The Tartan

By Jimmy Baracia and Sofia Johnson

Spoiler warnings for “The Lottery!”

Jimmy Baracia: I was convinced that I knew the story of “The Lottery” because I’ve seen the TikTok with the picture of the lottery… Do you know what I’m talking about?

Sofia Johnson: … No

JB: Anyway, it’s a picture of the end of the lottery where they’re bludgeoning her with stones. I thought they were mad because she won, so I went into it thinking I knew the whole story, but I had no idea that the lottery was literally them getting picked for death. It’s a fascinating premise.

SJ: It feels like “The Hunger Games” was inspired by this.

JB: I think that’s what all writers should strive for, taking a story and flipping it on its head. However, I wish there was more there about why they do the lottery.

SJ: Yeah, I do too. I think that’s kind of the idea of it, though, the “Why do they do this?” There’s the old man character who’s like, “I can’t believe people are getting rid of the lottery.” I think it’s supposed to critique people who just blindly stick to tradition. So I think we’re not supposed to know — and they’re not supposed to know — why they’re still doing it.

JB: Oh, like the whole point is that this is just established, and they’re like, “Well we can’t break it because it’s tradition.” I guess that makes sense. I wish they drew more attention to that, though, because I kind of glossed over that. I think I was more focused on the “Why is this lady pissed that she just won the lottery, like she’s getting all of this money, and she’s sitting there saying, ‘It’s not fair!’ And I’m like, “If you don’t want the money, I’ll take it.”

SJ: Wait, so what did you do when the stone hit her in the head?

JB: I knew they threw the stones at her. But I thought that she was like, going to be… in my head I think I created my own story, because I knew parts of it. Obviously, I knew it was about a lottery. And I knew about the stones. 

SJ: Yeah. I think it’s good that they mention the stones, and then they forget about them for a bit, and then they bring them back.

JB: I think that’s a very strong technique in horror and mystery specifically. I think those two genres really benefit from doing things like that. Like sliding in those snide little things that you don’t necessarily catch onto until you go back or reread it. Or discuss it, I guess.

SJ: Yeah, the first time I read it I completely forgot about the stones, and then re-reading it, I was like, “Oh, they’re doing that now!” It’s also creepy because they’re picking out the best ones, like the kids are picking out the roundest stones.

JB: Yes! Also, at first when I read it, I thought that… I obviously knew that they killed with the stones, but the story I created in my head was that she won and nobody liked this lady, so when she won all this money, they were like, “We have to kill her.” So I was like, “Oh they get the stones from the kids, it all makes sense.” Then you piece it all together: the fact that they have these kids willingly participating in murder! 

SJ: They don’t care at all! I guess, but I feel like if it was my family I would be so sad. Like, I wouldn’t be showing it to everyone being like, “Woooo!”

JB: I feel like she was the only rational one out of all of them. I guess that makes it so impactful as to being a horror story. You have the one reasonable character who is devastated at the fact that anyone in her family is going to die.

SJ: Yeah, that’s true! As soon as it’s in their family she’s upset, but no one else cares. That whole last sequence is so rough.

JB: I feel like every word is so meticulously thought out and placed in. Looking back, when you’re reading it you might think, “Oh, this is such a stupid minor detail,” but… I think it’s so interesting. I mean, I guess this is also a criticism of gender as well.

SJ: Yeah, and it’s very looked down upon for the women to go up.

JB: I also think part of that is because “the responsibility should fall on the men,” like whoever dies… it is the men’s fault. Because the guy who’s in charge of it, Mr. Summers, has a very happy name for a man of death.

SJ: Yeah, and he’s chipper.

JB: And the one woman, she’s sending up her son because her husband died or was injured or sick — or she was sending herself up, and people were like, “Don’t you have a son to do this for you? You shouldn’t be responsible for this,” which I think is also interesting.

SJ: Yeah, I guess I never thought about it as the “the responsibility should fall on the men” idea. I thought it was more just stereotypical gender roles.

JB: I think it’s kind of both. It’s highlighting the fact that women probably did not have rights. I don’t know what the exact date of the story is.

SJ: I guess it’s in the future. I think it’s dystopian, you know? That was the vibe I got. I think it is supposed to be in the future. But yeah, it definitely is emphasizing gender roles a lot. Yeah, it’s sad how excited the kids are. Also, now that I think about it, the gender roles are also shown in the kids. It shows the boys getting the rocks and roughhousing, and the girls are more calm.

JB: Also, with the children, I think it highlights the role of children in society very well. Because, I mean, you have these kids and I don’t think they fully comprehend what’s going on, like they’re all so excited for this, but I think it’s just a big event for them, like something to look forward to.

SJ: Yeah, because I guess they don’t know any different.

JB: Also, I don’t think they really fully grasp the concept of death.

SJ: I guess if no one in your family has “won the lottery,” it doesn’t really affect you when you’re that young. I don’t want there to be a sequel obviously but I want to know what the family is like after this. Do they care that their mom is dead now or not? 

JB: I think it would be so fascinating to see the outcomes. Like if the children have PTSD when they’re adults, and now they have to go up and pick. How long is this tradition standing?

SJ: I think it’s been a while because they talk about the box a lot, like how the current box is made out of parts of the first box. Wasn’t the tradition set by people who settled in the village?

JB: Yeah. It’s just such a good story. I can’t believe I hadn’t read it until now.

SJ: It’s so good to re-read, especially now that I’m older, because I think I read it in sophomore year of high school. So it’s different; I know more now.

JB: I think I knew about the story in my sophomore year of high school, but I never read it for class. I don’t know if your curriculum was the same, but our sophomore year curriculum was all dystopian.

SJ: Yeah, we did a lot of Ray Bradbury.

[Sofia and Jimmy go on a five-minute tangent about dystopian literature, George Orwell’s “1984”, and all-you-can-eat buffets.]

JB: Jumping back to Shirley Jackson. Have you read anything else by her? I was assigned “Haunting of Hill House” for class freshman year, so I knew that she was a very talented writer.

SJ: I have not! Is that Shirley Jackson? I didn’t know that. So, she’s, like, a full-on horror writer.

JB: Yeah, she primarily writes in horror. Which I think is so interesting, because I feel like a lot of successful authors are — at least in the realm of academia — specifically focused on literary fiction. This is not to say that horror writing is poorly done and shouldn’t be celebrated, but just that horror in general is so fascinating.

SJ: There are very few — I feel like especially from the era when “The Lottery” was written — there’s not a lot of horror writers that are really famous. 

[Sofia and Jimmy go on another (very long) tangent, this time about the literary canon.]