The Lottery

The Lottery can be defined in many ways, by author, by setting, by the time in which it was written, as a pseudo-allegory, etcetera. The “Cultural Context” preface says that “political scientist Hannah Arendt wrote about totalitarianism as it pertained to Nazi Germany and the Holocaust…she introduced the concept of ‘the banality of evil,’ the potential for ordinary people to do evil things.” We are also exposed to the idea that “The Lottery” may be “seen as a protest against totalitarianism.” (404). There is some credence in drawing a likeness between The Lottery and the evils of Nazi fascism. Some might argue this point by drawing attention to the fact that Shirley Jackson married a Jewish man (http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/396). These interpretations noted; a great disdain is portrayed for institution in general. Rather than portraying any particular institution as enriching any persons’ life, we see institution as something to be abhorred. We have many institutions in society: family, education, religion, economic, and political. We see the first attack on institution as early as paragraph 2: “School was recently over for the summer, and the felling of liberty sat uneasily on most of them.” In turn, the institution of school can be interpreted as the opposite of something liberating, more confining (even gothic). Some religious overtones can be interpreted in the statement “lottery in June, corn be heavy soon (408).” This statement comes at a time when the tradition of the practice is challenged. Ultimately, the religious-like tradition proves to be fatal. The institution of family is the last attack made, as Tessie’s stoned because of the household in which she belongs (bottom 409). The condemnation came in the form of a piece of paper made up of “heads of families, heads of households in each family, members of each household in each family” to be drawn in that order (bottom 406). This same statement could also be likened to an attack on the institution of government, as there is a system of sorts that must be followed, without bias. Because of the blurred lines between religion and government in this piece, fascism certainly could be another target of attack as if it were equated to the evil that institution can propagate.