Discussion Topic
Social Inequality and Identity in "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas"
Summary:
"The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" by Ursula K. LeGuin explores social inequality and identity through a moral dilemma. The story presents a utopian society whose happiness relies on the suffering of a single child, highlighting utilitarianism and social injustice. Characters face identity issues by either accepting this system or walking away, symbolizing a rejection of such moral compromise. The narrative addresses the broader theme of societal evil and individual responsibility, questioning whether personal happiness justifies collective suffering.
What identity issues do the characters face in "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas"?
Whilst I can see the point of the editors above, especially of #2, I would disagree. Perhaps we are risking stretching the allegorical nature of this excellent story too far. I think it is those who walk away who show tremendous courage and bravery. There is no sense in which we are shown that the citizens are able to challenge the system that gives them perfect happiness at such a great price for the pitiful child. There is no way in which they can choose to help release that child. The only way they can rebel is to sacrifice their own perfect happiness by walking away to an uncertain future. This is the only way in which they can rebel, and they are to be admired and respected for it.
I read the story as a metaphor for evil, one that explores the evils of society but transcends the social elements...
Unlock
This Answer NowStart your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
to address the underlying evil present in humanity itself. The society in the story has been maintained through traditional acts of evil over a period of time. These are both overt and covert acts; some actively participate in the imprisonment of a child, while others encourage it or merely allow it to happen. Regardless of the degree of personal involvement, everyone in society benefits from the subjugation and suffering of the defenseless.
Once social evil is identified, the question becomes how to respond to it--to embrace it, to ignore it, to walk away from it, or to confront and challenge it. In the story, those who walk away do so at personal sacrifice, but they also benefit; leaving evil behind makes it easier to forget what what they have seen and what continues to happen in their absence.
History does not honor those who walk away when confronted with evil, and literature does not celebrate them. It is those who choose to stay and fight for goodness and justice, often at the sacrifice of their own lives, who earn our respect for their courage. They are the ones who bring about change and advance human progress and decency. Walking away is not enough.
I think that you are right on a couple of points. Indeed, the story does bring to light that there is a pattern of victimization present in modern society. Individuals who are "happy" or ones who enjoy a certain degree of political or social power do so at the cost of another individual or group. Those who stay in Omelas are happy because of the struggles of the child. This construction is deliberate on LeGuin's part. It can be seen as the relationship between owner and worker, or groups in society that represent cultural norms over groups that are marginalized. The Special Education analogy brought out is an interesting one. I think that it might have been true some time back, but there is a much greater advocacy for special needs children now than ever before. The presence of high stakes standardized assessment that measures progress of special education children might be a reason why these groups and subgroups can no longer be seen as the child in the story. The idea of guilt and happiness is another significant element in the thematic development of the story. LeGuin establishes that the people who stay understand how things are and must accept responsibility for it. The people who leave are an interesting bunch. On one hand, they can be praised for their unwillingness to live in a configuration where their happiness comes at another's cost and would be much willing to live with their own guilt and personal pain than falsely live a happy state of being. On the other hand, I think that another reading could be what you suggest in that those who leave or stay are on the same moral level because they permit the suffering of another to take place. The ones that leave are more self centered in that they are more concerned with their own guilt than the pain and suffering of the child. However, given what LeGuin says about how there can be no helping of the child, as they have been in this condition for so long that little, if anything, would help is an important element here that needs to be assessed.
How does "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas" address religion, economic or social class to develop character identity?
With respect, I think you are slightly mistaken in your conclusions about this story. You are right in thinking that there are two groups of characters that are presented: those who stay, and those who decide to walk away from Omelas, the obvious subject of the story as indicated by the title. Yet, it is clear that they do not choose to leave because of any problem with class. It is made clear that those who choose to leave are not from any specific social grouping. Rather, those who leave appear to be reacting to a gut response that protests against the treatment of the child who is the source of the happiness of Omelas. This story is therefore not much about class. Rather, in this story the author is presenting us with an extreme moral dilemma. Is happiness for the many justified by extreme suffering and punishment for one individual? Note how the text posits this conundrum:
If the child were brought up into the sunlight out of the vile place, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, that would be a good thing, indeed; but if it were done, in that day and hour all the propserity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed.
Thus the two groups of characters who are referred to are those who hide and ignore there feelings of injustice and focus on "the greater good," and those who just are unable to accept such a Faustian pact, and are compelled, by moral forces beyond their control, to leave the city as an act of protest, in search of a better world which tries to attain happiness for all, rather than happiness for most at the expense of the one.
What are three main points that illustrate social inequality in "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas"?
Let us just quickly remind ourselves of the key point to this brilliant story. The reason that the citizens of Omelas are able to enjoy such incredible and unbelievable wealth, prosperity and happiness is precisely because all unhappiness is bestowed on the poor child that is described to us at the heart of the story. It is the ultimate example of utilitarianism, which believes that the happiness of the many is always to be chosen over the happiness of the few. In some strange way, the suffering of that poor child ensures the happiness of the citizens of Omelas. Therefore, the child is the only example of social inequality you are going to find in this short story. And what an example of social inequality this child presents us with:
The child used to scream for help at night, and cry a good deal, but now it only makes a kind of whining, "eh-haa, eh-haa," and it speaks less and less often. It is so thin there are no calves to its legs; its belly protrudes; it lives on a half-bowl of corn meal and grease a day. It is naked. Its buttocks and thighs are a mass of festered sores, as it sits in its own excrement continually.
This story then posits an ideal and perfect society that is only able to be ideal and perfect because of the systematic abuse and mistreatment of one child. This story asks if the price of this perfect society is too high, or is it acceptable given the state of happiness of the citizens of Omelas. The only example of social inequality in Omelas is this child, and so a thesis statement you could use might be as follows:
In "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas," the author creates a fantasy world where the citizens of Omelas are able to enjoy happiness and prosperity that is only possible because of the unhappiness and abuse of a child.
This thesis statement will allow you to talk about social inequality and how it is reflected in the character of the poor child who suffers so much so that others may experience happiness.