Omelas

            It surprises me just how much I enjoyed this story. It was a little difficult for me to get rolling with it, but once it hit its stride, I was sucked in. The descriptive details and engaging unique writing style had me captivated.

            So, Omelas seems to be a good place—full of joy and happiness. Several times LeGuin encourages the reader to imagine the city for themselves, often with suggestions, such as orgies (for those picturing the city as too goody-goody). For some time, it seems like a truly ideal city is trying to be painted. For example, LeGuin says the city has religion, but not clergy. I wonder if this distinction is one of personal disgust with what people do to and with religion.

            Midway through the description of the city, the reader is questioned: Can you believe this city is so full of joy? In other words, does it seem to good to be true? Well, yes, of course it does. There are no flaws. No blemishes. No hideous marks of reality. But, wait. What’s this? A child kept in a deep, damp, dark closet, bathed only in its own excrement, and loved only piteously through meager scraps of sustenance. A repulsive sight of sores and disfigurement. Somehow this child allows the rest of the city to live in the way it does, although not in blissful ignorance. Everyone must be made aware of this child’s suffering at some point in their lives. Apparently this experience of enlightenment shocks everyone into a stupor, although most manage to shake it off. Some, however, walk away from the city. Presumably disgusted with the necessary price paid for happiness. Where do they go? The citizens of Omelas don’t seem to know, or care I imagine.

            Clearly, this story is wrought with metaphors, but what are they? Does LeGuin intend for the reader to imagine parallels, just as they imagine the city, or does she hope they notice the allegory she intended? Is the child the disgusting byproducts of today’s society? The price paid to enjoy the life style we do? Is the child the hungry and homeless? The environment? Selfishness? I imagine the people who become aware of the child and continue to live in the city represent the “sheep” of our culture, but who are the people who walk away? And why is the place they walk so so fantastic in its own right?