There’s Something in the Water: A Response To Ursula K. LeGuin

Chrissie Evaskis

HONR 111

 

Ursula K. LeGuin’s The Dispossessed was written in 1974 as an ending to her critically acclaimed Hain Cycle and as a voice for her views on feminism and the state of the United States of America and former Soviet Union. In The Dispossessed, the reader comes across LeGuin’s view of the American education system through the thoughts and words of Shevek, her Anarresti protagonist. Shevek advocates doing work because it has to be done and feels comfortable in giving every student the same grade, no matter how much effort was put into the paper. The students of Shevek, however, are dissatisfied with this philosophy and request that each paper be graded, because they see no point in working hard without a grade as a reward. I agree with both the students and Shevek to varying degrees.

Shevek’s view on education has been formed by the society in which he was raised. Anarres, his home planet, is a barren, almost inhospitable place. On Anarres, everyone works to support everyone else because they can’t afford not to. If someone didn’t wish to work, they only had to “refuse posting.” Most do not, because it would impact the group in a negative way. More importantly, higher education classes were formed “…by student demand, or on the teacher’s initiative, or by students and teachers together (Dispossessed, 126).” By choosing to create a class, it was unspoken that there was an interest in what the course had to offer, which meant you wanted to learn the subject. There would be no need for grades.

At Ieu Eun University, the students approached Shevek about creating an open class. Shevek had every reason to assume that the students wanted to learn physics for personal knowledge. Ionian/American society is very different from Anarresti society, however. Americans are taught that it is our right, maybe even our duty to be individuals. Marching to the beat of a different drummer is what our country is famous for. We distinguish ourselves in different ways. Some of us have multi-colored hair, some of us dress differently, some of us play sports. Others of us do well in school. None of these aforementioned things are bad; however, our need to be different, to excel at what we do, leaves us wanting something tangible to gage our progress. Grades are our gages.

When Shevek begins teaching his open class, he had no intention of giving out grades to any of the students. He believed that receiving knowledge was its own reward. I agree with Shevek on this issue. Knowledge is not something that should be taken for granted, because knowledge is what makes the world run. Ideas are forming, theories are being tested, and inventions are being created, all to make the world a better place. You don’t have to go to college to learn and acquire knowledge; you can learn anywhere. The problem with the students is the fact that they aren’t learning, they’re “…disgorging it (information) at demand (Dispossessed, 127).”

The students are flabbergasted when Shevek tells them to write a paper on the topic of their choice and turn it in, knowing that everyone will get the same grade. The students questioned Shevek, “How could the diligent students be distinguished from the dull ones? If no competitive distinctions were to be made, one might as well do nothing (Dispossessed, 128).” As previously stated, grades are our gages. In Anarresti society, grades aren’t needed because the final result of anything is for the greater good. In Ionian/American society, individualism has made a highly competitive world, where people look out only for themselves. The final result of anything puts you either ahead or behind someone else who you’ve been in competition with. There is no group. However, I appreciate grades. Grades are what have gotten me through school and what will continue to get me through college.  I use grades as a measurement of how I’m doing in a class as opposed to everyone else. I also feel that if someone isn’t putting the effort into a class, there should be consequences. I like knowing if I’m good at something or if it needs work, though usually I can figure it out on my own. The problem is that grades are be heralded as the purpose of going to school, not just a measurement.

Shevek isn’t wrong in expecting people to learn because they choose to learn. The students aren’t wrong in expecting a grade for the work that they put into a project, paper, or assignment. The problem is the different societies that they represent. Shevek took higher education classes because he felt like learning about something. His society allowed him the luxury of choice. American society lets us choose as well, but only after we have taken “required courses” or we have completed the “core curriculum.” It’s like trying to pick a fish out of a barrel: sooner or later you’re going to find one that stinks. If a course is required, I have no choice except to take it, even if I don’t like the subject. This is where grades come in. If I had no consequences for not going to class or not going homework in a class I disliked, I wouldn’t do it. Grades keep me in check because I know that there will be consequences for my actions. Ionian/American society is good in that respect. America wants results and is looking for someone to deliver them. There is nothing wrong with my grades showing that I’m more suited to a job than someone else. However, Americans want to perform well, not for any pleasure, but for the highest-paying job. This is what Shevek is coming up against.

In conclusion, my response to Ursula K. LeGuin’s critique of Ionian/American education is that while Shevek’s reason for learning is great and admirable, it’s only one side of the argument. It’s not a belief issue so much as it is a society issue and until most of the problems are worked out, America will have problems with its educational system.

Works Cited

LeGuin, Ursula K. The Dispossessed.

         HarperCollins: New York, 10 East 53^rd Street, 1974.