In Ursala Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk When You Could Run?
Why Walk When You Could Run?
It has been said by many, "Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members”. What if the weakest member of a society is placed in a position to carry the town’s woes? That is true in Ursala Le Guin’s short story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.” Le Guin’s depressing tale describes a society that is neither compassionate nor relevant, speaks about a culture of people who are corrupt thereby making the characters static. However, those citizens of Omelas that do discover the enlightenment of conscience and walk away symbolize a shunning of their culture.
The people of Omelas, no matter how happy they may seem, show no compassion throughout the story. This can be proven …show more content…
For some unknown reason the city of Omelas has a strict rule that being nice in any sort to the child in the closet will ruin the makeup of the society. The culture of the city is to believe that, “…their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships…depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery” (Le Guin par. 9). They defend this treatment by believing that, “its habits are too uncouth for it to respond to humane treatment” (Le Guin par. 12). For generations and generations this has been going on, and because the city is smiling and their lives are filled with joy the child stays in, “…a mass of festered sores, as [the child] sits in its own excrement continually” (Le Guin par. 8). Though when they first discover the child in such a state of, “anger, outrage, impotence, despite all the explanations” the townspeople act like nothing happened and move on with their lives (Le Guin par. 10). For a couple of days sometimes weeks however, the people seem to be affected by the discovery but, “as time goes on they begin to realize that even if the child could be released, it would not get much good of its freedom” (Le Guin par. 12). Due to this terrible fact is the reason why the characters in the story are static, they do not continue with their sadness and grief enough to actually change society they just let it continue on over …show more content…
This is both a good thing and a bad thing because they let their natural instinct to do what’s right become prominent in their thoughts but instead of helping their society become stronger they, “…walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back” (Le Guin par. 14). The ones that decide to leave the city realize that, “…they, like the child, are not free” (Le Guin par. 12). From this realization sprouts the decision for the man or woman to leave the city forever thereby turning their back on the culture that they once lived in. Though it is a good thing that the person’s conscious returns and becomes prominent in them, the argument must be raised that instead of shunning the culture, that same person could instead fight to release the child and hopefully give the child a shot at joy in
It has been said by many, "Any society, any nation, is judged on the basis of how it treats its weakest members”. What if the weakest member of a society is placed in a position to carry the town’s woes? That is true in Ursala Le Guin’s short story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.” Le Guin’s depressing tale describes a society that is neither compassionate nor relevant, speaks about a culture of people who are corrupt thereby making the characters static. However, those citizens of Omelas that do discover the enlightenment of conscience and walk away symbolize a shunning of their culture.
The people of Omelas, no matter how happy they may seem, show no compassion throughout the story. This can be proven …show more content…
For some unknown reason the city of Omelas has a strict rule that being nice in any sort to the child in the closet will ruin the makeup of the society. The culture of the city is to believe that, “…their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships…depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery” (Le Guin par. 9). They defend this treatment by believing that, “its habits are too uncouth for it to respond to humane treatment” (Le Guin par. 12). For generations and generations this has been going on, and because the city is smiling and their lives are filled with joy the child stays in, “…a mass of festered sores, as [the child] sits in its own excrement continually” (Le Guin par. 8). Though when they first discover the child in such a state of, “anger, outrage, impotence, despite all the explanations” the townspeople act like nothing happened and move on with their lives (Le Guin par. 10). For a couple of days sometimes weeks however, the people seem to be affected by the discovery but, “as time goes on they begin to realize that even if the child could be released, it would not get much good of its freedom” (Le Guin par. 12). Due to this terrible fact is the reason why the characters in the story are static, they do not continue with their sadness and grief enough to actually change society they just let it continue on over …show more content…
This is both a good thing and a bad thing because they let their natural instinct to do what’s right become prominent in their thoughts but instead of helping their society become stronger they, “…walk ahead into the darkness, and they do not come back” (Le Guin par. 14). The ones that decide to leave the city realize that, “…they, like the child, are not free” (Le Guin par. 12). From this realization sprouts the decision for the man or woman to leave the city forever thereby turning their back on the culture that they once lived in. Though it is a good thing that the person’s conscious returns and becomes prominent in them, the argument must be raised that instead of shunning the culture, that same person could instead fight to release the child and hopefully give the child a shot at joy in