"The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas": Analysis of the Theme of Happiness
Read Review
Read Review
Table of contents
- Analysis of The Ones Who Walk Away from The Omelas
- Conclusion
- References
Is there such a thing as pure happiness? From my standpoint, the feeling of being happy and content in not one specific item, but one’s interpretation of life; something that cannot be physically touched, but more of a mindset in which you react. In “The Ones Who Walk Away from The Omelas” by Le Guin, is foreseen as a place where nothing but happiness exists, it has already been chosen for the people; until it is not. Sooner than later, the discovery that this too good to be true society is just that. Despite everything else, this is a no brainer, based on right and wrong, no matter who you are, pure joy and happiness should not ever depend on someone else having to suffer.
Analysis of The Ones Who Walk Away from The Omelas
In the novel, the ”upper class,” the civilians, seem to have embraced a philosophy focused on egalitarian values by placing the well-being of a city as the main concern, not the kid. This scenario is a fascinating twist on the separation of classes since in a capitalist system, the ”exploited” class typically represents the bulk of the population, the working class. In the Omelas, even if the state of the child is arguably worse than the average middle-class resident, there is only one child who must sacrifice (believed by the citizens) to uphold the ”egalitarian” tradition. But while class disparity is an important component of this narrative, it is actually also a set-up to investigate one's capacity to make choices by comparing the people who left Omelas after discovering the true roots of their happiness to those who remain in the area. Unlike other people in Omelas who actively attempt to rationalize their total power over the child, the individuals who left are the ones who effectively defend their conscience by taking the moral course of action. The narrator assumes that the reader will have a hard time believing that the Omelas is a real place because it is described as a kind of utopia; it only becomes “real” when we understand that its perfection is made possible by the misery and subjugation of a single child. Omelas is a commentary on the liberal impulse to imagine a more perfect society; in this case, the story is about the hollowness of such fantasies and impossibility of imagining happiness without some form of misery for comparison. This is why the destination of the ones who leave the Omelas is unknown: presumably, unable to live in a place where such compromises are not necessary. In this sense, the story is connected to real life not only by critiquing modern society, but by suggesting that the only way to eliminate subjugation is to “leave” Omelas, or to invent a truly radical, completely different way of life.
This idea of a falsified “perfect” society, is quite similar to the American dream. Living in a diverse state/country where there are many cultures surrounding us, it saddens me to see this so-called dream become an unrealistic vision for some. A family friend of mine came to America in hopes of a better life for her and her children. While she is able to have the freedom she once was not granted in her country before, she soon realizes that this also comes at a price. This happiness she strives for is soon put on hold, as they are denied help, resources, proper shelter, and work she was once promised. She soon realizes that in order to provide for her family, this may require unethical actions. This was the last thing she expected when coming to the “Promise Land”. But in comparison to the Omelas, she was doing what she thought was best in order to survive. The Omelas were turning a blind eye on deliberate, inhumane torture. In effect, this situation did not specifically require someone to suffer physically, in order to be happy, but rather walk into an unknown, expecting a completely different outcome.
Leaving Omelas, sadly, may never affect the dynamics in position. Leaving does not save the child from hurting, nor would it solve these problems other than the absence of the person from it. While guilt correlated with their wellbeing is renounced, all who walk away from Omelas only diminish the number of individuals for whom the child suffers. Just like my friend, once they reached America, despite their trials and hardship, would they be better going back to the horrible living conditions they once had. Or does doing what is best for yourself/and or family regardless of the journey, right or wrong, justify the process? A system that creates more happiness than it does misery, dictating that it is right and moral regardless of the suffering it causes. In order to “fix” this corrupt system, we all must stand together, or this cycle will continue to happen.
The fulfilment of all those who live there relies on an innocent child's pain. If the child's quality of life is to be changed from full suffering, in word or deed, as such Omelas' prosperity would be destroyed. By putting us in Omelas representational fantasy world, Le Guin allows us to come to terms with our ability to grasp with satisfaction and its variables. Le Guin states, “It is the existence of the child, and their knowledge of its existence, that makes possible the nobility of their architecture, the poignancy of their music, the profundity of their science” (Le Guin, 1973). Working or living in Omelas, being dependent on it for survival and prosperity, makes your happiness the result of the child. No matter how small the contribution, you will always be partially responsible for the horrendous misery of an innocent child. As long as you lived within the walls of Omelas, your happiness would never be your own and your hands would never be clean. Therefore, leaving the system, and severing the connection between the child’s suffering and your happiness is the right thing to do.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the concept of pure happiness is a subjective interpretation of life, rather than something that can be physically touched. The short story "The Ones Who Walk Away from The Omelas" by Le Guin depicts a society where happiness is derived from the suffering of a single child, which is an unacceptable moral compromise. This concept of a perfect society is similar to the American dream, where people believe they can achieve happiness through hard work and dedication, but the reality is often different. In order to achieve true happiness, we must work towards creating a system that does not require the suffering of others. Leaving Omelas may absolve guilt, but it does not solve the problem. It is our responsibility to work together to create a society that values the well-being of all individuals, rather than sacrificing the happiness of some for the benefit of others. Ultimately, true happiness cannot be achieved at the expense of others.
References
- Le Guin, U. K. (1973). The ones who walk away from Omelas. New Dimensions 3, edited by Robert Silverberg, Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday.
- Kahneman, D., & Deaton, A. (2010). High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(38), 16489-16493.
- Kesebir, S. (2011). A quiet ego quiets death anxiety: humility as an existential anxiety buffer. Journal of personality and social psychology, 100(6), 1203–1219.
- Myers, D. G. (2000). The funds, friends, and faith of happy people. American psychologist, 55(1), 56–67.
- Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 141–166.
- Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York: Simon and Schuster.
- Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: empirical validation of interventions. American psychologist, 60(5), 410–421.
- Sternberg, R. J. (2004). Culture and intelligence. American psychologist, 59(5), 325–338.
- Tov, W., & Diener, E. (2009). Culture and subjective well-being. In E. Diener (Ed.), Culture and well-being (pp. 87–104). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
- Waterman, A. S. (1993). Two conceptions of happiness: Contrasts of personal expressiveness (Eudaimonia) and hedonic enjoyment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 64(4), 678–691.
Cite this Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below
