1/30/2007

David's Review of "Omelas": A Perfect Story

Below you can find some meaty portions of DavidK's review of "The Ones Who Walk From Omelas." May I strongly suggest that you take the time to read through the entire review in addition to these excerpts!

Now please chime in with your own thoughts on this text, too. I will be happy to print them as separate posts here if you'd like, or I can create a list of hyperlinks to the posts on your own blogs. Your call. :)


While not everybody I meet shares my affection and respect for LeGuin's work, many of the readers I encounter who wouldn't even normally mess with fantasy fiction know this story. And I think there's a good reason for that. "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" is a story that you read and it stays with you, cropping up every now and again as a theme of memory, a twinge of the conscience. It's not a story you read and forget easily, or pass off as a bit of pleasant entertainment.

[SNIP]

One might be tempted to think, at first, that "Omelas" dispenses with plot, but this isn't the case. There's the setup (the celebration, and the comparisons of Omelas to our own civilization), the climax (the child), and the resolution (the choice of the inhabitants of Omelas to either reconcile themselves to the child, or not). Beginning, middle, end. It's just that the story is not the story of any one individual, but the story of the way in which the entire city deals with the consequences and costs of its happiness.

Enough on technique. As much as I admire LeGuin's bravery in crafting her fictions, and her incredible command of language, the most resonant thing for me about her work is its moral import. I cannot think on this story but that I think of how, in the United States, we are not a particularly happy people. And yet we do have a considerable amount of material security that we take for granted. Even the most wretched homeless in the United States can usually find enough food to eat (albeit from dumpsters) and find some shelter at night. It terrifies me to think that, in other countries, that even these most fundamental necessities are not guaranteed. I watched a documentary some weeks ago about children in Uganda who walk for miles every night to get from their internment camps to public buildings in distant townships, in a feeble attempt to avoid rape or being pressed into service as child soldiers, and those images still plague me. And the damn thing of it is that what material security we enjoy in America--that even the poorest of us enjoys--really comes at somebody else's expense, when you stop and think about it. The material abundance we have is the result of somebody's pain, somewhere--somebody has to work to make the products we buy for such a small portion of our disposable income, somebody's country is being diminished as its resources are being stripped away. We don't see these people who work in factories sweatshops and mines and plantations. Part of this is as a result of their distance from us; we shut them away, out of sight and out of mind, in that cellar closet that we optimistically refer to as the developing world. But ignorance is no excuse in the information age, is it? No--more often, we are unconscious of this kind of thing because we choose not to be. Or else we are conscious of it, from time to time, but find some way to accept it, and find some way to absolve ourselves of the responsibility for the lives we lead.

Does happiness exist in infinite amounts? Or is happiness a finite thing--can I only be happy at somebody else's expense? And even if it would only be the expense of one person, would that justify my own happiness?

I really don't know. I think on these things, for hours at a time, and just find my mind spinning around, arriving at no conclusions, my conscience stinging the back of my skull.

Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one? Or do the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many? The *Star Trek* movies don't really help in figuring that one out.

Reading "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas" doesn't make me feel good about the world. It doesn't make me feel secure, or that everything will be okay in the end. It doesn't reinforce my convictions. Which is exactly why I feel the need to pick it back up, every now and again, and wonder how many children there are out there, shut up in closets, suffering so I don't have to.

Gentle reader, this story represents my very ideal of what fantasy fiction can and should do. Rather than offering up a mindless escapism, this fiction holds up the mirror of metaphor to our own reality, and offers up a distorted reflection that is somehow more true than a literal representation. LeGuin's fantasy has all the power and truth of dream, and is profoundly human for all of its flight from our mundane reality. Stories like this are why I write, and stories like this are what I hope to someday write. Not to compete with Ursula K. LeGuin, because I don't think I could improve upon her work in any way, and because I don't think I need to re-say what she has already said. But in my own way, I hope to capture that dreaming truth, that myth that can say so much more than data and direct exposition ever could.

This is, I think, a perfect story.

4 comments:

SoCalSingleMama said...

The most striking part to me was that the children - when they first found out about the one that was suffering - the children knew it was wrong. It wasn't until they started to become convinced of the importance of their own comfort that they lost sight of the great injustice of it all.

jana said...

Let me take the discussion to a symbolic level. I like how DavidK discussed the parallels between the miserable child in Omelas and the misery of children and exploited workers in 3rd world countries. I _absolutely_ agree that this is an important reading of this text.

But let me suggest a different reading. Could we imagine the innocent suffering child as a Christ figure? Could we consider how Christians displace the blame and guilt for their actions by heaping them up on a scapegoat to suffer for them? If we take this reading of the story, how does it change our relationship to the miserable child in the text?

For me, this story was part of a major paradigm shift. For I am no longer comfortable displacing the guilt and suffering for my actions on someone else. Even if, as in the case of Christ, he was a willing victim, I feel that I no longer want part in a religious paradigm that has such violence as its foundation.

Anonymous said...

Jana,
I feel like it took me a little bit of careful consideration and rereading to understand what you were saying, but now that I figured it out, that makes a great deal of sense- because the child suffered, the people of Ornelas could enjoy a life of joy , just as Christ suffered so those of the Christian faith can realize joy and hope. Hmmm...

For me, (and I know this is digressing from the religious question), the crux of the question is whether or not our own happiness in life and in general is based on our comparative nature. I guess what I am trying to ask is whether or not we would be less appreciative our own lives if we did not have something to compare them to? I guess this can work two ways. I can be thankful that I am not (and never have been) wanting for food or shelter, but I can also be unsatisfied because I don't have as much as the person sitting next to me. And when I realize that my own happiness and joy in life is contingent on knowing that my life is always better or worse than others it's kind of a shaky thought because it makes me question the ultimate foundation of my own satisfaction in life? Can I ever be happy and satisfied in a sense of just being and surviving and breathing or can I only happy if I know what it is like to be unhappy? And, can I really be satisfied knowing the the only way I know satisfaction is because I know what satisfaction is not, and I know this because I know that others are not satisfied? Maybe these questions are too twisted or relative, but I think it is worth looking at the way we perceive as something that is hinged on constant need, and maybe even natural tendency to compare.

Thinking about these questions and going back to the question of faith, I guess the walk away from Ornelas could be seen as our own willingness to accept a world in which we are comfortable or uncomfortable with our own being without needing something to redeem this being (or maybe something to compare it to). In the case of Christianity and your comment on guilt and suffering based on my own actions rather than scapegoated onto a suffering figure, I guess the question is one of responsibility. While those who stay in Ornelas may seem comfortable living their contented lives because there is essentially one who suffers so they could know that contentedness, those who leave may be the ones who recognize that their contentedness, or lack their of, could potentially be found within their own conscious and their own judgment. They don't need something so awful in the world for their own redemption, but rather they recognize the need to find redemption from within, in the form of exploring their own consciousness and not existing solely in a world in which they can be happy because someone is not. Maybe those who leave could be considered more responsible because they don't need someone to suffer so they can feel like their life is okay, but rather because they have to fight to see whether or not life is okay outside of having something or someone to transfer their own guilt on. Maybe they are different because they seek their contentedness outside of something that is as defined as things are in Ornelas, and in my view this is probably much more difficult and involves a sense of personal responsibility and fulfillment rather than one of easy answers based only on comparison and a sort of easy redemption

I am not sure if these thoughts are concise or make a whole lot of sense. I realize I am asking many questions that don't entirely relate to each other or follow any logical sequence or progression, but maybe they are none-the-less thought provoking.

Bored in Vernal said...

I'm away for the weekend and don't have time to make a really long intelligent response. But I just wanted you to know that I read Omelas (my first time) and was very affected by it.
And Jana's comment really struck me. I've been thinking about it all night. Disturbing. I need to think about it some more.