Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucdavis.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!ucdavis!ccrrick From: ccrrick@ucdavis.UUCP (Rick Heli) Newsgroups: net.nlang Subject: Re: Pronouns devoid of gender connotations Message-ID: <314@ucdavis.UUCP> Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 12:30:21 EDT Article-I.D.: ucdavis.314 Posted: Thu Jun 27 12:30:21 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 1-Jul-85 06:20:50 EDT References: <2718@decwrl.UUCP> <337@spar.UUCP> <6473@boring.UUCP> Organization: University of California, Davis Lines: 21 Jack Jansen, jack@mcvax.UUCP writes > Ursula Le Guin wrote a book ("The Left > Hand of Darkness"), in which most of the people were genderless. > In the introduction, she said that she refrained from using 'heshe' or > 'te', since they sound so unnatural, but used 'he' and 'she' alternately > in stead. The first time you meet the use of 'she' for, for instance, > the king, it looks very funny, but you get used to it very soon, and > tend to forget the gender-specific aspect of he or she (At least, I did). I don't agree. Le Guin should have invented new terms for her book because the way LHOD came out, instead of being genderless, most of the main characters came out seeming very male. She has some success in startling us with minor characters who look like one gender, but have the capability of the other, but most of the main characters, particularly Estraven, seem so male that Le Guin's whole purpose is hurt. If she had invented other terms, maybe it would have been more worked more believably. -- --rick heli (... ucbvax!ucdavis!groucho!ccrrick)