1 Yozshutaxe

Write Reader Response Essay On The Lottery

When Shirley Jackson’s story “The Lottery” was first published, in the June 26, 1948, issue of this magazine, Miriam Friend was a young mother living in Roselle, New Jersey, with her husband, a chemical engineer who worked on the Manhattan Project. An exact contemporary of Jackson’s—both women were born in 1916—she had recently left her job as a corporate librarian to care for her infant son, and she was a faithful reader of The New Yorker. “I frankly confess to being completely baffled by Shirley Jackson’s ‘The Lottery,’ ” she wrote in a letter to the editor after reading the story. “Will you please send us a brief explanation before my husband and I scratch right through our scalps trying to fathom it?”

Friend’s note was among the first of the torrent of letters that arrived at The New Yorker in the wake of “The Lottery”—the most mail the magazine had ever received in response to a work of fiction. Jackson’s story, in which the residents of an unidentified American village participate in an annual rite of stoning to death a person chosen among them by drawing lots, would quickly become one of the best known and most frequently anthologized short stories in English. “The Lottery” has been adapted for stage, television, opera, and ballet; it was even featured in an episode of “The Simpsons.” By now it is so familiar that it is hard to remember how shocking it originally seemed: “outrageous,” “gruesome,” or just “utterly pointless,” in the words of some of the readers who were moved to write. When I spoke to Friend recently—she is the only one of the letter writers I could track down who is still alive—she still remembered how upsetting she had found “The Lottery.” “I don’t know how anyone approved of that story,” she told me.

In a lecture Jackson often gave about the story’s creation and its aftermath, which was published posthumously under the title “Biography of a Story,” she said that of all the letters that came in that summer—they eventually numbered more than three hundred, by her count—only thirteen were kind, “and they were mostly from friends.” The rest, she wrote with mordant humor, were dominated by three main themes: “bewilderment, speculation, and plain old-fashioned abuse.” Readers wanted to know where such lotteries were held, and whether they could go and watch; they threatened to cancel their New Yorker subscriptions; they declared the story a piece of trash. If the letters “could be considered to give any accurate cross section of the reading public … I would stop writing now,” she concluded.

As Jackson’s biographer, I’ve pored over more than a hundred of these letters, which she kept in a giant scrapbook that is now in her archive at the Library of Congress. There were indeed some cancelled subscriptions, as well as a fair share of name-calling—Jackson was said to be “perverted” and “gratuitously disagreeable,” with “incredibly bad taste.” But the vast majority of the letter writers were not angry or abusive but simply confused. More than anything else, they wanted to understand what the story meant. The response of Carolyn Green, of New Milford, Connecticut, was typical. “Gentlemen,” she wrote, “I have read ‘The Lottery’ three times with increasing shock and horror.… Cannot decide whether [Jackson] is a genius or a female and more subtle version of Orson Welles.”

One of the many who took the story for a factual report was Stirling Silliphant, a producer at Twentieth Century-Fox: “All of us here have been grimly moved by Shirley Jackson’s story.… Was it purely an imaginative flight, or do such tribunal rituals still exist and, if so, where?” Andree L. Eilert, a fiction writer who once had her own byline in The New Yorker, wondered if “mass sadism” was still a part of ordinary life in New England, “or in equally enlightened regions.” Nahum Medalia, a professor of sociology at Harvard, also assumed the story was based in fact, though he was more admiring: “It is a wonderful story, and it kept me very cold on the hot morning when I read it.” The fact that so many readers accepted “The Lottery” as truthful is less astonishing than it now seems, since at the time The New Yorker did not designate its stories as fact or fiction, and the “casuals,” or humorous essays, were generally understood as falling somewhere in between.

Among those who were confused about Jackson’s intentions was Alfred L. Kroeber, an anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley. “If Shirley Jackson’s intent was to symbolize into complete mystification, and at the same time be gratuitously disagreeable, she certainly succeeded,” he wrote. In an e-mail to me, Kroeber’s daughter, the novelist Ursula Le Guin, who was nineteen years old when “The Lottery” appeared, recalled her father’s reaction: “My memory is that my father was indignant at Shirley Jackson’s story because as a social anthropologist he felt that she didn’t, and couldn’t, tell us how the lottery could come to be an accepted social institution.” Since Jackson presented her fantasy “with all the trappings of contemporary realism,” Le Guin said, her father felt that she was “pulling a fast one” on the reader.

There were some outlandish theories. Marion Trout, of Lakewood, Ohio, suspected that the editorial staff had become “tools of Stalin.” Another reader wondered if it was a publicity stunt, while several more speculated that a concluding paragraph must have been accidentally cut by the printer. Others complained that the story had traumatized them so much that they had been unable to open any issues of the magazine since. “I read it while soaking in the tub … and was tempted to put my head underwater and end it all,” wrote Camilla Ballou, of St. Paul.

Even the New Yorker staff could not agree about “The Lottery.” The editors accepted it almost unanimously, the sole dissenter being William Maxwell, who found it “contrived” and “heavy-handed.” Brendan Gill, then a young staffer, told Jackson that the fiction editor Gus Lobrano, unsurprisingly, loved it, but reporters Joseph Mitchell, A. J. Liebling, and others were less impressed. (Gill thought it was “one of the best stories—two or three or four best—that the magazine ever printed.”) Harold Ross, the magazine’s editor at the time, never went on record with his personal opinion. But he wrote to Jackson’s husband, the literary critic and New Yorker staff writer Stanley Edgar Hyman, the following month that “the story has certainly been a great success from our standpoint.… [The cartoonist] Gluyas Williams said it is the best American horror story. I don’t know whether it’s that or not, or quite what it is, but it was a terrifically effective thing, and will become a classic in some category.”

The largest proportion of the respondents admired “The Lottery,&#8221 even if they did not believe they understood it. Arthur Wang, then at Viking Press and later to found the publishing house Hill and Wang, wrote to Hyman: “We discussed the story for almost an hour the other evening. It’s damned good but I haven’t met anyone who is sure that they … know what it’s about.” Nelson Olmsted, a producer at NBC, wrote to Jackson that he was interested in using the story on television. “I deal with hundreds of stories every year, but it has been a long time since I have seen one create as much interest and discussion as ‘The Lottery,’ ” he wrote. His own interpretation was that “humanity is normally opposed to progress; instead, it clutches with tenacity to the customs and fetishes of its ancestors.” (NBC ended up adapting “The Lottery” for two programs in the early nineteen-fifties.)

For the rest of her life, Jackson would receive letters demanding an explanation for “The Lottery.” She reportedly told one friend that it was based in anti-Semitism, and another that all the characters were modeled on actual people in North Bennington. After receiving a letter of praise from her college professor H. W. Herrington, she replied that the idea had originated in his folklore course. The best explanation for it is probably the most general, something like what she wrote in response to Joseph Henry Jackson, the literary editor of the San Francisco Chronicle, who confessed in his column that he was “stumped” by the story. “I suppose I hoped, by setting a particularly brutal ancient rite in the present and in my own village, to shock the story’s readers with a graphic dramatization of the pointless violence and general inhumanity in their own lives,” she replied. The New Yorkers Kip Orr, who was charged with responding to all the letters on Jackson’s behalf, echoed this position in his standard formulation: “Miss Jackson’s story can be interpreted in half a dozen different ways. It’s just a fable.… She has chosen a nameless little village to show, in microcosm, how the forces of belligerence, persecution, and vindictiveness are, in mankind, endless and traditional and that their targets are chosen without reason.”

“The Lottery” takes the classic theme of man’s inhumanity to man and gives it an additional twist: the randomness inherent in brutality. It anticipates the way we would come to understand the twentieth century’s unique lessons about the capacity of ordinary citizens to do evil—from the Nazi camp bureaucracy, to the Communist societies that depended on the betrayal of neighbor by neighbor and the experiments by the psychologists Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo demonstrating how little is required to induce strangers to turn against each other. In 1948, with the fresh horrors of the Second World War barely receding into memory and the Red Scare just beginning, it is no wonder that the story’s first readers reacted so vehemently to this ugly glimpse of their own faces in the mirror, even if they did not realize exactly what they were looking at.

Recalling “The Lottery” in our conversation, Miriam Friend was no less disturbed by it than she had been upon her first reading, nor had she changed her mind about it in the last sixty-five years. “Such a harsh story,” she said.

Ruth Franklin is a book critic and author of “A Thousand Darknesses: Lies and Truth in Holocaust Fiction.” She is at work on a biography of Shirley Jackson. Allison Bulger assisted with the research for this article.

Illustration by Victor Kerlow.

Reader's Response The Lottery Essay


Jane Ouding

Mr. Weber

AP Lit & Comp.

22 October 2014

The Lottery

How does one repent for their sins? Mustn't something be sacrificed? The Lottery by Shirley Jackson vaguely addresses this idea and the evil that comes with it. In The Lottery begins with a description of children running in the square gathering stones and putting them into piles. The villagers all met in the square at ten o'clock for the lottery. Mr. Summers ran the lottery, pulling out an old black box and a three-legged stool, and calling each family name. The man of each household, or the head of the family, then came forward and drew a sheet of paper from the box and opened it. Whoever drew the sheet with the black dot had to play again. In the second round of the lottery the family that lost the lottery, the Huchtinsons, then each had to pull a piece of paper from the box and the one with the black dot was to be sacrificed, specifically stoned to death.

There is a number of symbols throughout the short story that imply a deeper meaning than this surface sacrifice. Quite a few names in the text reveal the characters role in the story, such as Mr. Summers, who was the aficionado of the lottery which took place in the summer, June 27th. Old Man Warner acted not only as an old man unwilling to change his ways, but as a warning to not stray from tradition. The Delacroix family, meaning "of the cross", were the ones most actively participating in the stoning, or the "sacrifice", as their sons made the biggest pile of stones and Mrs. Delacroix participated most eagerly. Mrs. Graves served as a sort of foreshadowing to death and the grave. Lastly, Steve Adams', a man in the front of the crowd, name was an illusion to the first sinners, Adam and Eve. This can be inferred by St-Eve Adams.

Objects throughout the story also act as symbols. The old black box that was said to be made of broken bits and pieces of the previous lottery box symbolized the Bible, how the New Testament is bits and pieces of the Old Testament refurbished to fit the culture. This symbolism can also be inferred because bibles often have black covers, similar to the black paint of the box. The box also symbolizes a traditional mind set, thinking inside the box. It represented the lottery and tradition which people were reluctant and fearful to participate in, but unwilling to oppose. The wobbly three-legged stool that the box rested on represented the Holy Trinity; the Father, son and Holy Spirit. The box rested upon the stool the way the bible, the word of God, rests upon God himself. The method of sacrifice was a religious symbol as well, being the oldest and most prevalent form of execution in the bible. The...

Loading: Checking Spelling


Read more

The Winning Ticket - The Irony In Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery"

597 words - 2 pages When you hear the word "˜Lottery' an association is made with luck and reward. In Shirley Jackson's story, "The Lottery", an ironic ending shifts the reader's positive association of a lottery into one of misfortune and horror. The irony of the story is that the winner of the...


858 words - 3 pages Described as "a thoroughly chilling and unsettling story" (Porter), The Lottery was written by Shirley Jackson in 1948. In a letter to poet Howard Nemerov, she wrote, "...I have always loved to use fear...I delight in what I fear" (Guran).James Joyce was "born into a well-off Catholic family in Dublin, Ireland" (Barger). He later rejected Catholicism in...

The Lottery

539 words - 2 pages Shirley Jackson's, The Lottery, has raised questions in the back of every reader's mind towards the destructive yet blind rituals of mankind. A reflection of ourselves is what we see when looking through the pond of Jackson's mind. The Lottery clearly expressed Jackson's feelings concerning traditional rituals through her story, opened the eyes of its readers to properly classify and question some of today's traditions as cruel, and allowed...

The Power in Chanda’s Secret and The Lottery

1306 words - 5 pages On the surface, Chanda’s Secret, by Allan Stratton, is a mind-altering story about the tough life of a girl who lives in a world of disease and death. However, under the surface, is a story about a power struggle within Chanda’s life. “The Lottery” is a story that appears innocent as the town holds its annual lottery to ensure successful agriculture. However, the book soon takes a deep turn as the reader slowly realizes that the “winner” of the...

Necessary Sacrifice in The Lottery, by Shirley Jackson

1155 words - 5 pages When Shirley Jackson first published her short story “The Lottery,” it caused a great deal of controversy. It warranted high critical acclaim, but it also brought threats to Jackson’s life. The public was outraged that she would write such a violent story, which ended with the unmerciful killing of an innocent woman. The violence in response to the story ironically reflects the violence within, and reveals a darker, yet necessary, part of the...

compare and contrast a rose for Emily and the yellow wallpaper

882 words - 4 pages Owl creek bridge1. Bierce mingles realistic details with poetic imagery. What effect does this have? What at first seems to be the constant flow of the execution taking place in the present moment? Composed on the brink of the bridge. He shuts his eyes, a sign of him slipping into his own kind of reality, one that is relieved by any duty to laws of time. As the ticking of his watch slow down and more time passes between the strokes,...

owl creek bridge

882 words - 4 pages Owl creek bridge1. Bierce mingles realistic details with poetic imagery. What effect does this have? What at first seems to be the constant flow of the execution taking place in the present moment? Composed on the brink of the bridge. He shuts his eyes, a sign of him slipping into his own kind of reality, one that is relieved by any duty to laws of time. As the ticking of his watch slow down and more time passes between the strokes,...

Tradition or Cruelty in Shirley Jackson's The Lottery

2242 words - 9 pages Tradition or Cruelty in Shirley Jackson's The Lottery Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" satirizes barbaric traditions in a supposedly civilized village. As the story begins, the villagers appear to be fairly civilized and carry on fairly modern lifestyles. This is assumed by the men's discussion of planting, rain, tractors, and taxes. The lottery was outdated to such a degree that some may think that the tradition is primal competition of...

The Lottery by Beth Goobie is a Bad Influence on Teens

957 words - 4 pages A Bad Influence Throughout high school, the most essential trait to have above intellect and organization is good behavior. Without it, a student cannot be focused during a lecture, which can lead to disappointing grades and ultimately, a dreadful high school experience. The Lottery, by Beth Goobie encourages bad and rebellious behavior acted out by the protagonist Sally Hudson. At the start of the book, Sally gets picked by the school...

Analysis of Shirley Jackson's The Lottery

4961 words - 20 pages Shirley Jackson’s famous short story, “The Lottery,” was published in 1948 and remains to this day one of the most enduring and affecting American works in the literary canon. “The Lottery” tells the story of a farming community that holds a ritualistic lottery among its citizens each year. Although the text initially presents audiences with a close-knit community participating in a social event together on a special day, the shocking twist at...

Utopia and Dystopia in Harrison Bergeron and The Lottery

1479 words - 6 pages Utopia and Dystopia are themes that explore the substantial extents of deceiving ascendancy and contrive an impelling illusion of a ‘perfect‘ society. Utopia is described as a place, state, or condition that is ideally perfect in respect of politics, laws, customs, and conditions while a dystopia, or a negative utopia, is a society characterized as an illusion of a perfect society maintained through oppressive societal control, in which exploits...

Leave a Comment


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *