This was incredibly thought-provoking and had many lines I wished to highlight. As stated in the afterword, this story is a question, rather than an answer, which I think is quite an interesting experience. There is a lot of discussion proposed around happiness: how it is both undervalued (what with the belief that things surrounding happiness, instead of pain, is perceived as shallow or "stupid") and desperately sought after, no matter the cost, which is quite the paradox that exists in our society. Similarly is the way guilt is portrayed and discussed in the story: guilt supposedly doesn't exist in Omelas, due to all suffering being taken away through the misery of the child, yet some people leave Omelas, while others, those that stay, might initially feel guilt or sympathy for the child, but then explain it away to justify their consent to this system (as well as maybe ignoring it completely to live in their bliss "without" any guilt). It is interesting that the suffering of the child is not a secret to any of the citizens of Omelas because it implies that each citizen is making a distinct decision in regards to the situation whether to stay or leave. The last line is also interesting; the fact that those that leave "seem to know where they are going" poses another question to the audience right as the story ends. The afterward also includes an interesting point about interpretation, as well as an example that was sent to the author in which we can envision ourselves as each role in the story: the child, those that stay, and those who choose to leave. Overall, an excellent story that satisfies its intent: asking a question about happiness, suffering, preservation (self and others), and humanity's selfishness.