Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas Utilitarianism

Ursula K. Le Guin uses her story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” to exhibit her disapproval of the utilitarianism seen in modern society by contrasting the contentment of the citizens of the fictitious utopian city, Omelas, with an account of the abused child in a closet in the cellar of one of the city’s buildings. The reader is shown how, in spite of Omelas’ utopian qualities, there are some of its citizens that exit the city, never to return. Those that walk away serve to express Le Guin’s own negative view on utilitarianism, and serves to compel the reader to contemplate whether or not they could tolerate a situation such as the one detailed. Utilitarianism is a moral philosophy that deems that which both minimizes suffering and maximizes well-being as being morally right. It is hard to digest the image of a child “so thin [that] there are no calves to its legs,” whose “buttocks and thighs are a mass of festered sores, as it sits in its own excrement continually” (3). However, Le Guin clearly outlines within the story that the child’s appalling condition is unconditionally required for the all of the other citizens of Omelas to thrive: “The terms are strict and absolute; there may not even be a kind word spoken to the child” (3). Having one, single child as a scapegoat preserves the quality of life for everyone

The acceptance of their helplessness in the child’s predicament is symbolic of the modern individual’s helplessness in the treatment of those that make modern conveniences possible. Le Guin also gives the reader insight into the frustration faced by the citizens of Omelas: “They feel anger, outrage, impotence, despite all the explanations. They would like to do something for the child. But there is nothing they can do.”