Talk:The Lottery

Cleanup request

This article needs to be given a tighter structure. The rambling discussion of plot minutiae needs to be trimmed, and original interpretation should be removed and replaced with views from notable sources.

There also need to be sections on the writing of the story (composed in one evening, as I recall) and the outrage when it was first published (it was banned in about a dozen countries and the author was bombarded with hate mail).

I'm happy to work on this myself, but don't have the sources to hand at the moment. Would appreciate any help available. Perodicticus 16:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The story was first published in the New Yorker in 1948, and reflects in many ways the atmosphere of the much less technologically advanced, more homogeneous, and less crowded society that could have been had before WWII in, say, New England or Pennsylvania. I well remember those times myself, and immediately felt that the interpretation given here did not ring true. I remember the shocking effect the story had on me at the time (and still has today), but the scapegoating theme, to my mind, does not need the Marxist interpretation given here. Jackson, in my mind, simply used her own societal background to draw her picture. The interpretation given here is tantamount to a POV.

Of course, any interpretation would be a point of view. To expound on a work of fiction is to abandon the NPOV. In fact, I seriously doubt that a NPOV is ever possible in any but the most trivial situations; after all, being human, we all have prejudices, inseparable from our personalities, that we bring with us. See [1]. Too Old 13:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't see anything hard about having a NPOV here? We can't introduce new interpretations of the story because of the no original research rule, but introducing any sort of "So and so has interpreted this story in such and such way (reference link)" statement isn't a point of view - it's a fact. Chandon 20:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Forget cleanup of quality. Some of the statements are just factually wrong, but I'm not going to fix them right now. YechielMan 17:23, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Character symbolism

I'm going to be working on characterization for a stage version of this story, and I was wondering if anyone could help me out a bit? I was told that there is quite a bit of symbolism in the character's names and actions. The only example I was given was the black box, which, supposedly, represents a coffin. Any clues on what else there is? Thanks. Linktoreality 21:55, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Plot

How strange. A spoiler warning but no plot summary. Can someone expand? savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 03:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that, I am doing a summary of the story and there is no plot here.

totally new to wiki so I hope this shows up. In the summary it say "...Tessie Hutchinson, one of the most vocal and staunchest supporters of the continuance of the lottery, is the final choice.:"

I thought she was not a supporter but that she was against the lottery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.177.60 (talk) 18:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Controversial?

This comes from Wikipedia:Pages needing attention/Culture and Arts:

• The Lottery The article seems to be cut off mid-sentance at the end. Additionally, I don't understand why it was controversial. The only reason given seems to be that it is 'gloomy'. Dgies 16:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The page just needed to be reverted properly (it had been, but not to the correct version). I'm including this here because I agree that the reason(s) the book was controversial need to be more explicitly stated --Gareth Aus 22:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Fixed! Pepso 23:57, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Reasons for controversy: Seems to me the story suggests that it would be better to be guided by reason than by religion and tradition. Plus it invites us to look for analogues (like, to be totally obvious, the military draft, and, to be arguably less obvious, random attacks on homosexuals and the selection of Iraq as the country to attack when Afghanistan didn't hold out very long)in our own society. But, I believe, the stated reasons for objection were that the story was violent, and that it taught people to disrespect their parents (since the kid is made to help kill his mother. In other words, the protesters couldn't read well enough to know that the story was against the lottery, that their negative reaction to it had been engineered by Jackson. Personally, I suspect fear as an ingredient in the protest. "What if this story, in ways I don't quite grasp, is an attack on something that I hold dear even though it is only based on irrational tradition?" Something like the idea that we are inexplicably helped by the crucifixion of Jesus.70.179.142.192

Influences

I removed the Influences section, because no evidence was presented that any of the works mentioned were directly influenced by Jackson's story. The fact that they share themes in common with The Lottery does not prove a direct connection, since sacrifice, scapegoating and mimetic violence have been common themes in the arts throughout human history. Besides, the section was in danger of turning into a pointless collection of pop-culture cruft (Weird Al?!?). Perodicticus 12:16, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of cruft, I don't think it's appropriate to list every TV show, song, etc. that has ever made a passing reference to the story. It's a famous work of literature and bound to pop up in a lot of places; listing them all doesn't add anything to people's understanding. (I wouldn't even consider The Simpsons' reference to the story worthy of mention, let alone Squidbillies'.) Perodicticus 16:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

It seems Perodicticus that you are making a editing decision based on personal taste and not objectively. If an episode of PBS Masterpiece Theater's "The Inspector Lynley Mysteries" quoted several lines of The Lottery verbatim as a plot point (say something like Brad Pitt's film "Seven") you would allow it to be mentioned, but the fact that this was done on a show called "Squidbillies" causes you to deny a reference seen by 690,000 viewers (according to the Neilson ratings company). Why you think a show directly quoting "The Lottery" and naming its author as Shirley Jackson on air, which was seen by over half a million people is unworthy of a sentence in this article but Marxist and old Pre-Post-Feminist interpretations of the work read by a handful gets paragraphs appears to be bias. NOTE - this is not a passing reference or an obscure influence, this is direct verbatim quotation of the work on a nationwide network on a show likely to be syndicated internationally (in line with William St. Productions marketing policy). One of Wikipedias strengths is its ability to immediately incorporate current information and to expand the Definition of Encyclopedia to the common people. Yes the people at Britannica would never make any reference to Squidbillies, but they would also never allow an entire article to be written about a short story even "The Lottery", it only gets a sentence in their all too short Shirley Jackson entry.--Wowaconia 02:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

If an episode of PBS Masterpiece Theater's "The Inspector Lynley Mysteries" quoted several lines of The Lottery verbatim as a plot point (say something like Brad Pitt's film "Seven") you would allow it to be mentioned

Um, no, I wouldn't. (Or rather, I would not want it to be mentioned; only Jimbo Wales can decide what is allowed on Wikipedia.) Perodicticus 09:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

And this is exactly the kind of attitude displayed by the villagers. 85.183.154.22 (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

I removed the reference to Breaking Benjamin's "So Cold" as unsourced. If you disagree, please find a source and let me know when you edit it back in. Thanks! ArrowmanCoder (talk) 20:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

I removed the reference to "Falls to Climb by R.E.M. There was no reference and any reference to a stoning does not imply that it was inspired by "The Lottery". Additionally this whole section should be deleted because I'm sure "The Lottery" has inspired countless things as has all important literature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.248.185.22 (talk) 15:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protect?

Because of the massive amount of vandalism from anonymous IPs, I'm thinking this article is a good candidate for semi-protection. Anyone agree? Perodicticus 08:50, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good candidate for shut up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.230.144.239 (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Harvest?

The plot summary mentions that Tessie is sacrificed for the purposes of ensuring a good harvest, however in the short story the characters cannot seem to remember why they started in the first place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.146.148.67 (talk) 15:56, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

"Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon." 75.63.18.205 (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Dramatization

Many students come to this story not by Jackson's short story, but by the one act play. The article mentions it, but doesn't say who adapted it. Could somebody find out and add the name? I would like to know. —MiguelMunoz (talk) 20:58, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wicker Man (1973 film)

I think the parallels between the short-story this article focuses on and the cult classic linked to above deserve at least a passing mention. Warmest Regards, :)—_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 08:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Without a cite they do not. Alastairward (talk) 22:08, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

The size of Mrs Delacroix's stone

I am not a Jackson expert and I've only read this story standing up in a bookshop, although that was enough for it to stay with me forever. However, I think it was the London Review of Books review of the Library of America edition of Jackson's novels and stories that pointed out that the fact that Mrs. Delacroix picks up a stone so heavy she has to lift it with both hands is in fact evidence of her kindly nature, not of her hypocrisy; if Tessie gets hit by such a stone she will likely die instantly, whereas if she is only hit by many small stones her suffering will be unbearably prolonged. So Mrs. Delacroix is arguably shortening Tessie's suffering by using such a huge stone. Anyway, unless somebody checks the reference this particular tidbit is of little use, I admit. Lexo (talk) 22:39, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Additional Reference

The article for The Lottery does not mention that this story was also represented in film in this music video, as mentioned in its Wikipedia entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_That_You_Fear — Preceding unsigned comment added by StampyTheElephant (talk • contribs) 10:08, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

South Park

Unless we can produce claims from Trey Parker and Matt Stone, it is presumptuous to state that the "Britney's New Look" episode of South Park is based on "The Lottery".

For one, there is no actual lottery in the episode. Second, the sacrifice self-destructs, as opposed to being directly murdered by the townsfolk.

The notion that a sacrifice is necessary for a good harvest did NOT originate with "The Lottery", and that is the only common thread between the short story and the South Park episode.

I say yank the claim until we have a reliable citation. 67.175.56.225 (talk) 22:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, it seems there is a citation in the wiki page for the South Park episode. Perhaps it should be added here. 67.175.56.225 (talk) 22:33, 12 April 2012 (UTC)