Oppression. Language. Censorship. Voices, in many ways, was reminiscent of 1984. It seems that language has been a central theme of many of the books we have read – The Circuit, Sold, and even Looking for Alaska, and others as well . Language is empowering. In the case of Voices, the corollary is also true: Lack of language is disempowering, and that can be used to the advantage of the oppressor.

I had difficulty following the plot throughout the text. However, part of me wondered if this was intentional on behalf of author Ursula Le Guin. War is confusing and chaotic, and many people often are unaware of what is truly going on. In a real-world parallel, 92% of Afghaniadults didn't know about the terror attacks of 9/11 and about 70% of Americans thought Saddam Hussein was personally in 9/11. I'd like to think that Le Guin was trying to make a deep but subtle commentary by making the purposes of conflict and the parties involved difficult to follow. However, responding simply as a reader – especially from the perspective of a hypothetical young adult reader – the text was unenjoyable and confusing.

While the text in some ways is reminiscent of the refugee experience we have been studying in our previous units, the situation in Voices seems too ingenuine. In my view, fantasy is not an appropriate topic to communicate a certain experience. In reality, it serves better as a commentary on certain power structures. Rather than a refugee experience, I think Voices was somewhat effective in demonstrating the role that differing ideologies and beliefs play in oppression and conflict, such as those pertaining to religion within the text.
As a future educator I do have a certain affinity towards texts that present books as a form of empowerment and the formation of identity (one of the few reasons I seemed to be in the minority with a favorable view of Looking for Alaska). I enjoy positive representations of young readers within texts. However, I was unable to become immersed in the text.