The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas by Ursula K. Le Guin and A White Heron by Sarah Orne Jewett - Essay Example

?Charlet M. Chavez Oishi English 255 9 October For the Greater Good In the two short stories “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” by Ursula K. Le Guin and “A White Heron” by Sarah Orne Jewett, there are individuals caught up in the need to make momentous choices. The choice is not motivated by self-preservation but by utilitarianism, or the inspiration to make decisions that are best for the majority. The citizens of the city of Omelas, whether they choose to stay in their beloved city or whether they choose to walk away, do so in a manner that preserves all that is wonderful and good in Omelas. The main character in “A White Heron,” Sylvia, makes her final decision to keep the heron’s home a secret from the hunter also to preserve all that she sees as the best of her world. All of these individuals are shown both sides of the choice to be made in the story and are clearly offered the chance of individual relief of their anguish. In the end they do the only thing they know they must do, guided by their sense of right and wrong. Walk away, stay, keep a secret and remain quiet all are choices for utilitarianism. To explore the decisions made by the characters in these stories it helps to understand what they see as the greater good. In the story of “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” this is both the city and her citizens. Le Guin describes the city of Omelas as being “Bright-towered”, houses with red roofs, mossy gardens, tree-lined avenues, and “great parks” (824). It was the beginning of the Festival of Summer, a special of occasion, yet Omelas was likely always in a state of splendor. The city’s surrounding mountains and waters are ideal. Everything is on the verge of being too ideal, but not enough to be unreal. The citizens are perfectly matched for this city of Omelas. They are portrayed as a happy people but not in a simpleton form of happiness. The story emphasizes this in saying, “They were not simple folk, not dulcet shepherds, noble savages, bland utopians. They were not less complex than us” (Le Guin 824). It would be easy to say they could be automatons with no real need to express anything beyond one-note happiness. Nonetheless they are also described as “mature,” “intelligent” and “passionate” (Le Guin 824). The whole of their society, from the very young to the very old, embrace this ability to be so very happy and content in their city. The citizens are guided by their own principles, which uphold utilitarianism. Le Guin beckons the reader to imagine this city and her people in any way that brings understanding of that great joy, utter peace, lack of want. In the story, “A White Heron”, Sylvia chooses to keep the heron’s location a secret for its greater good. The vision of the greater good in her young mind is more subtle but no less important. She chose her action out of a sense of morality. In her young mind, she might not have fully comprehended the depth of her decision. Sylvia was an industrial born child taken to the country by her paternal grandmother to live in the country side. They were very poor, but got by. To her, the world was a vast improvement. Sylvia’s forest and its inhabitants are the source of her happiness and joy. She is a child true, yet something in that vision leads her to understand the special gift it is to be in its presence. She immediately took to the forest and all of its creations. Her grandmother made note of this to the bird hunter when saying “There ain’t a foot o’ground shedon’t knowher way over, and the wild creatur’s counts her one o’themselves (Jewett 624). Sylvia’s adventure up the great tree that leads to the view of the white heron’s nest is the turning point to her true understanding to what was the greater good. She had been sorely tempted by the offer of ten dollars to lead the hunter to the white heron. At the same time, she didn’t lead him to that tree, the old pine tree that towered above all. It made a landmark for sea and shore for miles and miles away. Sylvia believed that once atop this tree, she would see the ocean and the shore yonder (Jewett 626). As she is climbing, Jewett does an excellent job of describing what is happening to Sylvia, “with tingling, eager blood coursing through the channels of her whole frame, with her bare feet and fingers, that pinched and held like bird’s claws to the monstrous ladder reaching up, up, almost to the sky itself ” (627). This journey is a transformation for Sylvia; the shy child has been very brave. Now the momentous appearance of the white heron as she sits upon the treetop branch has arrived. She spots the heron flying up near her to land on a nearby bough, “…with steady sweep of wing and outstretched slender neck and crested head… [He] cries back to his mate on the nest, and plumes his feathers for the new day” (Jewett 628)! The beauty of the bird, its sheer innocence, as it cried to its mate, and sense of happiness resolved Sylvia to her final decision; to keep its location a secret for its greater good. For the people of Omelas the decision for utilitarianism is forced upon them when confronted with the child in the cellar. A child left there in a wretched state of neglect and abuse. They all know it is there. When the children of Omelas are between eight and twelve, seemingly capable of understanding, the situation is explained to them. The story explains it best in the following passage pertaining to the existence of the child in the cellar. They all know it is there, all the people of Omelas. Some of them have come to see it, others are content merely to know it is there. They all know that it has to be there. Some of them understand why, and some do not, but 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. (Jewett 827) These people are not allowed to choose for the betterment of the child without the loss of all that is Omelas. In conclusion both Sylvia and the citizens of Omelas must make momentous choices in their stories. Sylvia, must choose between the hunter’s offer of ten dollars, which would better her poor country lifestyle for the foreseeable future and keeping the secret of the white heron’s location. The citizens of Omelas must choose between helping a poor wretched abused child left to rot in a cellar and all the glory and happiness of Omelas. Their choices in the end become ones of utilitarianism, or the greater good. Sylvia chooses the keep the secret of the white heron’s location in order to preserve the forest sanctuary. The bird and its mate stand for the majority whose interests have to be protected. People of Omelas, whether they walk away or stay, choose not to interfere with the fate of the abused and neglected child in order to let the majority live in perfect joy and peace. This is the ideal way to deal with most decisions that affect the majority. Utilitarianism endears to maximize contentment and limit suffering. The minorities are forgotten in utilitarianism. If you are ever down on your luck, become an outsider looking in, you will be culled from the herd, for the greater good. It is the majority that matter, therefore, status quo is maintained to protect their interests. Both stories vividly described how utilitarianism is chosen over personal ideals for the greater good of the masses. Works Cited Jewett, Sarah Orne. “A White Heron.”The Short Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann Charters. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford, 2010. 622-629. Print. Le Guin, Ursula K. “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.” The Short Story and Its Writer: An Introduction to Short Fiction. Ed. Ann Charters. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford, 2010. 824-828. Print. Read More