“Those Who Walk Away from Omelas” is a fictional story classified as a short story by author Ursula Le Guin. The story has a vivid description that has many repetitions in the narration of the lifestyle of the people of Omelas. The story is full of deliberately vague and vivid descriptions. The narrator explains the happiness in the city of Omela, but it becomes clear that the narrator does not know the details of the details. The fictional character of the story emerges clearly when the narrator leaves readers the freedom to imagine the details as they see fit, "it doesn't matter. As you like" (Le, 1973). Say no to plagiarism. Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Ursula K. Le Guin wrote a very dark dystopian world in the story "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas". He presents Omelas as a utopia where everyone who lives there is happy because they live off the suffering of a single child. In order for everyone living in Omelas to continue living their happy life, it all depends on the misery of a child no kindness is allowed to be shown. Moving away from Omelas means rejecting everything that Omelas is. It should not be called a perfect place because not everyone is happy to live there. they keep quiet for a day or two, and then they leave the house… [walking] straight out of the town of Omelas[.]” It completely astonishes them, as it did me, to see a child treated so badly. Everyone is annoyed when they see the child for the first time, but then try to convince themselves that even if they saved him there would be no way he would appreciate life because of how much he has already suffered. The child would never be able to adjust since he has suffered for so long, so what would be the point? The meaning of these people moving away from this "utopia" is that they are actually more humane and compassionate than the people living in Omelas. They can't live with the guilt of knowing what all their happiness is due to, but at the same time they can't ruin everyone else's happiness with their own selfishness of wanting to save the child, so they go off into the unknown . The story gives details of the summer festival celebrated by the Omela. The pairing of people and singing demonstrates the happiness that dominates between them. However, the narrator turns away from the celebration and recounts the misery of a child locked in an isolated house from the Omelas. From the story of the suffering child comes the idea of ​​the scapegoat. According to Nugroho (2016), scapegoating is the act of placing blame on someone instead of others. The narrator makes the reader understand that the child's suffering is in exchange for the happiness of the people of Omelas. If the child is let out of the house and given the opportunity to enjoy life like the Omelas, then suffering is bound to befall the people of Omelas. Therefore, the child is depicted as the savior of life as his misery makes life possible. Ritchie (2016) postulated that allegories are stories that describe events and represent events metaphorically. In this context, the suffering child is used to represent the rich and the poor. The poor seem to work for the rich and the happy few. However, any conclusions about the meaning and causes of the child's suffering are left available by the narrator to the reader. Based on the context and view of the story, one can conclude that the story is Apollonian. Leddy (2016) describes the Apollonian as works whose aspects of human nature are presented as rational, orderly, and full of discipline. Happiness fills the people of Omelas and the writer describes the child as someone whose freedom is.20070609)