Sunday, November 13, 2011

The Discourse(s) of Gethen

As I read the first chapter of Samuel Delaney’s Queer Thoughts and the Politics of the Paraliterary, I was able to more fully grasp the nature of my struggle to understand Le Guin’s The Left Hand of Darkness and the world of Gethen which it depicts.  After reflecting on Bohannon’s misguided effort to prove Shakespeare’s Hamlet has universal appeal by telling the tale to a group of West Africans, Delaney concludes it is a grave error to assume “that a single recognizable event, a single recognizable object, or a given rhetorical feature will have the same meaning no matter what discourse it is found in”(31).  My tendency to evaluate Le Guin’s invented world on the basis of my own assumptions and systems of meaning, which are rooted in the varied discourses to which I have been exposed, has led me to struggle with a series of contradictions while working through The Left Hand of Darkness. However, the folk tales sprinkled throughout the novel, much like the stories the Africans tell Bohannon which allow her to more fully understand their cultural difference, present some insight into the discourse of Gethen, and how rhetoric is shaping this discourse throughout the novel’s course.
“The Place Inside the Blizzard,” identified within the text as a hearth tale, reveals what meanings are written onto bodies through the discourse of Karhide. Though the lack of sexual differentiation within the people of Karhide prevents the society’s systems of signification from closely resembling the patriarchal discourse readers are familiar with and undoubtedly influenced by, the valuation of human life paramount to the culture of Karhide is certainly familiar. This sanctity of life is evidenced by the taboos against incest and suicide which are highlighted within the tale. Though the taboo against incest may initially prompt readers to forge a connection between this societal value and the incest taboo which serves as a powerful force within patriarchal culture, the fact that incestuous sexual relations are permitted until a child is born suggests that the outlawing of incest within Karhide is not motivated by the conception that such actions are morally reprehensible and universally unnatural, but rather by a concern for the health of the nation (or more specifically a healthy gene pool). The fact that incest is subjugated only for its ability to compromise the survival of Karhidians is further evidenced by the footnote which reveals that the brother’s choice to vow kemmering only became an issue when it was interpreted as leading to his brother’s suicide. The regard for life instilled within Karhide’s society is perhaps best evidenced by the powerful suicide taboo revealed within the observation “murder is a lighter shadow on a house than suicide”(Le Guin 22).  Since murder can be construed as an act to save one’s life in order to defeat an enemy or protect the lives of self and others, while suicide is an active choice to extinguish life which cannot be easily allied to an effort to sustain life in some other capacity, and thus a clear and direct act of devaluing life, this hierarchy supports the valuation of life.  One can infer this valuation of life is at least partially a result of the difficulty of living in a land as barren and frigid as Gethen, a speculation Ai makes repeatedly throughout the text.
The valuation of life made evident through these taboos is interwoven into a cultural conception that people do not own their bodies.  The notion that bodies are communal property is also evidenced by the existence of a powerful suicide taboo, as this societal value suggests one does not have the right to extinguish the vigor of their body by taking their own life.  Furthermore, as Getheren is held responsible for the suicide of his brother and lover, a strange dynamic in which individuals are somehow responsible for the bodies they come into contact with emerges.  After being exiled, Getheren has all bodily comforts denied and his bodily presence within he community is largely ignored, suggesting his brother’s decision to compromise his own body compromised Getheren’s body as well. Nevertheless, he retains a name, and his sentiment “There is no place by the fire for me, nor food on he able for me, nor a bed made for me to lie in. Yet I still have my name, Getheren is my name” suggests this name allows him to retain a sense of identity and power (Le Guin 22).   Though he compromises his name, and thus  his individuality, through his departure into the winter landscape, he is unable to violate the principle code of his society by compromising his own body.  As he crawls through the snow, he resists the temptation to lie in the snow and die, his expressed desire, suggesting that the valuation of life championed by his society still has a hold on him. The glorification of life within the story is furthered as he encounters his dead lover, finding there is “no life in his belly” and he cannot say his name, a moment which asserts there is no individual identity or bodily fertility in death.  Getheren’s ultimate choice to retain his bodily integrity reinforces both the sanctity of life and the notion of the body as communal property, while his sacrifice of his name in order to attain physical integrity privileges communal bodies as more important than personal identities.  Nevertheless, as Getheren relinquishes his individuality to his community and maintains his body, the collective object, this inversion proves highly problematic for the community, which promptly falls into a state of illness and infertility.   However, as his identity and body are ultimately reunited, the merging of these entities causes both Geheren’s own death and the prospering of his former community, signifying the death of the individual and ultimately once again asserting the community’s control of bodies.  The notions of communal bodies and communal responsibility for bodies which pervade “The Place Inside the Blizzard” suggest these values are embedded within the discourse of Karhide.   As Estraven is exiled, and, on some level, is punished for his associate Ai’s “perverse” bodily difference, this discursive quality reemerges.  
Nevertheless, the chapters which follow this story give the distinct impression that the discourse of Karhide is changing.  Though human life has clearly been regarded as sacred throughout history, the government’s aggressive support of the violence emerging in the Sinoth Valley suggests this value is under attack by the powers that be.   Furthermore, Estraven’s suggestion that King Argaven is attempting to run Karhide “efficiently” in a manner similar to the neighboring nation of Orgoreyn, a condition which Ai suspects will give the Gethian nations “an excellent chance of achieving the condition of war,” suggests events on the horizon may irrevocably alter the discourse of Gethen(Le Guin 49).  Karhide, and furthermore all of Gethen, clearly face the potential of massive alterations in their discourse as the story of the envoy Ai unfolds. Negotiating between the old and the new manners of making meaning is a challenge I fully expect to grapple with as I make my way through the rest of the text.

Tracy

Works Cited
Delaney, Samuel R. Queer Though and the Politics of the Paraliterary.  
      Wesleyan University Press. Hanover and London. 1999. Print.
Le Guin, Ursula K. The Left Hand of Darkness. New York: Ace, 2000. Print.

No comments:

Post a Comment