On the surface, Behar’s essay and the two pieces of fiction we’ve examined may seem to have nothing in common. The first is a theoretical piece about an anthropologist, and the other two are fictional stories about seemingly happy societies dependent on the suffering of one. However, oftentimes, the most unlikely things can have working relationships with each other.
This relationship between texts is called “synthesizing”, which is essentially the combining of ideas and the way those ideas work to reach a common idea or understanding.
This week, you will use your critical thinking skills to synthesize two of these texts: Behar’s essay and either Moffat’s “The Beast Below” or Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas.”
First, compose a 300-500 word post in response to the following prompt, and use contextual evidence from both readings to show clearly the relationship between the texts as you see it:
Consider how the Behar essay and your selected piece of fiction work together to show how humans interpret extreme circumstances, different cultures and ideologies, and suffering.
If you choose to synthesize Behar and Moffat, think carefully about Behar’s claims regarding the necessity of vulnerability when considering how one or both protagonists (the Doctor and Amy) in “The Beast Below” explore the ship, react to the Vote, and determine the final outcome.
If you synthesize Behar and Le Guin, consider how Behar’s argument colors your impressions of the Omelas citizens who observe the child, wrestle with their reactions, and decide on the appropriate course of action.
