Le Guin's Left Hand of Darkness

In her article “Is Gender Necessary?” Ursula K. Le Guin mentions that her novel Left Hand of Darkness arose from 1960s feminism and her interest in probing issues of gender and sexuality. In the article, she describes protagonist Genly Ai as “conventional, indeed rather stuffy” (163). What interests me about Genly’s stuffiness is his misogyny. As Genly attempts to place androgynous Gethenians into a gender box, he continually tries to make them men and is struck by their feminine qualities. Without exception, except towards the end, the characters’ feminine qualities are unpleasant. I think this misogyny may have three potential origins: Le Guin’s sociohistorical context, her intent to show Genly as patriarchal, and the fact that the attempt to define a masculine gender box tends to result in misogyny associated with homophobia.

Evidence of Genly’s misogyny can be identified throughout the novel. Here is one example from his description of the guards at Pulefen Voluntary Farm: “They tended to be stolid, slovenly, heavy, and to my eyes effeminate--not in the sense of delicacy, etc., but in just the opposite sense: a gross, bland fleshiness, a bovinity without point or edge” (176). Each time Genly references femininity, his tone is disapproving. Here the diction contributing to the tone includes “slovenly, “gross, bland fleshiness,” “bovinity,” and “without point or edge.” The Gethenians are not neat or trim, as apparently men would be; they are fleshy, which suggests not only laziness but also a kind of threat of flesh, as if too much flesh would threaten to absorb one, which suggests a kind of fear of the maternal body. In addition, “bland,” “bovinity,” and “without point or edge” suggest stupidity, as if men would be more dynamic and intelligent, while women are uninteresting and lazily stupid, just sitting around without activity, chewing cud. What a portrait of femininity!

Some of this diction likely arises from 1960s views of men and women, as both genders were stereotyped in dualistic ways. In “Is Gender Necessary?” Le Guin references Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex and also Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique (161), both of which highlight the dangers of stereotyping. Friedan’s book in particular argues against women’s domestic role, which might relate to the depiction of women as bovine. Because they are imagined to sit around the house all day and to go to college only to get their “Mrs.” degree, it might be a commonplace to assume lazy fleshiness and mental inactivity. Obviously, anyone who makes this assumption has not had charge of domestic arrangements for a household.

However, there seems to be some irony in this assumption cropping up in Le Guin’s novel. It seems to be more meaningful than the anachronism of bouffant hairdos and go-go boots in Star Trek. In describing Genly as “conventional,” Le Guin calls attention to his depiction as a patriarchal man. Deploying a conventional, patriarchal man in an alien context calls attention to the socialized attitudes he cannot shake. Women are like cows because his culture feeds him that assumption. The fact that Genly’s views become more balanced by the end, in his ability to see both masculinity and femininity in King Argaven without horror (291), suggests that growth away from misogyny represents an important character development and also part of the learning that readers can take away from the novel.

The other lesson that emerges for me in exploring Genly’s transformation is that misogyny and homophobia are used as a threat to police the boundaries of the masculine gender box. Boys and men are encouraged to “be a man,” to avoid throwing or crying like girls, and to be strong, not show emotion, and deal with other men in less emotional ways, for example, as teammates in sports institutions where a slap on the butt means only team-oriented support. Genly’s exclusively misogynist opinions regarding femininity highlight the fact that producing patriarchal masculinity requires denigrating women and any potentiality of homosexual feeling or activity. Any sign of femininity is “prying, spying, ignoble” (48), something not to be emulated or desired. However, once Genly has developed a deep friendship for the Genthenian Estraven, a friendship verging but not acting on sexual desire, he realizes that femininity in others and even in himself is not a threat. People are not easily divided up in to masculine and feminine; they are human beings, all worthy of kindness, respect, and love. Misogyny and homophobia are thus tools of hatred, and individuals seeking balance in the world need to move beyond them.

I have read Le Guin’s Left Hand of Darkness many times, and I get new ideas from it with each reading. While de Beauvoir and Friedan enacted feminism through analytical writing, Le Guin has done a masterful job in communicating feminist ideas through fiction. In this case, she provides a pathway for addressing gender inequity. We are born within gender norms, and getting outside of them is difficult if not impossible. Through the “thought experiment” of science fiction (“Is” 163), Le Guin provides a glimpse of a more self-aware gender identity where humans can spend less time denigrating the other and more time building meaningful relationships within and across gender boundaries.

Works Cited

The Left Hand of Darkness Book Cover. amazon.com. n.d. Web. 18 Jan. 2014.
Le Guin, Ursula K. “Is Gender Necessary?” Language of the Night: Essays on Fantasy and Science Fiction. Ed. Susan Wood. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1979. 161-69. Print.

---. The Left Hand of Darkness. New York: Ace Books, 1969. Print.