This essay compares and contrasts Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery" and Ursula Le Guin's "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," two works of fiction that use festive, seemingly peaceful settings to expose the dark underpinnings of societal practice. The paper explores how both stories depict communities that sustain prosperity through ritualized suffering — one through annual human sacrifice, the other through the deliberate torment of a single child. Key points of comparison include the unquestioned acceptance of brutal tradition, the passive complicity of dissenters, and the rare few who ultimately refuse to participate. The essay argues that while Jackson offers a focused critique of blind ritual, Le Guin presents a broader philosophical meditation on the ethics of collective happiness built on individual suffering.
Literature has always been a vehicle for change, fueled by the contributions of writers and thinkers who provide the right food for thought. One such contribution is Shirley Jackson's short story The Lottery. Comparable in effectiveness is Ursula Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas. Both stories are fictional in nature and content, but each makes the reader pause and think about society and its philosophies.
The Lottery is set in a small town where villagers gather in the central square for the annual lottery, held just before the crop season. The lottery is aimed at choosing a winning family by way of a marked slip in order to sacrifice it and herald a good harvest. Since farming is the livelihood and lifestyle of the villagers, the crop is not merely a harvest but the focal point around which everything rotates — it symbolizes life itself. Holding the lottery is therefore considered important and necessary despite its brutality. The phrase "Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon" confirms that the event takes place in summer.
The second story is also set in summer and opens with a festival in the city of Omelas celebrating the arrival of the season. The story lays out the society's structure, but the peaceful and happy setting shifts into something grim and disturbing — a scenario that turns out to be the very foundation of the city's happiness and calm. Apart from the festive atmosphere, the city of Omelas houses a child who is kept in inhumane conditions to ensure that the entire city remains prosperous. This arrangement is accepted by the people living there, except for the few who simply choose to leave.
Though both stories are classics in the genre of short fiction, Le Guin's work is more of a landmark — comparable to a literary Utopia — in that it adds a new angle to the philosophy of existence. Jackson's story, by contrast, is a work of literary craftsmanship deploying irony, symbolism, and thematic layering with great skill. This difference in approach also makes the two works quite contrasting in their presentation. The Lottery focuses on a single societal issue: blind faith in, and unquestioned practice of, a ritual. Omelas, on the other hand, offers an exhaustive observation about life, existence, and meaning itself. Though both works address issues of life in society, The Lottery is a micro-level observation about ritual and tradition, while Omelas provides a macro, overarching view of life. Where presentation is concerned, however, both stories are comparable: each begins in a tone of gaiety and festivity before taking a dark turn and ending on a somber note. Both, therefore, deliver an unexpected twist, and both concentrate on societal issues, structures, and practices.
Shirley Jackson's The Lottery is comparable to Ursula Le Guin's The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas in that the societies depicted in both stories function on an unexamined assumption — a practice that has never been challenged. The key difference is one of setting: in Jackson's story it is a small town, while in Le Guin's it is a city. In The Lottery, the practice is to sacrifice one family in order to guarantee prosperity for the surviving village. The townspeople believe that offering a human sacrifice will bring a good crop, and since the crop symbolizes livelihood, they believe it will bring prosperity for everyone.
Similarly, in The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas, the society believes that in order for the entire city to remain happy and prosperous, one child must be sacrificed to suffering. The alternative is considered impossible because, as Le Guin writes, "if the child were brought up into the sunlight out of that vile place, if it were cleaned and fed and comforted, that would be a good thing, indeed; but if it were done, in that day and hour all the prosperity and beauty and delight of Omelas would wither and be destroyed." The terms are non-negotiable: "to exchange all the goodness and grace of every life in Omelas for that single, small improvement: to throw away the happiness of thousands for the chance of the happiness of one" is simply not acceptable to the society. The people believe the child's wretchedness is the price of their prosperity, and that "it is their tears and anger, the trying of their generosity and the acceptance of their helplessness, which are perhaps the true source of the splendor of their lives." This one child remains locked in a room under inhuman conditions so that the rest of the city may live in comfort.
"Hidden cruelty contrasts with outward happiness in both texts"
"How citizens justify or quietly oppose brutal traditions"
"Characters who reject or escape their society's moral compromise"
You’re 54% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.