Question One: If you were a citizen of Omelas, would you stay or would you walk away?
After my first read of the story The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas by Ursula K Le Guin, I thought that perhaps the people who walked away from the town were taking a plunge into their own exile: the same alienation which the imprisoned child in the town faces. I also considered though, wouldn’t that make them cowards for just walking away from the town? Simply leaving the child there and frankly running away from their problems? I agree with the second option, that the people who walk away from Omelas are running away from their problems without doing anything to help the situation- it is selfish and a useless effort to fix any issue. However, the ones who stay in Omelas are also selfish in the sense that they just learn to live with the poor child’s emotional and physical abuse and believe that the child’s suffering keeps their town flourishing.
Thus, if I were a citizen of Omelas I would like to believe that I would be heroic, take the child with me and leave forever, or perhaps take the child out of its claustrophobic room and stay within the town and face consequences there. Maybe nothing would change in the town; maybe everything will still flourish and the child can live freely. It is a utopia isn’t it? So why not? However, Le Guin does state that "they [the people of Omelas] would like to do something for the child. But there is nothing they can do" (3); It is the idea that the whole society would crumble if the child were to be freed. Thus how heroic would it be if I saved the child, but then a whole society suffers? This increasingly complicates the matter at hand and I believe Le Guin really traps her readers in Omelas.
In order to fully answer my question of “would I walk away from Omelas?” I need to reflect on question number three as well: to what extent is Omelas an analogy of our own society? Simply because although I say I want to be heroic, Omelas can be related to our modern society. The fact is we all wear clothes (at least the majority of the time). Where do those clothes come from? Maybe some from your grandma, but others come from sweatshops in undeveloped areas of the world in which some employees are young children. Do people still wear clothes? Yes, including myself. My point is that I’m not doing anything about it, I could boycott Nike or another name brand, but honestly I do not know which stores exactly do sell clothes by underdeveloped areas, probably quite a few though. This makes me stuck in my own Omelas in which I know the problem exists, but I’m not truly doing anything about it. I absolutely hate to admit that sad truth, but I believe I am also stuck in Omelas.
Hi Nancy,
ReplyDeleteGreat job in using real-life examples (and relating this question to Question #3) in your analysis. It is quite easy to say, in a detached/abstract way, that we would leave Omelas in disgust. But, as you point out, we are all stuck in our own Omelas and (for the most part) we don't do anything about it.
Your initial answer (that you would remain in Omelas and try to help the child) is strong in a number of ways. It points to the problems inherent in the 'boycott-attitude' of walking away from Omelas. To what extent does this address the issue beyond one's own moral dilemma? As you demonstrate, this attitude exhibits much of the same selfishness inherent in those who stay in Omelas.
To improve this response, I would try to remain closer to Le Guin's text. Your heroic answer does not necessarily fit within the information she provides about her fictionalized world. Le Guin writes: "They would like to do something for the child. But there is nothing they can do" (3). She delineates that the utopia would crumble if the child were helped - "Those are the terms" (4). So, does this complicate your answer?
Thanks for your feedback Mr. Connolly. Since the society "would crumble" if the child were to be set free, it definitely complicates the issue at hand. With that in mind, like I said before I hate that I'm stuck in my own Omelas, and I feel as though if all of society's needs to survive were weighed on my decision then it would absolutely complicate the issue and make it much harder for me to help the child. Going back to my heroism comment, how heroic would it be if I saved the child, but then a whole society suffers? I believe Le Guin really traps her readers in Omelas; if I were there I would be trapped too.
ReplyDelete