The Left Hand of Darkness as a Queer Text by NICK AUFDERHEIDE
When Ursula Le Guin published her science fiction novel The Left Hand of Darkness in 1969 it was well received by readers and critics, winning the Nebula Award and the Hugo Award back-to-back in 1970. Many people consider it to be one of the most influential pieces of science fiction writing, and The Paris Review claims that “no single work did more to upend [science fiction’s] conventions” (Wray, 2013). Science fiction, while entertaining thought-experiments that speculate on the changes that technology will have on society, do not often challenge preexisting, unquestioned social norms, particularly those surrounding sex, gender, and sexuality. As queer studies emerged in the late 20th century, it provided a new perspective “on how gender identification and sexual preferences are protrayed in literature” (Cole, 2021). One of the most interesting elements of Le Guin’s novel is its portrayal and exploration of sex and gender. On Gethen (or Winter) there is no gender; instead, every Gethenian is functionally sexless for most of the month until they enter “kemmer,” or their fertile period, during which they develop sex organs for reproductive purposes. Therefore, there is functionally no sexuality on Winter, as anyone can perform any sexual role depending on their chosen partner. This goes beyond speculative science fiction: the world that Le Guin created is one that transcends the gender binary, and it is therefore inherently queer. The narrative follows Genly Ai, a human emissary who travels to Winter to facilitate its inclusion in a coalition of humanoid worlds known as the “Ekumen.” Though Genly’s ultimate goal is to convince the inhabitants of Winter to join the Ekumen, a secondary narrative takes place that emphasizes Genly’s developing relationship with Estraven, a native inhabitant of Winter. Through examining the world that Le Guin created as well as Genly and Estraven’s relationship, readers can come to understand the novel as a significant queer text.
When referring to a queer narrative, it becomes necessary to define queerness itself. Hanna Kubowitz suggests that defining queerness casts it in direct opposition to a perceived sociocultural norm, which is often heterosexual, white, and able-bodied (2012). Therefore, anything queer must differ from those assumed norms as they relate to sex and gender, though it is also “that which is, and those who are, extraordinary or exceptional” (Kubowitz, 2012). Attitudes about anything that differs from social norms are often negative, and although those attitudes about the queer community still persist today, queer theory attempts to identify and explain how those social forms function within and expose the dominant narratives that keep those norms in place. By using queer theory and exploring narratives that somehow subvert or defy social norms, it is possible to imagine a future where what is considered subversive can be acknowledged, accepted, and even celebrated.
A queer narrative is then any narrative that features queer characters or highlights queer themes. A modern queer narrative would likely feature a character that is explicitly labeled as queer in some way or have its cast encounter some topic that introduces the subject, but queer narratives can also be subtle or obscured. Considering the historical and continued subjugation of the queer community, authors who wanted to include queer subtext in their narratives often had to do so by using specific imagery or phrases to alert readers to hidden or implied meanings. The fact that these meanings are hidden do not lessen their significance within the narrative; in fact, since they often require readers to employ specific strategies in order to discover them, they can often feel more significant due to their concealment. Those strategies can vary, but they require readers to confront the normative biases they have about sex and gender that are reinforced by cultural social norms. It quickly becomes clear that a reader who is queer themselves would be more likely to catch any queer narrative subtext than a reader who is not queer, but it is by no means impossible for that reader to discover those meanings: it simply takes careful thought, an examination of personal bias, and a willingness to allow the potential for queerness within a narrative.
The Left Hand of Darkness is not a subtly queer narrative: it features a population with a sexual structure that is completely alien to the reader as well as the novel’s protagonist. As Genly Ai explores Gethen and comes closer to meeting his goal of having Gethen join the Ekumen, he comes to better understand the native population of Gethen and learns to stop applying his own conceptions of gender and sexuality to them. During that time he also becomes closer to Estraven, whom he develops a deep emotional connection with that allows them to transcend the social barriers that keep them apart. Relearning inherent biases, discovering new ways of doing gender, transcending life experiences to connect with someone: these themes all lend themselves to a queer reading. Conceptualizing the novel as explicitly queer allows for a contemporary reader to confront their own ingrained biases about sex and gender as Genly does the same.
Before exploring what exactly about The Left Hand of Darkness marks it as an iconic queer novel, it is necessary to discuss the shortcoming of the novel as a queer text and, indeed, as a creative text in general. Although the inhabitants of Gethen are functionally sexless and without gender, Le Guin made the decision to exclusively use the masculine pronoun ‘he’ to refer to them. This choice is one that has been discussed numerous times by critics, and it is a decision that Le Guin reflected on multiple times after the novel's publication. Some critics claim that by exclusively using masculine pronouns she failed to adequately portray a world without a gender binary and that she “reinforc[ed] the socially constructed idea that femininity is to be seen as inferior to masculinity” (Cole, 2021). While reflecting on the novel in 1976, she referred to the Gethenians as “androgynous,” though she also acknowledged that, to many, “the Gethenians seem like men, instead of menwomen” (Le Guin, 1976). It is clear that there is a substantial criticism of the text here: Le Guin, by refusing to invent a new pronoun and instead using male pronouns for all Gethenians, failed to portray the nuance that a truly genderless society would have. Instead of readers seeing a society full of androgynes, they see a society full of men who are supposedly androgynous. Le Guin defended her decision to use the masculine pronoun for Gethenians, and equally condemned the idea that she could have invented a new pronoun for them, as she “refuse[d] to mangle English by inventing a pronoun for ‘he/she’” (Le Guin, 1976). The flaw in the novel, according to Le Guin, is the failure to adequately showcase Gethenians engaging in stereotypically feminine activities so that their androgyny is clearer to readers. However, there are various moments in the novel where Gethenians perform stereotypically gendered activities, and at numerous points Genly even expresses his surprise at seeing them act in such ways. While Le Guin initially defended her decision, she later acknowledged the damage done by “the universal masculine pronoun, in that it establishes men as the norm and women as Other” (Gleason, 1996). Therefore, throughout this paper, I will use the gender-neutral singular pronoun ‘they’ to refer to any Gethenian, though I will not change any pronouns that are within quotes from the novel.
Ursula Le Guin presented the idea of a world without gender as a “heuristic device, a thought-experiment” (Le Guin, 1976). Gethenians are not strictly male or female, though while they are in kemmer they are able to reproduce. This makes them “responsive to monthly cycles, thus linking their experience of sex and gender to human women’s experience of menstruation” (Pearson, 2007). In this alien world, Genly is an outsider, and his permanent sex characteristics make him subject to judgement from Gethenians: the King of Karhide refers to him as “a sexual freak or an artificial monster” and as coming from “a society of perverts” (Le Guin, 1969, p. 23).
Although from a reader's perspective, the Gethenians are the ones with the incomprehensible alien physiology, the narrative flips the script. This suggests that, within our own society, the marginalization of specific sexual identities is “arbitrary and determined by the heterosexual majority” (Lapointe, 2018). These differences often cause unease between Genly and the inhabitants of Gethen, and reinforces both parties' held belief of themself as the norm.
The novel begins during a parade in Erhenrang, a city on the planet Gethen in the nation Karhide. Genly Ai is watching the festivities with Therem Harth rem ir Estraven, a native inhabitant of Winter, Prime Minister of Karhide, and one of the most powerful people in the country. Genly is unable to conceptualize a person as anything but one of the two binary genders, and since Estraven’s outward appearance conforms with what Genly assumes, Genly instantly and instinctually classifies Estraven as a man. Genly continues to make assumptions about Gethenians genders, and always attempts to classify them according to the two-gender binary system. Although he has been on Winter for nearly two years by the start of the novel, he acknowledges that he “was still far from being able to see the people of the planet through their own eyes,” and that his efforts “took the form of self-consciously seeing a Gethenian first as a man, then as a woman, forcing him into categories irrelevant to his nature” (Le Guin, 1969, p. 11-12). By having the protagonist of the novel be an outsider on an alien planet with alien physiology, it becomes clear to readers that Genly and our own understanding of gender norms are irrelevant in understanding Le Guin’s world (Abraham, 2018).
Much of what distresses Genly about Gethenians in the early part of the novel is their failure to conform to his own expectations regarding how they should perform their gender. Specifically, since he perceives and treats the Gethenians as men, he becomes distressed or irritated when they display more typically feminine characteristics. He describes Estraven’s behavior at the festival as “womanly, all charm and tact and lack of substance, specious and adroit,” and wonders if it was “this soft supple femininity that [Genly] disliked and distrusted in him” (Le Guin, 1969, p. 12). Since Le Guin writes from a male perspective, and a male perspective that is inherently sexist against women, there is a large lack of any female perspective in the novel. This is once again assuming that Le Guin’s approach to androgyny in her novel equates it to masculinity. Though this criticism is certainly valid, the other effect of having a male protagonist is that it provides male readers someone to empathize with throughout the novel. Additionally, since Genly is “not the brightest or most insightful of narrators,” it is his “very slowness to understand that makes him a useful lens through which to view life on Gethen” (Pearson, 2007). As Genly confronts his own biased attitudes about sexuality and gender, the reader “can confront their own ambiguous responses to women through the cultural shock of seeing feminine qualities in Gethenians that Genly Ai unconsciously perceives as male” (Barrow & Barrow, 1987). By writing from a male perspective, Le Guin allows men to empathize with Genly Ai, which makes it more likely that they will come to confront their own ideas about sex and gender. This “difficult path of jarring revelations” is part of what helps the readers empathize with Genly (Abraham, 2018). As previously mentioned, the novel’s narrative lends itself easily to a queer interpretation, but additionally, but forcing readers to confront the fact that Gethenians are not male may also impact their perception of women.
Additionally, claiming that Genly’s perspective is one that encompasses the dominant cultural perspective over a marginalized one by choosing to feature a male protagonist over a female one ignores the fact that Genly himself is part of what readers identify as a marginalized community: he is Black, as are the native inhabitants of Gethen. Le Guin’s decision to feature exclusively people of color in the novel went against common trends in science fiction at the time. Therefore, claiming that Genly as a protagonist fails to offer a diverse perspective is simply not true, as his very existence is an example of diversity. Returning to the definition of queerness that describes it as “that which is, and those who are, extraordinary or exceptional,” as well as anything that goes against social norms (Kubowitz, 2012). Equating a Black male protagonist with a White male protagonist ignores the impacts that race has on our social interactions, and the racial imbalance that has persisted in our country for years, represented and reinforced by representation in the media. Le Guin’s decision to feature a Black male protagonist once again went against common conventions at the time, and her novels were the first time many people saw Black characters depicted in science fiction (Monaghan, 2016). To claim that Le Guin, by not featuring a female protagonist, failed to offer a perspective that differs from those typical of science fiction at the time is untrue.
Although the novel primarily focuses on Genly’s attempt to facilitate Gethen’s inclusion in the Ekumen, Genly’s developing relationship with Estraven is one of the most important elements of the plot. Through Estraven, Genly confronts his ingrained beliefs about sexuality and gender and comes to recognize Estraven as something outside of the typical gender binary. Estraven and Genly have spent many months together before the novel begins, but Genly still does not trust Estraven, as their “motives are forever obscure,” something he attributes to the innate femininity he senses in Estraven that goes against the way he perceives Estraven’s gender (Le Guin, 1969, p. 7). This distrust is exacerbated by a Gethenian concept called “shifgrethor,” which can be loosely compared to human conceptions of pride, and prevents Estraven from stating their thoughts outright. However, Genly still thinks that shifgrethor is “more to do with feminine notions of self-respect rather than masculine notions of honor,” betraying his still biased thinking (Barrow & Barrow, 1987). This causes a fundamental misunderstanding between the two that makes it impossible for them to communicate, and it is only in the latter portion of the novel that they are able to reconcile their differences.
The novel’s second act almost exclusively focuses on Estraven and Genly, after Genly is kidnapped, drugged, and imprisoned on a work farm by Karhidish nobility and Estraven rescues him. Estraven has long since been banished from Karhide, but the two must make their way back there in order for Genly to contact his people. However, their journey is not easy, as they must traverse the hundreds of miles of frozen land between Pulefen Farm, where Genly was imprisoned, and Karhide. During their first fifty days on the Gobrin ice, they bond considerably, first establishing their shared role as exiles: Genly shares that he “thought [him]self an exile,” and Estraven claims that they are in exile for the other's sake (Le Guin, 1969, p. 222). They are able to recognize the ways that they might have misinterpreted the others actions, and as they come to that realization they are able to better understand each other. From there, their relationship continues to develop, and they become closer and more intimate.
Eventually, their developing relationship comes to a head when Estraven enters kemmer for the first time during their journey, causing Genly to contemplate the idea of sex. He expects that it is likely that sexual intercourse is possible “between Gethenian double-sexed and Hainishnorm one-sexed beings,” and it is this conclusion that finally allows him to see what he “had always been too afraid to see, and had pretended not to see: that [Estraven] was a woman as well as a man” (Le Guin, 1969, p. 248). When faced with the reality of Estraven’s sexual nature after coming to know them as a person, Genly is finally able to truly understand their gender and the gender system on Gethen, overcoming his internal biases. This at last allows for the two to accept and love each other as they are, even as Estraven tells Genly that they must not touch each other, and even though Genly agrees. Genly thinks that this “sexual tension” between them allowed for friendship to rise, “a friendship [... that] might as well be called, now as later, love” (Le Guin, 1969, p. 249). Though their decision was mutual, they are both unsure of whether or not they made the right choice in choosing not to consummate their relationship. Despite the fact that Genly and Estraven do not confess their feelings, kiss, or become physically intimate, they still share a deep, spiritual connection that allows them to fully understand and respect each other. Estraven van Hart and Genly Ai do fall in love with each other, and their relationship is one of the driving forces of the narrative. As Genly confronts his irrelevant perceptions of sex and gender, he comes to realize that he has been ignorant in his assumptions and unfair towards Estraven, as well as towards Gethenians in general.
Ultimately, The Left Hand of Darkness by Ursula Le Guin offers a glimpse into a world where people are not defined by their gender. Despite its classification as a speculative science fiction novel, it is ultimately a story about love: love for one’s country, love for culture, and love for people. It should be recognized as a significant queer text for multiple reasons, most notably because of its groundbreaking exploration of an alternative gender system. By creating a world where the gender binary does not exist, Le Guin created an inherently queer text that imagined a world where normative assumptions and gender classifications are completely irrelevant. Genly Ai acts as a representation of the reader, with their own biases and assumptions, and as he comes to understand Gethenian physiology, the reader comes to understand it as well. This allows Genly and Estraven to be able to transcend their differences and fall in love. The narrative that Le Guin presents is an inherently queer one, and conceptualizing it as such helps readers understand the narrative in a deeper way and confront their own biases around sex and gender.
Works Cited
Abraham, V. (2018). The Left Hand of Darkness: Perspectives of Truth (Order No. 10810794). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2124445403). https://proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-the ses/left-hand-darkness-perspectives-truth/docview/2124445403/se-2
Barrow, C., & Barrow, D. (1987). “The Left Hand of Darkness”: Feminism for Men. Mosaic: A Journal for the Interdisciplinary Study of Literature, 20(1), 83–96. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24777705
Cole, N. (2021). Destabilizing Gender Binaries and Ideologies: The Progression of Gender and Queer Studies Through Twentieth Century Literature (Order No. 28413217). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (2512367852). https://proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.proxy.consortiu mlibrary.org/dissertations-theses/destabilizing-gender-binaries-ideologies/docview/25123 67852/se-2
Gleason, B. P. (1996). The rhetoric of androgyny: Gender and boundaries in Le Guin's "The Left Hand of Darkness" (Order No. 1380806). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (304269728). https://proxy.consortiumlibrary.org/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.proxy.consortiu mlibrary.org/dissertations-theses/rhetoric-androgyny-gender-boundaries-le-guins/docview /304269728/se-2
Kubowitz, H. (2012). The Default Reader and a Model of Queer Reading and Writing Strategies Or: Obituary for the Implied Reader. Style, 46(2), 201–228. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5325/style.46.2.201
Lapointe, G. (2018, January 24). “Light is the Left Hand of Darkness”: Deconstructing Gender Binarisms. Grace Lapointe. Retrieved December 11, 2022, from https://gracelapointe.medium.com/light-is-the-left-hand-of-darkness-deconstructing-gend er-binarisms-787809af471d
Le Guin, U. (1969). The Left Hand of Darkness. Ace Books. Le Guin, U. (1976). Is Gender Necessary? https://americanfuturesiup.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/is-gender-necessary.pdf Monaghan, E. (2016, April 1). Ursula K. Le Guin on Racism, Anarchy, and Hearing Her
Characters Speak. Literary Hub. Retrieved December 11, 2022, from https://lithub.com/ursula-k-le-guin-on-racism-anarchy-and-hearing-her-characters-speak/ Pearson, W. G. (2007). Postcolonialism/s, Gender/s, Sexuality/ies and the Legacy of “The Left
Hand of Darkness”: Gwyneth Jones’s Aleutians Talk Back. The Yearbook of English Studies, 37(2), 182–196. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20479309
Wray, J. (2013). Ursula K. Le Guin, The Art of Fiction No. 221. Paris Review. Retrieved
December 11, 2022, from https://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6253/the-art-of-fiction-no-221-ursula-k-le-guin
Nick Aufderheide is a senior pursuing a degree in English with a Women’s Studies minor. Selected by Trish Jenkins.