Both stories take place in a fantasy society which enforces conformity to soul damaging norms. Both stories are didactic, written to teach the reader cautionary lessons about troubling trends in our own society. But their tones differ radically.

Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergemon" is set precisely in the year 2081. Society has gone to absurd lengths to make sure everyone is "equal" and that nobody stands out. This especially means that people have their intelligence, talents, and good looks suppressed so that nobody else will feel inferior. This norm is enforced through violence: apparently anybody brave or intelligent enough to challenge the system is killed. This is a commentary on moves in our own society to "level playing fields" and give people equal opportunity. This future society, however, is so bad nobody would want to live in it.

LeGuin does not set "The Ones who Walk Away from Omelas" in a specific year. It, too depicts a society that has a troubling core: in this case, everyone else's happiness depends on the extreme abuse and neglect of an innocent child. This alternate society is depicted as appealing except for the child. Through it, LeGuin critiques utilitarian philosophy, which argues that the good life is achieved when a society provides the greatest happiness to the greatest number. Utilitarianism is a rationale used in public policy in our society, which is what LeGuin wants us to ponder.

Vonnegut critiques equalitarianism run amok; LeGuin critiques utilitarianism, even if it has not run amok. The stories are both didactic, but the tones are a study in contrast. Vonnegut's tone is madcap, so exaggerated and comic that one could argue he undermines his message, as it is impossible to envision people putting up with the society he describes. LeGuin's tone is serious and quiet, and her story is perhaps more convincing in urging us to think about how our society, in less stark ways, makes similar decisions to Omelas.