Nutty, I'm atypical in that I much prefer Le Guin's later short fiction to her earlier, and I also hate "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas." But I would recommend "Solitude," or one of the novellas in Four Ways to Forgiveness, for your purposes. Or maybe "The Matter of Seggri."

A lot of her recent work has been novella length, though, which maybe too long for your purposes?

Right. Although the short story cycle and the novella are big issues in this editor's world -- he was like "So many people have never heard of the short story cycle!!" and I said, not a problem with my people! -- we just don't have the space. Or rather, we could have the space, except Melville's got a novella, and between Melville and Le Guin, in an American fiction anthology, I know who wins.

The Seggri story and Solitude are indeed two I pointed out to him, and the others Amy recommended.

Hmm - curious as to what you disliked about "Omelas".

Not Micole, but my take on "Omelas" is that it's too shallow and obvious.

It raises some fascinating ethical questions, and I think that's why it's often taught in high school; it makes a great base for fascinating discussion/argument. But it's not really a *story* - it's an anvil, or a philosophy teaching anecdote.

And just so you know where I'm coming from - I am a huge LeGuin fangirl. I even love Always Coming Home (which many people hate) past all reason.

I really liked "Omelas", but I have to agree with Dani that it's not really a story, as such. A fable, okay. But not a story.

Hmm. Nutty, what about "The Day Before the Revolution"? I forget what anthology it's in... Or is it too much tied to The Dispossessed to be accessible?

I even love Always Coming Home (which many people hate)

I like Always Coming Home too, Dani. t /solidarity

t big grin at Katie

"Fable"! Thank you, Consuela, that's the word I wanted and was blanking on. Durr.

I tend to find Omelas similar -- it doesn't have a lot of subtlety. For an ethics discussion, good, but for a literature discussion, less so.

I've been coming across this question, "Why is this story good, and does being good mean a right fit?" a lot recently. Partly because, I read a lot of historical stuff that is interesting for historical reasons, but even I can admit that being historical is not always a good reason for modern people to read a thing. You know, sociology != literary analysis, or not in all cases.

BTW, a source question about a work in progress over in Great Write yesterday triggered a wonderful discussion of Roger Zelazny, which probably should have been moved over here. It did tie back into writing that's being done (taking the concept of Dayblood and running with it), so it was also appropriate for Great Write - but I thought I'd ping Roger's fans, in case they wanted to play.

I even love Always Coming Home (which many people hate) past all reason.

t looks at first edition copy -- complete with audio cassette -- and grins at Dani