Comments on: Critical Analysis: “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”

By: A Voice

A Voice — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 04:46:21 +0000

Your ideas are all very creative. Though, I believe some are straying from the main point. To answer the ‘breaking the flute’ comment… Why would you do that? It intrigues me how you came up with the idea. I am not criticizing your thoughts, simply pondering. I believe the flute player is a mere example of the joy within Omelas. None of that is to be truly focused on: the drugs, orgies, or parties. Those are all just to set up the idea of a ‘Utopian society’. The author writes this simply to make you think of your own perfect place.
Then the author asks you if you believe in this place. How could a Utopia possibly exist? She mentions the child. Then, dear readers, you realize there is no Utopia. There will always be the poor or the rich, the happy or the sad, the leaders and the low-classed people. It is the yin-yang concept. This is no Utopia. This place, Omelas, is the opposite.
Now also while reading comments I notice that people want to upset this balance, or change it. The balance is obviously all the suffering on the boy and all the joy to the people. But you cannot change this. It’s be like trying to paint white on the yin-yang black side. It would not be equal, so consequently everyone must suffer.
Finally I’d like to question comments on what you think the author’s purpose was. The author wrote this to make you think. This story applies to many truths in life. Sometimes they are terribly sad, sometimes they are beautiful and happy. The author does not take a side, though. The author is writing open-ended and is asking you what you would do. In our society, we view this child as something to pity. But the author doesn’t say she exactly pities it. ‘Knowledge is within everyone. They simply need to find it’.
Finally, I’d like to state my opinion. I would walk away. This child has a destiny, and I shall not bother it. I am neither cold-hearted nor evil, I just know it wouldn’t make a difference. If I opened the door and held the child in my arms, would it know what I am doing? If it’s been locked in a windowless broom closet for it’s whole life, then it doesn’t know what a human looks like exactly. We would be things. Things that insult the child, things that are dangerous. It wouldn’t be able to comprehend love, for it never experienced it.
If you loved this deep-thought story, then I recommend The Giver by Lois Lowry, or The Allegory of the Cave by Plato.
Before I wrap up, I’d like to finish by saying I am merely an 8th grade girl. I am 14 and to you all, I may have just screwed up my entire speech. Yes, now you shall view my writing as child-like and worthless. But if you think deeply and feel truly from the heart, you will come up with your own ideas. No black or white, right or wrong, but morals you have established. Then I ask that I am not compared to any other child. I am myself, age not a matter. Same as the child in the broom closet. I am just a voice speaking out.

By: Toc

Toc — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 01:38:22 +0000

But saving the child would not be humane, because, by doing that, you would be causing EVERYONE in Omelas (including the babies and other children) to suffer, much as the tortured child suffers.

By: Toc

Toc — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 01:29:55 +0000

But if you rescue the child, you don’t just destroy Omelas, you destroy it for all. Everyone would then suffer, just as the child suffers. Could you live with that?

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 23:33:11 +0000

Doctor Who, “The Beast Below” Season 5 Episode 2 is a variation on this story.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 22:12:39 +0000

Very insightful Alex. and very apt comparison to the alcoholic. The inventory steps of the Twelve Step recovery program allows for that sort of self-assessment of one’s complicity in the suffering, and makes it possible to accept responsibility for one’s life, to walk away from Omelas.

By: Robert Law

Robert Law — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 02:52:33 +0000

How do the people react when they learn about the child?

By: JonF.0707

JonF.0707 — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 06:58:54 +0000

Maybe then you walk away.

By: Keith

Keith — Sat, 12 Nov 2011 07:15:31 +0000

Let us all walk away from Omelas.

By: Alanmt

Alanmt — Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:56:32 +0000

I think that I would break the flute. It seems to me that the flute player, the same age as the prisoner, is the other half of the magic, adn hte fluteis the intrumetn that converts the suffering of one to the happiness of all. If that didn’t work, I would asy the kind word to the child.

Morality is not based upon a weighing in scales of the benfits and costs of the choice. There is no goodness worth the deliberate, unexplained suffering of an innocent child.

Some moral questions are absolutes. This presents one. Torture is another.

By: JJolly310

JJolly310 — Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:36:58 +0000

I have really enjoyed reading what everyone has to say. Thank you to Mr. Thripp for writing this captivating critism. I first read this story when I was fairly young, and one of the more simplistic things I took away from the story is that if the townspeople never knew or saw real suffering they could never possibly achieve true happiness.
But then thinking more you realize how could anyone possibly remain happy knowing that this injustice was occurring… There are so many ways to look at this short story. It is a true work of art to be cherished. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

By: Shy

Shy — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 11:01:14 +0000

When I read this story in philosophy, I felt outraged, and then even more when over half of the class chose to stay in Omelas (utilitarian view). A handful chose to walk away and only two of us chose to save the child; a mother and I. It was then that my professor told us about a student that freaked him out when he stood up and opted to BE the child, as in to take it’s place. My reply to his bizarre memory was, “If you feel it to be unacceptable or even absurd to have a life like that for yourself, than how can you justify it to be for another? If you remain utilitarian, then you must face that possibility or come to terms that it is wrong.” then I read this thread and was filled with joy that not only 2 of us in this world are humane. I also wanted to point out, though many of you feel this is related to present times… You could match this up to countless times in history that this relates to and will also relate to in the future.

By: Catch Me ;)

Catch Me ;) — Wed, 24 Aug 2011 00:02:59 +0000

I love the way that you interpreted this! “The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas” is a very interesting story. To me, it very much resembles todays day in time. It may not be a whole city’s happiness, but no matter where you go, there is always someone who is suffering. And someone else is getting joy and happiness out of that one person’s pain. For example…The poor kids who get bullied in school, or the homelss man on the street corner that is being bothered and harrassed. Someone is getting happiness and pleasure at someone elses expense. Its very sad that this is what the world has come to today!

By: Morat

Morat — Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:32:19 +0000

They are leaving to become whole human beings. We are dependent on others, but we deal with our own misery and accept the weight of the world.
In a way I find the short story of Omelas to be a foreboding of one of the themes in ‘The other wind’, the last book in the Earthsea series (if you haven’t read it already you should. As in now). Here the land of the dead is a terrible place because humans tried to conquer death by sorcery. Without death there can be no true life, Ursula K LeGuin seems to say. To be free and complete you need to accept death, darkness, and misery as well as life, light and happiness. Which in case of Omelas would be that we have to carry the weight of our own deeds and sorrows to be fully human. We can try to cheat - as the Earthsea wizards did or as the people of Omelas have done. But we are missing something when we do.
So where do they go? Anywhere. The important fact is that they are leaving and determined about it, making a moral judgement and refusing to gain happiness at the expense of another person.

By: Pope benedict Xi

Pope benedict Xi — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 06:25:19 +0000

they left because in the afterlife there are no farts. I

By: Alex Parazety

Alex Parazety — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 01:58:19 +0000

This child is showing the truth that Utopia cannot exist. Everything exist on the expense of another. Le Guin’s story is based on the Scapegoat theory. She calls this a “psycho-myth”. She also based this on the quote of William James, ” One could not accept a happiness shared with millions if the condition of that happiness were the suffering of one lonely soul”. The theory is that a person or group (or town in this case) shifted the blame to another, for them to suffer in their place. This child holds all the consequence of these careless peoples lives. It bears all their guilt. Omelas is a town scapegoating on this one child. The base of their city lies on top if this child. All the towns pain flows to the undermost parts of the city, into the child’s heart, and it feels all their guilt, pain, sorrow, but the ones who walk away. They take a part of this child’s pain with them, they own up to their own sins. The ones walking away are the ones acknowledging their own wrong-doings. Acceptance. Its like an alcoholic. Some realize what they are doing is running from something inside them, some trauma. Some face up to their pain. They do something about it. Omelas my be the place that a person escapes to after a traumatic experience. They may convince themselves that what they are doing is perfectly fine, and that they will not suffer the consequences. In dissociation, the person leaves their body in a traumatic situation. They see this traumatic event happening to someone else, not themselves. This child this is happening to is their ‘little self’, though most of them do not come to terms with that right away. The people who have came to terms, are the ones walking away, with the knowing, that all their guilt and blame cannot be put on their ‘little self’. That they are to be held accountable for their actions as well. They are the ones that know, that are ready to face everything, they are walking away to their future. The ones still there have yet to face their inner wars. They live as they please, and they shift all their pain and guilt to their ‘little self’. They don’t have to live with what they do because the other self is taking it all, it lives with all the consequence, because they have always shifted ‘bad’ to it, and ‘happiness’ and ‘pleasure’ have been theirs. They live for immediate gratification. Beer, drugs, sex. They are all things that people running from something on the inside use as a get-away. This is just my take on this, still using the fact that Le Guin said that this short story was based on the spacegoat theory. I have been through traumatic events that have also caused me to disassociate, this is what helped me come to this conclusion. And I am one walking away from Omelas…
Alex Age:Fifteen

By: KT

KT — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 19:39:03 +0000

I agree with your interpretation; it made me think of people being “released” in Lois Lowry’s The Giver.

By: bluebird

bluebird — Wed, 20 Apr 2011 01:58:05 +0000

Excellent post Robert. It is entirely possible they committed suicide because they could not deal with the existence of the darkness, misery and knowledge of the poor child.

By: Mary

Mary — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 20:46:31 +0000

I don’t think the child ages, or at least the same way as the rest of the people; The children when they are of age, come to look at the child and it may trouble them a few years. It is neither male or female. It can not grow or produce. It looks 6. Just as many Nations are years apart, or growing more apart is the story of Omelas. The rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer.

By: Cane

Cane — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:47:08 +0000

They are going anywhere but there. They refuse to accept the cost of the child in order for them to be happy. They would rather not be happy than be part of the child’s miserable existence. Certainly the remaining people perpetuate the suffering by staying and not speaking to the child. So what have the people who leave really accomplished?

By: Richard X. Thripp

Richard X. Thripp — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:25:11 +0000

That’s a very good analogy… people didn’t even believe the Holocaust when seeing it happen before their eyes. A lot of people today don’t see how ridiculous American imperialism is, or the recent seaquake and nuclear meltdown in Japan.

By: Zach

Zach — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:19:59 +0000

The story bears a striking resemblance to Hitler’s Nazism. When they came to power they did all they could to create this image of a utopia (propaganda, rallies, sparing no expense on the Berlin Olympics). The Nazi regime captivated the minds of the youth with programs designed to brainwash them into compliance. They were completely confident that all was well and life was good and just, until they grew old enough to understand the true horrors of the regime. Their “undesirable” peers would be swept away to suffer in darkness. Some would rationalize this by believing that they were subhuman. Others would suffer intense shame and their world would turn to darkness.

By: Richard X. Thripp

Richard X. Thripp — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:44:36 +0000

Maybe they flee to Switzerland? Or Russia?

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:35:04 +0000

Yes, I came to the same conclusions independently. A few cannot deal with the price that must be paid, and they commit suicide. They realize they can’t fight the system. And there’s really nowhere to go, but they know they can’t be part of this, so all they can do is go to a place even more unimaginable than Omelas. They kill themselves.

By: caveman

caveman — Wed, 02 Feb 2011 03:53:52 +0000

Maybe they were leaving this utilitarian morality in hopes of finding a better morality, a better way
to” justify” life and how they live it

By: Bob Klahn

Bob Klahn — Mon, 31 Jan 2011 05:15:18 +0000

I would consider it, or will, rather. However, I have posted most of that I feel is important about it.

Now I am looking at the Middle East uprisings, and seeing the Omelas challenge in the US response to the Egyptian uprising.

Expanding on that, was the Vietnam war justified as a means of stopping the spread of communism?

Was it justified if it brought down the Soviet Union, freeing hundreds of millions, at the expense of the few millions in Vietnam and Cambodia?

Ok, I’m doing it again. Dang!