A fascinating hybrid of historical and speculative fiction, wherein Le Guin crafts a fictitious Central European country for her characters' quest for freedom, amidst very real 19th century historical events. The main character is Itale Sorde, a young idealist from the Montayna province, of a well-off (but non-noble) landowning family. He leaves the security of the Montayna for Krasnoy, the capital of fictional Orsinia, to work for independence from the Austro-Hungarian Empire, spouting idealistic phrases reminiscent of the French Revolution: "I can't live for myself until everyone is free to do so!" (loc 632), for example. I could both agree with Itale's ideals of freedom, while seeing him as hopelessly naive, while feeling a vague nostalgia for the time when I was as idealistic. Mixed feelings, the ones you want to get from a novel. I feel more like Brunoy, the sickly thirty-something teacher Itale befriends in Krasnoy: "I have nothing but patience to fill the gap between my old ideals and my actual achievement", he says to Itale (loc 1485) in a pretty heartbreaking conversation that made me feel old and jaded.
Itale's development is sometimes mirrored by and sometimes collides with the trajectory of several other memorable characters. First is his sister Laura, whom Le Guin describes in the introduction as the closest she came to autobiography and who sees in his brother the promise of a freedom women at that time couldn't attain for themselves. With her, too, I found it easy to empathise, the frustration and longing for a wider world: "I never get bored. I just feel unnecessary" (loc 1732), she says in conversation with Piera Valtorskar, the younger neighbor who is Laura's friend and Itale's potential love interest throughout the novel, up until their significant final conversation.
Then there is Estenskar, a young poet whom Itale admires from afar in the Montayna and then meets in Krasnoy. Coincidences like these stretch plausibility, but then the weirdest consequences can happen in a fictional land of an indeterminate amount of individuals. He befriends several notables: a novelist (Givan Karantay), a radical politican (Oragon), a nobleman-diplomat (Enrike Paludeskar). It's like Le Guin took a sample of 19th century European society and crafted one character out of each social archetype. As I write this it seems forced, but in the novel it works.
In Krasnoy, Itale also befriends the poor little rich girl Luisa Paludeskar, all her material needs satisfied by her wealth and noble family yet trapped in the golden, diamond-studded cage of aristocracy. Her arc goes from unlikeable socialite to one of the most tragic, in my opinion, and her actions are among the noblest in the book, the most generous, despite the narrator describing her as "ungenerous" more than once. I think the narrator is playing games with the reader, sometimes.
Yet another young man who serves as foil for Itale is Sangiusto, an Italian exile who utters what might be my favorite idea in the book: "A liberal is a man who says the means justify the end" (loc 2279). I've seen liberals get a lot of disdain from both sides of the political spectrum in my times, but I like this idea of rescuing some original spirit of liberalism, of valuing freedom as the highest good human society can aspire to provide its people. The problem is how that freedom gets defined - and I think the book tries out various definitions but never settles for one. Plus, things get messy when the political starts to bleed into the personal. For example, consider Itale's reflection when contemplating a possible affair with Luisa: "For a liberal the means justify the end. To attain freedom one must live free. It was freedom she wanted, freedom she offered--and he was already so lost among contingencies, petty considerations, and conventional moralities that he could consider rejecting that offer! Was he a man or not?" (loc 2361).
The prose is somewhat flowery, and delves in rich detail into the various character's reflections and philosophical dialogues. It might get preachy at times, at others we could accuse Le Guin of telling rather than showing what her characters are going through. However, it all seems a self-conscious, chosen style, to depict in somewhat dated language the historical period she is portraying, to allow the reader a distance from the times while also allowing us to appreciate the continuities in the search for freedom. There are also some blunter references to ideals of progress that go hand in hand with liberalism, when Itale contemplates the proletarian urban workers of the industrializing city of Rakava: "If this was progress, if this was the future, did he want it--did anyone want it except the rich, the powerful, the owners?" (loc 3370).
At times, freedom (and other political ideals) starts to seem like a wild-card word standing in for whatever the characters most deeply desire. The problem is that even they seem to be in the dark most of the time as to what it is they desire. When Itale grows disillusioned with his work, he articulates this pretty explicitly:
"Had he outgrown that ambition, or merely fallen short of it? It was hard enough to keep the single candle alight in the depths of one's mutable, vulnerable being, against the indifferent winds of heaven; it was hard to stand up alone, and know where one stood, let alone where one was going." (loc 3387)
And then, after much comings and goings, imprisonments, an affair, a failed revolution with several wonderful images and a disappointing outcome (is that the fate of all revolutions?), Itale comes home, comes to realizations about freedom as a personal, not a political, achievement. There is much disillusionment in the final part of the novel--I even had to stop reading at times, it was so sad. But the closing scene is full of hope: "his heart said, you are my house, my home; the journey and the journey's end; my care, and sleep after care." (loc 5959). Itale realizes in all the dimensions of his life that, ultimately, the means are the ends.