Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.07 AVERAGE
4.07 AVERAGE
adventurous
emotional
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
(Read overnight, so the different dates are just me reading past midnight lol.)
So good. Drawn in from the start. Afterwards, immediately pored over various analyses, then found myself editing its Wikipedia page. (There had been a typo in a quote from the story, and they’d left out the last reference to Marvell’s poetry in the penultimate paragraph of the story).
As a neurodivergent person, Osden really captured my interest, and the total lack of the word “ableism” in ANY analyses, summaries, etc. that I’ve read was honestly shocking.
…But, of course, it also really wasn’t. How often is ableism, especially in terms of neurodivergence, actually talked about effectively? Not a rhetorical question, and I’ll give you the answer: Not often enough. Not NEARLY often enough. Neurodivergent has a red line under it as I type even now. Themes of ableism are often discussed in more general terms that then allow people to avoid mentioning the actual ableism at all. In this story, every analysis I’ve seen has hidden the ableism conversation under the more general, more “palatable” theme of interpersonal relationships. Yes, that is a theme, but ableism is a BLATANTLY clear sub-theme of that which I have not once seen referred to, even obliquely.
Tomiko and Osden are, essentially, the two main characters. Tomiko serves as almost a stand-in for the reader, as we learn things at the same time she does. Through her experiences (and also the rest of the crew’s, but primarily hers), the reader is given the barest glimpse of what it’s like to live as Osden. The arc of how the crew’s view of Osden changes is, fundamentally, the plot of the entire story. The very first thing the crew does is talk about him behind his back, in a conversation that ranges only from clinically neutral to aggressively negative, until Osden himself walks into the room. The very first line of dialogue is literally Porlock saying, “I can’t stand him.” And Osden doesn’t actually change throughout the story; the crew’s level of sympathy towards him changes, which he simply reflects back.
Osden’s empathetic abilities function similarly to sensory issues. The crew getting a glimpse into what it’s like to experience them, and becoming less antagonistic to Osden as a result, is something that I simply cannot read as anything other than neurotypical people getting a glimpse into what it’s like to have a neurodivergent person’s sensory issues, and learning that neurodivergent people aren’t “crazy”— they’re just dealing with things that the neurotypical people don’t have to.
The ending, where Osden becomes one with the consciousness of the forest, and is presumably at peace— finally away from the constant “smog of cheap second-hand emotions” that’s forced on him whenever he interacts with humans, finally in the company of a consciousness that understands and communicates similarly to how he communicates— is one that, to me, brings up the social model of disability.
(The social model of disability is basically a model saying that disabled people are only disabled if their society allows them to be by refusing to make accommodations/that people can only be considered disabled in relation to the people they’re surrounded by. For example, people in wheelchairs wouldn’t really be considered disabled any more than we consider people with asthma disabled *IF* our society actually made accommodations for them like ramps, accessible layouts of housing, etc. For an example of the second part, if a hearing person were in a room full of deaf people who communicated with ASL, which the hearing person didn’t speak, then the hearing person would be the only “disabled” person in the room, since they would be the only one who couldn’t communicate.)
What other stories’ endings try to do by miraculously curing someone’s disability (yuck to that trope), this story actually does correctly: The disabled character gets a happy ending here because HIS ENVIRONMENT IS NO LONGER ONE THAT ACTIVELY HARMS HIM! He’s still autistic! He still has his empathetic abilities! BUT, he’s no longer in a place where he’s getting assaulted, both emotionally and physically. Hence, social model of disability. His environment is one that accommodates how he functions, and he’s around people/a consciousness that functions the same way. He can just BE. It’s great.
Now, obviously this story was written in the 70s. It’s not exactly the poster child for anti-ableist sentiment (it literally talks about how his autism is “cured” at the very beginning— yay, love eugenics /s) but overall, it far exceeded all of my expectations. The first statement of how Osden had everyone at his mercy, being then contrasted later on when Tomiko realizes that HE’s at all of THEIR mercy *all of the time*, gave me chills. That second one was a great paragraph, and the immensity of the relief that I felt, as a neurodivergent person, reading it for the first time and realizing that, yes, this story was headed in a good (read: not ableist) direction, was beyond words.
So, overall, I REALLY liked this story. I might go read it again right now.
So good. Drawn in from the start. Afterwards, immediately pored over various analyses, then found myself editing its Wikipedia page. (There had been a typo in a quote from the story, and they’d left out the last reference to Marvell’s poetry in the penultimate paragraph of the story).
As a neurodivergent person, Osden really captured my interest, and the total lack of the word “ableism” in ANY analyses, summaries, etc. that I’ve read was honestly shocking.
…But, of course, it also really wasn’t. How often is ableism, especially in terms of neurodivergence, actually talked about effectively? Not a rhetorical question, and I’ll give you the answer: Not often enough. Not NEARLY often enough. Neurodivergent has a red line under it as I type even now. Themes of ableism are often discussed in more general terms that then allow people to avoid mentioning the actual ableism at all. In this story, every analysis I’ve seen has hidden the ableism conversation under the more general, more “palatable” theme of interpersonal relationships. Yes, that is a theme, but ableism is a BLATANTLY clear sub-theme of that which I have not once seen referred to, even obliquely.
Tomiko and Osden are, essentially, the two main characters. Tomiko serves as almost a stand-in for the reader, as we learn things at the same time she does. Through her experiences (and also the rest of the crew’s, but primarily hers), the reader is given the barest glimpse of what it’s like to live as Osden. The arc of how the crew’s view of Osden changes is, fundamentally, the plot of the entire story. The very first thing the crew does is talk about him behind his back, in a conversation that ranges only from clinically neutral to aggressively negative, until Osden himself walks into the room. The very first line of dialogue is literally Porlock saying, “I can’t stand him.” And Osden doesn’t actually change throughout the story; the crew’s level of sympathy towards him changes, which he simply reflects back.
Osden’s empathetic abilities function similarly to sensory issues. The crew getting a glimpse into what it’s like to experience them, and becoming less antagonistic to Osden as a result, is something that I simply cannot read as anything other than neurotypical people getting a glimpse into what it’s like to have a neurodivergent person’s sensory issues, and learning that neurodivergent people aren’t “crazy”— they’re just dealing with things that the neurotypical people don’t have to.
The ending, where Osden becomes one with the consciousness of the forest, and is presumably at peace— finally away from the constant “smog of cheap second-hand emotions” that’s forced on him whenever he interacts with humans, finally in the company of a consciousness that understands and communicates similarly to how he communicates— is one that, to me, brings up the social model of disability.
(The social model of disability is basically a model saying that disabled people are only disabled if their society allows them to be by refusing to make accommodations/that people can only be considered disabled in relation to the people they’re surrounded by. For example, people in wheelchairs wouldn’t really be considered disabled any more than we consider people with asthma disabled *IF* our society actually made accommodations for them like ramps, accessible layouts of housing, etc. For an example of the second part, if a hearing person were in a room full of deaf people who communicated with ASL, which the hearing person didn’t speak, then the hearing person would be the only “disabled” person in the room, since they would be the only one who couldn’t communicate.)
What other stories’ endings try to do by miraculously curing someone’s disability (yuck to that trope), this story actually does correctly: The disabled character gets a happy ending here because HIS ENVIRONMENT IS NO LONGER ONE THAT ACTIVELY HARMS HIM! He’s still autistic! He still has his empathetic abilities! BUT, he’s no longer in a place where he’s getting assaulted, both emotionally and physically. Hence, social model of disability. His environment is one that accommodates how he functions, and he’s around people/a consciousness that functions the same way. He can just BE. It’s great.
Now, obviously this story was written in the 70s. It’s not exactly the poster child for anti-ableist sentiment (it literally talks about how his autism is “cured” at the very beginning— yay, love eugenics /s) but overall, it far exceeded all of my expectations. The first statement of how Osden had everyone at his mercy, being then contrasted later on when Tomiko realizes that HE’s at all of THEIR mercy *all of the time*, gave me chills. That second one was a great paragraph, and the immensity of the relief that I felt, as a neurodivergent person, reading it for the first time and realizing that, yes, this story was headed in a good (read: not ableist) direction, was beyond words.
So, overall, I REALLY liked this story. I might go read it again right now.
The way the autistic character was portrayed and used in the story has aged poorly, but Ursula yet again packed so much in 40 pages...
Content Warnings
Graphic: Ableism
This story is extremely well written and intriguing. The characters are fairly diverse and the concept of what is life, how do we define consciousness is present and interesting. A quick read, but excellent.
adventurous
challenging
dark
reflective
medium-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Brilliant. Ecologically profound and deeply moving. Highly recommended.
adventurous
emotional
funny
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Yes
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I read this as part of a writing course on the subject of character building- so much of my reaction and response to this short story revolves upon this subsection of fiction. I will say in terms of the work as a Le Guin piece- I was rather pleasantly surprised. I had read The Dispossessed earlier this year and while I remain impressed and in awe of what it was able to accomplish I had very little experience of joy while reading it. This story I felt nearly the opposite- I feel there are some half-baked or less thought out elements (some of which are of the time) that didn't connect with me but as a whole I really enjoyed reading it. The plot cadence and character building was adept but most importantly Le Guin's humor really shone through in regards to this piece. I was laughing for almost my entire read. As a story within the Hainish cycle I'm not sure it adds much to my understandings or regards toward Hain but fits with the larger trope of colonizers going to planets to be anthropologists and sometimes succeeding and sometimes not at leaving positive impressions on their surroundings.
So with that-the characters. This story is only 35 pages or so but does a better job at fleshing out characters than most novels can accomplish in 400+ pages. The ingenious way that Le Guin sometimes tells you about characters in underlying ways was as impressive as it was enjoyable to read. The way she relates a single character to their study- soft science vs. hard. My favorite characterization was when she balked at a Hainishmen for being teleological as antithetical to his society but then he "didn't take the bait."
I did think this story's use of autism (the word) as just a general lack of empathy was both inaccurate and kind of dated but also had little effect on the story as a whole. In place of when Le Guin used the term I was still able to garner the idea of what she meant- and the existence of this form of processing on an alien planet was not mirrored in impact to that with how it interacts on earth. Should Le Guin be held to a higher standard given her knowledge of psychology and anthropology ? Maybe, but she's been dead a few decades now so the ultimate effect is quite little. Maybe now its my turn to be teleological in nature.
I really appreciated the progression of the story, how it evolved the characters in relation to both each other and the environment . The end felt very inevitable, not only kind of as a metaphor for there being a lack of possible "curing" of Osden's inability to connect with his peers but also how everyone is sort of taken out by their personal achilles heel. Everything that happens in the beginning of the story and onward perfectly causes the inevitable end.
So with that-the characters. This story is only 35 pages or so but does a better job at fleshing out characters than most novels can accomplish in 400+ pages. The ingenious way that Le Guin sometimes tells you about characters in underlying ways was as impressive as it was enjoyable to read. The way she relates a single character to their study- soft science vs. hard. My favorite characterization was when she balked at a Hainishmen for being teleological as antithetical to his society but then he "didn't take the bait."
I did think this story's use of autism (the word) as just a general lack of empathy was both inaccurate and kind of dated but also had little effect on the story as a whole. In place of when Le Guin used the term I was still able to garner the idea of what she meant- and the existence of this form of processing on an alien planet was not mirrored in impact to that with how it interacts on earth. Should Le Guin be held to a higher standard given her knowledge of psychology and anthropology ? Maybe, but she's been dead a few decades now so the ultimate effect is quite little. Maybe now its my turn to be teleological in nature.
I really appreciated the progression of the story, how it evolved the characters in relation to both each other and the environment . The end felt very inevitable, not only kind of as a metaphor for there being a lack of possible "curing" of Osden's inability to connect with his peers but also how everyone is sort of taken out by their personal achilles heel. Everything that happens in the beginning of the story and onward perfectly causes the inevitable end.
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
A mix
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Yes
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
empathy, to be known, to know others, to be ones "whole" self / experience wholeness in someone else
--> making one a monster, making Osden's trap of hostility through ones own rejection of him
--> making one a monster, making Osden's trap of hostility through ones own rejection of him
A beautiful story from one of my favorite authors, but 3 stars for its being so blatantly anti-autistic.