Status
Available
Call number
Collection
Publication
Creative Education (1997), Hardcover, 32 pages
Description
'The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas' is a short story originally published in the collection The Wind's Twelve Quarters.
User reviews
LibraryThing member horacehive
A superb piece of short fiction which ultimately shows that everything has a price and that sometimes that price may be deemed to high to pay by some of us.
LibraryThing member Scribble.Orca
This book is an analogy for how we justify enjoying our good fortune obtained though the enforced suffering of others. Whether it is within the circle of your own family, your neighbourhood, your state or your country, there is a chain of events, circumstance, belief and acquiescence which
Show More
continues to sustain an amoral inequality in our local and global societies. We wouldn't need this book or others like it if reality was different. Show Less
LibraryThing member krizia_lazaro
This one is really sad. Ursula K. Le Guin is really the goddess of science fiction. The story was simple but oh so heavy. A real must-read.
LibraryThing member antao
“There's a point, around the age of twenty, when you have to choose whether to be like everybody else the rest of your life, or to make a virtue of your peculiarities.”
In “The Dispossessed” by Ursula K. Le Guin.
Thank you, Ursula k. Le Guin, for encouraging me to celebrate my peculiarities.
Utilitarianism is supposed to be a way to be good, by maximizing happiness. But if maximizing happiness above all else leads to evil, then it's a bit of a non-starter. If you bring in rules and regulations to stop leading to an Omelas type scenario, then these are meta rules that aren't justified by utilitarianism, and so you're leaning on something else, or shorter, you've stopped justifying your acts by utilitarianism and at best it's become are process within the framework. In real life, we can't know what maximizes happiness, and so it's all a bit philosopher’s armchair. The story cuts through that, and lets us know what it might mean to maximize happiness and what it might cost. I see a pretty obvious answer if you value treating people fairly, and that's eschewing maximizing happiness.
Anyway, enough of my half-remembered ideas on philosophy...
The Kantian will say it is never acceptable to treat anyone merely as a means to the ends of others -- which the society of Omelas does. But consider: Save for one wretched child, Omelas is the absolute best society one could imagine. (If you don't like my sketch of this utopia, says Le Guin in the story, tweak it to match your ideal of perfection.) In practice, every society has many individuals living wretched lives. Omelas has more real happiness and less misery than we will ever achieve this side of paradise. To free the child or to walk away would accomplish what -- give one a feeling of personal virtue perhaps, but at what cost to others?
At times one of the adolescent girls or boys who go to see the child does not go home to weep or rage, does not, in fact, go home at all. Sometimes also a man or woman much older falls silent for a day or two, and then leaves home. These people go out into the street, and walk down the street alone. They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates. They keep walking across the farmlands of Omelas. Each one goes alone, youth or girl, man or woman. Night falls; the traveler must pass down village streets, between the houses with yellow-lit windows, and on out into the darkness of the fields. Each alone, they go west or north, towards the mountains. They go on. They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. They place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.
Bottom-line: I think the last paragraph of "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" one of the most perfectly judged, achingly evocative things ever. It speaks to so many of us.
In “The Dispossessed” by Ursula K. Le Guin.
Thank you, Ursula k. Le Guin, for encouraging me to celebrate my peculiarities.
Show More
The short story about 'Omelas' is as insightful a demolition of utilitarianism I've read. Well, I didn't mean refutation, I meant demolish the underlying rationale. If we're all OK with someone perfectly innocent being lumped with all misery so we can be happy, then it's for the greater good, no? If we're not happy with that trade, and I doubt any society that isn't made of psychos would be, then for the utilitarianism is obviously undesirable as second order moral justification.Utilitarianism is supposed to be a way to be good, by maximizing happiness. But if maximizing happiness above all else leads to evil, then it's a bit of a non-starter. If you bring in rules and regulations to stop leading to an Omelas type scenario, then these are meta rules that aren't justified by utilitarianism, and so you're leaning on something else, or shorter, you've stopped justifying your acts by utilitarianism and at best it's become are process within the framework. In real life, we can't know what maximizes happiness, and so it's all a bit philosopher’s armchair. The story cuts through that, and lets us know what it might mean to maximize happiness and what it might cost. I see a pretty obvious answer if you value treating people fairly, and that's eschewing maximizing happiness.
Anyway, enough of my half-remembered ideas on philosophy...
The Kantian will say it is never acceptable to treat anyone merely as a means to the ends of others -- which the society of Omelas does. But consider: Save for one wretched child, Omelas is the absolute best society one could imagine. (If you don't like my sketch of this utopia, says Le Guin in the story, tweak it to match your ideal of perfection.) In practice, every society has many individuals living wretched lives. Omelas has more real happiness and less misery than we will ever achieve this side of paradise. To free the child or to walk away would accomplish what -- give one a feeling of personal virtue perhaps, but at what cost to others?
At times one of the adolescent girls or boys who go to see the child does not go home to weep or rage, does not, in fact, go home at all. Sometimes also a man or woman much older falls silent for a day or two, and then leaves home. These people go out into the street, and walk down the street alone. They keep walking, and walk straight out of the city of Omelas, through the beautiful gates. They keep walking across the farmlands of Omelas. Each one goes alone, youth or girl, man or woman. Night falls; the traveler must pass down village streets, between the houses with yellow-lit windows, and on out into the darkness of the fields. Each alone, they go west or north, towards the mountains. They go on. They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. They place they go towards is a place even less imaginable to most of us than the city of happiness. I cannot describe it at all. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas.
Bottom-line: I think the last paragraph of "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" one of the most perfectly judged, achingly evocative things ever. It speaks to so many of us.
Show Less
LibraryThing member rretzler
Ursula K Le Guin based this short thought experiment on the ideas of Fyodor Dostoyevsky and William James. In Omelas, everyone is happy…except for one child, who is locked away and lives in abject misery. All in Omelas accept that for the rest of the society to remain happy, the child must remain
Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? …Or the one? What if the sacrifice were made by an adult instead of a child? What if instead of happiness, the choice were health instead? Would you walk away from Omelas? It’s an interesting thought and not so farfetched as one might think. I believe this is something that happens in our society daily, except, of course, it is not one child or one person, but instead, many who are less fortunate in some way so that others can be more fortunate. I believe there are degrees here - the situation can be a deliberately horrific one like the story, or perhaps in some cases, not a choice, but a natural situation that can be improved. On the horrible side, all of the attempted genocides in the last century spring to mind, for example. However, there are those who suffer from disease or illness, and because of that suffering, cures are developed so that others can be healthy. If, however, the pain or illness is inflicted upon one purposefully, instead of happening naturally – like Mengele’s experiments on the prisoners in Auschwitz – then the result is indeed atrocious regardless of the outcome. Of course, my words and thoughts don’t do this story justice – you must read it for yourself.
Show More
in misery. All, that is, except for those who walk away from Omelas.Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? …Or the one? What if the sacrifice were made by an adult instead of a child? What if instead of happiness, the choice were health instead? Would you walk away from Omelas? It’s an interesting thought and not so farfetched as one might think. I believe this is something that happens in our society daily, except, of course, it is not one child or one person, but instead, many who are less fortunate in some way so that others can be more fortunate. I believe there are degrees here - the situation can be a deliberately horrific one like the story, or perhaps in some cases, not a choice, but a natural situation that can be improved. On the horrible side, all of the attempted genocides in the last century spring to mind, for example. However, there are those who suffer from disease or illness, and because of that suffering, cures are developed so that others can be healthy. If, however, the pain or illness is inflicted upon one purposefully, instead of happening naturally – like Mengele’s experiments on the prisoners in Auschwitz – then the result is indeed atrocious regardless of the outcome. Of course, my words and thoughts don’t do this story justice – you must read it for yourself.
Show Less
LibraryThing member Luisali
Omelas, città felice, i cui cittadini sanno distinguere tra il necessario, il superfluo ed il dannoso:
"Happiness is based on a just discrimination of what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive."
Omelas, città incantata, che celebra non il trionfo sui
Omelas, città perfetta?
La maggior parte degli abitanti ritiene di sì, pur sapendo bene ciò che è confinato dietro una porta chiusa a chiave in uno sgabuzzino senza finestre.
Pochi decidono di andarsene, ognuno da solo, nella notte, verso una meta sconosciuta e forse inesistente:
"They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."
Poche pagine magistrali che tolgono il fiato con una domanda senza risposta.
"Happiness is based on a just discrimination of what is necessary, what is neither necessary nor destructive, and what is destructive."
Omelas, città incantata, che celebra non il trionfo sui
Show More
nemici, ma la vittoria della vita e la pienezza dell'estate.Omelas, città perfetta?
La maggior parte degli abitanti ritiene di sì, pur sapendo bene ciò che è confinato dietro una porta chiusa a chiave in uno sgabuzzino senza finestre.
Pochi decidono di andarsene, ognuno da solo, nella notte, verso una meta sconosciuta e forse inesistente:
"They leave Omelas, they walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back. The place they go towards is a place even less imaginable. It is possible that it does not exist. But they seem to know where they are going, the ones who walk away from Omelas."
Poche pagine magistrali che tolgono il fiato con una domanda senza risposta.
Show Less
LibraryThing member kthxy
I… really don't know what to say. The beginning was fun and the end destroyed me emotionally - I enjoyed it a lot. The thoughts it sparked about perspective and inclusion in utopia, and the construction of utopian societies, were wonderful as welll. At the same time though, the way this disabled
Show More
child is used to make a point didn't sit quite right with me. Show Less
LibraryThing member abergsman
Spoiler ahead.
The happiness of an entire city, at the expense of one child. This short story is a harsh criticism of the problem that underlies utilitarianism.
The happiness of an entire city, at the expense of one child. This short story is a harsh criticism of the problem that underlies utilitarianism.
LibraryThing member margaretfield
very short read. more an illustration or a koan. it leads to great questions
LibraryThing member The_Literary_Jedi
This is one of those stories that sticks to the marrow of your bones and won’t leave you. I often use this story along with “Harrison Bergeron” in my classroom and to illustrate creative writing themes. A masterpiece for me!
LibraryThing member Tikimoof
As with the other great short stories, I'm still pondering it. It felt like kind of a subversion of utopian fiction, but it's also a question of true kindness and empathy. And a question of what a person can bear, and for how long. And a question of what society the ones who walked away from Omelas
Show More
would live in. Is the child's mother one who walked away? (I don't have a real review, just a lot of questions.) Show Less
LibraryThing member IonaS
This is one of the stories given us to read in Goodreads’ Short Story Club. Several of these stories are horrific and this is one of those stories.
Omelas is a city containing happy people. “They were not barbarians.”
It is the Festival of Summer.
In the basement of one of the beautiful
In the room a feeble-minded child is sitting. It may have been born defective or has become so through fear, malnutrition and neglect. It looks about six but is in fact nearly ten.
The door is locked and nobody will come. But sometimes the door opens, someone comes in and kicks the child, and the food bowl and the water jug are hastily filled.
The people never say anything but the child sometimes says “Please let me out. I will be good.” They never answer.
The child is naked. Its buttocks and thighs are a mess of festered sores as it sits in its own excrement continually.”
The people of Omelas all know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. They all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the health of their children, everything good about their city “depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery.”
They all believe that if the child were taken into the sunlight, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, then ”all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed”.
No kind word could ever be spoken to the child.
The reason for the necessity of the child being kept in misery and suffering is not explained.
It seems to be a fact of life. It’s just the way it is. The child has to suffer for all the others to be happy.
We’re told that some of the adolescent girls and boys who go to see the child leave home. Sometimes it is older men or women who leave. They walk out of the city of Omelas. They go alone. They do not come back,
Again no explanation is given for where those people are going, or why. It is up to the reader to understand. Perhaps they just can’t bear to live in a city like this where everyone’s well-being depends on the abject suffering of a pitiful child.
Instead of perhaps discussing with each other and with the authorities whether the child’s suffering is really necessary and whether it should not be rescued, these people choose just to leave.
Perhaps the meaning of the story relates to how we humans tackle other such wrongdoings; instead of trying to do something about those things, we shut our eyes to them by departing from the situations in question.
We feel we cannot do anything and ignore these evil things.
Omelas is a city containing happy people. “They were not barbarians.”
It is the Festival of Summer.
In the basement of one of the beautiful
Show More
public buildings of Omelas or one of its private homes there is a room with one locked door and no window. In the room a feeble-minded child is sitting. It may have been born defective or has become so through fear, malnutrition and neglect. It looks about six but is in fact nearly ten.
The door is locked and nobody will come. But sometimes the door opens, someone comes in and kicks the child, and the food bowl and the water jug are hastily filled.
The people never say anything but the child sometimes says “Please let me out. I will be good.” They never answer.
The child is naked. Its buttocks and thighs are a mess of festered sores as it sits in its own excrement continually.”
The people of Omelas all know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. They all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the health of their children, everything good about their city “depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery.”
They all believe that if the child were taken into the sunlight, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, then ”all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed”.
No kind word could ever be spoken to the child.
The reason for the necessity of the child being kept in misery and suffering is not explained.
It seems to be a fact of life. It’s just the way it is. The child has to suffer for all the others to be happy.
We’re told that some of the adolescent girls and boys who go to see the child leave home. Sometimes it is older men or women who leave. They walk out of the city of Omelas. They go alone. They do not come back,
Again no explanation is given for where those people are going, or why. It is up to the reader to understand. Perhaps they just can’t bear to live in a city like this where everyone’s well-being depends on the abject suffering of a pitiful child.
Instead of perhaps discussing with each other and with the authorities whether the child’s suffering is really necessary and whether it should not be rescued, these people choose just to leave.
Perhaps the meaning of the story relates to how we humans tackle other such wrongdoings; instead of trying to do something about those things, we shut our eyes to them by departing from the situations in question.
We feel we cannot do anything and ignore these evil things.
Show Less
Awards
Hugo Award (Nominee — Short Story — 1974)
Original publication date
1973
Physical description
32 p.; 8.6 inches
ISBN
0886825016 / 9780886825010