“Critical Research Essay” by Nery Bonilla

A first-time reader of Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery” may be shocked by the killing of
Tessie Hutchinson, mostly because the villagers show no anger, or hesitation when they stone
her to death. The brutality appears sudden, but a closer reading reveals that Jackson has quietly
prepared the reader for Tessie’s fate from the very beginning. Her careful descriptions of the
townspeople’s calmness, the children’s playful gathering of stones, and the ceremony’s casual
efficiency reveal a community where violence has become so normalized that no one recognizes
it as violence at all. When examined through Michael Robinson’s argument connecting the story
to Holocaust literature and Darryl Hattenhauer’s analysis of Jackson’s dark exploration of
ordinary life, the killing of Tessie comes as more than a shocking twist it becomes a warning
about how societies transform harmful traditions into something needed. Shirley Jackson’s “The
Lottery” illustrates how everyday people can commit horrific acts when adhering to outdated
traditions, highlighting that the true horror lies not in the violence itself, but in how readily
society normalizes it.

From the begging of the story, Shirley Jackson uses regular details to show how violence
is hidden beneath everyday life. The villagers gather “in the square, between the post office and
the bank, around ten o’clock,” as if they are gonna have a town meeting. The scene is described
on a “clear and sunny” morning, a choice that takes away all traditional markers of horror. Even
the children take part innocently they collect stones and make “a great pile of stones in one
corner of the square.” Jackson never labels the stones as weapons, she relies on the reader to later
recognize the horror embedded in this seemingly playful detail. Hattenhauer notes that Jackson’s
work exposes “the darkness within ordinary people and daily life,” and this is exactly what her
imagery accomplishes. By embedding violence inside normal communal behavior, Jackson
shows that the villagers are not monsters they are ordinary people who have learned to accept
cruelty as tradition. This contrast makes it clear to the reader that Tessie’s death isn’t due to
personal animosity, but rather because the entire community adheres to a tradition that feels so
normal that no one thinks to question it.

The casualness of the ritual becomes clearer when Mr. Summers runs the lottery “as he
did the square dances, the teenage club, the Halloween program.” Jackson shows that the lottery
is treated just like any other harmless town event, which suggests that violence can feel normal
when it is presented as something everyone is expected to take part in. The villagers hesitate only
for a moment “a whisper of hesitation” but they quickly go along with the process because
they see it as necessary. Even Tessie arrives late and jokes that she “clean forgot what day it
was,” which shows how deeply the ritual has blended into everyday life. She knows the lottery
kills someone each year, but her casual attitude shows how numb the whole community has
become to the violence hidden in this event. Jackson uses these small moments to show that
violence is easy to ignore when it is disguised as tradition.

Michael Robinson’s argument adds a historical angle that strengthens this idea. He
connects the villagers’ behavior to the organized violence of the Holocaust, where ordinary
people followed harmful systems because those systems felt normal, routine, and expected.
Jackson wrote “The Lottery” in 1948, when the world was still trying to understand how
everyday citizens had taken part in or stayed silent about mass murder. Robinson argues that
Jackson reflects this reality by showing a town that keeps the lottery simply because it is
tradition. This becomes clear when the villagers proudly say they “still remembered to use
stones,” even though the black box itself is old and falling apart. The ritual continues not because
it makes sense, but because it feels familiar. This explains why Tessie’s final protest “It isn’t fair,
it isn’t right” is ignored. Her words challenge the community’s belief that tradition must always
be followed, no matter the cost. Robinson’s point makes it clear that Tessie’s death exposes the
danger of obeying a system that values routine more than human life.

Old Man Warner is the character who represents this way of thinking most clearly. He
becomes the voice of tradition, repeating old sayings without offering any real reason for
keeping the lottery. He acts like the keeper of the ritual, repeating sayings such as “Lottery in
June, corn be heavy soon,” which he treats like wise truths even though he never proves them.
He angrily calls other towns that ended the lottery “crazy fools,” which shows how terrified he is
of any change. His authority comes from age and habit, not from understanding. Hattenhauer
explains that Jackson often creates characters who defend harmful customs simply because those
customs are old. Warner’s stubborn belief in the lottery, and his dislike of younger people shows
how traditions can keep themselves alive even after their real purpose has been forgotten.
Jackson uses him to show that communities often protect old practices more strongly than they
protect their people’s lives.

Tessie Hutchinson becomes the clearest test of this loyalty. She is not a rebel from the
start, she only protests once she becomes the chosen victim. Before that, she follows the rules
just like everyone else and even pushes her husband to “Get up there,” supporting the idea that
everyone must follow the ritual. Jackson uses Tessie to show how normal the lottery has become:
even the people who fear it take part in it until they personally feel threatened. Once Tessie
speaks out, the villagers instantly turn against her. Mrs. Delacroix who had joked with Tessie just
minutes beforegrabs “a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands.” This detail shows
how quickly friendship disappears when tradition is more important than compassion. Through
Hattenhauer’s view, Tessie becomes a symbol of how societies silence people who question the
rules. The village kills her to protect the illusion that their tradition is necessary and right.

Robinson’s analysis makes this even clearer by showing that systems of violence depend
on group participation. No single person kills Tessie; instead, everyone throws stones, which
makes the violence feel shared and therefore less personal. Jackson’s use of passive language “A
stone hit her on the side of the head” and “they were upon her” makes the mob seem like one
single force instead of many individuals. Robinson connects this to real historical situations
where people joined in harmful actions not out of hatred, but because they thought they had to
follow orders, tradition, or social pressure. Jackson uses this idea to show that societies often do
terrible things not because they choose cruelty, but because they don’t choose to question what
they have always done.

Seen through both Hattenhauer’s and Robinson’s arguments, Tessie Hutchinson’s death
becomes the main symbol of the story’s warning us that anyone can commit horrible acts when
they give up their moral judgment and simply follow tradition. The villagers do not see
themselves as murderers they see themselves as a community celebrating something that thy
have celebrated their whole life. Their casual conversations, teamwork, and their acceptance of
the old black box all help hide the violence beneath the surface. Hattenhauer notes that Jackson
often places horror in bright, ordinary settings, and the sunny June morning only makes the
violence stand out more sharply. Robinson’s comparison to the Holocaust shows that real
societies often carry out violence through routines that feel normal to the people involved. The
final image shows Tessie surrounded by her neighbors as they raise their stones. This shows
Jackson’s message clearly that even the most dangerous evil is not dramatic or supernatural. It is
the familiar, comfortable cruelty that grows when people obey tradition without ever questioning
it.

Overall, in “The Lottery,” the killing is not an accident, a crime of passion, or the result
of anger. It is a ritual, carefully performed by a community that has forgotten or chosen to forget
its origins. When examined through Robinson’s and Hattenhauer’s ideas, Tessie Hutchinson’s
death becomes a symbol of the danger of unthinking obedience. Jackson uses this killing to show
how violence survives when people refuse to question the customs that control their world. The
story’s power lies in this quiet truth societies often commit their greatest cruelties not out of
hatred, but out of habit.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

“Critical Research Essay” by Nery Bonilla (Draft)

A first time reader of Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery” may be shocked by the killing of
Tessie Hutchinson, mostly because no one in the village seems angry, or upset to hurt her. But a
closer reading shows that the killing is hinted at throughout the story. Like for example how
calmly the community accepts their tradition of throughout stones at people. At first the story is
slow making it feel calm until it is time for the tradition. Shirley Jackson hides violence inside
normal, everyday behavior. When read together with Michael Robinson’s article, which connects
“The Lottery” to Holocaust literature, and Darryl Hattenhauer’s analysis of Jackson’s Gothic
themes, Tessie’s death becomes more than a shocking twist. It becomes a symbol showing how
ordinary people can commit terrible acts when tradition tells them to. Shirley Jackson’s The
Lottery shows how ordinary people can do terrible things when they follow old traditions,
proving that the real horror is not the violence itself but in how easily society accepts it as
normal.

The first sign that Tessie might die appears in the villager’s routines, which supports
Shirley Jackson’s message that normal behavior can hide cruelty. The villagers gather around,
talk about the weather, and let the kids collect the stones as if it is just a game. Which we will
soon learn the dark reason they are used. Darryl Hattenhauer says that Shirley Jackson’s fiction
reveals “the darkness within ordinary people and daily life.” Jackson does not use ghosts or
monsters instead, she shows how people use old traditions to hide their dark side. In the story,
the lottery is described the same way someone might describe a holiday celebration. Because
everyone takes part, no one feels responsible. Even Tessie arrives late even though she is
walking into a ceremony that must end someone’s life. Shirley Jackson places violence inside
normal life, making the horror come not from surprise but from recognition.

Michael Robinson’s argument helps deepen this idea by connecting “The Lottery” to
Holocaust literature. He explains that the story mirrors the logic of mass violence during the
Holocaust, people followed harmful rules simply because the rules were familiar and socially
needed. Jackson wrote this story in 1948, when the world was still trying to understand how so
many people took part in or accepted organized killing. Robinson says that the calm and
business-like behavior of the villagers is similar to how real-world atrocities were carried with
routine. This helps explain why Tessie’s final protest, “It isn’t fair,” is ignored. Fairness does not
matter in a system built on tradition, not on protecting life. Robinson’s comparison shows that
Tessie dies not because anyone hates her, but because the villagers cannot imagine life without
the ritual that demands her death.

Old Man Warner is the character who represents this way of thinking most clearly. He
becomes the voice of tradition, repeating old sayings without offering any real reason for
keeping the lottery. When he calls towns that stopped the lottery “crazy fools,” he shows that
people often cling to tradition out of fear. Hattenhauer’s analysis helps explain Warner’s role.
Jackson often creates characters who defend traditions simply because they are old, not because
they are good. Warner insists on keeping the ritual even though he does not know why it exists.
Jackson uses him to show how authority is created through repetition rather than wisdom. His
presence makes Tessie’s death feel unavoidable, even though the story hints that the villagers
could make a different choice. Jackson shows a world where responsibility disappears behind
custom, allowing violence to become something the whole community shares without guilt.

Tessie Hutchinson’s role becomes more important when looked at through Darryl
Hattenhauer’s ideas about social pressure and identity. Tessie is not a heroic challenger of the
tradition she only speaks out once she becomes its target. Her sudden change from joking to
panicking shows how deeply the ritual shapes her community. The villagers ignore her fear
because her protest puts their stability at risk. Jackson uses Tessie to show how communities
silence anyone who questions their beliefs. According to Hattenhauer’s interpretation, Tessie is
showed as being pushed down by the expectations of her society. She faces punishment not just
for drawing the marked slip, but also for attempting to defy the role imposed on her. Her death
reinforces the unity of the village and illustrates how violence can serve to uphold social order.
Michael Robinson’s work supports this idea by showing how systems of violence depend
on ordinary people choosing group loyalty over moral judgment. The villagers, like the
communities he studies in Holocaust history, use tradition to avoid feeling guilty. No single
person kills Tessie everyone joins in and throws stones, so the responsibility is spread out.
Violence becomes an act of duty, not hatred. Robinson’s analysis shows that Jackson is not only
telling a story about a strange town, but she is also giving a warning about how real societies
justify harm when everyone takes part.

By focusing on the killing of Tessie, Jackson shows how easily violence can hide inside
ordinary life. The villagers do not see themselves as murderers, they see themselves as people
just doing a yearly tradition. Their calm conversations about crops, their small jokes, and their
steady cooperation create a normal surface that distracts from the horror beneath. Hattenhauer
notes that Jackson’s Gothic style does not use dark, stormy settings but bright sunshine and open
spaces places where readers least expect dark things to happen. Robinson adds that the villagers’
lack of emotion mirrors historical examples of organized violence carried out by regular people.
The story’s final image. Tessie surrounded by neighbors who cannot imagine doing anything
except raising their stones becomes a powerful statement about how easily people surrender their
moral responsibility to tradition.

In “The Lottery,” killing is not an accident, a crime of passion, or the result of anger. It is
a ritual, carefully performed by a community that has forgotten or chosen to forget its origins.
When examined through Robinson’s and Hattenhauer’s ideas, Tessie Hutchinson’s death
becomes a symbol of the danger of unthinking obedience. Jackson uses this killing to show how
violence survives when people refuse to question the customs that control their world. The
story’s power lies in this quiet truth: societies often commit their greatest cruelties not out of
hatred, but out of habit.