Analysis of the Lottery by Shirley Jackson--Females’ Inferior Position
analysis of The Lottery by Shirley Jackson--Females’ inferior position The Lottery written by Shirley Jackson tells such a story: There is an ancient traditional annual event held in a small town in America. Anyone who wins the “lottery” will be stoned to death for harvest. Tessie is the new unluckier this time, who has to suffer this cruel and inhumane punishment. Seen deeply, females’ inferior position is showed elaborately in this novel.
First, the appellation to females shows that they are in subordination to males. “Mrs. Hutchinson came hurriedly along the path to the square” (Jackson, 2), “she said to Mrs. Delacroix” (Jackson, 2), “Mrs. Dunbar said regretfully” (Jackson, 3). Here “Mrs. Delacroix”, “Mrs. Hutchinson” and “Mrs. Dunbar” all suggest that one female cannot be an individual being after her marriage, since she has to be a part of her husband by calling her “Mrs”. When Tessie comes lately, the villager’s addresses that “Here comes your Missus, Hutchinson” (Jackson, 2) instead of calling her own name also shows that she has become a subordinate object for her husband. Just like Lakoff says in his book Language and Woman 's Place, “It is with Mrs, Miss, and Mr. Since a significant part of the opinion one normally forms about a woman 's character and social station depends on her marital status - as is not the case with men” (Lakoff, 73). This phenomenon is common all over the world. Why don’t males change their appellations like female do? Actually, the marriage cannot change anything but the couple’s new relationship and family lifestyle. So does a female have to compromise to become her husband’s stooge? Perhaps only when she makes accomplishment can she be introduced as an independent individual. Those who are satisfied with their status quo are likely to accept the new subsidiary address. Thus, females’ subordinated appellations gradually become accustomed.
Second, the role of being a housewife unconsciously influences a female’s equal right
First, the appellation to females shows that they are in subordination to males. “Mrs. Hutchinson came hurriedly along the path to the square” (Jackson, 2), “she said to Mrs. Delacroix” (Jackson, 2), “Mrs. Dunbar said regretfully” (Jackson, 3). Here “Mrs. Delacroix”, “Mrs. Hutchinson” and “Mrs. Dunbar” all suggest that one female cannot be an individual being after her marriage, since she has to be a part of her husband by calling her “Mrs”. When Tessie comes lately, the villager’s addresses that “Here comes your Missus, Hutchinson” (Jackson, 2) instead of calling her own name also shows that she has become a subordinate object for her husband. Just like Lakoff says in his book Language and Woman 's Place, “It is with Mrs, Miss, and Mr. Since a significant part of the opinion one normally forms about a woman 's character and social station depends on her marital status - as is not the case with men” (Lakoff, 73). This phenomenon is common all over the world. Why don’t males change their appellations like female do? Actually, the marriage cannot change anything but the couple’s new relationship and family lifestyle. So does a female have to compromise to become her husband’s stooge? Perhaps only when she makes accomplishment can she be introduced as an independent individual. Those who are satisfied with their status quo are likely to accept the new subsidiary address. Thus, females’ subordinated appellations gradually become accustomed.
Second, the role of being a housewife unconsciously influences a female’s equal right
Cited: FRANKLIN, Ruth. The Read: I’m sorry, Ms. Jackson. The New Republic. May 19, 2010.Available at: <http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/75032/the-read-i%E2%80%99m-sorry-ms-jackson>. Access on: 13 Aug 2010. Jackson, Shirley. The Lottery. Adaptor: Janek Liebetruth, Version 1. September, 07 2007. Print. Lakoff, Robin. Language and Woman 's Place. Published by: Cambridge University. Source: Language in Society, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Apr., 1973), pp. 45-80. Print.