Why We Should Question The World
DescriptionAn essay diving into one of the most persistent concepts of humanity—tradition—and why we need to ask questions in order to grow as an intelligent society.
MessagePlagiarization of this content will result in expulsion from your school/university and legal action. All work is owned by its respective author.
ImageRobert McCall
For as long as humanity has existed, we have always had customs, things that are seen as traditional and normal; no one would dare to bat an eye at them. Think about giving presents at a birthday party, or shooting fireworks to celebrate the new year ahead. Many around the world do them without thinking, without giving much thought as to why. And, sure, these are mostly harmless, but what if the thing that is seen as routine is, in fact, dangerous? Like, let us say, stoning people to death? Or maybe trapping a child in a basement? These ideas seem absurd, though in the worlds of The Lottery by Shirley Jackson and The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas by Ursula Le Guin, they are perfectly normal. Together, they live in what they believe is a perfect society, but do it at the cost of one for the greater good. These two stories follow characters who believe in traditions blindly, both living in a utopia and using a scapegoat to keep it, though differ in how they see themselves, one embracing it without question while the other treats it as something to be embarrassed by.A utopian society. Seems nice, right? Nothing ever goes wrong, nothing ever seems bad. Life is perfect. The people of The Lottery think this way; they believe they live in a flawless world. There are no problems, nothing can go wrong. Just listen to this fantastic description: “The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green…” (Jackson 1). Do you hear that? The fresh warmth, the flowers blossoming. It sounds too good to be true, too good to be real. And, of course, if you know the ending of the story it is. But for a split second, you believe they live in an ideal world, that their town is truly happy. The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas is no different; their city is seen as the pinnacle of perfection. It is isolated and technologically basic; minimalism and necessity keep them satisfied. Omelas is described as “a city in a fairytale;” they "did without monarchy and slavery," living without many of the worse aspects of human society (Le Guin 1). Just like in Jackson’s piece, this is the perfect, utopian world for its people. And yet again, by the end of the story, we know why some walk away from it. These two places, these two narratives, are acutely similar in more ways than one. But how exactly do they keep that perfection?Blame has always been used to thwart the fear of people; no one ever wants to accept the responsibility, but they love to pin it on others. These short stories are absolutely no different. They use scapegoats—someone baselessly accused of the troubles of the world—in their narratives, as they attempt to ensure their respective idealistic societies by picking out certain individuals to blame for the evils of the world. In The Lottery, they rely on a good harvest each year to keep their tiny population alive. So, what do they do to guarantee a good yield? Have a dandy old sacrifice, of course! They have set up a system where each family picks a slip, and whoever wins has to draw again with the rest of their relatives. Whoever is the victor of that one gets stoned to death. This is exactly what happened to Tessie Hutchinson, as she was the unlucky soul sentenced to their demise. “‘Be a good sport, Tessie.’ Mrs. Delacroix called, and Mrs. Graves said, ‘All of us took the same chance’… Tessie Hutchinson was in the center of a cleared space by now, and she held her hands out desperately as the villagers moved in… A stone hit on her head… ‘This isn’t fair, this isn’t right,’ Mrs. Hutchinson screamed” (Jackson 5, 7). At this moment, they are coming in for the stoning, and we can tell that what they do is seemingly unfair to the punished, but normal to the punisher. The people of The Lottery do not care whether or not it is hurting someone, because it is not hurting them. They murder this one woman in the hopes of a good crop. They murder her so they do not have to be. It seems to be an endless and grueling cycle, but they are not alone in this ideal. Throughout The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, we hear about the beautiful world they live in. The Festival of Summer, the peaceful waters, the joyous subjects. Everyone lives the best life possible. Though yet again, we are made to question how? And the answer is just as horrifying. “In the room [basement], a child is sitting… 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… but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children, the wisdom of their scholars, the skill of their makers, even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weathers of their skies, depend wholly on this child's abominable misery” (Le Guin 3). The people of Omelas are no different from those in The Lottery. They subject a child, sometime in their early years, to be trapped in a locked room away from society, treated like an animal. Everyone knows about it, everyone is aware, yet they do nothing because they believe that it is the only way their lives will be good, that they themselves will get an “abundance of the harvest.” Not only are both stories seemingly about the wellbeings of their crops, but together they show that the suffering of one is intending to bring joy to the many, using the ways of a scapegoat. Is this right? Is this wrong? The answer is muddy. They know it is bad to some extent, but believe there is no other way to maintain their utopian worlds. Though, there is a distinction between them, because how they see what they do does clash in one specific way: their guilt.The largest difference between these two stories is how the citizens of their respective societies feel about their atrocious activities. Think about it, if you were subjecting people to such torture for the greater good, would you not feel at least a bit bad? A little remorse, maybe? The characters of The Lottery say no. “‘Well, now.’ Mr. Summers said soberly, ‘guess we better get started, get this over with, so's we can go back to work…’ (Jackson 2). For them, it is an everyday occurrence. Nothing is out of the ordinary, nothing seems strange to them. Every person in it shows little to no regard for what they are doing or how they are doing it. Instead, actually, they ridicule those who choose not to participate in other towns. ‘Some places have already quit lotteries,’ Mrs. Adams said. ‘Nothing but trouble in that,’ Old Man Warner said stoutly. ‘Pack of young fools’” (Jackson 4). It is clear they have little feelings towards stoning people; it is clear that they do not care about how brutal the tradition is. The normality of it all tears away their guilt. But what about in Omelas? What do they think of keeping a child in a basement, locked away and withering away in its own dirt and feces? “No matter how well the matter has been explained to them, these young spectators are always shocked and sickened at the sight… They feel anger, outrage, impotence, despite all the explanations. They would like to do something for the child. But there is nothing they can do” (Le Guin 4). This is the largest disparity of these stories: how they feel. The people of Omelas do care, and some even walk away from it, which is why the title is what it is. Though there is little they can do. No one likes the trapped child, they hate that they have this dirty little secret, but they think it is needed to keep their utopia. Regardless of the validity or truth to it, they continue to have it because it is customary to them, because it has always been the standard. Together, these narratives explore two very different perspectives of the same situation, leading them to lightly contradict. But no matter what, they both hold on to that tradition, and never question the world around them.The Lottery by Shirley Jackson and The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas by Ursula Le Guin are remarkable and extremely comparable works, both delving head first into the difficult topic of traditions and the question of challenging them. Whether believing in a utopia through the usage of scapegoats or seeing how they feel about it differently, both begin to ask you about yourself, about what you follow blindly. We all do it, everyone does. We go on day in, day out, never asking one simple question: why? Is it ignorance? Arrogance? Shame? Fear? As humans, why do we listen and not learn, why do we keep perpetuating the same toxic cycle over and over again? Why do we not question the world? Because we are scared. We are scared of change, of being wrong, of being an outcast. But sometimes we need to take that risk, we need to be the “weird” one, as nothing will happen if we do not. And that is the lesson of these stories, that is the thing they have made abundantly clear: learn from the past, and do not let the status quo blind you. Question the world around you; do not let history repeat itself. We know when something is wrong, just like the people of Omelas, but we cannot just walk away from it. We need to stand in front of it, stare it right in the eye, and make a difference, no matter how scary it may seem. Every person on this planet, every reader of these stories, has the inherent right to create change. All you have to do is accept that obligation, in any way possible.
Sources
Jackson, Shirley. The Lottery. Creative Education, 1983. Le Guin, Ursula K. The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas: A Story. HarperCollins, 2017.
