Identity in Doris Lessing’s Space Fiction By David Waterman

The voices of dissident intellectuals encourage a critical evaluation of a repressive regime, hence these dissidents are often the first among the “bad elements” targeted by the dominant power. In Charles’s case, his ideas for a radical transformation of the human condition are incomprehensible for the majority of the population, and out of fear they label him as psychopathic and lock him away, thus rendering him irrelevant. However, in his role as a university professor, “in a garment of intelligible words” (77), Charles can continue his guerilla campaign without appearing crazy, all the while trying to change society from the place where he has the best chance to do so, namely from the interior. Rice agrees with Terry Eagleton’s opinion which recommends engaging society before trying to overturn it: people only listen to a message which seems reasonable (Rice, 77). A resistant subject, in order to be effective, must correspond to a certain social definition of normality; according to Rice, following this logic, a radical guru is less effective than a classics professor (78). Charles, and the other guerillas he will join, must work in disguise not only to avoid additional torture at the hands of the dominant power and its institutions of normalization, but also to encourage progressive social changes. In any case, the activities of a subject—resistant, collaborator, or more likely a hybrid of the two—are always a performance of approved roles. Society in general, and with good reason, is afraid of open rebellion and the radicals who encourage revolution; people are afraid of losing their place. Charles and the others must disguise their “insanity” to overturn the dominant ideology, along with its framework of binary opposition and exclusion, if they are to lead people to rediscover their individual and collective androgyny as a means of liberating their identity from such a coercive framework.