The One Who Walked Away From Omelas Analysis

"The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" demonstrates how happiness can’t exist without moral sacrifice through its use of symbol. The child being kept alone in a locked room underneath the most beautiful building of the city is a symbol of how someone’s happiness in Omelas depends entirely on that child’s misery: "they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships…depends wholly on this child’s abominable misery" (246). This passage makes it clear that happiness can only occur if Omelas’ citizens act like they constantly forget the child’s existence and let it "live" in its constant suffering. It’s evident that this symbol illustrates the delicate relation between happiness and moral sacrifice.

The short story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, written by Ursula Le Guin, is about a so-called perfect society where the sacrifice of a child is what provides harmony, equality, and prosperity to the citizens of this city. As a reader, one is invited to create and visualize their own utopia, so that one is emerged with the reality of a moral dilemma: the happiness of many for the unhappiness of one. The symbol represented in the story reflects current and past society issues such as military sacrifice, slavery, and injustice.

In the short story “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” by Ursula K. Le Guin the theme is that in order to be truly happy, one must stand up for what’s right, even if it means leaving everything that they know. Society creates traditions and ways of thinking that are not easy for everyone to follow. In Omelas, the citizens have the choice to ignore the suffering of a child locked in a cellar, or leave the life and the city they are familiar with. The people of Omelas must ask themselves whether it is better for a child to suffer for the city’s happiness and wealth, or should the city suffer, just to give the child a shot at happiness? It is ironic because Omelas is a

As previously stated, the narrator is the one who describes and foreshadows the scapegoat use of the child. The narrator described a lack of guilt in Omelas which leads to the idea of scapegoatism. Once the narrator reveals the child and the harsh conditions in which it lives, the narrator also reveals uses of the child. In fact, the narrator makes the reader aware of the scapegoat by stating, “They all know it has to be there,” (252). After the narrator explains how the people of Omelas know the child has to remain in its tortured cellar, he/she explains that their city and its beauty depends on it (252). The depiction of needing the child for the ultimate happiness of the utopia basically describes using him/her as the person to blame. Basically, the child is giving the people of Omelas someone to blame for all the minor flaws, so that they can continue their happy life. Lastly, the narrator explains the theme of ignorance being bliss when he/she describes, “Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there,” (252). Since the narrator tells the reader that not everyone goes to see the child, he/she is telling the audience that some choose to not see it. If they don’t see the child suffering then they can pretend it is not, and they can

Regardless of the fact that she does not exactly condemn the purposeful disregard for the life of the child that the people of Omelas have, the way Le Guin depicts the child and the language she uses signifies that she sees its suffering as something that is not only wrong, but almost evil. Le Guin’s writing style is akin to the way an artist would paint a picture. She

Ursula le guin's the ones who walk away from Omelas brought us an issue about happiness: could the happiness built on the suffering of the other be called as happiness? morally speaking, this utilitarianism mind-set of majority's interest over the sacrifice of individuals idea is wrong because human beings can not be evaluated like an object: the life of every individual is meaningful and it is the freedom of himself to decide his own destiny. however, in the daily practice, we find that people keep calculating the strength and weakness in order to achieve the best outcome. unfortunately, we have to reluctantly admit that life is a trade-off itself.

As we explore this peculiar world of Omelas, we are prompted to ask ourselves, "What do I think is the `perfect society'? What is happiness to me?", and most importantly (to me), "Would I walk away from Omelas?" While we explore these

In “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” by Ursula Le Guin, the informally-speaking narrator depicts a cookie-cutter utopia with perpetually happy citizens that sing and dance in the music-filled streets during the Festival of Summer. However, under one of the beautiful public buildings lays a child, no older than ten years-old, who lays in its own excrement. Although the citizens know the emancipated child is there, they refuse to act upon the child’s suffering, for their happiness depends entirely on the child’s abominable misery. Through ethos, the narrator illustrates this utopian society with a casual tone and frequently asks the audience for their input. Le Guin’s fairy-tale introduction of the story establishes her credibility through her extensive knowledge and understanding of the people of Omelas. Le Guin utilizes logos through the narrator’s second person point of view which incites the audience to draw their own conclusions about the city of Omelas and question their own justifications of the child’s existence. The concept of the happiness of many relying on the necessary suffering of one forces the reader to question their own morals and their justifications for the child’s physical and mental condition. Through ethos, logos, and pathos, Le Guin presents the contrast and divide between the citizens of Omelas and the child in the cellar in order to challenge the reader’s capacity for moral self-conception.

This theme is consistent throughout the story and most evident for instance, when the narrator states that their "Happiness is based on a just discrimination of what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive" (2). Here Le Guin establishes the basis and justification for the peoples malicious mistreatment of this child and reveals that the “child’s abominable misery” is absolutely necessary to maintain their collective happiness (5). For this reason, this revelation is a clear parallel to present day humanity that continually justify evil misdeeds and abuses as a means to an end of ensuring their happiness without guilt or consideration for others.

The people of Omelas are materialistically happy but are morally unhappy. The narrator implies that happiness is knowing the differences between what are needs, desires, and detriments to a person. Every person alive has basic needs which are deemed necessary, such as sustenance and shelter. All honest humans will admit that they have wants and desires that are not necessary, and many push the limits to attain them. And always there are those who are willing to allow the suffering of others to achieve their own desires. The adults of Omelas are not using just discrimination, and because of their immorality, are not happy.

As the people of Omelas continued to accept the truth of their city, some have begun to see the child as more of an it than a person and regarded the child similar to a wild animal. “One of them may come in and kick the child to make it stand up. The others never come close, but peer in at it with frightened, disgusted eyes” (245). Not only do the residents accept the child’s misery, they have also

The citizens come to the consensus that nothing can be done for the child, and nothing should be done. To help this one miserable child would lead to the suffering of an entire city, after all. This is what the narrator persuades us to think. She uses many methods to prove her point. For instance, she tells us that if the child were to be saved, “in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed.” (1552). She defends the people of Omelas, who are not heartless, cruel, mindless “simple utopians,” but instead as passionate, intelligent, gentle people capable of sympathy. However, they understand that “the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars…the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery.” (1552). Not only this, but she asserts that the child is too “imbecile” to recognize love anymore; it has grown too used to the darkness of the cellar to ever revert back to normal civilized life. At every turn, she finds a way to argue against compassion and in favor of causing pain; she portrays the assessment the Omelasians make of the child to be so logical and responsible that even the reader starts to buy into it. Why help the child? There is no point, is there? Continuing this abusive treatment of it is for the good of the order, isn’t it? The narrator makes it extremely easy to

Ursula K. Le Guin’s novel The One Who Walks Away From Omelas describes the culture of the fictional city Omelas. In this beautiful city by the sea, there is a Summer Parade going on and people are gathering throughout the streets to go see the children’s horse race. Omelas is not under the rule of a monarchy, it has no army, no religious leaders, and very few laws, yet there is little crime. The people of Omelas are happy and lives a minimalist lifestyle in terms of tangible possessions. They believe in free love and they are “mature, intelligent, passionate adults whose lives are not wretched”.

Men and women walk the streets, and weep at the fact of the child in the cellar. The child in the cellar is the existence of why the Omelas treat their children gentle but yet full of compassion and joyful love for happiness. The tearless rage, treatment, freedom, and acceptance of the Omelas to the child have long ever to be free and fearful.

The short story by Ursula Le Guin, is about a flawless utopian society that puts all of its guilt onto the misery of a child who is locked away in a cellar broom closet in order to keep the society in picture perfect condition. (Attebery). One of the literary devices she uses throughout the story is symbolism. Le Guin makes this child carry the burden of the society Omelas symbolic to Jesus because in the Bible, Jesus dies on the cross and takes all of the sins away from the believers. This symbolism shows a moral decay within the society because the burden is no longer casted and saved by written beliefs who promise to take these troubles and cast them away. It is being given to a child who in return can give nothing back. This child didn’t deserve this punishment and Le Guin tells the reader that some people know about the child, but instead of trying to help they just ignore the pain this child endures for them while they live their perfect life. Just like in the Bible, Jesus did so much for his people and his disciples, but when he was on the cross no one came to help him, and his people that he endured so much for just watched him die on the cross. This kid will live the same life that Jesus did toward the end. Everyone will turn and not come to his rescue and the child dies alone in suffering with the burdens of the world.