A short story by Ursula Le Guin called “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” describes a utopian society that lives in harmony yet possesses a terrible secret. Omelas is a city that is presented as a perfect place that has futuristic technologies, sophisticated people, and does not rely on evil to succeed (Le Guin 205). However, there are people who leave this town after realizing the price of such prosperity, while many more accept it with little-to-no guilt. This essay will analyze why people stay in Omelas, despite knowing the terrible secret of this town.
Le Guin’s unique portrayal of Omelas provides a critical philosophical question. Everybody in this city realizes there is a cost to their happiness and a single soul has to experience ultimate cruelty as long as Omelas stands (Le Guin 207). However, the majority of society readily and willingly accepts this circumstance. Utilitarianism is apparent in this short story, as the crowd weighs in the suffering of a single individual against collective happiness. A child is a factor that somehow influences the happiness of others, as Le Guin shows that people “know that it has to be there” (207). This knowledge enables people to perceive the worth of their utopia.
People who live in Omelas do not live the experience of that caged child, nor do they ever want to alleviate its suffering and potentially sabotage theirs. They begin to argue that the imprisonment of an innocent person is necessary and it is pointless to release them, as they can no longer comprehend what freedom is (Le Guin 208). In order to keep Omelas in its state of prosperity, its citizens indoctrinate children on the inevitability of this cruelty. Since younger generations also meet this prisoner and realize the price they pay for having a utopian society, the moral qualities of the entire population are aligned (Le Guin 208). Therefore, people who stay do not realize the flaw in their way of thinking.
At the same time, there are individuals who are unable to accept this harsh reality and struggle to find peace with such brutal knowledge. Those who leave possess a solid moral compass that continues to tell them that the core philosophy of their city is wrong. Le Guin states that “there is none of in Omelas is guilt” (205). Those who experience guilt do not belong in this place. In my imagination, potential dissidents may argue against leaving, as their core moral dilemma consists of an attempt to free the child and accept the consequences.
However, since none did so in the text, the beliefs that were instilled into them by society prohibit such an act, as they know that a child is crucial for the city’s prosperity. Utilitarian values govern people’s actions even when they do depart, as they weigh their suffering caused by remaining in Omelas versus leaving it and seeking relief from this burden. The same trail of thoughts prohibits others from ruining the happiness of thousands who remain in Omelas by continuing to question the possibility of the child’s release.
In conclusion, people do not leave Omelas en masse due to their complacency with the situation that is based on a utilitarian premise that they rationalize in their minds to the point of belief. Individuals from a very young age are convinced that a child has to suffer for their benefit. They are taught not to feel guilty, as this quality is detrimental to everyone’s happiness.
Work Cited
Le Guin, Ursula K. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.” The Wind’s Twelve Quarters: Short Stories, HarperCollins, 2017, pp. 203-209.