History YMMV / TheDispossessed

* TearJerker: Poor Tirin. After putting on a satirical play and deciding that art is his calling in life, he is driven to a nervous breakdown because the people of his community think he is not a good Odonian and loudly criticise him for it. It gets to the point that he feels that society has rejected him, and seeing no other option, shuts himself away in an asylum. He apparently leaves the asylum at some point and meets Shevek later in life, at which point he is a broken shell of a man, obsessing over his play and desperate for the approval of others.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Unfortunately, this simply isn't true to RealLife guerilla warfare. Guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This is especially glaring with the context that America was actually involved in [[UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that the book was written. The guerrillas in that war had a very highly developed military hierarchy. Even anarchist guerrillas have hierarchies in real life, though in that case the officers are usually elected.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy. This even goes for real life anarchist guerrillas, though there the officers were usually elected.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy. This even goes for real life anarchist guerrillas, though there the officers were usually elected.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy. This even goes for real life anarchist guerrillas, though there the officers were usually elected by the enlisted.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[UsefulNotes/TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.
** To be fair, there are historical examples of guerrillas who didn't use hierarchy, like the POUM militias GeorgeOrwell fought with during the SpanishCivilWar (read Orwell's ''Literature/HomageToCatalonia'' for a detailed description). Of course, they lost the war.

** To be fair, there are historical examples of guerrillas who didn't use hierarchy, like the POUM militias GeorgeOrwell fought with during the SpanishCivilWar (read Orwell's ''Literature/HomageToCatalonia'' for a detailed description). Of course, they lost the war.
* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with subtly, with the increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that the profit motive as practised on A-Io provides a far better life to most Iotians than Shevek had been led to believe. Then, practically out of the blue, A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand. Well, ''duh'', Anarresti anarchism is better than ''that''. So, for that matter, is the United States of America in the 1970's, for which A-Io was obviously meant to be a loose analogue. Hell, by the 1970's even the real-world analogue of Thu, the USSR, was not mowing down protestors in such numbers that the closely-packed dead bodies were left jammed in a standing position. The whole philosophical debate is tossed aside and replaced by Baddies Are Bad.
** In an interesting case, the A-Io's actions are understandable, though not justified - they remember what the last strike led to, and they are all out of moons to bribe dissidents with.
** It's probably worth noting that, while massacres of striking workers weren't common in 1970s America, they ''were'' common in America at the turn of the century, so this could also simply be a case of AnachronismStew.

** In an interesting case, the A-Io's actions are understandable, though not justified - they remember what the last strike led to, and they are all out of moons to bribe dissidents with.

* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with subtly, with the increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that the profit motive as practised on A-Io provides a far better life to most Iotians than Shevek had been led to believe. Then, practically out of the blue, A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand. Well, ''duh'', Anarresti anarchism is better than ''that''. So, for that matter, is the United States of America in the 1970's, for which A-Io was obviously meant to be a loose analogue. Hell, by the 1970's even the real-world analogue of Thu, the USSR, was not mowing down protestors in such numbers that the closely-packed dead bodies were left jammed in a standing position. The whole philosophical debate is tossed aside and replaced by Baddies Are Bad.

* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with subtly, with the increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that A-Io and the profit motive generally provide a far better life to most Iotians than Shevek had been led to believe. Then, practically out of the blue, A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand. Well, ''duh'', Annaresti anarchism is better than ''that''. So, for that matter, is the United States of America in the 1970's, for which A-Io was obviously meant to be a loose analogue. Hell, by the 1970's even the real-world analogue of Thu, the USSR, was not mowing down protestors in such numbers that the closely-packed dead bodies were left jammed in a standing position. The whole philosophical debate is tossed aside and replaced by Baddies Are Bad.

* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with subtly, with increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that A-Io and the profit motive generally provide a far better life to most Iotians than Shevek had been led to believe. Then, practically out of the blue, A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand. Well, ''duh'', Annaresti anarchism is better than ''that''. So, for that matter, is the United States of America in the 1970's, for which A-Io was obviously meant to be a loose analogue. Hell, by the 1970's even the real-world analogue of Thu, the USSR, was not mowing down protestors in such numbers that the closely-packed dead bodies were left jammed in a standing position. The whole philosophical debate is tossed aside and replaced by Baddies Are Bad.

* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with subtly, with increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that A-Io and the profit motive generally provide a far better life to most Iotians than Shevek had been led to believe. Then, practically out of the blue, A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand. Well, ''duh'', Annaresti anarchism is better than ''that''. So is the United States of America in the 1970's, for which A-Io was obviously meant to be a loose analogue. Hell, by the 1970's even the real-world analogue of Thu, the USSR, was not mowing down protestors in such numbers that the closely-packed dead bodies were left jammed in a standing position.

* DebateAndSwitch: Most of the book can be read as a dramatized debate over the question of whether anarchism, represented by the Odonian philosophy practised on Anarres, or liberal democratic capitalism, represented by the nation of A-Io, is better. Although it is clear that the author's sympathies lie mostly with Odonianism, the question is dealt with very subtly, with the flaws and increasing majority-backed repressiveness of Anarres being shown, as is the fact that Urras is far more prosperous than Shevek had been led to believe. Then A-Io massacres peaceful protestors by the thousand

** To be fair, there are historical examples of guerrillas who didn't use hierarchy, like the POUM militias GeorgeOrwell fought with during the SpanishCivilWar (read Orwell's ''Literature/HomageToCatalonia'' for a detailed description). Of course, they lost the war.

** To be fair, there are historical examples of guerrillas who didn't use hierarchy, like the CNT-FAI during the SpanishCivilWar (read Orwell's ''Literature/HomageToCatalonia'' for a detailed description). Of course, they lost the war.

** To be fair, there are historical examples of guerrillas who didn't use hierarchy, like the CNT-FAI during the Spanish Civil War (read Orwell's ''Literature/HomageToCatalonia'' for a detailed description). Of course, they lost.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare, as even a cursory study of the topic would have taught her that guerilla armies do indeed have rank structures, organized units, and hierarchies of command (they are basically just light infantry who are trained in raiding tactics). This was an especially egregious error, given that America was actually ''involved in'' [[TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, Creator/UrsulaKLeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare -- an especially egregious error, given that America was actually involved in [[TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.

* CriticalResearchFailure: Shevek floors an Urrasti in debate by pointing out that military hierarchy is unnecessary, since, after all, guerrillas manage without such things. Apparently, LeGuin had never troubled herself to learn anything about guerilla warfare -- an especially egregious error, given that America was actually involved in [[TheVietnamWar a guerrilla war]] at the time that she wrote this book -- with guerrillas who had a very highly developed military hierarchy.