[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 38 KB, 318x451, theoneswhowalkawayfromomelas.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18770799 No.18770799 [Reply] [Original]

what's your opinion on this short story?
you can google it for the full story, it's about 4 pages long.

>> No.18770851

>>18770799
Good but I’m going to deduct a few points because all I could think of was Ivan Karamazov’s prelude to The Grand Inquisitor story

>> No.18770867

>>18770799
it is a nice allegory, I think The Dispossessed is more powerful

>> No.18770876

>>18770799
>femoid writers
not even once

>> No.18770899

>>18770851
>>18770867
i'll have to look into those, thanks.
i personally liked it because for its short length, it gives you a lot to think about even if it's your typical trolley sort of situation. like what's the alternative to omelas, what happens to those who walk away, is the kid suffering really necessary for the upkeep of omelas, what if you knew the kid personally, would you live in omelas? good stuff.

if there are any other philosophical fiction like this, please do recommend.

>> No.18770905

>>18770876
>not judging a book by its content
do you pick books based on how cool the cover looks too?

>> No.18771034

>>18770899
the concept is somewhat similar to Brave New World. i think you would enjoy it if you havent read it already

>> No.18771041

>>18770899
>what happens to those who walk away
that's what The Dispossessed covers

>> No.18771308

Fuck the kid. Knowing about his suffering would obviously make me a bit sad at times, but I would simply ignore these thoughts and keep on living, just like any other sane person. I think caring about the kid is just some sort of irrational abrahamic neurosis.
The thing about real life is that there are billions of kids like this, both literal and figurative (for example, intensive animal farming, which is genuinely disgusting). It is inescapable, and human life has always been this way. You can dedicate your life to freeing some of them (for example, become a vegan eco activist) but you will never be able to walk away from all the Omelas in the world and live a life of a saint. Even ending your life isn’t a real solution here. You will have to arbitrarily draw a line somewhere, at which point you really lose the right to do the moral grandstanding.

>> No.18771402

>>18770799
Shirley Jackson's The Lottery is a better short story on scapegoating imo. It seems that Omelas was trying to illuminate this phenomenon, but the point is all fuddled. She turns it into the trolley problem and what am I even supposed to feel about the people that walk away? They're kind of idiots

>> No.18771620

>>18771308
what if the kid was someone you knew personally or was related to you? or what if you were the scapegoat? would that change your perspective?

i was reading something about omelas and how dysfunctional families have a scapegoat child to maintain a sort of blamelessness for their abuse. omelas doesn't need to be a whole society, it can happen in families and smaller communities too. if talking in the sense of people discovering you're on a vietnamese basket-weaving forum with politics that aren't politically correct, you'd be the scapegoat for "what went all wrong" in the world's progression. nothing really comes out of cancelling or shunning you, a single insignificant person (the basement child), from society, but that "ignorance is bliss" sort of idea is what people would be fine with in order to maintain their sense of reality (omelas).

>>18771402
thanks, i'll look into that. i don't think it's fair to call the ones who walk away idiots. we don't know what happens to them, but the story i think tries to tap into superificial pleasure and intrinsic pleasure. you can still enjoy life without an iphone or something for example, by looking at a nice sunset or making a friend smile.

>> No.18771672

>>18771620
>i don't think it's fair to call the ones who walk away idiots.
why? what are they walking away from? what are they changing? that kind of solitary monastic lifestyle has already been totally irreparably fucking BTFOd by countless writers hundreds of years ago (Rabelais for one). they are doing nothing, contributing or changing nothing. you can't escape society. that's not an option today, or when this story was written. What is the modern equivalent of "walking away from an omela"? Can you name one? Walking Away is not only not an option, but being a total loner is not an answer to any of our problems and never can be. That's not how any of this works

>> No.18771747

>>18771672
who says they're going to be loners though? it's not just one person walking away from omelas, it's implied in the title there's more than one. maybe they end up building some society that doesn't exploit a suffering child.

the story is pretty vague on purpose because it's more like a thought experiment than what literally happens to the people though. as i said before, it could call on to the intrinsic vs superficial pleasures by setting your own standards of what successful, fulfilling living means instead of what society gives to you.

with how globohomo/corporate the world is now, it's pretty much impossible to escape the exploitation of others, so yes you're right about that. but considering the author's taoist and buddhist influences, i don't think my interpretation is too far of a stretch either.

>> No.18771839

it's a gnostic allegory. those who walk away from omelas are those who walk away from a fundamentally unjust universe

>>18771672
society is your absolute horizon which is why you can't comprehend those who secede from it.

>> No.18771853

>>18770899
Chekhov's The Bet will be right up your alley. Short and sweet like Omelas.

>> No.18771857

>>18771747
>who says they're going to be loners though? it's not just one person walking away from omelas, it's implied in the title there's more than one. maybe they end up building some society that doesn't exploit a suffering child.
if the scapegoating mechanism weren't necessary then what's the point of the story? it's just a society somehow under the false assumption that it is? what kind of message is that? and these aren't realistic options either, these societies don't exist. what you're proposing as the option here is just some pointless utopian fantasy

>because it's more like a thought experiment
i agree, tho that was also sort of my problem with it. it's sort of the trolley problem, as opposed to an "actual" short story, like The Lottery
>it could call on to the intrinsic vs superficial pleasures by setting your own standards of what successful, fulfilling living means instead of what society gives to you
i honestly dont know what this means but im going to take a guess. the problem about pleasure here is that Walking Away is fundamentally life-denying, and basically a denial of worldly pleasure (remember killing the kid makes everyone in society happy in this though experiment) just like the scholastic monks (again Rabelais et al already BTFOd this mindset half a millenium ago) which is very ironic because they obviously don't think that. they're just idiots (imo) but this is not just my take on a thought experiment, its a criticism of the story because i doubt Ursula really intended that

but anyway, if you like Ursula, i thought this video was charming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M73cyc9lhhI at the very least fun to watch while eating something. its a unique interview because the interviewer is just a mom that just likes reading a lot, and is really innocently curious about what it's like to be a female artist

>> No.18771888

>>18771839
>society is your absolute horizon which is why you can't comprehend those who secede from it.
there is no seceding from society dumbfuck. it's hilarious that you think you're the one being openminded here. but go ahead keep shitposting your fantasies on 4chan

>> No.18771915

>>18770799
Read it when I was 14. It's haunted me ever since.

>> No.18771932

Said this on another thread, but it reminds me of Chris-chan, like he is the child which the internet abused in order to... feel good? I dunno.

>> No.18771941

>>18771888
that's what omelicucks like you need to believe

>> No.18771948

>>18771932
it's truman in the Truman show, it's Sophia in the Valentinian cosmogony, it's every pig slaughtered for bacon and it's every dead-eyed stripper on a Friday night.

>> No.18771970

>>18770799
People who reject consequentialism are gay.

>> No.18771977

>>18771970
How is the child's fate not a consequence?

>> No.18772005

>>18771941
well IN the story, as i said, leaving society is ostensibly possible. but even in this fantasy world, it's still fucking dumb >>18771672 >>18771857 precisely because you're the ascetic cuckold here

>> No.18772016

>>18772005
>nooo you have to live within the a priori limits I've set up for you nooooo
Fuck off

>> No.18772048

>>18771977
not that anon but it is a consequence, that's the point. walking away is just putting your fingers in your ears while pretending you have a choice.. but the choice doesn't do anything and if everybody behaved like you did we would be in Hobbes state of nature, which is incomparably worse than that child's fate.. but we haven't even escaped the problem.. we're just going to end up back to where we are.. so what was the point..

>> No.18772059

>>18772048
why would people who conscientiously secede from an unjust system just revert to barbarity... omelas is not a city that can be reformed, it is all cities, suffering is ineradicable so long as it is possible for cities to exist, stop projecting your naivete about being able to change omelas onto those who rightfully know there's nothing that can be done, cosmologically

>> No.18772061

>>18772016
>a priori limits
make an argument fucker, if you have a problem with the "limits" i'm setting, show me, say something. this is just pseudery otherwise

>> No.18772063

>>18772048
Assuming that there are no other choices, it's the better one.

>> No.18772075

>>18772061
society is not the absolute horizon of being you trog. jesus americans really think teen movies are the be-all end-all of existence don't they?

>> No.18772088

>>18772059
>why would people who conscientiously secede from an unjust system just revert to barbarity...
The point isn't that THEY individually revert to barbarity. It's that if everyone just walked away, then we are in a state of nature, with no society. This is undeniably a worse situation and again this is so far fucking removed from reality because Walking Away is not an option.
>omelas is not a city that can be reformed, it is all cities, suffering is ineradicable so long as it is possible for cities to exist,
what are you even talking about? where did i say asmuch? on the contrary, that's MY point, this is consequentialism as that anon pointed out >>18771970 there's a choice to be made here and walking away is not making any choice or solving anything. if all the people that walked away formed a new society, THAT society would scapegoat as well, as you agree.

>> No.18772099

>>18772088
i don't get how you retards can read these stories and still be so fucking baffled by them.

those who walk away from omelas walk away from the world TOUT COURT, they don't walk away to REPRODUCE the world and its child somewhere else. fucking christ. and hobbes was a psychopath, I reject your premises

>> No.18772106

>>18772075
im not american dipshit. i'd tell you to go live in the woods but you're already clearly living in a fantasy land.
>>18772063
what is? walking away? how? who is benefitting in this scenario? did you even read the story?

>> No.18772122

>>18772099
>those who walk away from omelas walk away from the world TOUT COURT, they don't walk away to REPRODUCE the world and its child somewhere else.
READ THE THREAD DIPSHIT. I'm not the anon that claimed they would make a new society, this one did >>18771747 which is the only reason I brought that up. Walking away from the world is retarded, and I'm not going to repeat myself, go fucking respond to my old posts >>18771672 >>18771857

>> No.18772130

>>18772106
christ almighty it feels like I'm teaching a sped class for free

there is NO benefit you fucking mongoloid, there is no transaction because those who walk away are precisely walking away from the field of transaction itself, which is founded on the primary transaction: of death for life, suffering for joy, the child's misery for the beauty of omelian society.

>> No.18772137

>>18772122
I did, you're all brainlets, I'm here to set the record straight. Sorry faggot, but "nuh-uh" doesn't make for very compelling reading.

>> No.18772150

>>18771034
the concept is is just allegorical fiction for Utilitarianism

>> No.18772162

>>18772130
>those who walk away are precisely walking away from the field of transaction itself, which is founded on the primary transaction: of death for life, suffering for joy, the child's misery for the beauty of omelian society.
genius, cool, you walked away (again not possible anywhere but your fantasy world) and nothing changed. you denied life and pleasure, and the child is still being tortured. cool. go preach your dissociative philosophy elsewhere you ascetic dipshit

>>18772137
Here to set the record straight in a thread that you refuse to read. Great nobody cares

>> No.18772179

>>18772162
Pathetic undergrad smoothbrain. We all read Nietzsche, Matthew.

>> No.18772194

>>18772179
not sure what you mean, if anything Neitzsche's argument is the opposite of mine - pretty sure he thinks asceticism is life affirming, but maybe that's what you meant. and i'm not Matthew

>> No.18772269

where did u guys go? this was one of the rare times i was having fun in a 4chan argument. im gonna go read and sleep, som1 keep this bomb ass thread bumped. nice job OP >>18770799
this is the kind of shit /lit/ misses. we need more short story discussions, more trolley problem threads

>> No.18772309

i stepped away for a minute to browse other boards but thanks for all the anons joining in the discussions. i didn't think there would be too much traction here.

>>18771853
thanks anon! i'll definitely look into this one.

>>18771857
>what you're proposing as the option here is just some pointless utopian fantasy
what i'm trying to say here is that the act of walking away from omelas can be more about taking responsibility of your own burdens and suffering rather than to off-load it on to others. a society where whatever your merit brings to the table is not too far off from a fantasy but it would probably regress us to a more simpler state. (think in terms of small rural villages) it's far from a utopia, but at least you would reap what you sow. the suffering wouldn't be onto another human being, but rather an animal for food, but they wouldn't suffer for too long because it's not practical.

>i honestly dont know what this means but im going to take a guess.
i understand your sentiment that walking away isn't a real solution (imo, i wish she explored what would happen if a person mercy kills the kid) but it calls to the people to think about what really is important, like your principles and your personal definition of happiness. i can eat a delicious pot roast served by a michelin tier chef everyday in omelas, or i can catch my own food, be thankful it kept me full, and take pride in the fact i caught and cooked it myself. i can watch the greatest movie in the world in omelas, but i could also enjoy a sunset on a hill and imagine my own story. that is what i think people who walk away from omelas could possibly find after they walk away from omelas.

maybe it's not intended, but stories like this are allowed to be interpreted in any way you like. again, it's a thought experiment. thanks for the interview, i'm aware she's not a philosopher on the tier of plato or anything, but a good story gives you something to think about, and that's exactly what i felt she did for me.