narrator of “Those who Walk Away from Omelas”: people in Omelas are happy

narrator: not simple. still a complex society. not claiming they’re perfect. don’t know exactly what they’re like, just that they’re happier than us.

narrator: we have a bad habit of considering happiness as something rather stupid

narrator: (continues into one of the longest paragraphs I have ever seen, all about postulating possible ways the happy society of Omelas could be structured. Periodically breaks the fourth wall, to check in with the reader about whether they consider it plausible now)

narrator: (seems to realize that the reader still isn’t buying it, because we’re still hampered by our view of happiness as “something rather stupid.” Realizes our minds are still going, “can’t be real, it’s too good”)

narrator: (introduces the whole child-torture plot element)

narrator: (devotes rest of story to insisting that the child torture is absolutely necessary to the happiness of the people)

narrator: (never explains a single detail of how or why. Makes absolutely sure that this element of the story, practically speaking, is much more implausible than anything else suggested so far.)

readers: (come out of this story, inevitably, with our minds focused on the idea that a good, happy society necessarily requires some people’s suffering… and perhaps on the question, “is this really true?”)

Author of “Those who Walk Away from Omelas”: (also said, “We live in capitalism, its power seems inescapable — but then, so did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings.”)

readers: yeah… good life impossible; suffering inevitable. that’s what the story’s about. :-(