The+Dispossessed

** Is Anarres or Urras more utopian? This question might lead you to consider the novel as an ambiguous utopia. **
Determining Utopia in //The Dispossessed//: A Search for "No Place" When I initially began reading //The Dispossessed// by Ursula K. Le Guin, I made the immediate assumption that Anarres //was// the utopian society. When the novel described Urras, I perceived this planet representative of Earth (or even just the United States). With that in mind, reference to Urras as a land of abundant resources brought to mind words like “excess,” “wasteful,” and “greed.” My thoughts lead me to the conclusion that if Anarres was intended to correct the problems of Urras, it //must// be the utopia in this story. My belief in this theory was only augmented by the idea that utopian novels are written to provide a solution to perceived societal problems.

However, as I delved further into the plot, I was forced to reframe my original opinions. The first thing I noticed was that, perhaps, abundance should not just bring about thoughts of “excess,” but also the idea of “plenty.” This term has a much more positive connotation, implying that Urras might actually be a paradise like the Garden of Eden, one of the first utopian tales. In fact, after visiting Urras as an ambassador from Anarres, Shevek begins to refer to Urras in terms of “paradise.” Wastefulness and greed continued to play an important role, depicting what a land of abundance can do to a society, but it was clear that Urras was not the dystopia I had originally imagined.

This reframed mindset seemed to describe Anarres, as well. As the novel progressed, Anarres began to lose its utopian appeal as problems were slowly and subtly revealed. Most apparent was the barren land and sparse resources that characterized the planet: a quality that contrasted greatly with Urras. But the society had political and social struggles as well. Initially, Anarres seemed to be an unusually perfect anarchic society, however, as the later in the novel, Shevek became conscience of the fact that he was not //as// free as he had once believed. He realized that the thoughts and opinions of the general public, as well as close colleagues and friends, have a significant influence on what a person can and cannot do. This begins to reveal an unfortunate tendency of human nature that creates a constant struggle for power among a population.

Part of what makes this novel an ambiguous utopia is the fact that neither planet is undeniably “good” or “bad.” Both planets have qualities that are “eutopic” and “dystopic,” making it difficult to place a label on either planet. Thus, it seems that the only way to determine which planet represents utopia is through use of the literal definition: “no place.” With that definition in mind, Anarres stands out as a utopian society. The determining factors of a utopia are based largely on perception, making the statement “one person’s utopia is another person’s hell,” overwhelmingly applicable.

Coming from the perspective of a United States citizen it is difficult to imagine a functioning anarchist society. The capitalist believes in competition and self-improvement and the idea of democracy implies a political structure. The anarchist, however, rejects formal political structure and (in this particular case) promotes the well being of all persons in the society. This notion is inconceivable to the capitalistic democrat, making Anarres the perfect “no place,” for the United States citizen.

Additionally, as previously mentioned, Anarres is a society that was put in place to solve the problems of Urras. Throughout the course of the novel, we see that some of those perceived problems are very reminiscent of problems we face in our society today. Anarres provides a new functioning society that offers a solution to these problems in a way that has never been seen before, making Anarres truly utopian.

This struggle to find utopia, which even the protagonist partakes in, brings to light the strategy of an ambiguous utopia. By creating good and bad elements to each society, the reader is forced to forget labels and begin comparing the problems presented in both societies to the problems faced in contemporary society. Through this, the reader inevitably determines utopia by deciding which society best corrects the problems that exist today. The reality of the society is not a factor when speaking in ideals, which is why “no place,” is a powerful tool for social examination. It allows Anarres, a society which we cannot perceive to be functional or successful, to become a utopia for citizens of the United States.