolute of state the with concerned is myth Plato’s that He suggests (43). ontology” an of framework the in as sense historical the in much so not origins, a of conceive should we “instead, literally; story Aristophanes’s early and estate endeavoringand the heal humansore” tocombinetwoinone (Plato 141). lon heterosexuals.

hc h dsigihs from distinguishes he Which the because heterosexuality, as “natural” as considered is homosexuality Plato in that note to important is It In n i bo o adoyy n hrahoiim n G in hermaphroditism and androgyny on book his In ging to be reunited; thus anciently “is mutual love ingrained in mankind, reassembling our our reassembling mankind, in ingrained love mutual “is anciently thus reunited; be to ging s could also be regarded as an expectation, an ultimate project” (82). If it is through through is it If (82). project” ultimate an expectation, an as regarded be also could s reproduc not does it and ual), , “this desire for fusion is a yearningBut a of the tothe is return past.coincidence two fusion for, “this desire to h Mtpyis f Sex of Metaphysics The 13

ih u oiia fr ct n w, ah af ol lo fr t fellow, its for look would half each two, in cut form original our With -

self byparticipat self

“ ucsie ul sexuality dual successive

18) Jlu Eoa an ta w sol nt tak not should we that warns Evola Julius (1983), since reproduction only comes after the split which marks marks which split the after comes only reproduction since ing in absolute being: flesh becomes a mere tool for “an “an for meretool a becomes being:fleshabsolute in ing 17

”

–

the ability ability the utopian

” 14

raeco can be seen as an archetype that archetype an as seen be can to shift from one sex to the other other the to sex one from shift to future time future state le purpose of sexual encounters encounters sexual of purpose le

- Roman antiquity (2002), (2002), antiquity Roman

, a spiritual condition of condition spiritual a , being which is neither neither is which being in which we will we which in

– e –

CEU eTD Collection ac 9). (Hargreaves life” sexual and social in permissible and respectable the of hetero disturb and disrupt to power androgyne’s wholeness, 2.2 presuppose (173). opposition bel Badinter mind, in this Having life. of aspects all to applied then is thinking binary this but position, an seizes “ideology rational), and strong as men and capability, reproductive their to due immobile and frail emotional, ( body the of truth the in rooted becomes sexes the of dualism the when priori were they that well so other each completed woman and man writes, she beginning, the In relationship. hierarchical Elisabeth Badinter ‘return’ its more but of aware becoming are we that theref is “It ourselves. of part stifled to have we androgynous, become structure androgynous our recognize “apprenticeship our precedes which memory” archaic “an share all we Since irrelevant). become again once will difference which in future a imagine knowledged the fact that androgyny can question and subvert the origin of oppositions that that oppositions of origin the subvert and question can androgyny that fact the knowledged d all aspects of knowledge” (7). knowledge” of aspects all d t s o srrsn ta feminists that surprising not is It sexes the of complementarity the how on reflects also Badinter The Rise and Fall of Androgyny in the 1970s in of Androgyny Fall and The Rise

indicated “the supremacy of the One or the lesser the or One the supremacy “theof indicated ieves it is possible to redeem androgyny for feminism since otherness need not need otherness since feminism for androgyny redeem to possible is it ieves per t cnet iaim (aLo 1) Sm hv wloe “the welcomed have Some 11). (MacLeod binarism” contest to appears puts “almost all “almost

it (167).it

upon this primary d primary this upon

powerful: N unlearn ” ot only are the two sexes assigned a superior and inferior inferior and superior a assigned sexes two the are only ot ore not so much the ‘advent’ of an androgynous nature androgynous an of ‘advent’ the much so not ore

(Badinter 169). In other words, in order to (once again) again) (once to order in words, other In 169). (Badinter would

eul ifrne n lan o t epes the express to how learn and difference sexual the masters of life, of masters the 18 ichotomy . . . . . ichotomy un o nrgn, a iue ht promising that, figure “a androgyny, to turn

- normative relationships” and “test the limits the “test and relationships” normative

. . . .

necessity of the Other” (5). However, However, (5). Other” the of necessity to differences, we should be able to to able be should we differences, to

te eun f h rpesd’ as repressed,’” the of return ‘the

and extends it to all levels of life life of levels all to it extends and ”

and there was nothing that nothing was there and a been had the view of of view the S ome

tu nd no a into rned

women as women have also have a CEU eTD Collection freedoms” imaginative and possibilities social identities, sexual of range a of expression no political value (Harris; for feminism Secor). had and women, of detriment the to difference sexual erase to threatened women, oppressed that myth patriarchal a merely was is of others for while Freeman), and tyranny Bazin Gelpi; (Heilbrun; the against struggle feminist for useful be could that figure neglected Androgyny (13). sexuality” and gender historical those for fascination moment particular hold to “seems explains, MacLeod Catriona seeminglyand terrifying” now, possible (162). a the in is “androgyny Secor, Cynthia wrote not,” or it about think (Weil history American in “megatrend” eleventh the it dubbed equality sociopolitical and f fight a into “integrated widely was it Notwithstanding, critics. and writers feminist by embraced universally or uncontroversial means no my was it though traction, otherness (Fayad 60). assimilating of way more one only is and it” accepting than rather femininity excludes which wholeness for desire patriarchal a of product “a is it that claiming heritage, Platonic its and ( gender”culturalof the construction in complicit already “always possibly and 9) (Hargreaves challenge” to seeks also it categories binary toward sam suspicion feeling stopped the at But 7). 5, (Brisson roles of division strict and couple, the and family the of role the organization, social specifically, more or, reality, our structure utemr, du Furthermore, as myth, androgynous The period? this in important so become concept this did why So D uringof feminism second inparticular, theconcept the wave androgyny ofa of gained lot s when cultures are actively engaged in rethinking the most basic assumptions about assumptions basic most the rethinking in engaged actively are cultures when s ring this time androgyny became particularly protean, “serving as the the as “serving protean, particularly became androgyny time this ring

between the sexes the between s

it, being aware that androgyny is “always bounded by the by bounded “always is androgyny that aware being it,

for some feminists provided a familiar but somewhat but familiar a provided feminists some for ” 19

(

Weil 145 Weil Fayad 61). Some have completely rejected it it rejectedcompletelyhave FayadSome 61). ),

and in 1984 in and 1). “Whether we choose to to choose we “Whether 1). ir – tm, eiit never feminists time, e

it is pertinent, popular, popular, pertinent, is it

Time or psychological psychological or

magazine even magazine

gender CEU eTD Collection H Tracy As options. social and behavior signified but body, the in located p a as androgyny of conceiving in Woolf followed Coleridge’s T. concep the of Samuel invoked she which reevaluation a for in basis the provided androgynous, be must mind great (1929), a that pronouncement Own” One’s of Room “A in 13) (MacLeod book seminal Heilbrun’s Carolyn of publication Anglo the in Woolf Virginia of reception implication “that important, thefinal, is of androgyny and most (191). realitysocial a as altogetherpower abandon could wecommunity, androgynous the creating v imposing hierarchical arbitrarily for androgyny of interpretations patriarchal the criticized She (164). collective” the of substructure the “as operate they that in behavior our affect they because andro reclaim to tried Dworkin In 186). Freeman and (Bazin generally more attitudes social in change a to lead would it because community ideal an of realization the to closer us bring of forms other all abolish would inequality gender ( culturally” matter longer sex “the of elimination a capabilities reproductive women’s Sex a for wish utopian a containing 10), (Hargreaves t the expense of the other half. other the of expense the t hs theoretical These (1970) Shulamith Firestone warned that due to the natural division of labor labor of division natural the to due that warned Firestone Shulamith (1970) t and its liberatory potential during the Second Wave. In fact, numerous authors authors numerous fact, In Wave. Second the during potential liberatory its and t alues onto what she saw as complementary forces. She was convinced that by that convinced was She forces. complementary as saw she what onto alues . Woolf’s famous call for an androgynous mind and the marriage of opposites opposites of marriage the and mind androgynous an for call famous Woolf’s .

eae ha debates distinction 11 . tes et vn ute ad rud ht h eiiain of elimination the that argued and further even went Others ).

gyny for feminism and stressed that myths are important important are myths that stressed and feminism for gyny T d

herefore, the end goal of feminist revo feminist of goal end the herefore,

– itself: genital differences between human beings would no no would beings human between differences genital itself:

en infcnl afce b to eeomns the developments: two by affected significantly been both men and women developed only half of themselves, of half only developed women and men both - American academic feminism of the ‘60s, and the the and ‘60s, the of feminism academic American 20

Toward a Recognition of Androgyny of Recognition a Toward

better and fairer society. In society. fairer and better

inequality yhc unity sychic – Woman Hating Woman

economic, racial, sexual sexual racial, economic, Androgyny .

lution would be the be would lution argreaves explains, explains, argreaves The Dialectic of Dialectic The

(1974) Andrea Andrea (1974)

a tu not thus was –

in 1973 in that is, is, that –

and –

CEU eTD Collection 15 Judaeo the Shakespeare, tragedy, (Greek literature” and myth of world vast “the to looks Heilbrun Wave. Second the of androgyny of concept the with engagements scholar Woolf Virginia devoted a incidentally, found in negati to positive from ( Papers” Studies Androgyny “The in published texts the of some and book Heilbrun’s as metaphysical. dichotomyman/woman the of idea rejectedthe and essentialism of critical were who Irigaray, Luce and Cixous Hélène Kristeva, Julia Moi, Toril as such authors by represented was phase the of volume second the of publication subsequent the and Association Language Modern of meeting annual the in Woolf of critique severe Elain by specific in concept, feminist a as androgyny toward attitude critical a by marked was phase second The androgyny. of recognition a for plea Heilbrun’s as well and of cooperation a for overlapping attitudes different men and women non as function can we not or whether but discussion, under really never was dissolution sexual

See, for example, Lem (1971), Annas (1978), Fitting (1985), and Fayad (1997). Fayad and Fitting (1985), (1978), Annas Lemexample,(1971), for See, ai el n e book her in Weil Kari oad Rcgiin f Androgyny of Recognition a Toward I section following the In nlddteWofa ocpino nrgn a apyhlgcl n otciel as ideal poetic and psychological a as androgyny of conception Woolfian the included

2.2, 1974) because I hold that they map a different range of attitudes to androgyny, to attitudes of range different a map they that hold I because 1974) 2.2,

Le Guin’s

phases: androgyny, feminism, and the critical difference. The first phase called phase first The difference. critical the and feminism, androgyny, phases:

oad nrgn i te eid ewe 16s n 19s no three into 1990s and 1960s between period the in androgyny toward n the - ovel

hierarchically (107). Women’s Studies Women’s ve, and also to a large extent correspond to the idea of idea the to correspond extent large a to also and ve, m

and inform many of asculine nrgn ad h Dna o Difference of Denial the and Androgyny A Literature of Their Own Their of Literature A

focus on what Weil calls the first and the second phase: phase: second the and first the calls Weil what on focus and fe and

journal (1974) devoted to t to devoted (1974) journal minine

17) y aoy Hibu ( Heilbrun Carolyn by (1973) 21 i ) ts

represents one of the most influential feminist influential most the of one represents

on the individual as well as institutional level institutional as well as individual the on analysesand critiques.

(1977), and a forum on androgyny at androgyny on forum a and (1977), he said he

19) categorize (1992) 15

- hita tradition, Christian meeting h ws not was, who

e Showalter’s Showalter’s e androgyny as as androgyny . The third third The . Women’s d

the

CEU eTD Collection Warren example, for see, discussion, detailed a For feminine. Stevenson, the including by masculine the of perfecting 17 16 d and aesthetics) of kind a as to sure makes also Heilbrun perversion, of Speaking (10). present” is ideal androgynous the that perverted or ludicrous protagon female and male the of roles the where works those in is “it says, she as roles: of reversal a to down boils androgyny case which in femininity. by perfected ultimately (xvii), impulses” ‘femininor ‘masculine’ either of intrinsicvirtues the on not values, currentour on reflection m redeem to offers “androgyny of vision particular this out, points Hargreaves As (xv). pejoratively and more, them promote to necessary now is it undervalued, fe the exalting by thinking binary in grounded firmly remains Heilbrun fact, In women. interchangeable and men not between are they that fact the only but themselves, roles the of “naturalness” women example, (for roles andindividuals inwhicha isopen fullrange toeveryone experience (ix, x). of in world a toward gender” of prison sexes r a suggests that ideal liberatory a represents her for Androgyny impulse feminine “the calls what of presence continuous the is, that androgyny”, of river hidden “the unearthing of aim the with few) a name to just Group, Bloomsbury the novel, English the history, medieval

In that sense, her visio her sense, that In 148. p. Weil, Kari also See Since for her “a full range of experience” translates into a less rigid ascription of gender of ascription rigid less a into translates experience” of range full “a her for Since

–

an act of balancing of act an Romanticism and the Androgynous Sublime the Androgynous and Romanticism suiiy y eiiig t (100). it” feminizing by asculinity minine. minine.

n is not that different from that of Romantic poets for whom androgyny represented a a represented androgyny whom for poets Romantic of that from different that not is n 17

Or, perhaps more troublingly, it can be seen as a sort of travestism, of sort a as seen be can it troublingly, more perhaps Or, e explains he

. She urges that we move away “from sexual polarization and the the and polarization sexual “from away move we that urges She .

her androgyne turns out to be yet another exam another yet be to out turns androgyne her may be aggressive and men tender), she does not undermine the undermine not does she tender), men and aggressive be may keep o te rsne f an of presence the or ”

feetae i fo “n nmlu pyia cniin of condition” physical anomalous “an from it ifferentiates

androgyny on the level of representation (in fact, (in representation of level the on androgyny which social roles and behavior can be freely chosen by chosen freely be can behavior and roles social which

that

22 16 (2010). ic fmnn tat ha traits feminine since

lhuh elrn nit hr oiin s “a is position her insists Heilbrun Although

s cn e eesd ihu appearing without reversed be can ist drogynous roles for female characters. characters. female for roles drogynous to e s te em “masculine” term the use conciliation between the the between conciliation ve

ple of masculinity masculinity of ple been drastically drastically been

she sees it sees she she e’ e’

CEU eTD Collection that concludes she Finally, Mother. the of fear givens; as masculinity and femininity takes male; feminized the of images up conjures androgyny that is objections other her Among (164). future” foreseeable the of reality the describes way no “in tak cannot which image an eternity, in perfection, of image static “a in rooted is androgyny that is objection main Secor’s politics. feminist for one powerful more a be might witch a or Amazon an of image the that suggested are “androgynes that proclaimed famously She (163). context social of devoid person a of image the up conjures it since use political no has which concept men and means,“what redefineand be may mean, it to feminist of position the address must we Harris, to According men. towards men of hostility conceal to managed had androgyny of discussion the which problem the confront to folly” is escape to seek we limitations and prejudices the by wholly suffused so myth a through regeneration own our seek “to Thus (175). themselves” within and homosexuals of fear a sub him disguise by represented by evidenced as 1970, early linkedidea sometimes to is ofandrogynyhomosexuality since it and bisexuality (xiii). the with uncomfortable be might herself, like readers, her that fearing (xii), hermaphroditism A rethinking Cynthia Secor similarly sees androgyny as a limiting, reactionary, and essentially male male essentially and reactionary, limiting, a as androgyny sees similarly Secor Cynthia jugation of women” (172). He (172). women” of jugation

is a false image of liberation whose purpose has been “the co “the been has purpose whose liberation of image false a is ”

th places stress on genital differences; has heterosexual bias; and bypasses the male male the bypasses and bias; heterosexual has differences; genital on stress places at has no positive value and is and value positive no has at Daniel A. Harris who argues that the myth of androgyny is androgyny of myth the that argues who Harris A. Daniel of androgyny and Heilbrun’s contribution contribution androgynyof Heilbrun’s and

discouraged people from embracing “normal homosexual impulses homosexual “normal embracing from people discouraged

Te nrgn Ppr” Te ot negative most The Papers”. Androgyny “The

points out that historically the term has been use been has term the historicallythat out points e into account the rough going of historical process” and and process” historical of going rough the account into e

“retrograde and “retrograde 23

“it is premature to unite with men” because men” with unite to premature is “it

male (183). had taken offensive” (175) offensive”

rarer than unicorns” (163) and (163) unicorns” than rarer -

optation, incorporation, or or incorporation, optation, a more critical tu morea

(181). Instead, we need need we Instead, (181). “ the sexist myth i myth sexist the . Androgyny for for Androgyny d to invo to d p osition rn in

–

the the the ke is n CEU eTD Collection Diffe“Sexual See an impasse. actually that is something solution “a as as a formulating seemingly by difference) ofsex(ual truth the at arriving difficultyof the registers it symbolically but “realness,” its of terms real” the in in traces leaves paradoxically, not described better be can androgyny 19 (173.) inexperience” our observe 18 first the how traces she article her In masculine. the by completed one feminine andro of sorts possible two are there that claims She (151). homosexuality/lesbianism or bisexuality physical of discussion e as conceived psychic a “to refer to term the uses She it. reject outright not 242). r refer toreality too it takes she sense, that in and for blueprint a socie future a as or action political androgyny posits it that in misguided is concept the of Secor’s understanding that claim further I identity). that on up giving entail would (which androgynous our feminine find to have and we that suggests masculine it because of categories the perpetuates androgyny that criticism own her defeats argument this then proposing), is Secor womanhood strong to road the be the seems ‘not merely being stop to have women If androgyny. into “alienated” be themselves groupletting before a as identityseparatewomen’s (169). aggress and power of means the up take and first privately meditate to need women eality in the first place; myth may be ideological, bu ideological, be may myth place; first the in eality

I am shamelessly misappropriating from Alenka Zupančič’s discussion of sexual difference here, but perhaps perhaps but here, difference sexual of discussion Zupančič’s Alenka from misappropriating shamelessly am I The fn ti pit oeht otaitr i ta i apas o al o a etbihn of establishing an for call to appears it that in contradictory somewhat point this find I Barbara Charlesworth Gelpi, on the other hand, approaches androgyny critically, but does but critically, androgyny approaches hand, other the on Gelpi, Charlesworth Barbara

same criticism is made by D. Harris, who says that androgyny “corresponds to nothing we commonly wecommonly nothing to “corresponds whoandrogyny that says Harris, D. by made issame criticism

18 xisting in all individuals” and, similarly to Heilbrun, Heilbrun, to similarly and, individuals” all in xisting , 19

misses the mark since myth cannot be evaluated in terms of its proximity the beevaluatedits misses mark of since cannot myth interms to

gynes: the masculine one completed by the feminine, and the the and feminine, the by completed one masculine the gynes: ty. She fails to consider androgyny as a myth or a metaphor, metaphor, a or myth a as androgyny consider to fails She ty.

(my emphasis). In other words, androgyny may not be “in the real,” but real,” the “in be not may androgyny words, other In emphasis). (my literally. - man’ and become and man’

That is why her criticism that androgyny does not not does androgyny that criticism her why is That 24 own identity as women before we can become become can we before women as identity own

rence and Ontology,” Ontology,” and rence t it is “neither false nor true nor false “neither is it t

powerful in their own right (this right own their in powerful

unity, either potential or actual, or potential either unity, distances herself from the the from herself distances nonexistence e - flux flux 32 (2012). 32

in the the in ”

(Lincoln real

kind iveness iveness

that, that,

of of CEU eTD Collection opposites, and then, having realized that “the whole or complete human being is is being human complete or whole “the that realized having then, and opposites, principles, two the of interdependence the perceive to manage ultimately sex. biological from genderseparate constructedandculturally with as wavepreoccupation second inferr be can it and sex, not of terms in expects (185 work and personality, behavior, society what determine longer no will genitals child’s “the culture: wholeness” of experience “the define Freeman as and androgyny Bazin situation. historical own our of terms in it specify and it alter must we new; be must concept our However, (185). androgyny” of definitions past beyond must we as just but past, the by shaped been have too “we past, the in roots have concepts like just because concept, the keep should we that examples of no be to seem there her, to according fact, in tradition; “masculine” the under it categorize likewise would she that assumed safely be can it but androgyny, of idea Woolf’s mention not anta arehierarchicaland opposites two the which androgynyin of view binary the beyond go not does thus and represented, equally are feminine the and masculine male of world Gelpi Interestingly, new (157). androgynes” brave a into ourselves “talk to not careful be to ought we that warns Jung. Judaeo the through persisted has androgyne oevr acrig o hm te egn o te ae n fml picpe would principles female and male the of merging the them, to according Moreover, argue Freeman Alma and Bazin Topping Nancy Vision” Androgynous “The in Finally,

Nevertheless, she considers the theories of androgyny as potentially liberating, but but liberating, potentially as androgyny of theories the considers she Nevertheless, - lead lead Chris the feminine typethe feminine androgyny of to an overcoming of sexual difference as well as gender inequality. If we we If inequality. gender as well as difference sexual of overcoming an to tian tradition, to Romantic poets and Saint and poets Romantic to tradition, tian ed that the stress on the psychic instead of the physical reflects the reflects physical the of instead psychic the on stress the that ed out

different historical interpretations historical different - 6). Like Gelpi, they use androgyny as relating to gender, relatingto androgynytheyas Like use Gelpi, 6).

fails to see the possibility of androgyny in which the which in androgyny of possibility the see to fails .

that belongs to the domain of society and and society of domain the to belongs that

o eod u on at w ms go must we past, own our beyond go - Simonian then s, and finally Freud and and Freud finally and s, – gonistic. She also does also Shegonistic.

e a tased the transcend can we from Greek myth and and myth Greek from can can CEU eTD Collection self it with comes that power the and fantas the embodies androgyne the difference disavowing by sense, that In sex). other the (of loss a by marked subject desiring split a is hand, other the on ( consciousness” of dawn the at stage objectless earlier pre for stands pre the original to linked an Being 19). (Hargreaves to separation or division involve return not does that state nostalgic symbiotic a signals also It (63). divide gender the of transgression, constructs that difference very the of androgynous the that theorizes imaginary the of domain 2.3 changesocial structure.and orderand inits thus utopian the is inethics a implies also change radical This (211). being” human new the of Rebirth “the about bring non cooperative, change of radical injection a involves that ideal an is them for Androgyny (190). other” each with relationship creative a through existence their define opposites, conflicting be to appear although principles, two “the that and elements” female and male from derives being predominantly either androgynou pyhaayi raig fee b Facte ata (19 Pacteau Francette by offered reading psychoanalytic A - -

Oedipal, “recall[ing] the auto the “recall[ing] Oedipal, Androgyn sufficiency”(70). - eia dom Oedipal

a desire for the end of desire desire of end the for desire a s” (191), we will transcend duality. In contrast to Gelpi’s view of and of view Gelpi’s to contrast In duality. transcend will we (191), s” y as Appearance and and Appearance y as i o eprec i wih ifrne s ncnwegd androgyny unacknowledged, is difference which in experience of ain

masculine

and - - posits posits irrhcl non hierarchical, looking figure presents us with an impossibility of the erasure erasure the of impossibility an with us presents figure looking

or - ,

eroticism of early of eroticism

and resolves “the narcissistic desire for completeness and and completeness for desire narcissistic “the resolves and feminine it the

and contains the wish to return to the plentitude of the the of plentitude the to return to wish the contains and as an entity, but a symptom of symptom a but entity, an as

s s ujcs n tu rpeet a eil o a or denial, a represents thus and subjects as us (In)visibilit ,

26 Bazin and Freeman believe that “each human human “each that believe Freeman and Bazin

- elitis - infancy, or perhaps more accurately more perhaps or infancy, structures t Pacteau y of Diff y of y of regaining one’s ‘lost half’ half’ ‘lost one’s regaining of y 68). The post The 68). 9 lcts nrgn i the in androgyny locates 89) erence no u society” our into

repressed desire repressed - Oedipal subject, Oedipal rogyny as as rogyny

that will will that –

they they “the She the the

CEU eTD Collection the as defined be would Kristeva for love since love, not “a does ofsigns, emergence androgyne The (70). otherless” faultless, narcissism (masculine) 20 other to relation in only but directly, expressed be cannot that shifter”) (“a meaning shifting i read we that proposes he Instead, avoided. or for aimed be to condition of kind this believes he because (Harris feminism to inimical even and useless therefore is and real nothing to refers androgy that claiming novels, other among analyzes, failure: referentcannot bycontained the impossible be thebody. signification; female and male both being of female, androgyne the of status contradictory The (81). masculine” “c necessarily is and symbolic” the outside exist “in an represent to impossible is it Pacteau, to to seems criticized often as androgyny, why also is That (80). overdetermined” invisible the of side the hermaphrodite non a or identity sexual express as being of lack a Ultimately, s one that figure a only but street, the in androgyne an encounter cannot One 78). (77, distance” a of object “the is it appearance; and look between e as ees

In Pacteau In Tales of Love of Tales eoig edr n cec Fiction Science in Gender Decoding androgynous preserve the gender binary gender the preserve

argues that an that argues as a result, a as

whose body is uncovered and flaunts and uncovered is body whose

( 1987), Kristeva Julia 1987), signification in which “he admires himself in another androgyne androgyne another in himself admires “he which in

y s h ipsil referent impossible the is ny (62)

the androgyno the drogyny does not exist in the real; rather, it resides in the relation the in resides it rather, real; the in exist not does drogyny

a ; and - eiig self desiring, doyy hs eog t te re of order the to belongs thus ndrogyny

thatis The Left Hand of Darknes of Hand Left The

“appears at once formally impoverished and semantically semantically and impoverished formally once at “appears

reads androgyny as preceding the system of signification: it is a it signification: of system the preceding as androgyny reads thinking misses the point in that it posits androgyny as a a as androgyny posits it that in point the misses thinking undecipherable

while at the same time trying to overcome to trying time same the at while ed by the by ed us representation is always a compromise, or even a a even or compromise, a always is representation us - ufcet en (62, being sufficient –

(2002), in the chapter on androgyny where he he where androgyny on chapter the in (2002),

27 - between” of genders since “the image does not does image “the since genders of between” oiin i lgcly usd ay ytm of system any outside logically it positions

ambiguous sexual appearance suggests a non a suggests appearance sexual ambiguous

without its counterpart” (70). itscounterpart” without aught up between the feminine and the the and feminine the between up aught . He rejects the criticism that androgyny androgyny that criticism the rejects He .

its visibility, the androgyne is androgyne the visibility, its searching s , Brian Attebery follows Pacteau in in Pacteau follows Attebery Brian , –

that of being neither male nor nor male neither being of that 20

and sees only himself, rounded, rounded, himself, only sees and 0. s poe t opposed As 70). ok ta “wls n the in “dwells that look” appearing

y oe feminists, some by a a in with sign a as t it not , . According According . located on located ; Secor ;

form of of form being the o ) - .

CEU eTD Collection of constituents asthenorm, as (woman negation and opposition through 150 Attebery, (133, ourselves seeing of ways new and identity lies term the of usefulness real the where slippage that precisely is it and noticing, our without another narcissism, balance, fashion, decadence, androgyny Sinc signs. “man

. ”

because

rsns calne o h bnr sse ta ses o eie t constituents its define to seeks that system binary the to challenge a presents i i “ohn i isl, bt ny a place “a only but itself,” in “nothing is it e can in different contexts different in can

it invites us to us invites it r esultantly question

challenge our assumptions our challenge

st an d for a whole range of things: wholeness, bisexuality, wholeness, things: of range whole a for d and so on (133). The meaning The (133). on so and ing 28

the the “ no neutrality and t - man - akr tnig o ohr things,” other for standing marker ).

” of expressions new generates and Androgyny and ) universality universality salse oe f the of one establishes

slip then, , s

fro of m one sign to sign one m according to to according the catthe e g o ry ry CEU eTD Collection but, does, theory like much gender concerning issues in society androgynous an about 6 (Christian differently read to you compels that something (Butler, (155 novel athinking bywriting feminist with engaging her for and gender,” of meaning the and sexuality of meaning the understand and mid the in that notes Guin Le Necessary?” Gender to order patriarchy” (210). describing SF, American recent cul the of absence the condemned further She organsintellectual monsters by rape instant to subject reduce been had they where fiction, science in women of representation (1975) Other” the and SF 1930s the of works and voices new to fiction the field of of seenan scie andreferred Waveopening can as Feminism up toasSecond be Ch. in detail more I science1960s and in the New 1970s,whichin discussed Wavehave fiction of movement the 3.1 Ursula K. Le Guin’s Le K. Ursula e Wv authors Wave New

3. Situating Situating

The Left Bodies find new tools for challenging the existing, primarily gender, assumptions. In “Is “Is In assumptions. gender, primarily existing, the challenging for tools new find The Left Hand of Darkness Handof Left The

135), literature can induce a feeling of “surprise that comes from reading reading from comes that “surprise of feeling a induce can literature 135),

Hand of Darkness –

. On this subject, in her scathing critique of male elitism in SF in elitism male of critique scathing her in subject, this On .

1.2 or, at best, loyal little wives or mistresses of accomplished heroes” (208).heroes” accomplished of mistresses or wives loyallittle best, at or, .

tlzd cec fcins blt t evso atraie oite in societies alternative envision to ability fiction’s science utilized The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The o eaiuae te e Wv cicdd ih ht s commonly is what with coincided Wave New the recapitulate, To

a reaction against sexist and racial stereotypes in the science fictio science the in stereotypes racial and sexist against reaction a ,

e un rt ta fmns hle se lgt n the on light shed helped feminism that wrote Guin Le The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The it –

as “brainless regressivism” and “a perfect baboon baboon perfect “a and regressivism” “brainless as r old or

- 29

ad cetss eee b hprrpy f the of hypertrophy by desexed scientists maid tural and racial Other and the proletariat from from proletariat the and Other racial and tural

- 1960s she started to feel the need to “find to need the feel to started she 1960s

was published in 1969 and it belongs to belongs it and 1969 in published was because it because - 6). Being a legitimate place of theory theory placeof legitimate a Being 6).

not only enabled her to articulate to her enabled only not 2). Le Guin’s literary narrative narrative literary Guin’s Le 2).

features d to “squeaking dolls dolls “squeaking to d

novum

“Am this meant this ( Suvin erican ) nce nce in n CEU eTD Collection functioning. and invention ofits the details novel, later a of center the at is LHD in appears briefly that ansible ch the match not does books stories short of collection Darkness 22 Wittig’s 21 of union intergalactic the represent to climate) its of because Winter as known (also Gethen TheAi, aTerra, nativeEnv protagonist who issentas isGenly ofthe an planet abnormal. self defined “properly” of“fully” is perspective the becomes and matter thedomain human of whereby the equally ins often their of because however, exist; not does alien the of category the that appear would it humanoid), least at (or human are beings all which in universe a is it Since 164). (Barbour encounters” alien of number any for provide . . . variety its in marvelous a produced time same the at but continuous, historically “thusand expanding, single, is that universe humanoid had They galaxy. the throughout planets habitable of number a across species humanoid different scattered ago, time long a had, who Hainish the by populated stories short and novels connected loosely of number consequencesgender ofabolishing ( transgressive a as well as trendy a time the at and served it a platform as patriarchy against struggles of forefront the in was literature fact, In perspectives. multiple people androgynous an of form the

See, for example, Doris Le example,Doris for See, Namely, The Left The Before proceeding to discuss t discuss to proceeding Before Les Guérillères Les

human. The definition of the human, as I hope to show in the following sections, sections, following the in show to hope I as human, the of definition The human. (1969), (1969),

oanns World Rocannon’s

- Hand of Darkness of Hand reflexively: The Dispossessed The

(1969), or Margaret Atwood’s orMargaret (1969),

The Birthday of the World the of Birthday The

ssing’s ssing’s only the self is truly human, while the other is perverse, deviant, and deviant, perverse, is other the while human, truly is self the only oooia hsoy f h Hiih nvre Fr xml, h dvc cle the called device the example, For universe. Hainish the of history ronological

for ideas articulating feminist (1966), (1966), [It]

The Golden Notebook Golden The (1974), (1974), is part of part is

is a universe full of ‘humans’ who disp who ‘humans’ of full universe a is he structure of the novel, I shall I novel, the of structure he lnt f Exile of Planet

Attebery The Word for World Is Forest Is World for Word The –

t a hl u apoc te rbe fo feh and fresh from problem the approach us help can it Le Guin’s Le

(2002). It should be noted that the publication history of the the of history publication the that noted be should It (2002).

, although not uncontested, not although , urmountable differences, these beings are not all not are beings these differences, urmountable 129) 30 The Edible Woman Edible The

(1966), (1966), (1962), Sylvia Plath’s Sylvia (1962), Plath’s .

so - called Hainish Cycle that consists of a a of consists that Cycle Hainish called iy f Illusions of City and criticism, The Dispossessed The 22

ht ae lc i te universe the in place take that

(

1969 (1976), (1976),

briefly summarize the plot. plot. the summarize briefly ). The Bell Jar Bell The

21 The Telling The (1967),

, which is concerned with concerned is which , lay enough variety to variety enough lay tool for exploring the the exploringfor tool while

h Lf Han Left The (1963), Monique (1963), oy tothe planet androgyny

(2000), and the and (2000),

was of d

CEU eTD Collection practice. common isa It in kemmer. withpeople other sex 23 and decides inthe other thebureaucratic major totryOrgoreyn. hisluck nation, Karhide leaves too he life, his for fearing and, failure a been has mission his realizes Genly Karhide, flee to forced and traitor a declared suddenly is Estraven When Genly. by situation authori social of principle i own his by also and Estrav by caused is out, turns it as suspicion, Genly’s of. distrustful is Genly whom Estraven Minister Prime the by promoted is t order in Argaven King mad the with meeting conquest. we what to relates (L mobilize capacityto is the of lack a by things, amongother explained, war of absence the and scale, massive a on never but exist, does Violence rape. or war becomes exploitation of object o an as ‘woman’ category the like,” the and homes, keep i opines, Rudy Kathy si absent is concept 8). ( penetrated” be and penetrate to potential same the and equipment same the with or r a male As characteristics. sexual either female assumes individual an which during sexuality strong and active of period somer biolog their from proceed that roles gender no have theythat is Gethen of people the of featuredistinctive most The Ekumen. calledthe worlds 83 bsolete (35). Furthermore, there is very little sexual frustration on Gethen, on frustration sexual little very is there Furthermore, (35). bsolete

Partly because

Genly first lands in Karhide, a monarchy, where he spends two years trying to arrange a a arrange to trying years two spends he where monarchy, a Karhide, in lands first Genly A ny Gethenian can bear a child and choose any social role; consequently, gender as a a as gender consequently, role; social any choose and child a bear can Gethenian ny

–

sexually inactive or latent, but every 22 to 23 days they enter they days 23 to 22 every but latent, or inactive sexually

there are are there recognize as recognize nce the social position of position social the nce

f there is no single group of people that can “give birth, raise children, raise birth, “give can that people of group single no is there f kemmerhouses nability to master master to nability ty ” (LHD 14), all of which lead which of all 14), (LHD ”

masculine values of activity, dominance, and the desire for desire the and dominance, activity, of values masculine

in most towns and cities and most towns in en’s lack of “a true sex” (I sex” true “a of lack en’s esult

of that particular physiognomy physiognomy particular that of shifgrethor 31 a o persuade him to join the Ekumen. His cause His Ekumen. the join to him persuade o n

individual is not determined by biology. biology. by determined not is individual “h utasaal ad all and untranslatable “the , cl e. ot f h tm te ae in are they time the of Most sex. ical –

places where people may come and havemay and come wherepeople places s

to a number of misreadings of the the of misreadings of number a to

return to this issue in Ch. Ch. in issue this to return HD 51) which Le Guin Guin Le which 51) HD kemmer “both ‘sexes’ come ‘sexes’ “both 23

no nationalism, no

Mendelsohn Mendelsohn or estrus, a a estrus, or - important 3.5 As As )

CEU eTD Collection in it do to but truth, the tell to is latter the of business the that claiming other, the on novelists of futurological fores handmaiden “a as function sometimes indeed can SF while that and fact,” fiction is nor truth ( context” collective specifica “a as fiction science of view his and Suvin Darko of that recalls position Her xiv). xvii, (LHD descriptive but predictive, not is it future;” the about isn’t fiction “science Guin, Le to According present. the upon reflect thought a as book t read we that proposes she Instead, genre. the delineating for insufficient device simplistic a as sees she which future) the into it projecting and trend present a (taking extrapolation 3.2 Ekumen’s of vision intergalactic cooperation. f shame to put is Orgoreynrival their that pleased is and Ekumen the join to agrees finally Argaven King border. the cross to tryingwhile death to shot is traitor considereda still is Estravenwho while Genly and mission.succeed, they his odds, all resume Against can Genly that so Karhide to back get to order in glacier, vast a ice, interrogated.Finally, Estravencomes rescue tohis a and journey they set theGobrin onacross c work a Farm, Voluntary Pulefen the to sent and arrested much fact, in are and cause his about care not Orgotathe do that Gradually realizes hetool. political himselfbecomea let to not byEstraven Even though he seems to be warmly welcomed by the Orgota politicians, Genly i Genly politicians, Orgota the by welcomed warmly be to seems he though Even Le Guin draws a line between prophets, clairvoyants and futurologists on the one hand, and Le andfuturologistson the and one a Guindraws hand, line between clairvoyants prophets, from herself distances Guin Le novel, the of edition 1976 the to introduction her In The Use of Lies in Science Fiction in ofLies The Use or secretly trying to dispose of Genly and not being the first nation to accept the the accept to nation first the being not and Genly of dispose to trying secretly or - experiment Metamorph ight,” this ismerely this ight,” (28). “secondaryfunction” its

hs proe s y o en t pred to means no by is purpose whose , 4. ui wrs ht otlgcly at s o pragmatic not is art “ontologically, that warns Suvin 84). ., lly roundabout way of commenting on the author’s the on commenting of way roundabout lly

manages to send out a signal to his ship to land, to ship his to signal a out send to manages

like Karhiders, afraid of him of afraid Karhiders, like

m wee e s rge and drugged is he where amp

ict the future, but to to but future, the ict . He is suddenly is He . s warned warned s he he CEU eTD Collection lie, A be. may function its what and approached be to is fiction of work a how to as hint meant not is position authorial manipulative seemingly true” not is what of conceive to language?) for capacity our to (related capacity our on predicated is thinking introduction which of (one truth the telling of ways multiple are there and truth between relationship that precisely is position agai itself self for purpose specific ( content” intellectual its as well as fiction science isaquestioneliminated; it ratheran answer. than means which device, heuristic a as it using but setup, sexual Gethenian the recommending not is she that on commentary her (1976), Necessary?” Gender p to not is xv) (LHD occur” or exist will never and did never which events and places, persons, “inventing of purpose and fails, and f a as seen is fiction science happens, that When works these that fact are nevertheless the ideas, of originality the or predictions their of accuracy the on their of basis the on not judged (wrongly) often are fiction,” “genre called Ch. in out pointed peculi “a It would appear that Le Guin’s intention behind writing the 1976 introduction is to redeem to is introduction 1976 the writing behind intention Guin’s Le that appear would It r n dvos a” LD v, ht s t tl le i odr o el h tuh A I As truth. the tell to order in lies tell to is, that xv), (LHD way” devious and ar nst attack, particularly the attack that it fails to tell the truth” (30). But Le Guin’s Guin’s Le But (30). truth” the tell to fails it that attack the particularly attack, nst – that the novel is an experiment that tries to see what happens when gender is gender when happens what see to tries that experiment an is novel the that also

that to that literary fiction fiction 1.1 if it succeeds, because then it stops being fiction (Murray Walker 30). The The 30). Walker (Murray fiction being stops it then because succeeds, it if –

, since science fiction science since , n u cpct fr ly for capacity our on The Norton Book of Science Fiction Science of Book Norton The

and to and - artifacts and not blueprints or prophecies sometimes gets forgotten. forgotten. gets sometimes prophecies or blueprints not and artifacts commentary in literature is the highly practical one of defending defending of one practical highly the is literature in commentary ropose a new model for humanity, for model new a ropose urge the critics to study “its literary techniques and devices as devices and techniques literary “its study to critics the urge Norton

5. ene ury akr xlis ht “one that explains Walker Murray Jeanne 25). ( as well as utopian as well as 33 n o iaiig 2) Ti prdxcl and paradoxical This (29). imagining or ing

ailure: both if it claims to predict the future future the predict to claims it if both ailure: The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The

fiction is not straightforward not is fiction to disorient the reader, but reader, the disorient to , paradoxi ,

(1997) ) as

novels Le Guin Guin Le cally, –

she writes that “human that writes she , belonging to the so the to belonging ,

is to lie). In another another In lie). to is literary value, but but value, literary emphasizes in “Is “Is in emphasizes . She is insistent insistent is She . provide a provide

and that and - CEU eTD Collection those of intentions the read to failure Genly’s by is, that object,” its to relation dominant its in neutra supposed the and imperialism cultural of critique a providing as novel the reads example, for Fayad, Mona (123). unthinkable” is it where there even norm the of model the reestablishes and normative, an to inherent are limitations these Jameson, self of lack its and discourse scientific the of limitations the to points categories his of applicabilityuniversal was neutral,his position objective and unproblematic. been avouchedhave that might experience, he tothat Prior wayoflife. Gethenian teachings the and having after only uncertainty of principle the embrace to come has who person a of that is writes Genly which from position the Yet biased. and story one up make they together that and fa these of none that insists Genly 1), (LHD best like they fact the choose to free are readers the though Even 43). (Bickman perspectives and voices of variety its of because is it story whose sure not am (“I of consists story the voices of multiplicity the underlines and mine”) 1). (LHD he sentence first very t the between distinction the in collapses fact, In imagination. the of matter a is truth that statement matter of the(LHD imagination” xix). “a or perspective, of question a artifact, an is truth the that is xviii) (LHD lies” circumstantial ( question into reality puts that a for word another is which Genly Ai makes a similar disclaimer at the beginning of his account, repeating Le Guin’s Guin’s Le repeating account, his of beginning the at disclaimer similar a makes Ai Genly His inability to abandon his preconceptions about gender and reconsider the vali the reconsider and gender about preconceptions his abandon to inability His ) LD ) I cn e rud ht te oe ahee uiy o i sie f but of, spite in not unity achieves novel “the that argued be can It 1). (LHD ”) Moreover, Genly refuses the privileged authorship position (“The story is not all all not is story (“The position authorship privileged the refuses Genly Moreover, - reflexivity when it comes to understanding radical difference. According to to According difference. radical understanding to comes it when reflexivity lity of anthropology. By means of “mimicking male scientific objectivity scientific male “mimicking of means By anthropology. of lity metaphor, is at the heart of all fiction; it is an essential maneuver maneuver essential an is it fiction; all of heart the at is metaphor, Norton ruth and fiction: “I’ll make my report as if I told a story” story” a told I if as report my make “I’ll fiction: and ruth

–

31). The ultimate lesson of these “elaborately “elaborately these of lesson ultimate The 31). a story that is necessarily incomplete, fragmented incomplete, necessarily is that story a thropology as a discipline, which is “necessarily is which discipline, a as thropology 34

xoe t te Handdara the to exposed cts are false false are cts dity and and dity

CEU eTD Collection to join. world the persuade and connection a establish to Envoysent an is before its inhabitants to are myth 24 and romance, story, adventure dystopia, Orwellian straightSF, novel, political the narrative, travel the find we novel the In (267). differentkinds” n of anthology virtual a constituting thereby intertwined, and imposed artfully modes narrative of group heterogeneous a from “constructed is, that discontinuities,” in suggests way” (Bickman 42). meaningful aesthetically and organic, functional, a in SF in wedded be can content and “form a whole seamless a form to together come sections different these that argued have critics Some Genly. by narrated also events the of some on perspective own his provide which notebook Estraven’s from excerpts Investigator first the of notes field the and myths, tales, are they plot: the to related directly not are chapters clock and calendar Gethenian the on appendix an and history, and myths voice. narrative sole the not is he 42), (Bickman it in appear that materials various the ordering and selecting of 3.3 the Othera mere as ofoneself. image interpret to trying in inherent dangers the and (65) eye” the scientific the of of neutrality supposed fallibility “the consider to us invites Guin Le people, genderless to roles feminine masculin of assigning repeated and prejudices his of because accurately him around

Investigators are sent by the Ekumen to study a world and its society and culture without revealing who they who revealing without culture and society its and world a study to Ekumen the by sent are Investigators

tes hwvr hv qetoe te oe’ utmt unity. ultimate novel’s the questioned have however, Others, charge in and book” the of consciousness structuring “the be to seems Genly though Even Generic Discontinu Generic rhelge o te Future the of Archaeologies 24

ocrig h ise f G of issue the concerning

h novel The ities d that nd

lo contains also h Lf Hn o Darkness of Hand Left The

35 (2005) that the novel is based on “generic “generic on based is novel the that (2005) tein eult. ute, or hpes are chapters four Further, sexuality. ethenian

Estraven’s

account

(267) s go eape f how of example good a is f , aeo, o e for Jameson, ield reports, Gethenian Gethenian reports, ield . But despite these these despite But . . raie tad of strands arrative Six out of twenty of out Six

xample, xample, and e

CEU eTD Collection the in which and Karhide’ by interrupted it is because is notend realized of, critical is Jameson that system the of foreshadowing a already is this war, for preparation But Orgoreyn. in farms 26 successively. only sex cantakeeither on (sexual time same the at sexes both of 25 concludesJameson (275). as itself,” history of social) political, (economic, determinisms multiple the from “released traditional a not is it though Even capitalism. without West the of history the imagine to attempt its in lies strength greatest novel’s the said be can it sense, that In societies. commercial their with links positivism: of refusal a for opposed is ignorance of stand valorization Karhide in principles religious Handdara the capital”(269 monopolylate of system total “the in immersion reader’sown the to au the of affirmation symbolic “a as understood be to basically, is, it progress: linear of idea the of repudiation a implies technology to indifference Karhide’s like just dynamics, Gethen on violence institutionalized of lack (the bias pacifist novel’s the Secondly, (277). system” market the of dynamic inner “the Gethenians “‘no a for desire of Karhide, isthepeculiar third the is theme is first The novel. the in finds he that (themes) material of types four the between homology w coherence is there contends, Jameson discontinuities,

There are instances of institutionalized violence on Gethen Gethen on violence institutionalized of instances are There characteristics the exhibit not do they because hermaphrodite as sexuality Gethenian characterize not would I What ultimately brings these themes together is a “subterranean drive” towards utopia utopia towards drive” “subterranean a is together themes these brings ultimately What the Genthenians’ hermaphroditic sexuality, hermaphroditic Genthenians’ the Utopia, exuality for Jameson signifies a rejection of the kind of desire that he equateswith he that desireof kind the of rejection signifiesa Jameson forexuality - place’ of a collectivity untormented by sex or history” (279). To start with, start To (279). history” or sex by untormented collectivity a of place’ it contains the contains it since Orgoreyn is shown in the novel as moving towards capitalism, nationalism, and a and nationalism, capitalism, towards moving as novel the in shown is Orgoreyn since

an unhistorical society (276). society unhistorical an

difference is not inscribed in their bodies but rather the lack thereof), but thereof), lack the rather but bodies their in inscribed not is difference

utopian impulse impulse utopian

ecology,mythology fourth andreligion is and the (267). to the teachings of Meshe in Orgoreyn which Jameson which Orgoreyn in Meshe of teachings the to 26 rvas ciiu o growth of critique a reveals ) 36 s joining the Ekumen. s joining the

which 25 –

for example, the secret police or the voluntary the or police secret the example, for tonomy of the organism” in opposition in organism” the of tonomy the second is the political organization political the is second the hich stems from an essential structural essential an from stems hich can be found in a vision of humanity humanity of vision a in found be can

Thirdly, the cold climate ought climate cold the Thirdly,

- orien - 70). Lastly, 70). e power ted –

a CEU eTD Collection role. and position social one’s determine sexuality to have or biology either the viewthat or 27 topolog sad “the traces hermaphroditism determinism, bodily from flight a or body, the of disappearance the of utopia the enacts androgyny if Thus, (6). imagination” the to everything “leaves and disembodied is androgyne the while imagination,” As body. the of visibility absolute the signifies and sex of order the to belongs hermaphroditism 74). (Pacteau body” the of uncovering the gesture: one in “dwells distinction the hermaphroditism: is This indiscernible. identity to belongs novel the in represented as androgyny that said be can it sense, that In former. the from proceed not need latter the that claim the make to order in biology) of interpretation social the to related betw distinction the maintain to needs novel the that suggest also I essence. than rather relation and potentiality a as closed; of instead ended androgyny as of notion the uses he means which detrimental, necessarily as desire posits and argument fram that In violence. sex from freedom which in (274) fantasy” human ancient “an as war of) absence (the of theme the to relation in exclusively reads he which com it when reductive somewhat as regarded be can approach Marxist strictly his However, book). Jameson’s of subject main theis that all, (after general in thinking utopian of limitations and structure the deliberationon

I would not say that Gethenians are free from sex (if by sex Jameson means “biological sex”), but from gender, gender, from but sex”), “biological means Jameson sex by (if sex from free are Gethenians that say not would I This interpretation is certainly impressive, and its its and impressive, certainly is interpretation This I, on the other hand, would like to read Le Guin’s representation of androgyny as open as androgyny of representation Guin’s Le read to like would hand, other the on I, agevs rus te emprdt bd “os’ lae l that all leave “doesn’t body hermaphrodite the argues, Hargreaves hl adoyy tns o te niiiiy f edr n oltrto o difference, of obliteration and gender of invisibility the for stands androgyny While a historical

the order of gender and signifies its erasure by virtue of making gender gender making of virtue by erasure its signifies and gender of order the

wr, aeo’ raig ipiis ehna sxaiy o i his fit to sexuality Gethenian simplifies reading Jameson’s ework, , or,inhisterminology,,

es to understanding the implications of Gethenian sexuality, sexuality, Gethenian of implications the understanding to es also

I want to draw the line between androgyny and and androgyny between line the draw to want I 37

een sex (as related to biology) and gender (as (as gender and biology) to related (as sex een as as a desire f 27

eoe eutd ih reo from freedom with equated becomes raet otiuin is n the in lies contribution greatest or thehistory. endor of y of the body” by presenting an an presenting by body” the of y

uh o the to much

- CEU eTD Collection (29). 28 people these that imagines and solution, a sexuality of kind this consider not does definitely pr psychic of set new whole “a to leading potentially as this sees he and kemmer, during female or male become will one whether knows never one indeterminism: sexual by caused anxiety the about wonders He (23). system” a such in destiny harshness individual’s cruel “the show to failing of Guin Le accuses he which in (1971) novel the of review critical quite but respectful his in Lem Stanislaw author fiction science Polish 3.4 completely deeplytroublesome. butalso disruptive and visible, is sex which in society, own of image opposite the be to seems This it). to according arranged invisible everyday with interfere not does time it (because same the at is sexuality that said be can it So 99). (LHD sexuality inactive and active of cycle the fit to shaped is society whole the of structure the that and kemmer of plenty is there that and sex by unaffected is life daily the that states she place one in kemmer: and somer between tension uneasy this reveal Oppong Tot Ong Investigator first the of notes The domina overwhelmingly is it kemmer during while somer, during only Gethenians of life a as sexuality o problem the escape cannot (Foucault, “Utopian I which from place” absolute “the as body the plentitude: overdetermined

In Furthermore, rather than following Jameson in claiming that “Gethenian physiology solves solves physiology “Gethenian that claiming in Jameson following than rather Furthermore, Some po Some

Men’s Only Galactic Freak Galactic Only Men’s The Empire of Signs of Empire The

separate tential problems resulting from the Gethenian sexual set up are outlined by the the by outlined are up set sexual Gethenian the from resulting problems tential problem f sex” by doing away with sustained desire (274), I contend it articulates articulates it contend I (274), desire sustained with away doing by sex” f

room made for it, but in another she admits th admits she another in but it, for made room

Body

( 1982

with no (easy) solutions. After all, sexuality is absent from the social social the from absent is sexuality all, After solutions. (easy) no with ” 229 ” ),

Roland Barthes wrote that in the in that wrote Barthes Roland

- 30). - Show

life) and ubiquitous (because the whole society is society whole the (because ubiquitous and life) 38

W est

“sex is everywhere, everywhere, is “sex 28

at Gethenians are ruled by by ruled are Gethenians at oblems” (23). Lem (23). oblems” except in sexuality in except of the the of nt. nt. ” CEU eTD Collection 92). i 29 them. to back reflected gender about ideas their having of deprived been have would readers narrator sole the been Estraven Had “normal”. is what about preconceptions own his/her reconsider to forced is but own, his/her from different radically world a to arrives only not c a is it Other; the of issue the with engage and difference confront to precisely is perspective outsider’s an from story the presenting of purpose The encounter. alien no been have would there perspective, pro the about only written Guin Le Had theseand people’sinsufficient soheris psychological (22). lives insight carica weak a but uninteresting, only not deems he (which Ekumen the joining Gethen about plot political larger her for background freak galactic “a than more little to Gethenians of strangeness Accord narrative. the of center the at (!) Man placed not had Guin Le that regret his is second the and (24), sense” social the in but sexual the in not men only but women, no are there where planet a “about is book the that pronouncement and even homophobia ( unrulysexuality of fear and anxiety own Genly’smirrors also but 135), (Atteberyandrogyny” th of some “expresses only not androgynous/hermaphrodite being of possibility the about thinking when feels obviously he unease ontological The (24). curse” a not and blessing, “a actually is sex single a in fixedness possible worst the not “are bodies own our that conclusion the in comfort finds he end, the In (23). grief” and unhappiness of lot “a feel must n the text the n

Interestingly enough, Le Guin claims to have chosen a “normal” male Terran narrator narrator Terran male “normal” a chosen have to claims Guin Le enough, Interestingly Although not entirely without merit, these criticisms miss what I believe to be the point. point. the be to believe I what miss criticisms these merit, without entirely not Although T upon. reflect briefly to like would I which points Lem’s two are There

” ( ” Attebery 130) 130) onventional strategy used in utopian and science fiction in which a visitor visitor a which in fiction science and utopian in used strategy onventional

- see

precisely in order to aver to order in precisely

Ch. Ch.

3.7 axey ht copne te acln vepit on viewpoint masculine the accompanies that anxiety e ). 29

ture). Consequently, we do not learn enough about enough learn not do we Consequently, ture). blems that Gethenians experience, from their own own their from experience, Gethenians that blems t such negative reactions on the part of male readers ( readers male of part the on reactions negative such t 39

development in the universe” and that that and universe” the in development n t hm se a rdcd the reduced had she him, to ing - show” and used it merely as a a as merely it used and show”

who is “our surrogate surrogate “our is who e is i his is first he SFC SFC – ,

CEU eTD Collection male/human the of and time long a for language male “the or masculine, generic grammarians”of male (169). neutral, not is pronoun generic a as “he” that aware was she that added she however,(1988), text same the of version Redux Inthe (169). it” damn genericpronoun, the is considered ( masculine” is which pronoun feminine the use nor point, she review, Lem’s to response her in example, For occasions. several on choice her justify to tried has Guin Le explains: Op Tot Ong notes her In androgynes. to referring for pronoun masculine the of choice the by extent large a to created is women no are there that impression The failures. central oneThis is ofthe the book’s key lessons. of one be to this believe I since (22), lot own our about something us teach to fails Karhiders that opinion Lem’s with disagree I sense that In worlds. two the of E strangement But is Lem entirely wrong about there being only men (in the social sense) in the novel? novel? the in sense) social the (in men only being there about wrong entirely Lem is But It is understandable why such a position would stir controversy considering that the the that considering controversy stir would position a such why understandable is It continually to forget that the KarhiderI am with isman, not a but amanwoman 101). (LHD B feminine. the or neuter the less than defined, specific, less is it god: transcendent a to referring in pronoun masculine the used we same as the reason for “he,” say must I somer, in persons for used pronoun” “human Karhidish the Lacking

using an invented neuter pronoun, but finally decided against it, pleading that “’he’ “’he’ that pleading it, against decided finally but pronoun, neuter invented an using SFC

here proceeds not only not proceeds here most often criticized aspects of the book, and Le Guin admits it is one oftenis ofhermost it criticizedLe aspects book,andGuin admits ofthe

1. n I Gne Ncsay” h smlry stresse similarly she Necessary?” Gender “Is In 91). said that she did not want to deform English in order to make an ethical an make to order in English deform to want not did she that said - miut ihrn i msuie eeis (ru 6. u ised of instead But 6). (Braun generics” masculine in inherent ambiguity

that feminists have illuminated “the far “the illuminated have feminists that - as - norm bias,” has been the focus of the feminist critique of of critique feminist the of focus the been has bias,” norm from the peculiarity of Gethenians, but the juxtaposition the but Gethenians, of peculiarity the from t h vr ue f h poon n y huhs ed me leads thoughts my in pronoun the of use very the ut 40

ee mr dcsvl ‘ decisively more “even the strangeness and fate of of fate and strangeness the - reaching consequences consequences reaching sexifying

but “an invention “an but s

ht h had she that

’

than the the than pong pong CEU eTD Collection the or masculine the either (dependifeminine into slippage constant reader’s the and Genly’s both sense that in and endangered, is position own my then unintelligible, is Other the If (63). us” define – divide gender the of denial the for stands androgyny If (62). language” of limits the to us takes which concept evasive ever an attempt “any suggests, Pacteau Francette As terms. general more in problem language a as androgyny to points also this But difference. imagining to comes unive the under feminine the re Themasculine. subsume to tendency a and binaries the beyond think 193).“Postcolonialism/s” constructedness the of aware him/her making by and speak, to so text, the against 134) (Attebery androgyny” the in “misuse” its then we thatmostly thinking andof our lives part much so is principle MAN “the if that is us teach can pronoun of choice Guin’s Le What goeslanguage the issueof Cornell argues, beyond use itself.As Christine which bias masculine Genly’s reflects it how and characters the of perception and reading bes the really pronoun invented an is (and solution satisfying a provide to failing for Guin Le admonishing

hn t ersns a het o our to threat “a represents it then our language . There is no doubt that the pronouns are an addi by misconceptionscreated and perceptions misleading the to succumbquickly readers many and Genly knows Genly By masculinizing Genthenians, both Genly and Ong Tot Oppong reveal their inability to to inability their reveal Oppong Tot Ong and Genly both Genthenians, masculinizing By a valuable part of our education (qtd. in Pearson, “Postcolonialism/s” 194). t one?) I propose we look at what the use of the masculine pronoun does to our to does pronoun masculine the of use the what at look we propose I one?) t

on some basic level that he is being inaccurate; we know he is being inaccurate, but both but inaccurate,being is he know we inaccurate; being is he that level basic some on f edr s mle b te s o msuie rnu (Pearson, pronoun masculine of use the by implied as gender of aders have to try to resist this this resist tryto to have aders ng on the situation) can be seen as a form of psychic defense and an attemptan and psychic of defense form a asseen becan situation) the on ng novel

eel is nufcec b ivtn te edr o “perform to reader the inviting by insufficiency its reveals –

a divide which constructs us as subjects in the first place place first the in subjects as us constructs which divide a given identity and to the system of social rules which which rules social of system the to and identity given

don’t realize its existence or its effects” (Braun 4), effects”(Braun realize its existence or its don’t 41 impulse

and face their own limitations when itwhen limitations faceown andtheir tional burden on the reader, but they are to define androgyny reveals reveals androgyny define to

rsal rsal CEU eTD Collection (non constitutes what of ideasovercometheir to forcesthem readers it the becauseof part the 1 (“IGN” things” these ( man, a etc.?” not watching, at delighted privately wastes, “was she that confesses icy across sledges of haulers ministers, prime scheming as women imagine to unable or unwilling are us of most because men, are Gethenians other Es that insist to tend we “that Guin, Le asks possible,” it “Is does? Estraven that things the of all do not woman a Could gendered? be to have activities these of any that represent Guin’s Le not or whether arguing of Instead roles. female and male into division the beyond think to difficulty the indicate also they activities, social of range wider a show to failure simultaneously “house as but activity, “feminine” entirely an as Genly by perceived not is ice the across journey instan for child, his of care take or housework any do him see don’t we but glacier, a across sledge a pulling and strength great using by people rescuing politicians, other with negotiating scheming, we whom politician a is Estraven gender supposedly the for traits masculine of preponderance (24), masculine” are behavior, and mores, Le to According novel. the in men only are there in “ at wiser been had she if much and difference with faced when identity one’s preserve to action n I Gne Ncsay” e un lo pnd that opined also Guin Le Necessary?” Gender “Is In

Although the above stated criti stated above the Although ” ation of androgynes is flawed (which it necessarily is), we should ask why we think think we why ask should we is), necessarily it (which flawed is androgynes of ation

(170). I find it instructive to consider this statement in relation to the criticism that criticism the to relation in statement this consider to instructive it find I (170).

–

ce. Even his meticulous calculation and preparation of meals during their their during meals of preparation and calculation meticulous his Even ce. an image of wholeness that reflects backan ofwholeness ourincompleteness. reflects image tous that - 70). But to see Gethenians as menwomen as Gethenians see to But 70). wifely” and “scientific” (LHD 259).wifely” and(LHD “scientific” showing cisms are valid and to some extent do speak to the author’s the to speak do extent some to and valid are cisms e i stain w nral ascae ih e: e is he men: with associate normally we situations in see

the ‘female’ component of the Gethenian characters characters Gethenian the of component ‘female’ the “ a space of confusion of space a

42 n Bin teey iial osre “the observes similarly Attebery Brian and

m, “Karhider garments, manners of speech, of manners garments, “Karhider m, h poon woul pronouns the

- free characters” (131). After all, all, After (131). characters” free

does require some effort on effort some require does ”

(

MacLeod but a manwoman, do all do manwoman, a but nt atr that matter dn’t SFC traven and the the and traven 19)

of identity of

1. She 91). - CEU eTD Collection woman more become they case which in despicable, or when confusing inappropriate, except actions men, their considers as Gethenians perceives generally He 100). (LHD your expectations” on dependent role corresponding a him towards adopting while Woman, or Man of d theEnvoy, Genly Oppong’s advice categories.Against rigidgender of Gethen to Ong into Tot ( delivers?” qu into intelligibility whenexpectations. his with person’s heincongruous behavior findstheother c is that experience life the translating of difficulty “the demonstrates way hierarchical a in characteristics gendered assign to tendency His traits. unders his through but language through only categoriesnot binary imposes Genlysince resolution a of much provided have not would pronoun invented an for opting However, pronouns. masculine of use his to, reducible not but 3.5 does thetruehave androgyne todopolitics except asa thebinari merging of envisioned be androgyny can feminism: for androgyny of problem central the exemplifies non a imagine to reluctance own criticism the Accordingly, behavior. )gendered oes precisely “what a bisexual naturally does, which is to cast him [a Genthenian] in the role the in Genthenian] [a him cast to is which naturally does, bisexual a “what precisely oes Judith Butler wonders if we can “encounter the difference that calls our grids of of grids our calls that difference the “encounter can we if wonders Butler Judith an Estraven of masculinization Genly’s suggested, I have As

Hanging out with Effeminate Deviants: Effeminate with out Hanging Undoing - ie Te srpin f eiiiy s el’ srtg o dmrain through demarcation of strategy Genly’s is femininity of ascription The like. omprehensible” (Fayad 61) and becomes particularly evident in situations in evident particularly becomes and 61) (Fayad omprehensible”

35). Genly certainly tries to resolve the challenge by placing the people people the placing by challenge the resolve to tries certainly Genly 35). sin ihu tyn t frcoe h calne ht h difference the that challenge the foreclose to trying without estion es which first need to be carefully delineated? In firsttobecarefullyes need which delineated? words, other - - it Furthermore, actions. “masculine” typically perform man style of an alien species into a language and cultural cultural and language a into species alien an of style tanding of behavior, appearance and psychological psychological and appearance behavior, of tanding and 43

clean thehouse? such as that of Lem and Attebery shows their shows Attebery and Lem of that as such

Is Androgyny Feminine? Androgyny Is d other Gethenians is aided by, aided is Gethenians other d

he he CEU eTD Collection to introduction his In sex”. true “the terms Foucault Michel Geth the as sees Genly what of problem the and normativity of (Pearson, recognition” question “the is here stake at is what that espouses ask howmany him hechildren he only hadfathered had had, none borne four). tofind (but to Genly entice even looks feminine landlady’s The 50). (LHD nature” kind ignoble spying, buttock “fat has landlady his and 33), (LHD amused” be to pretending woman angry an“like like laughs KingArgaven opaque: or despicable either them finds he where situations in Genly to feminine appear characters other of number A of sense “a feels he to, tries he when because either man a as Estraven of think cannot he However, dislike. his of source the was femininity” supple i finds and tact and charm “all womanly, acts Estraven thinks and deviousness,” “effeminate and intrigue” own his from stems Estrave suspicion read to failing at his frustration that discern soon we but 7), (LHD obscure” forever gendered of thegencontamination as a terms, most him to appear characters other the when precisely well) as reader the to perhaps (and Genly Paradoxical (135). maleness” than weaker, as well as dangerous, more and darker and messier something as coded always nearly is femaleness “for purity, and rank of loss a indicates feminine to masculine from shift the explains, Attebery weak deceitful, inferior, deemed and devalued is part feminine the which h fc ta t hm ehnas “do Gethenians him to that fact The are motives “whose Estraven, of distrustful appears Genly novel the of beginning the At feminine; consequently, feminine; ipsil t tik f i a a oa, ihl akn hmef hte “hs soft “this whether himself asking rightly woman, a as him of think to impossible t lack of substance of lack Queer ,

specious and adroit” ( adroit” and specious enians’ failure to perform gender properly can be related to what to related be can properly gender perform to failure enians’ it can be said be can it 76). The sense of of sense The 76). n’s behavior. He is “annoyed by this sense of effeminate effeminate of sense this by “annoyed is He behavior. n’s not appear properly gendered” (Butler, (Butler, gendered” properly appear not the absence of gender in the novel is expressed in expressed is novel the in gender of absence the eric masculine by offemininity.aneric eruption 44

falseness falseness LHD 8, 15, 13). At the same time, Genly time, same the At 13). 15, 8, LHD ly, androgyny becomes most manifest to manifest most becomes androgyny ly, s” and “a soft fat face, and a prying, prying, a and face, fat soft “a and s” falseness or

insubstantiality insubstantiality ecln Bri: en the Being Barbin: Herculine , of imposture of , and inauthentic. As inauthentic. and proceeding from proceeding ” ( ” Bodies LHD 13). LHD

8) CEU eTD Collection for hermaphroditism about hisresearch court later but birth at female as treated was 30 meant and being; (157). of convince” dimension some quality, some “lacked too, people, Other 157). (LHD edges the around unreal” bit little a just little, a vague, “insubstantial”, little “a likewise Shusgis and “fluid” “vague,” him to appear streets The Mishnory. (“Postcolonialism/s” 193). expect cultural the of reversal a as “works then, encounter, alien This 267). (LHD admits later he as a was man,” who a woman woman, a who was a man myfriendship to give trust, wanted my to truth” “the is what and not, or him trust can he whether is, he person a of kind what decide cannot Genly sex, true Estraven’s determine to unable when Consequently, (xi). sex” of bottom the “at truth the “the With (x). individuals” about away truth stripped nature” of phantasmagorias profound and secret most the for search must we that sex of areathe in is “it that implied identity”(viii) sexual determining and determined ha to was “everybody that belief The one”. “true the was sex which determine and body the decipher to had doctor nature,the of disguise a as seen was sexes the of mixture any Since (viii). sex” true one the discover and deceptions anatomical its an of idea the “strip rejecting th to was thedoctor of role and the body, inasingle intermingling thesexes of to way its on well was medicine time the At (viii). individuals” discusses Foucault Nineteenth a of Memoirs Discovered Recently

The English translation of the memoirs of Herculine Barbin, a famous nineteenth famous a Barbin, Herculine of memoirs the of translation English The Genly uses similar terminology when describing the Orgota people and their capital capital their and people Orgota the describing when terminology similar uses Genly

to ta sx eel te rt o te ef” s ed Pasn argues Pearson Wendy as self,” the of truth the reveals sex that ation to signal to Genly that he should not trust the Orgota to help him with his mission, a mission, his with him help to Orgota the trust not should he that Genly to signal to Although Although the 19 the

eid i abgos edr efrac drn smr “ hd not had “I somer. during performance gender ambiguous his behind th

century juridical efforts to “limit the free choice of indeterminate indeterminate of choice free the “limit to efforts juridical century n h faeok f h narrative the of framework the in

The History of Sexuality of History The - ordered to live as a man. Foucault discovered the memo the discovered Foucault man. a as live to ordered

by the medico the by 45

- etr Fec Hermaphrodite French century

and helped republishthem. helped and - juridical system, we shall arrive at at arrive shall we system, juridical ve his or her primary, profound, profound, primary, her or his ve these impressions are partly partly are impressions these - century intersex person who person intersex century

hy ald to failed they n hs host his and

e body of body of e (1980), irs during irs 30

CEU eTD Collection and Slusser 289). (Jameson limits” absolute own our of contemplation a into transformed all the in mired irrevocably itself “finds face are We world. own author’s a the reflectionextent isalwaysof alienemphasize thattherepresentation ofan world tosome to order in categories, human any bygrasped or portrayeddirectly be cannot otherness radical ca he what to refers He 106). (102, all” at imagined be can beings, sentient different radically life, alien “whether categories own our onto back falling without difference” radical understand possibly wonders Jameson fiction, science in aliens of representation the to relation In 3.6 which body, Gethenians toprovide. fail the of intelligibility perfect the with equated be to comes morality whereby deceit, their from profit to order in (ix) sex true their of knowledge inmost their dissemble i emphasizes, Foucault As trusted. be to not are characterperfidiously true hides its androgyny they else what knows who unintelligible, is gender their If gender. fixed the of sign a is “insubstantiality” their that is implication further

border stands for (37). marks that border, articulating it while at the same time disarticulating andconfusing the distinctions the the on place its Taking other. the of speech the and same the of speech the between otherness, pure and familiarity pure between somewhere itself positions always The alien,Michael explains Beehler, We, the Other Humans Other We, the

eel is netig ie is side: unsettling its reveals l Lms ukoaiiy thesis; “unknowability Lem’s lls

: Becoming AlientoOneself : Becoming wt or naaiy o mgn te nnw: h mind the unknown: the imagine to incapacity our with d –

that of a rapacious multifaceted rapacious a desire that of

- too i t

46 eey tmoay tt i wih h body the which in state temporary a merely - aiir ad hrb bcms unexpectedly becomes thereby and familiar,

ndividuals are believed to be able to always to able be to believed are ndividuals nam ” border between identity and difference, it difference, and identity between border

l, i cam ht h ain as alien the that claim his ely, ir

lack of being as lack of of lack as being of lack

may be hiding? Here hiding? be may ? Inany? case, t “how we can can we “how ,

hey hey and CEU eTD Collection I will (Butler,able tolive?” beUndoing 3). of part as regarded be still I will gender, certain a am I “If as: formulated be can questions main the Thus life. of ways and forms different between made are that distinctions subtle the out the all, (after human equally or alien, equally is everybody which in situation a introducing by but aliens, and humans them, and us between line a drawing simply by not novel the in illustrated is 2) (Undoing b power of site “a as recognition install subject. human normative Gethenians to being simultaneous foreign as is Genly that show to careful is Guin Le But 9). (LHD cousin Argaven’s Tibe, tells he I,” as foreign so are foreigners “Few tales ofhimself and his man’s with along engendered always parasite the written, be to stories allows that pest the is alien “the Beehler, to According man. about knowledge of production the enables actually inst and it, beyond not intelligibility, of border the at located thus is alien The (111). opines Jameson as ourselves,” with away do would alien the about knowledge the at arrive to attempt an in anthropomorphism humanly all). at represented be of not could it otherwise (because imaginable parameters the within “radical” only is it that in human the of domain the to belongs still radically essentialThe other not positional, (Beehler 37). alien is other the words, provide “the point ofcomparison neededtobeginfor study to man tothink even himself” (6). posit this share Rabkin

the human? Will the ‘human’ expand to include me in its reach? If I desire in certain ways, ways, certain in desire IIf reach? its in me include to expand ‘human’ the Will human? the The function of the alien as a constitutive exclusion is thus to refer back to to back refer to thus is exclusion constitutive a as alien the of function The On Gethen, Genly is constantly aware of (the other people’s awareness of) his alien status. alien his of) awareness people’s other (the of aware constantly is Genly Gethen, On - alien meaning” (37). o ad ru ta ain ae eesrl atrppii sne they since anthropophilic necessarily are aliens that argue and ion - for Butler’s claim that to withhold a recognition of humanity is to to is humanity of recognition a withhold to that claim Butler’s - the Hainish universe is entirely anthropocentric), and then working then and anthropocentric), entirely is universe Hainish - other brings into play the way the alien is used to produce a a produce to used is alien the way the play into brings other

y which the human is differentially produced” produced” differentially is human the which y 47 ead of marking the limit of human cognition it it cognition human of limit the marking of ead

s hy r t hm ad their and him, to are they as If we tried to strip away the the away strip to tried we If s such as anthropos “we , ; in ;

CEU eTD Collection “permanent (his outsider an as him mark immediately not clothing). layers of underthick hidden iskemmer” does appearance his and much, too out stand not fewcri very fact that whicha is (LHD37), 31 Ia freak, sexual (LHD am” than 250). an nomoreoddity, torealize, “is (Pearcon,comes Genly 191). “Postcolonialsm/s” AsEstraven the which by process presen the also but humans, of group normative the as “us” of definition on not shows thus novel The as him marks turn in perverse tothem. As Genly to inhuman and strange seem Gethenians makes that thing perversion a arousal, sexual potential or kemmer permanent “the that explains Pearson Wendy 191). “Postcolonialism/s” (Pearson home” at are who ‘humans’ the and arrive who ‘aliens’ sense Gethenian the in normal not definitely is he be, may he these of Whichever 34). (LHD Void” the of Domains the from visitor a or monster artificial an or ki gender. of visibility the terms, betweenof the humansactive theduration state is of types of sexuality, different orinGenly’s to

Potentially, it could also be race, since Genly is black and most Gethenians are “yellow are Gethenians most and black is Genly since race, be also could it Potentially, ng is disinterested because he ha he because disinterested ngis Consequently, the question of normative gender and sexuality and gender normative of question the Consequently, halfdeads be may adults of abnorma percent or pervertsphysiologically four or three rare; not is it perversion; call they what causes female, the pr Excessive h dfnto o te huma the of definition the ce of the stranger makes our own experience of being normal increasingly normal being of experience own our makes stranger the of ce

– . They are sterile (LHD 67).

renders him less than human to most Gethenians” ( Gethenians” most to human than less him renders olongation of the kemmer period, with permanentkemmerwithhormonaltheolongationmaleorofperiod,imbalance the towards

expounds, expounds,

ly how the visitor or stranger ( stranger or visitor the how ly 31 n.

When Genly tries to tell Argaven that “we are all men,” the men,” all are “we that Argaven tell to tries Genly When

s this In ways in which Genly does gender does Genly which in ways ls

tics have discussed. His height is above average, but generally he does does he but generally average, above is Hisheight discussed. have tics

already cast the Envoy into the position of “a sexual freak sexual “a of position the into Envoy the cast already –

normals, by our standards our by normals,

particular 48

tt se b Gtein a a om of form a as Gethenians by seen state ae h mi ciein o delineating for criterion main the case

the alien the . . . . .

The Karhidish slang for them is is them for slang Karhidish The Queer becomes intimately linked intimately becomes ; a ; – fter all, “it is always the always is “it all, fter )

as a being in a state of of state a in being a as is expunged from the from expunged is

76). Thus the same same the Thus 76). - brown or red or brown unheimlich - brown”

CEU eTD Collection independ and agency of lack striking (101). experience” appalling an is It being. human a as only judged and respected is “one Gethen, On 101) (LHD senile” suffer will pride his that advance in alerted be to needs Envoy first the that warns Oppong performance. his acknowledge cannot and rules the with and other, imaginary an even ( alone. gender ( recognition mutual on depends ( advance in determined showingconsideredshameful” would “eitherevil tears be or (LHD247). understan not does Estraven (LHD explains Oppong as game,” the play “cannot people these socio of pattern “entire Genly’s (235). of standards no had he all, “after him; help to trying genuinely but patronizing, not is friend his that realizes immediately he However, 235). (LHD woman” a like more “built and him than shorter is who someone fromcommands Estraven when offended glacier, findshimself across still Genly terms.pull to see Duringthe their own Estraven onhis 3.7 Undoing Undoing As the story progresses, Genly gradually starts to overcome his presumptions and attempts attempts and presumptions his overcome to starts gradually Genly progresses, story the As ulr a age ta gne i a id f nesn cletv atvt woe ue are rules whose activity collective incessant of kind a is gender that argued has Butler ept hs ndetn peupin f acln sproiy Gny em t ehbt a exhibit to seems Genly superiority, masculine of presumption inadvertent his Despite Strange Encounters, or Adventures i orAdventures Encounters, Strange

1). Gender 1). One of Genly’s main problems is that he performs his gender for no o no for gender his performs he that is problems main Genly’s of One 1).

One is always ‘doing’ with or for another, even if the other is only imaginary” imaginary” only is other the if even another, for or with ‘doing’ always is One –

is not asingularreiterationis not a buta doing, whose“success” set of ofnorms because he will expect his virility to be r be to virility his expect will he because ,

even though though even

el hm o i dw ad rest and down lie to him tells d why Genly hides his face when he is crying; he ponders why why ponders he crying; is he when face his hides Genly why d his “doing” is not recognized not is “doing” his Bodies they allow for improvisation within a scene of constraint constraint of scene a within improvisation for allow they ence and does not seem to have much control over what over control much have to seem not does and ence - sexual interaction is nonexistent” on Gethen because because Gethen on nonexistent” is interaction sexual

2. h emphasize She 12). n Perversion n Perversion 49 alns, f iiiy t cmlct hs pride” his complicate to virility, of manliness,

–

“unless he is very self very is he “unless

since s eas h hs rul taking trouble has he because

that “one does not ‘do’ one’s one’s ‘do’ not does “one that egarded, which it will not be. be. not will it which egarded,

his audience is not f not is audience his 101). For the same reason same the For 101).

- assured, or assured, amiliar amiliar not ne,

CEU eTD Collection (Butler, reality” of theo gender and them outofkemmer. keep to drugs given are they because is lifeless seem prisoners the reason the that learns he are equ prisoners the and fleshiness,” bland gross, “a of sense a by defined heavy,” slovenly, him to appear prisoners and guards Both masculinity. order in other, the on prisoners other and guards the and hand, one the on himself between difference the uphold to his loses capacity todefine he more the Gethenians, the with has he contact more “the and Estraven,” with relationship symbiotic his through . . . losing of danger in “constantly is he which identity for defin to femininity no Having 70). (Fayad the with contact “contaminated” been has he his words, other in natives;” the by of term) (Ai’s intrigue’ ‘effeminate ‘wimp’ a to reduced is Ai then, speaking, “Textually sacrifice. accomplis cannot he finally, and, alone, iceGobrin acrossthe Karhide to return cannot he own, his on Farm the escape cannot he drugged, and abused and Farm Pulefen the to taken forcibly is he politicians, Orgota the trusts naively he documents, help Estraven’s Orgoreyn without enter cannot King,he the with audiencearrangean cannot heclimate, cold the in barely survive can heNamely, displays” he(69). that otherwise, privileged a as masculinity of domina position his on insistence his that is unaware, entirely is Ai which of one and text, the of ironies strongest the of “one out, points Fayad Mona As him. to happens The question of embodiment and of reading the body is body the reading of and embodiment of question The tries still Genly power, of stripped completely is he where farm, voluntary the at even But ally “flabby” and “their talk trivial” (LHD 189). His attitude remains the same even after even same the remains attitude His 189). (LHD trivial” talk “their and “flabby” ally ry come together in the novel and where “practices of instituting new modes modes new instituting of “practices where and novel the in together come ry himself as(Fayad a masculine 70 subject” nce is completely thwarted by the ridiculous absence of control, physical of completely ridiculous absence or nce by the is thwarted Undoing

to distance himself from them and preserve his idea of active and virile virile and active of idea his preserve and them from himself distance to

9 ae worked are 29) e himself against, Genly is left without a grounds a without left is Genly against, himself e 50

out

W ae rsne wt a ain oy a body, alien an with presented are We . effeminate - 71). h his mission without Estraven’s without mission his h t he site where site he

te urs r “stolid, are guards the : literary narrative narrative literary

with the with CEU eTD Collection into Gethenians the locked “unnecessarily had she 169). (“IGN” heterosexuality” that regret expresses Guin Le Necessary?” Gender “Is of same writes Oppong that Tot Ong coupling. heterosexual monogamous basically is which kemmering,” “vowing of practice accepted widely the is there Gethen, on status legal no has marriage though even However, 161). “IGN” Guin, (Le introverted” urban than tribal “more are Hearts convenience. economic for primarily together livewho 800) and 200 (between people of group a of consists it and hearth, a called is Gethen 32 Estraven enough, Interestingly 21). also: see (3; sexes” anatomical both of mixture a be to appeared vertebrates when age earlier an to throwback a “atavistic, as seen generally is figure dual the explains, Hargreaves Tracy As 101). (LHD rut” of imperative the mechanical to beings human of “subjection the requires and animals” lower of cycle estrous “the l Much (Pearson, body” sexualized and sexed the of corporeality the not in is firmly who human and is who to as “disorientation his situates it because troubling, finds Genly 59). redefine that resistance of space “a lover”(139). the of those complementfeatures Attebery As other. the whatever on taking to by partner sexual her/his to “responds kemmer in response Gethenian a underlines, a as relationally, produced but organs to reducible (Pearson, identity” permanent a than rather state temporary “a as (Butler, stone” in written not are confined were otherwise, becoming re norm, the exceeds in that, becoming of mode “a as but fact,” accomplished and static (kemmer) self and uncontainable, unpredictable, because sexual threateningly time same the embo an is body that body utopian

Le Guin has been criticized been has Guin Le t s ti contingency “this is It

ike Ong Tot Oppong, he finds this kind of sexuality degrading because it resembles resembles it because degrading sexuality of kind this finds he Oppong, Tot Ong ike . It is also non also is It died contradiction: it is underdetermined, a pure potentiality pure a underdetermined, is it contradiction: died i s not s works the norm, and makes us see how realities to which we thought we we thought we which to realities how see us makes and norm, the works

- - marked by marked sex kemmer partners are so rare as to be ignored (LHD 96). In 96). (LHD ignored be as to rare so are kemmerpartners sex

essentialist, because it entails a body which is “not understood as a as understood “not is which body a entails it because essentialist,

for maintaining the heteronormative model of sexuality. The basic social unit on unit social basic The sexuality. of model heteronormative the maintaining for

of bodies, the possibility, if not the fact, of sexual contact,” that that contact,” sexual of fact, the not if possibility, the bodies, of

s the ways in which gender identity is constructed” (Fayad (Fayad constructed” is identity gender which in ways the s

the social the

51 in the same way as way same the in 32 Undoing

Le Guin’s vision of androgynyof Levision Guin’s ” and “communal, independent, and somewhat somewhat and independent, “communal, and ”

29). Gethenian 29). Queer o ur

body is body 76), a state that is that state a 76), sexuality the Redux version version Redux the . The Gethenian Gethenian The .

(somer) thus

can be seen seen be can Queer - contained opens up opens , but at at but , - sexe

78). 78).

not d

CEU eTD Collection Queer of form a into “interpellat[ed] beenhave will adventurehe his of end the by (229), us” between love no friends; no mine, of flesh no were “[t]hey that says Genly though Even humanness. and sexuality “normal” of domain the of questioning a an homophobia of kind this overcome to precisely is do to attempts novel the What (229). touch” hand’s the under “metamorphos[e] treacherously may body the where and sp they when ice, the on alone time their This during 229). disquieting (LHD particularly moon?” becomes the possibility of phase new a at lover a be may friend any where world s of kind this by alarmed feels homophobe, outright an not although who, Genly, to threatening particularly form male or female a either into transform time any at can the invoke also Estraven (LHD 250). be, l strange “A inferior: is that sexuality Genly’s is it that thinks end the nights together in a small tent. Friendship is impossible where sexuality looms by looms sexuality where impossible is Friendship tent. small a in together nights the end ” he says, he ” Furthermore, Genly’s initial attitude towards Gethenians and his reservation towards towards reservation his and Gethenians towards attitude initial Genly’s Furthermore,

78).

“ exual shiftiness exual to be spread out over every day of the year and never to know the choice of sex”of choice the know to never yearand the of everyday over out spread be to specte

and unpredictability and r

of homosexuality, since Genly knows that Estraven’s body body Estraven’s that knows Genly since homosexuality, of 52

“What is a friend,” wonders Genly, “in a “in Genly, wonders friend,” a is “What ‘hermaphronormativity’” (Pearson, ‘hermaphronormativity’”(Pearson, ow Te atr osblt seems possibility latter The . - grade sort of desire it must it desire of sort grade d move towards move d CEU eTD Collection it. learn to capacity the same have species humanoid not all though 34 A.Kolmerten. Carol in Landscape,” 33 ( advanc in knowing than valuable more finally is opens question the that bond the sustaining since Other, the of face the in Other the about unknowingness its with “lives response nonviolent the know,” to seek not does and ask, not t “does response while response: nonviolent and violent the to down comes Other the towards position the concerning dilemma ethical ultimate the it, puts Butler As Other. the to you?” posed are “Who question the to answer nonviolent a as defined is love novel the in Thus of recognition but assume, traditionally would one as other, L (267). bridge” “the was emphasis, 267). sudden and great “the that later, as now called, be well as might recognition it . . . rose us between friendship of assurance this from was It them. between tension sexual hi him refused Estraven, rejected had he then until that first his by atconfused is Genly night. one kemmer enters Estraven when peak its reaches contact sexual mindspee through second and kemmer, into coming Estraven’s with dealing by first their twoinsteps: established is emotional bond Their 251). alone”(LHD alien,equal, ( run” glacier. 3.8 Undoing

Mindspeech is a form of telepathic communication in which one cannot tell lies. It is an acquired skill, even even skill, acquired an is It lies. tell cannot one which in communication telepathic of form a is Mindspeech more For el’ gaul cetne f srvn ae pae uig hi juny cos the across journey their during place takes Estraven of acceptance gradual Genly’s I t is important is t Love Among theGlaciers Love Among LHD 25), cut off from their respective societies, that they can become “equals at last, at “equals become can they that societies, respective their from off cut 25), LHD 33

It is only in that isolated, that in only is It

35). on the role of ice and landscape in in landscape and ice of role the on tpa ad cec Fcin b Fiction Science and Utopian

friend’s New York: Syracuse University Press, 1994. Press, University Syracuse York: New to note that it wa it that note to

taciturn behavior, but soon realizes what is happening. He confesses He happening. is what realizes soon but behavior, taciturn ove here denotes not so much a deep connection or knowing the the knowing or connection deep a much so not denotes here ove

s from the difference, not likeness, that love c love that likeness, not difference, the from s ( anti y )

h wr o wmn writers women of work the utopian oe: ols f Difference of Worlds Women: 53

space where “nothing grows and no beasts no and grows “nothing where space

s reality, and finally acknowledges the the acknowledges finally and reality, s

hopeless and and hopeless e what holds us in common” common” in us holds what e , see Naomi Jacobs, “The Frozen Frozen “The Jacobs, Naomi see , . Eds. Jane L. Donawerth and and Donawerth L. Jane Eds. . extreme disparity. disparity. extreme ch. 34

The fear of fear The e violent he a love me: ” (my (my ” love love CEU eTD Collection and information, get to order in him truck seduce in the prisoner another to attempts who Gaum spy Orgota the and 35 a permanent statecanonly case,resolved(in this death. be by Estraven’s) non idealized aliens of merging true a of impossibilitythe recognizes that one emotional and intellectual more a of non the Consequently, 194). (“Postcolonialism/s” men” up end bet or woman a [would] and man a between encounter an only have can we possibilities gender: reifying “both ultimately female, of instead male became Estraven male become als might Estraven course, Of 193). (“Postcolonialism/s” female” become only can Estraven and male be only can Genly novel, the of terms the “in because is this Pearson, to According consummated voice the Estravenofhisdead brother hears the of nature sexual The 138). (Attebery equals” unlike between marriage of sort “a is it union;” sexual than closer as book the in described “is merging telepathic the explains, Attebery As 274). real from comes that mind intimacy of intimacy an one;” “[T]hat austere and obscure an relationship. “but observed, Genly of bond,” a was us kind between established intimate more far a signifies but act, plane another on achieved sex. of absence surprising a is there sex, about largely

Intercourse is evaded on severa on evaded is Intercourse el’ ad srvns oe s ee cnumtd hscly i ti nvl hc is which novel this in physically: consummated never is love Estraven’s and Genly’s el b Genly

i ti cs, a ad androgyne) and man case, this (in lee ta te had they that elieves r idpaig s ute itniid y h fc ta ised f el’ own Genly’s of instead that fact the by intensified further is mindspeaking ir -

– social space of the Gobrin ice, and the impossibility to turn their symbiosis into into symbiosis their turn to impossibility the and ice, Gobrin the of space social their relationship, they would have met “once more as aliens” (LHD 267). 267). (LHD aliens” as more “once met have would they relationship, their

and, indeed, Genly can be accused of eschewing homosexuality eschewing of accused be can Genly indeed, and,

heading for the Pulefen Farm Farm the for Pulefen heading –

l occasions occasions l through minds through

zn “h etn o te akes ta separate that darkness” the of extent “the izing

touched –

not only between Estraven and Genly, but also between Estraven Estraven between also but Genly, and Estraven between only not

Bt vn hs bon this even But . the only way they could touch, because had they they had because touch, could they way only the peech, which not only substitutes the actual sexual actual the substitutes only not which peech, 54

who enters kemmer and becomes a woman.a becomes kemmerand enterswho and lover Arek - sexual encounter is rejected in favor in rejected is encounter sexual 35

oee, hi sxa uin is union sexual their However, cno prit usd o the of outside persist cannot d .

between between d –

them (LHD (LHD them

but even if if even but ween two ween

Genly and and Genly o CEU eTD Collection upon following day, andnight like moments, reversible merely undoubtedly “are feminine the Le wholeness. a create to together working while other each by modified constantly but essential in (or yang and yin of equality and interdependence the acknowledges that complementarity a hierarchy, without dualism a envision to attempt an binaries, of reworking a precisely but difference, (sexual) abolishing out an not is contribution Guin’s Le that suggest bad as other us destroying Butler contends, man in “result must, with interacting perhaps and can, alien the with contact The world. own their from estranged feel reader the and Genly both that way a such in encounter alien the reconstruct intelligen with apes great species; different two of animals, strange great, of troupe a like were “They alien: him to appear that colleagues own his is it lands, spaceship his when end, the in that extreme so is perception (Pearson, human” not is and is who of perception Genly’s immanent and immutable genderis that perception Genly’s of least at or 3.9 Following Wendy Pearson, I believe that the novel “tracks a kind of undoing of gender of undoing of kind a “tracks novel the that believe I Pearson, Wendy Following e un eivs ht t s th is it that believes Guin Le social organization of sexuality” (Undoing 191). the for consequences necessary or natural no has that way a in difference sexual negotiatingconstantly n have will indeed, ‘one,’ be not will human This plane. human,itseems,mustmonstrous,The itself,another strangehumanbecometoreachieve the even on to Guin Le Guin's Idealized Humanism: Humanism: Idealized Le Guin's here – e

– and is calling for a healthier model of integration (“IGN” 172). I would like to like would I 172). (“IGN” integration of model healthier a for calling is and ncounters a ncounters

the separation of yang from yin, and the moralization of one as good and the the and good as one of moralization the and yin, from yang of separation the

the alien to the point of altering his own shape in the process” (Slusser 8). As As 8). (Slusser process” the in shape own his altering of point the to alien the n

unlikely terms of the novel, light and dark) which are not fixed and fixed not are which dark) and light novel, the of terms t eyes, all of them in rut” (LHD 318). The novel manages to manages novel The 318). (LHD rut” in them of all eyes, t e

dualism ally Is There Human Is ThereHuman , Jean Baudrillard, who Baudrillard, Jean ,

of value value of 55

right rejection of duality or a wish for for wish a or duality of rejection right in utmt fr, u i wl b oe ht is that one be will it but form, ultimate o s cribed beyond Gender? Queer

o in pines

eul difference sexual 77). In fact, the shift in in shift the fact, In 77).

that –

and an alteration in alteration an and the masculine andmasculine the

that is is that –

CEU eTD Collection beh human of styles in and consciousness human of fabric the in change radical “a both is stake ethics new a world: the at looking of way new whole a encompasses death . . defines light life, death; and givesrise life (190). todarkness,anddarkness light” to . other each with relationship creative a through existence their “define argued, is there as long So it? isn’t essential, an is “duality too: dualists are they that responds Estraven But 252). (LHD dualism” with are “we like much be, must they wholeness with obsessed how hence and are, on comments Genly poem, the recites Estraven When poem the that framework this Tormer’sLay, thenovel from can takes which title, its be interpr in is It feminine (228). and psyche” masculine individual the each of within principles withdrawal and thrust alternating an rather but female oppos “the on based not is that dynamics of kind the entails but differences, of submerging a for prescription a not is androgyny that explains Brown Barbara other. the to n poweris aup is dream difference sexual Baudrillard, a in another one with placeschanging andother one In the novel androgyny is the figure of that balanced and harmonious relationship in which in relationship harmonious and balanced that of figure the is androgyny novel the In h maig f a of meaning The like the endand the way (252). like hands joined together, together like lovers in kemmer, Two are one, life anddeath, lying and darkness the right hand of light. Light is the left handof darkness avior” (Daly, qtd. in Hargreaves 102) and “a radical change in our philosophical approach” philosophical our in change radical “a and 102) Hargreaves in qtd. (Daly, avior” ot unequally distributed but emerges from the lack of lack the emerges from but unequallydistributed ot –

and the ideaand ofsubsequently the myself ndrogyny for Le Guin thus exceeds that of of that exceeds thus Guin Le for ndrogyny

and

h other the “ itself

a utopia: the idea that such pairs of te of pairs such that idea the utopia: a .” The two principles, as Bazin and Freeman have have Freeman and Bazin as principles, two The .” reuniting another themis 56

n endless process of seduction of process endless n

how isolated and undivided Gethenians Gethenians undivided and isolated how the eted: need to subjugate one part part subjugate one to need ”

, s

ex ( if you will you if 12

7 and/or gender and and gender and/or - ition of male and male of ition 8 rms can be split split be can rms ) .

” .

What is at is What ( 127 ).

For CEU eTD Collection Ch. (see utopia of theories recent more of light in But 171). (“IGN” anatomy” human in change radical imaginary, an on based is it since society, contemporary to alternative practicable that is herself, Guin Le by provided as answer, The novel. 3.10 society. genderi to prior human a posit to feminism: ( “human” the of emergence existence into comes gender that claimed be cannot it relations, gender of matrix t according subject, the Since itself. sex argued, has Butler as even, or gender as constructed as just be might gender beneath humanness basic some of people w and men as not ourselves of think and identities gender our transcend to able be ever will we if wonders Rudy Kathy 160). (“IGN” human” simply presumably, be, would left Gu Le that if preced as to supposed also being, is It human unpolitical. entirely was a category as only judged is one Gethen on that writes Oppong Tot Ong th presumes and (99), says Jameson as illusion,” metaphysical) (or humanistic a by “inhabited or humanistic, epistemologyaontology new and ofthe human. of implications the and located be can androgyny feministproject asgrasped: a be not wish utopian the that here is It 170). (Badinter The final question that I want to ask is whether is ask to want I that question final The However, what that human might be is not clear. Le Guin’s vision is ultimately deeply deeply ultimately is vision Guin’s Le clear. not is be might human that what However,

1.3 “A Society of Eunuchs:” Sex, Progress and Utopia Sex, Progress Eunuchs:” of “A Society in explains in

), (34). What these idealized these What (34).

can it really be claimed that ut that claimed be really it can at “human” as a category is category a as “human” at

that she had she that Bodies

“eliminated gender, to find out what was left. Whatever was was Whatever left. was what out find to gender, “eliminated humanist

7). That is, perhaps, the final trap of androgyny for for androgyny of trap final the perhaps, is, That 7). opia is simply about “practicable alternatives”? Suvin alternatives”? “practicable about simply is opia

positions fail to take into account is that the idea the that is account into take to fail positions 57 always ng ng (

only –

uiesl ua ntr usold by unspoiled nature human universal a ) The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The

desirable, unconstructed, and unconstructed, desirable, to remove gender, to but to remove o Butler, is produced through the through produced is Butler, o

it is not, because it “poses no no “poses it because not, is it e all other identity categories. identity other all e

imagine a new

is a utopian a is universal. universal. omen but but omen after

the

CEU eTD Collection the in fecundity its shows that differences of union the of reverse the way a in and relation, imp sterility love terms, Plato’s in a of terms in drive sexuality, cyclical Gethenian of make to achie ever could society a such if wondering eunuchs,” Opp Tot Ong and (xii), frigidity and impotence change. no also but death, no is there reproduction, immortality also but unity promises therefore and reproduction and that state a signifies It 145). (Plato halves separated the of pursuit” and “cravingPlatonic the to opposition in existence timeless and static a with associated been des a with utopia of association The 9). (Vieira established” been has society ideal the “after progress for need no is there since soci imagined of models offered I As unchangeable. and androgyny as steril Gethen, on progress technological of lack the temporalityand static, as utopia of idea traditional the between interrelation the at looking by issue this consider to like would flui as seen ( applied be to method a but realized, be cannot or can that state a as not utopia at look we that proposed has What these three have in common is the notion of completeness which is static, timeless, static, is which completeness of notion the is common in have three these What pite the pite overishing move to uniformity and represents “the zero state of social relations, a non a relations, social of state zero “the represents and uniformity to move overishing –

lacking desire, how could it produce anything? In this produceanything? it could how desire, lacking

more recent more d and “never realized or com or realized “never and d Metamorph e lack .

) is seen as productive, while androgyny is equated with impotence and and impotence with equated is androgyny while productive, as seen is ) ” ( ”

changes in the utopian genre. Similarly, androgyny as wholeness has has wholeness as androgyny Similarly, genre. utopian the in changes already explained already Fayad . 52). Having that in mind, should the feminist utopia not rather be be rather not utopia feminist the should mind, in that Having 52). .

eties as “frozen images that don’t allow for historical change” change” historical for allow don’t that images “frozen as eties 67). It follows that the active and continuous sexual drive ( drive sexual continuous and active the that follows It 67). historical Oppong plete, but always revolutionary always but plete, ,

(and unattainable) perfection survives to this day this to survives perfection unattainable) (and traditional 58

describes “the absence of continuous sexual sexual continuous of absence “the describes ong describes Gethenians as “a society of of society “a as Gethenians describes ong

Heilbrun links androgyny with the with androgyny links Heilbrun

utop ve anything (LHD 102). (LHD anything ve ias were static and ahistorical and static were ias c ontext

precedes sexual difference difference sexual precedes , androgyny is seen anseenandrogyny , is – ” (Teslenko 169)? I 169)? (Teslenko ”

hr tee s no is there where

and th and

U nsure what what nsure e view of view e

fear of of fear

and and or or - CEU eTD Collection and mutual changeonuncertaintycomplementarity. and based 22) (Vieira process” a “as defined is but fixedness, and perfection novel the of context the In sterile. as androgyny and productive as difference sexual of understanding the of criticism as but stasis, for wish a as not read be thus can r transitory and cyclical as sexuality of conception The 164). (“IGN” principles two the combining by subvert subjugates and conquers which ‘male’” the of linearity driving explains difference. sexual from proceed to supposed is that motivation the lack inhabitants ice an is it frozen: symbolically and literally both is society Gethenian slowly very happen things and revolutions, great no been have There (52). faster go vehicles their make not do they why or (30) invented have they that devices heating excellent the use not do they why to as confused technology the advancing about much care to seem not do people (29), old” years mechanical “the that fact belpeople andOne, Year isalways it Here remains socialaswas”(276). exactlyhappens: order it immemorial “an BalandierBadinter states (qtd. in 179). relationship and/feminine masculine the to attributed character exemplary Jameson has observed that one of the most important features of Gethen is that nothing that is Gethen of features important most the of one that observed has Jameson t ee is here introducing

o yh f rges n Gethen on progress of myth no ieve “that progress is less important than presence” (LHD 52). Despite the Despite52). presence” (LHD importantthan less is progress“that ieve

te iclrt o te fml’ i odr o civ balance achieve to order in ‘female’” the of circularity “the - nutil g o Ivnin n ahd i a lat he thousand three least at is Karhide in Invention of Age industrial , balance is not equated with the traditional utopian idea of of idea utopian traditional the with equated not is balance ,

–

ie vlto, r h mvmn o a of movement the or evolution, like

be as pors i ascae wt “the with associated is progress cause ejection of progress along with the the with along progress of ejection

– and

a continuous negotiation continuous a -

covered world whose whose world covered which

lce (0) The (105). glacier ” s Georges as ,”

h wns to wants she :

Genly is Genly Le Guin Guin Le

CEU eTD Collection a androgyny fact, In itself. androgyny the of nature of than terms gendered in thinking beyond move to inability our of revealing more is vision Guin’s Le K. Ursula respect, incompat therefore is and binary gender the affirms and maintains androgyne al is gender that say to But it. with do to what and difference sexual thinkin stop to inability our does it as difference sexual of obliteration the signify (11). gender” narrates [and] fictions engenders poi MacLeod constructed. is gender how about something us tells that body a but gender, without body (346) genealogies” alternative and worlds o stories feminist new powerful Felski, regain). (or achieve to strive should we duration (229). its in infinite and colossal, beautiful, transfigured, body a of utopia the proceed, represen androgyny of idea the believe locate to utopian, as itself body the of conceive to then, mean, it would What versa. vice and utopia, thinking with up tied always thus is body the Thinking (233). “zero utopia of opposite utopique Corps Conclusion h body, The But androgyny need not be thought of only as only of thought be not need androgyny But

point of the world” from places, possible ofthewhich“all radiate”emergepoint world” and real orutopian,

d oes not ha not oes

is not the same as to claim, as critics like Harris and Secor have done, that it it that done, have Secor and Harris like critics as claim, to as same the not is nts out, “[t]o look at the androgyne is to look at how and why Western culture culture Western why and how at look to is androgyne the at look “[t]o out, nts

explains ” 96, s h origi the is 1966), ,” – ve to ve

the place to which we are condemned, condemned, are we which to place the

Mich

inevitably l ocut n n o hs euiu bt btue etrs (“ lectures abstruse but beautiful his of one in Foucault el f possible futures, fueling imaginative projections of new new of projections imaginative fueling futures, possible f imply the end of history of end the imply

of n

an and the principal actor actor principal the and s uh utopia a such ts T androgyn . e usinn o sxa difference sexual of questioning he Perhaps it is more helpful to think of it not a as as a not it of think to helpful more is it Perhaps 60 s it is represented in the book is not essential not is book the in represented is it s

Ultimately, the androgyne does not so much so not does androgyne the Ultimately,

an image of self of image an ous society ous – “

; the pitiless place pitiless the the “

rather, it may help to generate to help may it rather, in

oy rm hc al things all which from body of - The Left Hand of Darkness of Hand Left The contained perfection which which perfection contained ible with feminism. In that In feminism. with ible

l uois I i nt the not is It utopias. all as ncie i the in inscribed ways utopia in the body? I body? the in utopia ”

(229) , stresses Rita Rita stresses , – about g

but the but As As Le Le

CEU eTD Collection ever the self revealthe truthabout masculine generic the of contamination a as terms, meaningless are to serves femininity t case which in despicable, or confusing characters the expectations our when from deviate precisely evident most becomes androgyny reader, the for possibly hints narratorial challenges novel assumptions. normative our question and ourselves upon back turn to forced alien the imagining of difficulty a 91). (Cixous values” of orchestrator “the be not need opposition that show ack envision to out sets but thinking, space i resistance tothe of a up opens it such as and other, the to response in itself transforming otherwise, becoming eternal and Le Guin’s contribution, Guin’s Le nowledges the interdependence the nowledges bt eainl proces relational, but ,

– that would have us perceive them them perceive us have would that

that is why, paradoxi why, is that us

remind us that we are applying our categories in a situation where they they where situation a in categories our applying are we that us remind to e te hrces s nrgnu i sie f h lnusi and linguistic the of spite in androgynous as characters the see dea sexgender butalsoto as fixed, ofa identity biological as fact. as

I have suggested, lies in the fact that she does not reject binary binary reject not does she that fact the in lies suggested, have I of

gendered behavior gendered . :

being faced with our own limitatio own our with faced being of the two principles (light/dark, or male/female) male/female) or (light/dark, principles two the of a ul n reactive: and sual uls wtot hierarchy without dualism cally, androgyny cally, e bcm mr woman more become hey 61

, and subverts the expectation that sex can sex that expectation the subverts and , : as me as when when

in the novel is expressed in gendered gendered in expressed is novel the in h Gtein oy s constantly is body Gethenian the n . As I have I As . w e find e their actions inappropriate, actions their – -

ie Ti “nrso” of “intrusion” This like. cmlmnaiy that complementarity a ns in doing that doing in ns argued What is at stake is stake at is What Furthermore, the Furthermore, , for Genly, and and Genly, for , – ,

we are are we and to and

CEU eTD Collection Definition ofDystopia.” Utopiaand Claeys Isabelle de Courtivron. Cixous, Barbara.Christian, “TheRaceTheory.” for --- 1993. Judith. Butler, 31.3 (Fall, 1980): 227 Brown,Bar Antiquity Luc. Brisson, Benjamins AmsterdamWodak. Philadelphia: Publishing John and Company, 1997. GenderlessForms.” Braun,Friederike.“Making The Men MAN outofPeople: Principle inTranslating Studies Guin “Le Martin. Bickman, London: andWesport Press, 2006. Greenwood Bernardo,Graham Murphy. SusanM.,and J. University 1987. Press, Slu E. George Beehler, 2.2 (Feb., 185 1974): Bazin Benedict.YorkLondon: New and 1993. Verso, Jean. Baudrillard, Science Studies Fiction Douglas. Barbour, Wright. Harper New York: & 1989. Row, Badinter, Elisabeth. 2002. Brian. Attebery, Androgyny Words: New Science Studies Fiction Worlds, “New J. Pamela Annas, Bibliography . Undoing Gender.

Geoy “es rm oehr: nacd oiblt ad h Composite the and Sociability Enhanced Somewhere: from “News Gregory. , Topping , 4.1(March 42 1977): Hélène

. Trans. Janet Lloyd.. Trans. Berkley Janet LA: & University California2002. Press, of M bara. of “Left Hand Darkness:Future, Androgyny, Past.” Present, ichael. Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of ‘Sex’ of Limits Discursive the On Matter: That Bodies Nancy , . “Sorties.” . “Sorties.” sr n Ei S Rbi. abnae n Ewrsil: oten Illinois Southern Edwardsville: and Carbondale Rabkin. S. Eric and sser eul Ambivalence: Sexual

eoig edr n cec Fiction Science in Gender Decoding

The Transparency of Evil: Essays on Extreme Phenomena Extreme on Essays Evil: of Transparency The “Wholeness and Balance in the Hainish Novels of Ursula K. Le Guin.” Guin.” Le K. Ursula of Novels Hainish the in Balance and “Wholeness “ The Unopposite Sex: ofthe GenderThe TheEnd Battle Communicating GenderCommunicating inContext - odr Patrols Border - New YorkLondon:New and Routledg 215. 235. , 1.3(Spring, 1974): 164 , 5.2(July, 1978): 143 , and Alma Freeman. “The Androgynous Vision.” Vision.” Androgynous “The Freeman. Alma and , New YorkNew 34

New French AnAnthology Feminisms: 39. ’ s

- the Left Hand of Darkness: Form and Content.” and Form Darkness: of HandLeft the

47.

: Harvester Wheatsheaf,: Harvester 1980 .” History

nrgn ad emprdts i Graeco in Hermaphroditism and Androgyny les Te nhoooy f cec Fiction Science of Anthropology The Aliens:

Cultural Critique Cultural , 98.330 (Apr., 2013): 145 , 98.330 - Ursula K. Le Guin: K. ACritical Companion Ursula 62 156.

173.

e, 2004. . Eds.Helga and Ruth Kotthoff Nw ok n Lno: Routledge, London: and York New . , 6(Spring, 1987): 51 in Feminist Science Fiction.” Fiction.” Science Feminist in

90 . Eds. Elaine Marks andEds. Elaine - 98. . New York: Routledge, York: New . - . Trans. Barba. Trans. 173.

oe’ Studies Women’s Extrapolation Science Fiction Science . T . rans. James James rans. -

63. 3 - ra ra 29. -

Roman . Eds. .

, , CEU eTD Collection 2010. Utopianism.” and Literature “Feminism Alessa. Johns, Fictions Fredric. Jameson, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2003. Science Fiction Hollinger, TheoryVeronica. “Feminist and Science Fiction.” London: 200 Greenwood Press, Fantasy and Fiction Science 1960 Fiction, “Science M. David Higgins, Norton & Company, 1982. G. Carolyn Heilbrun, 1974): 171 Disguise.” in Myth Sexist The “Androgyny: A. Daniel Harris, Androgyny.” of 1974): 151 Politics “The Barbara. Charlesworth, Gelpi University 2008. Press, Wendy Eds. --- 37.2 (2007): 182 Darkness of Hand Gender/s,S Wendy.“Postcolonialism/s, Gay Pearson, century FrenchHermaphrodite --- 234. Contemporary Art Foucault,“Utopian Body Michel. BantamBooks, Firestone, Shulamith. of Critique Guin’s History Le “ Anthropology: Rita. Felski, and Androgynyes, “Aliens, Representation in Mona. Fayad, Evola, Julius. Dwo Press, 1995. and Peter John, Nicholls.Clute, . “Towards a Queer Genealogy of SF.” SF.” of Genealogy Queer a “Towards . Introduction. .

rkin, Andrea.

1 .” 74 . New 2005. York: Verso,

New Literary History New Literary - . Ed. Gregory Claeys. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, Press, University Cambridge York: New and Cambridge Claeys. Gregory Ed. . 199. - - 184. 160.

The Metaphysics ofSex a Pasn Vrnc Hollinger Veronica Pearson, Gay i d sèl, i d sx: rnsxaiy Psmdrim ad h Dah of Death the and Postmodernism, Transsexuality, sexe: de Fin siècle, de Fin

. Eds. Farah Mendelsohn and Edward James. Cambridge New James. Mendelsohn. Eds.Farah and York: and Edward 1970.

- Herculine Barbin:Being the R 196. ’ HandofDarkness The Left . Ed. Caroline A. Jones. London. Ed.Caroline and A.Jones. Archaeologies of Archaeologies Woman Hating :

Gwyneth Jones's Aleutians Talk Bac Talk Aleutians Jones's Gwyneth

The Dialectic ofSex oad Rcgiin of Recognition A Toward

72 -

100. . , 27 . New 1980:vii York: Pantheon,

9. oue : Overviews 1: Volume The Encyclopedia ofScience Fiction .

. Plume, 1974. . Plume,

” 73 .2

125 Sensorium: Embodied Experience, Technology, and Sensorium: Experience, Embodied Technology, the Future: The Desire Called Utopia and Other Science Science Other and Utopia Called Desire The Future: the - (Sp 83. . New York: InnerInternational, York: . New 1983. Traditions - 136.

ring, 337 1996): : The Case forFeminist Revolution : TheCase ue Uiess Sxaiis n cec Fiction Science in Sexualities Universes: Queer

.” – 63

Mosaic 05 Nvl ad hr Fiction.” Short and Novels 2005: ecently DiscoveredaNineteenth of ecently Memoirs

Androgyny h Cmrde opno t Utopian to Companion Cambridge The n Ja Gro. iepo: Liverpool Liverpool: Gordon. Joan and exuality/ies and the Legacyexuality/iesof the and

E. oi An Ri. etot & Westport Reid. Anne Robin Ed. . Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006. 30.3 (Sept., 1997):59 - k.” 349. The Yearbook of English Studies English of Yearbook The Nw ok London: & York New . The Cambridge The to Cambridge Companion

– oe’ Studies Women’s oe’ Studies Women’s

xvii. . New York: Martin’s St. . New

- . 73. New York:

22 (Feb., 2.2 ,

, 2.2 (Feb., 2.2 , Women in in Women ‘ The Left The

. W. W.

229 - - . , CEU eTD Collection University 19 Press, Fiction Science of Anthropology The Aliens: Slusser, F Shaw, Debra. 169. Reappraisal.” Early An “Androgyny: Cynthia. Secor, University 1925. Press, Androgyne.” Plato. the of Representations Referent: Routledge, 1989. Impossible Fantasy of “The Formations Francette. Lies.” Pacteau, as Itself on Commentary A Fiction: Language Studies “Science Jeanne. Walker, Murray YorkLondon: and 1986. Methuen, Tom. Moylan, Press, 2003. EdwardEds. Farah Cambridgeand James. Mendelsohnand York: New C Merrick, inScience “Gender Helen. Fiction.” CambridgeUniversity Press, 2003. Science Fiction Mendelsohn,“Introduction: Farah.Reading Science Fiction.” from Marco Polo. Lincoln, Lem, “Lost Opportunities.” Stanislaw. --- Attebery. Norton York:W. & New W. Company,1993. ------art Review --- Science Fiction --- Science Fiction --- 208 Other.” the and SF “American K. Ursula Guin, Le rankenstein Inheritance . Introduction. . “Lost. AResponseOpportunities”. to Interview Wray.TheFictionLe Artby No.221.” John . “UrsulaK.Guin, of Brown.” Mrs. and Fiction “Science . Redux.” Necessary? Gender “Is . - of The -

210. - fiction Lysis. Symposium. Gorgias Symposium. Lysis.

206 (

Left HandofDarkness Left

ere . ad rc . Rabkin S. Eric and E., George Bruce

241 - Fall

no “ Introduction: Women, ScienceIntroduction: Women, Fiction.” and . . New York . Eds . New York Demand the Impossible: Science Fiction and the Utopian Imagination Utopian the and Fiction Science Impossible: the Demand

- - “ , 221

252.

62 ” , 8.3(Autumn, 1978):29 n al Mom Early An 2013) h Nro Bo o Sine Fiction Science of Book Norton The Comparative Studies in Society andHistory Studies inSociety Comparative 87. - . Farah Mendelsohn and Edward James. Cambridge New James. Mendelsohn. Farah and York: and Edward - 84. ursula

6 .

Es Vco Bri, ae Dnl, n Cr Kaplan. Cora and Donald, James Burgin, Victor Eds. . - 5 . Palgrave 2000. Macmillan, 14. June June : Harper Perennial, 1993(1979): 97 : Harper Perennial, 1993(1979): 155 - k

- le . Time Warner International,. Time Warner 1996. 2014 - guin n i te icus o ‘errs’ Reflec ‘Terrorism’: of Discourse the in ent . Trans. .

1 - . < 12. > h Lnug o te ih: sas n ats and Fantasy on Essays Night: the of Language The SF Commentary

http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6253/the The Language of the Night: Essays on Fantasy and Fantasy on Essays Night: the of Language The SF Commentary

. - W. R. M. R. W. 37. “ . Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois Southern Edwardsville: and Carbondale . Introduction

The Cambridge The toScience Cambridge Companion Fiction 64

Science Fiction Studies Fiction Science

Lamb. Cambridge and Cambridge Lamb.

Women’sStudies 1

24 (Nov., 1971): 22 Eds. . 11. 20 Te nhoooy f h Alien.” the of Anthropology The :

26 (Apr., 1972): 90 1972): 26 (Apr., -

34. Women, andFiction:The Science, The Cambridge The to Cambridge Companion

rua . e un n Brian and Guin Le K. Ursula , 48.2 (Apr., 2006):, 48.2(Apr., 242 117. - 172

, 2.2 (Feb., 1974): 161 1974): (Feb., 2.2 , a mbridgeUniversity - , 2.3 (Nov, 1975): (Nov, 2.3 ,

24. London: Harvard London: - 93. in o a Tale a on tions The Paris The Paris

London: Modern - 259. . New . -

. -

CEU eTD Collection Press ofVirginia, 1992. Kari.Weil, Ed. GregoryCambridgeand York:University CambridgeNew Press, Claeys. 2010. Vieira, “The Fatima. Concept ofUtopia.” Darko.Suvin, Androgyny and theDenialAndrogyny ofDifference and Metamorphoses of ScienceMetamorphoses of Fiction

The Cambridge Companion to Utopian Literature toUtopian Companion The Cambridge 65

. Yale University Press, 1977. . Charlottesville and London: University and. Charlottesville

3 - 27.