Similarities Between The Giver And The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas

Imagine yourself living without emotions, color, love and the choice to decide things. Imagine that your parents and siblings are all assigned having no love for each other. Imagine that the pleasure people get in your society depends on someone else’s misery, and the happier people get, the more pain someone would have to suffer from. And imagine that you are the one who is required to sacrifice everything that you have for the happiness of your society. Is this really a true happiness is in a place where everything is perfect? The two famously known texts, The Giver by Lois Lowry, and “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” by Ursula Le Guin are about a utopian society that is actually a dystopia. The citizens who live in this society are blinded

from the truth and perceives in the fake utopia of the society that they live in. The happiness that the people get are completely based off of one’s abominable misery. Both The Giver and “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” demonstrate how one’s misery is necessary in order for the gain of society’s happiness; however, the two stories also present very distinctive ideas of sacrifice-in The Giver, one can voluntarily choose to sacrifice their contentment to bring happiness of the society, while in “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, sacrifice of one’s delight is forced in return for the society’s happiness.
As stated earlier, both The Giver and “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas show that happiness can only be achieved when one’s desolation is gained. For example, in the novel The Giver, when Jonas questions about the pain that memories can cause and why it cannot be shared to the rest of the society, The Giver answers that “everyone would be burdened and pained. They [the Committee Elders] don’t want that…They selected me-and you-to lift that burden from themselves” (Lowry 113). The committee in Jonas’s society once decided that they would need a person to uphold all the pain unwanted in the society, they weren’t willing to sacrifice their own happiness, but they did want others to take the responsibility out of it. There had to be a person who receives the memories to prevent everyone in the society from agony, and the chosen one was Jonas. Also, as Jonas received the memory of war, he was “overwhelmed by pain” and “he could bear it [death of men and animals] no longer” (Lowry 120). While Jonas was in a panic because of the warfare, all the other citizens were “free of anguish because he had been selected” (Lowry 121). As a result of receiving the memory of the warfare, Jonas was suffering from the pain of it and he was also shocked to see dead people laying down on the ground. During this time that Jonas had deteriorated, other people in the society had nothing to worry nor fear about. These people had no idea of what was really going on in their society and had a straightforward life. Without the sacrifice that Jonas made to the society, the citizens wouldn’t be having as much enjoyment as having to go through the pain, just like Jonas did while receiving the memories of war.
Similarly, in “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, the society sacrifices a child to obtain the unwanted pain and misery to gain the happiness of the society except that child.

For instance, in “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, the citizens knew that the child existed and was still willing keep him there to gain the happiness for themselves, “the beauty of the city, the tenderness of friendships, the health of their children, …even the abundance of their harvest and the kindly weather of their skies, depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery” (Le Guin). The citizens of the city Omelas clearly depends whole a lot on this child. Everything positive that the citizens are feeling and earning are based on the child’s infelicity. The people objectify the child as a tool that can absorb all the pain and misery of the society. Furthermore, if the child is brought up to the real world and experiences the contentedness, “in that day and hour all the prosperity and delight of Omelas would wither away and be destroyed” (Le Guin). Not only the people’s life depends on this child’s sorrow, but even a bit of pleasure of the child can bring the misfortune of the entire society. Thus, there wouldn’t be happiness of the society without someone to sacrifice their own happiness, which is the child in this

case.
Despite the similarities of the two texts, The Giver focuses that sacrifices are based on one’s voluntary actions to benefit their community. For instance, in The Giver, when Jonas learns that the previous Receiver had asked for a release after not being able to endure all the pains from receiving the memories, he claims that he would “have never done it-never have requested release, no matter how difficult his training became” (Lowry 143). Jonas had experienced plenty of pain after being the new Receiver and he had received more painful memories than the ones that Rosemary received. However, he still did not fail his duty of the Receiver and continued to support his society. Even after Jonas realized the truth of the release and his society, he decided to leave the community to share the memories with everyone in the society (Lowry 165). Jonas knows that escaping from the community may result in the loss of his own life, but he voluntarily risked his life and made a choice to leave the community to restore the citizen’s memories and people’s true happiness. Simply, The Giver shows that voluntary sacrifice is necessary to find the happiness of the society.
On the other hand, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” shows that sacrifice for the benefit of the society shouldn’t be based on one’s voluntary actions, but forced. For example, the child begs people to let itself free out of the dark basement, “‘I will be good,’ it says. ‘Please let me out’” (Le Guin). That child is being treated harshly in an inhumane way like being kicked “to make it [the child] stand up” and the “good bowl and the water jug are hastily filled” (Le Guin). This child being locked up down in a basement, does not have the choice of whether to sacrifice its rights and live a miserable life to save its society or to come out to the world and experience the freedom and joy. This child has its rights taken away from it forcibly and it must live its own life through the misery set up by the society to ensure everyone else’s happiness. Overall, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” shows that the sacrifice necessary for the society’s happiness is enforced.
Altogether, The Giver and “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” are two very different texts, they both stresses the idea of making a sacrifice to get ahold of something greater than the sacrifice itself, which in these two texts are the happiness of the community. Although The Giver allows this sacrifice to be made within one’s choice, just like how Jonas decided to endure the path leading through the happiness of the whole society, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, however, shows that sacrifice of one’s personal rights cannot be made voluntarily, so it must be forced. Indeed, the child desperately wants to escape from its miserable life, but it is compelled to sacrifice everything that it owns, including its physical body. Trying to gain happiness always requires some sort of sacrifice in return. That sacrifice can be someone’s life, someone’s elation or even something that is greater than this. Yet, some societies are still willing to sacrifice their own citizen to be able to reach the true happiness. In conclusion, one needs considerate thoughts when sacrificing someone’s rights for the other people’s happiness since when the people know that their joy are dependent on one’s severe melancholia, they might escape from the society.