Skip to main content

OK Boomer

Sentence Analysis 
“The Lottery” page 297
“Listening to the young folks, nothing’s good enough for them. (...) Used to be a saying about ‘Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon.’First thing you know, we’d all be eating stewed chickweed and acorns. There’s always been a lottery”
The phrase “OK, Boomer” was floating around for a while and was pretty funny. It’s a phrase used to mock attitudes stereotypically possessed by the baby boomers—typically judgemental or outdated views regarding changes in today’s society which differ from their idealization of their youth, for example: criticizing our continual reliance on technology, or denying the existence of climate change and oppression of minority groups. Given the publication of “The Lottery” being shortly after World War II, we discussed the possibilities in class that it’s an allegorical story about bystanders who stayed silent while the Holocaust happened around them, or that it’s a criticism of conscription. I think another take is that Jackson is using the piece to call out the “boomer mentality.”
Although it’s weird to consider because Jackson wrote this piece before most baby boomers were even born, it can still be seen as a criticism of traditionalist conservatism, stereotypically attributed to boomers. Jackson uses Old Man Warner as an embodiment of the typical facets of traditionalist conservatism: emphasis on tradition and custom while resisting change. When someone brings up the obsolescence of The Lottery in other towns, he criticizes the decision and insists his town continue the custom because “there’s always been a lottery.” Traditionalist conservatism justifies adhering to custom by saying tradition arises from the collective experiences and knowledge of society aggregated over time—because we as individuals can’t be smarter than society as a whole, we shouldn’t challenge tradition. Old Man Warner hints at this collective knowledge when he talks about the old saying “The Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon,” implying The Lottery is some ritual his ancestors performed which they found to bring good harvests.
While Jackson depicts traditionalist conservatism in a straightforward manner through Old Man Warner, her criticism is less direct. One way she does so is pointing out the hypocrisies in traditionalists who selectively observe traditions. Old Man Warner is guilty of such hypocrisy when he overlooks various other inconsistencies in The Lottery, such as Mr. Summers replacing the wood chips with paper, and neglecting the original ritualistic elements of The Lottery(the singing and chanting meant to be led by Summers).
Another way Jackson criticizes traditionalism is by proposing that tradition can become outdated by falling behind the progression of culture or science. In the case of "The Lottery," the barbaric ritualistic killing is anachronous and out of place. From the first few descriptions we receive, the community appears civilized and advanced beyond barbaric acts like jumping on people and bashing them with stones. By having Old Man Warner justify these barbaric actions with “there’s always been a lottery,” Jackson is ridiculing people who justify actions using tradition. She is proposing that we look at the way we think and behave as a society, and consider if we are doing the right thing, or just blindly conforming to tradition.

Comments

  1. Nicole SoutheyMay 13, 2020 at 12:20 AM

    I think you bring up really interesting points. This idea of traditions or practices that are upheld despite them being outdated is definitely something prevalent in our society and it might not be as deadly as in the lottery but it is definitely an annoyance.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How short is too short

Prompt 1) Q&A: How short is too short While the length of different literary mediums are not strictly defined, we as consumers have a good sense if something is too long or too short. We often make critiques on the length of films or shows, either being too rushed or too drawn out. On the one hand a film can’t be so short that it doesn’t allocate enough time to significantly develop the characters and plot, but it also can’t be so intricate that it bores the readers. In my opinion, The Fall of the House of Usher falls in the latter category. That thing put me to sleep . You could probably cut out 50% of the words and still achieve the same effect as the original text (a slight exaggeration, but you know how it is). When I read First Person Shooter , my initial impression was the opposite—it tried to do too much and ran out of room, so it left many loose ends. It left me wondering: was this short story too short? The thing that bothered me most was the subplot of the main ch...
11 comments
Read more

"Who's to know"

Alternative title: “Who’s to know” The original title “Barbie-Q” is probably a play on the word “barbeque”, since at the end of the story the narrator mentions that the dolls come from a factory that burned down the night before. I really like this title because the fun wordplay actually describes a pretty disturbing image of a human-like doll being burned and slowly melted. Freaky. This contrast shows in the story as well. The narrator takes an unwavering fun and excited tone throughout the entire story, even during the mention of the factory fire. When she hears the news, she is really excited because the fire means she gets to buy some toys on the cheap. However, if you think just a little harder, her excitement completely overlooks the disturbing reality that a whole factory burned down and probably some people with it. I don’t know if this signifies some other deeper meaning to the story, but I just found the connection between the tone of the title and this scene very interes...
3 comments
Read more

Climate Change

Connect any of the stories we’ve read this semester to the current global crisis. How does the story help us understand our time? How do current events affect how we understand the story? The story “There Will Come Soft Rains” depicts a destitute, post-apocalyptic scenario: humans are presumably extinct. The house, which represents the last trace of humanity on Earth, begins to deteriorate, breaking down and eventually being consumed by fire. It’s a bleak scene, as nature reclaims what ultimately always belonged to it. Based on the historical context, this story, which was written in 1950, can be interpreted as a criticism of the tensions of the Cold War. It illustrates the potential future of humanity wiping itself out through nuclear war, leaving nature to slowly reclaim the Earth, until the last house which represents millions of years of our civilization turns to dust. This story presents the idea of nature being a higher power which is above petty human conflict—it’s a forc...
2 comments
Read more