Question 1:
In comparing the original story of ‘The
Lottery’ with the film version, I noticed some differences in setting. First
off, there were many changes to the ‘traditional way’ in the original story. In
the film version we didn't see any evidence of previous changes to tradition of
the lottery, in fact we saw the mayor strictly telling the construction workers
that the platform is built and taken every year to follow tradition. The
original story depicts the people as being far more flexible and traditions
being substituted; “Because so much of the ritual had been forgotten or discarded”. They go through the story explaining that chips
of wood have been substituted for slips of paper, chants were to be sung, and believes that a different method was to
be used. Changes were made but the general method was still in effect.
Another difference in setting comes
when a few citizens begin talking about other towns having the lottery. It wasn't mentioned in the film that other
communities had lotteries and it’s probably assumed that New Hope is the only
town still with a lottery. However, in
the original version the people talk about how some districts have given up the
lottery or are talking about giving it up. This gives a sense that at one
point, all the towns had a lottery, but they are slowly decaying as people give
it up when they slowly realize it does nothing to help them.
Question 6
Both stories argue that the whole
is greater than the individual, that the suffering or murder of one to secure
the whole triumphs over the whole suffering together. I believe that this solution is immature and irrational;
the community should hire a counsel to work out the cities problems much like
modern ways. The lottery creates a quick
and drastic solution to a complex problem, the citizens of New Hope and Omelas have
shut down their creativity from the thought that human sacrifice is the only
way. They have been born and raised to know that the lottery is the one and only
solution, and for most citizens that ideology is set in stone.
I think that the short story version of the Lottery is trying to create a sense of slow progress towards doing away with the practice all together. It kind of outlines the gradual process of how traditions fade away. The beginning of this process is seen in the story as the original traditions are lost, gradually replaced by new ones. I think the author is trying to make a direct relation to everyday life here by emphasizing this point. Culture, not matter where it is located is constantly changing; we do not have the same laws and practices that we once did. So, i think one of the purposes of the short story is to allow readers to experience how societies change in the form of an interesting story.
ReplyDeleteim going to assume that the reason the movie version omits several details is simply because of the era in which each story takes place. the short story is set in a fictional place with no real established time period ( if i remember correctly), while the movie is given a real location in what appear to be the 90s. leaving out those details just made the story seem more believable in a real world scenario.
ReplyDeletequestion 6: I agree it is irrational. From both stories, the people are all kind of brainwashed into a certain thinking, and rationalize it somehow in their heads. Being born into that kind of lifestyle would mean its all you know, so i guess its understandable that they live somewhat normally, because they have to go on with life. The Omelas story, i think, deals more with morality and realizing the suffereing of this innocent child shouldn't be what keeps the city happy.
ReplyDeleteI agree! It is completely inhuman and irrational to conduct such events. The death of a person should not be viewed as a relief, like it is viewed in New Hope. One should not have to be sacrificed in order to sustain peace and prosperity for a town. Have they ever questioned what would happen if this "chosen" person were to not be killed and left to live. Would there really be chaos? Will it be the end of New Hope, as they all make it seem?
ReplyDeleteFor question 6, I completely agree that this way of life is irrational and unnecessary. There are so many other solutions to the problems they could potentially face. I don't see why this what they default too. There is no reason for it to be that way.
ReplyDelete