Terri Tims
Dr. Michael
English 5307 VC01
02 May 2014
Shirley
Jackson’s Commentary on Society in “The Lottery”
Many readers wonder about meaning
that can be made from Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery.” It seems that a study of the work reveals
that many different types of critics could claim the work as an exemplar for
their critical emphasis. With its focus
on women, the story could be interpreted effectively through feminism. With the presence of tradition and myth in
the story as well as human interactions, a psychoanalytic interpretation could
be supported as effective. However,
because of the content of the story and Jackson’s limited cryptic comments on
her work, it becomes clear that Jackson was exploring the structure and
injustices of human society. By
investigating the economic relationships among the townspeople and how those
relationships affect the balance of power and the outcome of the story, the
reader can find that Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery” makes a statement about
the way that capitalism manipulates people and their interactions with others.
One critic who analyzed parts of the
short story without critiquing society is Zhu.
Zhu takes on the role of a New Critic as she explores the irony in the
story, but then changes tack to look at the story from a Marxist and feminist
perspective. Zhu points out five ironies
in Jackson’s short story, and through the examination of those ironies
establishes that “the author succeeds in creating a sharp contrast helping her
to shock readers and making them to meditate over the reality” (36). By focusing on the ironies present in the
text, Zhu is following the pattern of New Critic Cleanth Brooks, who felt that
through the unusual presentation of the ordinary, the writer could transmit
deeper meaning to the reader. As Brooks
so eloquently states in describing the importance of the ironies surrounding
the ordinary, “it is the tail of the kite˗˗ the tail that makes the kite fly ˗˗
the tail that renders the kite more than a frame of paper blown crazily down
the wind” (799). Zhu points out that
“The Lottery” is full of ordinary objects and situations which Jackson infuses
with ironic importance, making the story the unforgettable piece that it is.
Interestingly,
Zhu combined her use of New Criticism in examining “The Lottery” with Marxism
and feminism as she studied the various characters. An exploration of the story’s relation to
social theories will be explored later.
Another way of approaching Shirley
Jackson’s short story “The Lottery” is through an examination of human
psychology. In his article, Fuyu Chen
particularly focuses on Tessie Hutchinson and her role as both a representative
of the community and a scapegoat for the community. Chen notes that through her behavior before,
during, and after the lottery, Tessie Hutchinson displays the emotions that all
of the townspeople have experienced, and in her death, the community is
reminded of the deaths of previous lottery “winners.” In fact, “Tessie Hutchinson is a
representative not only for her own family but also for all the villagers, even
the whole mankind. The dark side of
human nature becomes darker in the sunlight” (1024).
Because Tessie is just like all of
the town’s residents and all of the people of the community who have gone
before her, she is suited for the task of becoming the town’s scapegoat. The idea of a scapegoat, or someone who will
bear the sins of the town, is an image that is deeply rooted in the human
psyche. Human beings need to have
someone killed in order to purify themselves and the community is part of the
“unconscious mythology whose primordial images are the common heritage of
mankind” (Jung, On the Relation
552). The murder of Tessie Hutchinson
and all of the other victims who have gone before her is not rational, but it
is an event that satisfies the basic psychological needs of the community
members. Though there is some evidence
in the short story that some people are beginning to object to the lottery,
their voices are not heeded. “What one is up against here is the kind of
fateful misunderstanding which, under ordinary conditions, remains forever
inaccessible to insight. It is rather
like expecting the average respectable citizen to recognize himself as a
criminal” (Jung, Principle 562). The people of the town do not see themselves
as murderers. The need to shed blood is
too deeply ingrained in their collective unconscious. The lottery will go on.
Does the lottery still go on in
today’s world? In his article on the
short story, Shields argues that it does, claiming that the lottery is alive
and well in American society in the form of the death penalty. Shields mentions economic stratification
which will be discussed later, but the main point of his article is that the
death penalty is administered unfairly in this country. In a way, those who are
convicted of murder and sentenced to death in the U.S. might as well be taking
part in a lottery because the administration of justice in these cases is so
arbitrary. “In the U.S., not everyone who is responsible for killing someone is
executed… What then determines whose name is drawn? There are a variety of
variables unrelated to the act itself that lead to these fatal decisions…”
(Shields 417). Shields calls for an
evaluation of the way the death penalty is administered in the U.S. so that
American society does not continue to repeat the inhumanity that people opposed
so loudly when it was characterized in “The Lottery.”
Another way of interpreting “The
Lottery” is through the perspective of the feminist critic. The men of the community represented in the
story are the ones who are in charge of the ritual, and “those who are most
discomfited by, or resistant to, the lottery are women” (Oehlschlaeger
260). Just as the men in the story
control the lottery, they also control the women. The men draw first for their families,
meaning that the women only have the ability to choose their own slips of paper
from the box when in immediate jeopardy (Whittier 354). Also, the women in the story are identified
by their relationships with men, as is evidenced when Eva is passed from the
jurisdiction of her father’s family to that of her husband’s (Whittier 354). The whole procedure of the lottery is
inherently sexist and defers to the patriarchal society because women who have
more children are less likely to be chosen in the lottery. Women in this
society are not only encouraged to have more children but to have male children
who will marry and make the family’s pool of members eligible to draw larger.
“Like Old Eve, a woman may literally be ‘saved’ by childbearing” (Whittier
357).
The reader may see Shirley Jackson’s
expression of a woman’s frustration in Tessie Hutchinson: “female authors
dramatize their own self-division, their desire both to accept the strictures
of patriarchal society and to reject them” (Gilbert and Gubar 1536). In Tessie, the reader sees a character who is
initially lighthearted in her attendance at the lottery, though she has perhaps
silently expressed her disagreement with the ritual through her lateness. Tessie continues her good humor until her own
husband draws the slip of paper with the black spot. Once Tessie’s family is chosen, she begins to
rebel against the system in which she formerly participated. However, the ritual that the community
demands will not be stopped, and in Jackson’s story, “untoward and vocal
females like Tessie Hutchinson will be ‘shut up’” (Whittier 355). For the feminist critic, perhaps the theme of
the story is that woman’s inclination to rebel against the patriarchal society
will always be punished.
Though New Criticism, Feminism, and
Psychoanalytic Criticism are all interesting ways of interpreting Shirley
Jackson’s “The Lottery,” the method of interpreting the work that most
effectively makes meaning is Marxist Criticism.
The village depicted in the story, with its tradition of an annual
lottery, shows how, as Williams describes, a tradition is “not just ‘a
tradition’ but a selective version of a shaping past and a pre-shaped present,
which is then powerfully operative in the process of social and cultural
definition and identification” (1280). Jackson
repeats throughout the story how the lottery has changed over the years: “so
much of the ritual had been forgotten or discarded.” The story mentions a chant
that was performed, but “years and years ago this part of the ritual had been
allowed to lapse.” When referring to a ritual salute, “this also had changed
with time.” However, the most important
aspect of the lottery is still present: “Although the villagers had forgotten
the ritual and lost the original black box, they still remembered to use
stones.” The people of the village have
modified the ritual over the years, but their modification of the ritual makes
their community what it is, and preserves the power in the hands of those who
wield it. In fact, the lottery “serves
to reinforce the village’s hierarchical social order by instilling the villages
[sic] with an unconscious fear that if they resist this order they might be
selected in the next lottery” (Kosenko).
Most interesting when looking at the
story from a Marxist viewpoint is the group of people who administer the
lottery. While all of the other men in
town are represented as laborers, the wealthiest and most influential citizens,
Mr. Summers, Mr. Graves, and Mr. Martin, officiate over the lottery and
maintain its equipment. Mr. Summers owns
the town’s coal interest, Mr. Graves is the postmaster, and Mr. Martin is the
grocer. Though some may argue that these men are the ones with the most time and
ability to administer the lottery, their relation to the rest of the population
is definitely one exhibiting hegemony, as it displays “rule or domination…[in]
relations between social classes” (Williams 1276).
Much emphasis in the story is placed
on work. Before the actual lottery
begins, Mr. Summers makes the comment, "guess we better get started, get
this over with, so's we can go back to work” (Jackson). Of course, Mr. Summers really means that the
lottery needs to be started so that the men present can get back to their
work. Mr. Summers has the leisure time
to devote to activities like the lottery, so he is not concerned about getting
back to work himself. Perhaps his main
concern is that the men get to work to support the capitalist economy of the
town.
Even participation in the earliest round of
the lottery is limited to males of working age and ability. The only males who do not draw are boys who
are still in school or younger and Mr. Dunbar who is home with a broken leg. Women choose in the first round “only in the
absence of a ‘grown’ working male” (Kosenko).
If the lottery were just about choosing a victim from the village,
everyone would just draw his or her own slip of paper, but the establishment of
the routine that is present in the story keeps the townspeople from complaining
about the unfairness of their society and “also reinforces a village work ethic
which distracts the villagers' attention from the division of labor that keeps
women powerless in their homes and Mr. Summers powerful in his coal company
office” (Kosenko).
Most
importantly, the lottery could well serve as a way for the citizens of the
village to release their frustration and anger over their position in
society. It is not socially acceptable
to complain about the lottery, as is seen when Tessie complains over the
unfairness of it all, and surely it is not acceptable to complain about how “part
of their labor goes to the support of the leisure and power of a business class”
(Kosenko). However, it is acceptable for
the people to stone one of their own to death.
Where does the anger and brutality come from to commit murder? Perhaps the answer is that the anger comes
from the people’s own desire to rebel against the system that confines them,
but each year, the spark of their anger that could grow to the fire of
rebellion is quenched by the commission of a violent murder.
Shirley
Jackson spoke very little about the meaning behind her short story, “The
Lottery.” In fact, one of her few
comments about the work was made when she was asked how she felt about the
story being banned in the Union of South Africa. Kosenko reports that Jackson’s response was
that she was glad at least someone understood.
Jackson’s answer reveals that she meant her story to be one about class
struggle. Shirley Jackson was glad that at least the government of the Union of
South Africa recognized in her story the same type of class dissatisfaction
going on in their own country and saw Jackson’s short story as powerful enough
to cause people to call for change.
Shirley
Jackson’s short story has had many meanings for the many people who have been
students of the work. While critic can
argue about the most effective way of interpreting the story, the most powerful
way for all readers is the Marxist interpretation. Though psychology and gender inequality may
be aspects that are present, all readers can see class stratification in their
own societies, and Shirley Jackson’s short story, “The Lottery,” provides
readers with unique and powerful ways of thinking about power and its presence
in human culture.
Works
Cited
Brooks, Cleanth. “From My Credo: Formalist Criticism.” The Resisting Reader. Critical Theory:
Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: St.
Martin’s, 2007. 798- 806. Print.
Chen, Fuyu. "A Representative
and a Scapegoat: Analysis of Tessie Hutchinson in the Lottery." Theory and Practice in Language Studies
2.5. (2012): 1022-6. ProQuest. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Gilbert, Sandra M., and Susan Gubar.
“From Infection in the Sentence: The
Woman Writer and the Anxiety of Authorship.” The Resisting Reader. Critical Theory: Classical Texts and Contemporary
Trends. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: St. Martin’s, 2007. 1532-1544. Print.
Jackson, Shirley. “The Lottery.” Learnhub. 2014. Web. 6 May
2014.
Jung, Carl G. . “On the Relation of
Analytical Psychology to Poetry.” The
Resisting Reader. Critical Theory: Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends.
Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: St. Martin’s, 2007. 544-553. Print.
------. “The Principle Archetypes.”
The Resisting Reader. Critical Theory:
Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: St.
Martin’s, 2007. 554-564. Print.
Kosenko, Peter. “A Reading of
Shirley Jackson’s ‘The Lottery.’” New
Orleans Review. 12.1(1985): 27-32. Web. 06 May 2014.
Oehlschlaeger, Fritz. "The
Stoning Of Mistress Hutchinson: Meaning And Context In The Lottery." Essays In Literature 15. (1988):
259-265. OmniFile Full Text Mega (H.W. Wilson). Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Shields, Patrick J. "Arbitrary
Condemnation And Sanctioned Violence In Shirley Jackson's 'The Lottery'."
Contemporary Justice Review 7.4 (2004): 411-419. MLA International Bibliography. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Whittier, Gayle. "'The
Lottery' As Misogynist Parable." Women's
Studies. 4 (1991): 353. Academic OneFile. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
Williams, Raymond. “From Marxism and Literature.” The Resisting Reader. Critical Theory:
Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends. Ed. David H. Richter. Boston: St.
Martin’s, 2007. 1272-1290. Print.
Zhu, Yuhan. “Ironies in ‘The
Lottery.’” Studies in Literature and
Language. 6.1 (2013):35-39. WorldCat. Web. 14 Apr. 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment