“You cannot buy the revolution. You cannot make the revolution. You can only be the revolution.” This profound statement by Ursula K. Le Guin in “The Dispossessed” encapsulates the essence of her work. Le Guin's novel represents the pinnacle of what Science Fiction (SF) can achieve. SF is at its best, most enduring, and most literary when it uses its traditional forms not to explore space, but to explore us. By using the vehicle of SF to pose big questions that are more easily addressed with binary planets, grand theories of time and space, and so on, we can better understand both the limitations and the possibilities of our species.

The great SF writers, such as Asimov, Vonnegut, Heinlein, Dick, Bradbury, and many others, have been able to explore political, economic, social, and cultural questions and possibilities through the lens of the future, time, and the vastness of space. Ursula K. Le Guin firmly belongs in the pantheon of great social SF writers. Her work will be read far into the future, not because it reflects the future, but because it so perfectly captures the present. Her ability to use the conventions of SF to explore the human condition makes her a truly remarkable writer.

Approximately ten years ago, I started reading the famous "The Dispossessed" and left it on page 71. When I picked up the book again, the bookmark was right where I left off, so I'm quite certain about it. Of course, I started reading from the beginning again :) and I was amazed at myself. I couldn't understand how I could have left it unfinished. The worlds created in the book are realistic and enchanting until the end. If an anarchist writer creates an anarchist society, we expect it to be perfect in every way, and that's usually the case. Ayn Rand glorifies capitalism in her novels because she is a capitalist through and through. However, Ursula Le Guin has created a world while taking into account the possible shortcomings (such as scarcity, drought, and malicious people) of a world where everyone is equal and free. Therefore, as it is also said in the last word, there is no utopian situation. In the opposite world, people are surrounded by various blessings. Everyone is taking advantage of these as much as they can. But unfortunately, not everyone has enough power. Some are swimming in wealth while others are struggling in poverty. And the reader is forced to make a choice here, whether it is a moral and ethical choice... Is it a world where we may be poorer but everyone has the same opportunities, free, where no one gives or takes orders, and where working and producing is not compulsory but moral? Or is it a world where there are various consumer goods but some people cannot take advantage of them? Of course, the topic is not this simple. It is explained in much more depth in the book. And I can't pass without saying that the plot of the novel was also very good.

I turned the last page with that wonderful and rarely experienced sense of satisfaction that reading a great novel gives...

Mülksüzler is not only a masterpiece of the science fiction genre but also of the modern novel genre, already a classic. U. K. LeGuin is an anarchofeminist writer, and in this novel, she has depicted both anarchy and feminism almost to the last drop of blood.

I have a suggestion for those who will read this book. Definitely start reading the book after doing some preliminary research and reading Bülent Somay's Sonsöz at the end of the book. There are very satisfying blog posts and informative comments about the book on the Internet. Just like in The Little Prince (A. S-Exupery) and Animal Farm (G. Orwell), when you have information about what or whom is being represented, where the allusions are, and which periods and what are actually being targeted in the story being told, the book is read much more enjoyably.

It is not necessary for me to explain what the book is about or who the protagonist is. However, I would like to state that this book is a very rich source book in terms of political, philosophical, sociological, and even psychological aspects. There is almost no topic that LeGuin has not mentioned. Social management systems, economic doctrines, philosophical trends, religion, the universe, art, war, sexuality, ecological problems, education, violence, selfishness, authority, ego, jealousy, theft, family, production, creativity, bureaucracy, love... If I were to continue writing, I would have to copy the book as it is. Even the issue of migration and refugees has not escaped LeGuin's pen.

Is there no aspect to be criticized? Of course there is. For example, the use of a large number of terms like "Theory" and "Hypothesis" creates confusion in the flow of the novel and makes reading difficult. Also, when describing the prison experience in childhood, LeGuin has not paid much attention to the level. However, the conversation between the Oiei family and Shevek was one of my favorite parts.

Concepts such as freedom, systematics, property, and equality have been poured into LeGuin's pen without any distortion. In the end, the fact that there is no ideal system for humans emerges. The greatest harm to humans is not being given by cosmic events, natural disasters, or any other negative thing. The only harmful thing is still humans.

If I had to summarize the book in one sentence, I would use the sentence "Thoughts cannot be destroyed by suppressing them. They can only be destroyed by not being paid attention to" that I chose from the book. I really liked it and I definitely recommend it even to those who do not like science fiction.

For preliminary information, some review articles:

http://www.kayiprihtim.org/portal/inc...

http://www.bilimkurgukulubu.com/edebi...

http://www.arkitera.com/gorus/1158/mu...