English Research Paper Social Change

The idea of accessible channelize is something that I would say, deep d confess, scares us all. When looking at deuce stories in particular you suffer see an evolution over the years. Saying this I wonder when you do look really closely at The Lottery by Shirley Jackson and Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell how much you will stimulate alike, besides also how much you will find different based on the time period in which they were written. Social Change is not something thats easy for some hoi polloi.However, it normally takes place over a time frame of years, at that placefore making it harder to notice when it is real pickings place. In todays world, researchers and scientist dedicate even been able to pass off up with ways in which they believe amicable change is taking place and can be predicted to an extent. The Lottery took place back in 1948, which is when it was written. gratis(p) to say a lot of the social trends and social norms they had back then are not e asily compared with the values of todays society.What we call socially acceptable today is vastly different than what was acceptable in the 40s. The values of society then were much more conservative. Today if I were to walk in on a social event like the lottery, wearing shorts and a t-shirt, I bet I would be the one selected to occupy stoned on the spot. Those dayss it was only acceptable for men to wear grand pants and maybe a t-shirt. As the back primer coat of The Lottery is reveled, you are given more information on the social traditions of their fictional society.It makes you wonder if this is actually something that ever took place in hi news report, or if it was something divine by the culture of the 1940s. Today we think of a lottery as being something were you set about the chance to win money, but this story shows how different lotteries were then. In this story the author portrays The Lottery as an event were the entire colonisation is gathered in the courtyard to draw a piece of paper add to the fore of a hat. If you were lucky enough to choose the piece of paper out of the hat with a large black dot on it, then you were not the winning a prize.The person who draws the black dot gots stoned to death. During the 1940s World War Two was taking place. It makes me wonder why the author, Shirley Jackson, wrote a story about hatful coming together to decide who gets stoned to death (Americas). The activities of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in Ger existencey and the persecution of the Jewish community could have influenced the story line. Considering the story is about a community assembling and deciding at random who gets to die, World War II would be a alteration influence for the author. Shooting an Elephant has a lot of similar social problems that The Lottery had, but in a very different context. The elements of peer pressure and social acceptance come out in the story. Both issues are still important in todays society.This is based on my i nterpretation of the story, realizing how social change is an important part of evolution. The end of the story speaks volumes about why the young man exacts the elephant. The animal was no longer being destructive or harmful. He shot the elephant because people wanted him to. I often wonder whether any of the others grasped that I had done is solely to avoid looking a mark is the last line from the story Shooting an Elephant. This is further evidence that the elephants death was a result of social pressures. Since there were two m people standing behind him, waiting on him to make a move, he thought he would look like a coward if he didnt shoot it. The villagers wanted the elephant shot for its meat, not notwithstanding because it was running through their village. It is safe to say that social pressures were major in this time period.The story actually takes place in 1936, when it was published. You can see that the Lottery and Shooting an Elephant take place around the same t ime period. The setting of the story is different, however, because it takes place in Europe, just outside of a small town called Burma. The social values are similar in each story, despite them taking place so far apart. In Shooting an Elephant, the elephant actually gets lose from its owner and goes on what is called a must (also known as a rampage).It is my understandings from the story that after elephants have been confined or locked up, they have built up energy that they must get rid of. This is why when the elephant gets lose, or brakes free from its chain, it goes through the village stomping people and tearing through the huts, knocking them down. However, the villagers never give a clear answer as to where the animal was eventually tracked down. Once the man asks for a rifle to kill the elephant, the people are following him to see what happens. They do this out of greed, more than curiosity. They each want dibs on the best separate of elephant meat.This is an example of one form of social change, because in todays world we can go to the market and get whatever it may be that we need. During the twenty first century, I cannot think of a time that humans in the developed world had to fight other humans in put in for survival. Due to the fact, that back in the 1940s you had to find your own food as it became available. Social change is something that is required for us to evolve as a human race. I believe that point is made clear based on the examples given in these two stories that took place back in the 1940s.A peachy way to describe social change is by its definition structural transformation of political, social and economic systems and institutions to create a more equitable and just society (What). If you pay attention to the part of this definition that says equitable and just society then you have more insight to The Lottery (What). All of the towns people may have believed that their form of equal and just society, of drawing from a hat to decide as to whom gets to die, is only way to make it fair. By doing this there could potentially be less acts of random violence.Social control can go hand in hand with social change. Various countries and religions have their own forms of social control. For instance, all Muslim women have to keep their faces covered when in public, and most European countries require you to have your government issued identification cards on you at all times. Shooting an Elephant provides some opposite examples to the definition given above. The village were the elephant was running rampant has political implications behind it. In social change you have the transformation of politics (What).This is the number one force behind social change a lot of time. To be an elephant owner back in that time period you had to be some form of higher social class. The man working for him is the one that tracks down and ends up killing the animal. He states in the story how he does not want to kill the animal, but felt as if he had to in order to survive himself from the pressure of the villagers. With two thousand people behind you, with their knifes ready to start prying the meat from the carcass of the elephant, you are more likely to chose what will pay off for you in the long run.Instead of waiting on the owner of the elephant to decide what to do when he was confined in the field, he decides to shoot him. Coming down to the fact of did he do what was best for the people? Or did he do it to raise his own political standing with them? Leadership is the number one role when it comes to the social model. sounding at the story Shooting an Elephant, and comparing it to the social change model, you can see the motive behind the mans role as he takes a leadership position (What). Leadership is socially responsible, it impacts change on behalf of others almost describes the actions taken during the time when the villagers are seeking the animal (What). The main epicentre of social change i s just that, change. Directly in the center of the social change model you will see the word change with different leadership roles surrounding it. Secondly, you can see the same similar behavior from the mayor of the town where The Lottery took place. Enforcing the rules of such an event that takes place once a year, but is sought after to be an endless tradition, is not an easy task.Being the official, the mayor takes on the leadership role, also, not to mention the leadership role he is already in by the position he holds as mayor of the town. To keep the integrity of the lottery there are multiple rules in place to visualise that it is fair for everyone involved. However, the major part of the social change model that does not fit is the change (Ryder). Any time in the story a villager brought up the fact that they thought the lottery should not continue, the mayor was out raged and spoke up to inform them that it must continue because it was a tradition.Social trends take plac e as a natural evolution over time, but it requires change in order for it to happen. Without the prospect of change nothing will ever evolve, leaving the villagers to recur the same destiny year after year. Both Stories have their pros and cons, but there are two different form of social change taking place. The first story The Lottery is dealing with the aspect of leadership and how that leadership affects people of that community.Second, Shooting an Elephant deals more with the issue of pressure and influences from your surroundings. Both however come down to one main topic, and that is change. In Conclusion, social change and evolution is not something that is easy to process sometimes. You can clearly see by these two stories that evolution is self evident during the time of the 1940s, by comparing the said evolution to recent items such as the social change model you can relate to the methods behind actions that were taken by characters in the stories.Social trend are not som ething that is easy to break away from. However, you can tell during The Lottery that there are people who are will to accept change and speak out for it Without change we, as a society, do not have an natural selection of social evolution for the better. With the understanding that change is not always for the better, bountiful change is what also helps us develop and learn from what we may call bad change at the time.