Ursula K. Le Guin’s short story, “Those Who Walk Away from Omelas”  describes a utopian society in which every citizen that lives in Omelas, except one, is permanently happy. The citizens of Omelas “could perfectly well have central heating, subway trains, washing machines, and all kinds of marvel‑ ous devices not yet invented here, floating light sources, fuelless power, a cure for the common cold. Or they could have none of that: it doesn’t matter. As you like it.[…] Smiles, bells, parades, horses, bleh. If so, please add an orgy. If an orgy would help, don’t hesitate.” (Le Guin, 2). This portion from the story explains how the citizens of Omelas could have all of the advances in the world, or none, and they would still be just as happy. In Omelas, the citizens could obtain any source of happiness they seeked (ex: an orgy). However, all of this jubilation and joyfulness comes at a price. A child is kept locked up, in a room no bigger than a closet, and left with no comfort, no warmth, no love, the bare minimum to eat, and no happiness. This child is suffering, but the people of Omelas are not allowed to even speak nicely to it, let alone free it from captivity, or else Omelas would be rid of all of its happiness. After exposing themselves to the conditions of this child, some citizens swallow their pride and continue living in Omelas, while others decide that their happiness is not worth the suffering of this child, so they leave Omelas. Where, you might ask? Who knows.

     In her short story, Le Guin uses statements such as “Do you believe? Do you accept the festival, the city, the joy? No? Then let me describe one more thing.”(Le Guin, 3) and, “Now do you believe in them? Are they not more credible? But there is one more thing to tell, and this is quite incredible.”(Le Guin, 5), to express ethos (voice) throughout this piece. Le Guin is the narrator of this story, therefore she is using such quotes to help readers better understand Omelas, by further analysing and dissecting it herself. This, in turn, makes her appear more credible, as she gives readers very elaborate explanations to what Omelas is really like, and readers have no other perspective, but Le Guin’s, to base their thoughts of Omelas off of. 

     Purpose, or logos, can be found in this text through Le Guin’s explanation of Omelas. “They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas.[…] they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children,[…] depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery.[…]They would like to do something for the child. But there is nothing they can do.[…] if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, that would be a good thing, indeed; but if it were done, in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed.”(Le Guin, 4). Here, Le Guin gives reasoning as to how the city of Omelas obtains its happiness through a suffering child kept in captivity. Le Guin explains how, although some citizens may want to help/rescue the captive child, they can not do so unless they want Omelas to be stripped of all its beauty and happiness. Moreover, the purpose of this story is to explain what Omelas is and how the citizens there behave, and Le Guin gives logical reasoning as to how the city is able to maintain its happiness. Although some citizens may decide to leave the city after confronting the child being kept in captivity, most decide to continue living happy lives in Omelas, at this childs expense. Further, by asking questions like, ”Do you accept the festival, the city, the joy? No?” and “Now do you believe in them?” It shows how part of Le Guin’s purpose in writing this piece is to allow readers to think critically of the situation in Omelas, and relate to it (by putting themselves in the shoes of an Omelas citizen or by relating the situation to their personal lives).

     Le Guin exhibits pathos (sensitivity) through this writing, mainly when describing the imprisoned child in Omelas, and how citizens react to it. “The child, who has not always lived in the tool room, and can remember sunlight and its mother’s voice, sometimes speaks. ‘I will be good,’ it says. ‘Please let me out. I will be good!’ They never answer.[…] it speaks less and less often. It is so thin there are no calves to its legs; its belly protrudes; it lives on a half‑bowl of corn meal and grease a day. It is naked. It’s buttocks and thighs are a mass of festered sores, as it sits in its own excrement continually.” (Le Guin, 4). Le Guin uses very descriptive language and imagery here, to paint an image in the reader’s heads, to depict the actual condition of the child. Usually, one may feel empathetic towards another human being that is hurting/in need of help, so Le Guin uses this quote to make readers realize the severity of the situation in Omelas, and how absurd it is for it to be allowed for someone to be kept under these circumstances (especially a child). Le Guin then adds, “They feel disgust, which they had thought themselves superior to. They feel anger, outrage, impo‑ tence, despite all the explanations. They would like to do something for the child.[…] Often the young people go home in tears, or in a tearless rage, when they have seen the child and faced this terrible paradox.”(Le Guin, 4-5), to vividly describe how some citizens react to seeing the child. Usage of descriptive words such as, “disgust”, “outrage”, and “tearless rage” make it so readers can emotionally connect to the story since, they themselves may also be feeling similarly to how citizens of Omelas were feeling here, after reading about the captive child. One may also connect the situation in Omelas to situations in their real life in terms of how things humans purchase on a daily basis are made/produced by corrupt businesses, etc. Furthermore, through all this analysis, Le Guin leaves readers wondering if they themselves would stay living in Omelas, if it meant that a child would be suffering 24/7 for the rest of the city’s happiness.

     Overall, Le Guin succeeded in describing the most significant factors of Omelas by using voice, sensitivity, and reasoning. She asked questions in her story to make readers better interact with the piece, and she effectively described how Omelas was a city in which its citizens experienced no guilt towards imprisoning a child for their own benefits. While those that indeed recognized the morality of the situation, removed themselves from the equation entirely by leaving the city. Where did they go after Omelas? Who knows. Do you agree with why they left? Would you yourself stay in the blissful environment of Omelas, even if it meant a child would be forever imprisoned and suffering? That is up to you.