|
Has anyone here read "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson? Did people really draw names and throw rocks at the person who wins the lottery, historically? Or did that come out of the imagination of Shirley Jackson?
[ ]
Want to answer more questions in the Work & School category?
Maybe give some free advice about: School?
There is no historical fact for, The Lottery. This story, written in 1948, was a metaphorical comment on our capitalistic society. The village's most powerful man, Mr. Summers, owns the village's largest business (a coal concern) and is also its mayor, since he has, Jackson writes, more "time and energy [ money and leisure] to devote to civic activities" than others . Summers' very name suggests that he has become a man of leisure through his wealth. Next in line is Mr. Graves, the village's second most powerful government official--its postmaster. (His name may suggest the gravity of officialism.) And beneath Mr. Graves is Mr. Martin, who has the economically advantageous position of being the grocer in a village of three hundred. First, the lottery's rules of participation reflect and codify a rigid social hierarchy based upon an inequitable social division of labor. Second, the fact that everyone participates in the lottery and understands consciously that its outcome is pure chance give it a certain "democratic" aura that obscures its first codifying function. Third, the villagers believe unconsciously that their commitment to a work ethic will grant them some magical immunity from selection. Fourth, this work ethic prevents them from understanding that the lottery's actual function is not to encourage work per se but to reinforce an inequitable social division of labor. Finally, after working through these points, it will be easier to explain how Jackson's choice of Tessie Hutchinson as the lottery's victim/scapegoat reveals the lottery to be an ideological mechanism which serves to defuse the average villager's deep, inarticulate dissatisfaction with the social order in which he lives by channeling it into anger directed at the victims of that social order. It is reenacted year after year, then, not because it is a mere "tradition," but because it serves the repressive ideological function of purging the social body of all resistance so that business (capitalism) can go on as usual and the Summers, the Graves and the Martins can remain in power. To simplify and identify this even further it was a comment on how we as a society will turn a blind eye to governmental injustices and allow governmental officials to stay in power. People reacted heatedly to this story when it came out. South Africa even banned it.
I hope this clears things up for you.
LULABELLE
]
aome cultures really did.
and in some 3ed world countries they still do.
its not considered murder because it what they belive
]
Yes I have read it. Its not historical, or as far as anyone knows, its just demonstrating the feelings of Shirley Jackson. You see, the people did this every year, and no one knew why, they just knew it was tradition, so no one fought it. Its kind of a story showing that people need to question and fight back against what they dont believe in.
]
More Questions: |