To Serve Man, Part 2

Behind every great fortune there is a crime.
                                  --Honoré de Balzac

The Hunger Games: A hugely popular and contemporary example of a story built on the sacrifice of children for the good of the world.

Okay, so hopefully now, after having done a little research, we have some contextual knowledge about the story.  We know a little something about Le Guin, the setting and about the philosopher whose ideas inspired the creation of this story.  But let me review, just to be safe.

Omelas.  Simply print "s-a-l-e-m-o", hold that word up to a mirror, and you'll see "omelas" (though not exactly; the "l" and the "s" will likely be backwards).  "Omelas" is a mirrored reference to Salem, Oregon (Salem, O), Le Guin's home.  Now that's sort of clever, but this is where we need to put on our Analytical Hats and ask the question "why?"  Part of the answer may be pretty simple: it's a place she knew.  But why backwards/mirrored?  Writers commonly refer to cities by their real names, so there was really nothing to stop her from actually referring to Salem.  I would suggest two things are going on here.  

First, the story is a fantasy, so "inventing" the name of a town helps remind us that we are in a fantasy world.  However, finding out what Omelas actually refers to is not exactly difficult, so I think something else is going on here.  By mirroring the name of an actual place, I think she wants us to realize that while this is a fantasy world, she wants us to realize that the behaviors she talks about in this story are a part of our real world.  Maybe not literally, but the best fantasy writers (and Le Guin was and is one of the best) use fantasy not as an escape, but as a way of cautioning us as to what we are or what we might become if we are not careful.  In short, she is talking about you and me, and the world in which we live.  So think about that--we may not lock children in basements as some sort of bizarre sacrifice, but are there other ways in which we have created a "look-the-other-way" society, a society in which we try not to pay much attention to how we manage to get and keep the good things that we have? 

Breaker Boys (Child coal mine workers), early 20th C.  "Breaking" was dangerous work.

As far as William James is concerned (the far more challenging task), James articulated a philosophy known as Pragmatism.  I'll give you the short and sweet version of Pragmatism: basically, if something benefits us, then it is good and true.  We commonly tend to think that there are absolute truths out there, and we should pattern our lives to adhere to those truths.  James is saying the opposite: if we do something that benefits us as a society, then that something is true. Let's say, for example, that a government decides that every citizen must wear a uniform when outside of their homes.  After a while, the government and the citizens discover that this has created a greater sense of community, and has removed the stress of using clothing to signal one's class status, or send hostile messages, or to just separate oneself from the rest of the community.  In short, wearing uniforms has proven beneficial to society as a whole.  Not for every individual--that's impossible--but for society as a whole.  In the scheme of pragmatism, then, because we benefit from wearing uniforms, then wearing uniforms is good and true.  First the action, then the rule, NOT first the rule, then the action. 

Mill Girls, Massachusetts, late 19th C. 

As you might sense from my example above, pragmatism often then is reduced to a simplistic duality: the good of the many vs. the good of the one.  (Though it's not actually quite that simple.) In the world of Pragmatism, often the good of the many outweighs the good of the one--and that's where this story comes in.  Yes, it's horrible that the child has to suffer, but if the result of the suffering of a single person is the happiness of the whole town--the good of the many--including all of the other children in the town, then is that not a fair trade-off?

So let's dig a little deeper and focus on a couple of elements in the story itself.  I'll present you again with a series of questions to which to respond, except that your answers here will pertain directly to the first option in your second assignment you have coming up, and hopefully will be able to help you generate content for that essay by giving multiple, and complicated, things to think about.  (And that's the point--to recognize the complexity of things, that there are no simple answers).  


On With the Show

Here are the tasks/questions I would like you to address for "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas."  What I'd like to do is try to get some debate and (respectful) argument going--the kind of argument that's supposed to occur in college (and beyond), and not the name-calling and stubbornness we see all-too-often now.  

Below you’ll find a couple of questions that I’d like you to write your answers to. Keep in mind that if you choose this option for Assignment #1, your answers to these questions can go a long way to generating content for that essay.  What I'm asking you to do here is a common part of the writing process, for writers at all levels: use writing to generate ideas, not just to assemble them. 

Reading and Reaction Questions
 

• Do you think what the town is doing is evil, or are they making a difficult choice to benefit the greater good?  Related to that, we are told that at some point every citizen must visit the child, see what's being done to the child, and participate in abusing the child.  Is this an act of cruelty, or is this a way of making sure that the citizens of Omelas understand where their good life comes from?
• I'm guessing that most/all of you are horrified at the thought of so much suffering being visited upon a person.  Fair enough.  My question is, how much of that horror is based on the fact that it is a child who is suffering?  Would you be as horrified if it were an adult?  And what difference should it make whether it's a child or adult, a sweetheart of a person or an asshole?  Isn't all life supposed to be valuable, period?
• Finally, would you stay, or would you go?  Why?

As I mentioned, I'd like to try to get debate going, so here's how I'd like this to work.  First, write your responses to the questions above.  (And if it helps, keep in mind that what you would be doing is writing a draft of a potential essay.)

Then, I want you to respond to at least one other student, one with an answer that you disagree with.  Explain what you disagree with, and why.  That "why" is important, because that's where analysis lies.  And as I mention above, keep the disagreement respectful. 

2.  

Please respond by Monday, 2/3.