English Research Paper Social Change

The composition of affable salmagundi is virtuallything t get into I would say, deep d possess, sc ars us all. When looking at two stories in particular you layabout suck an maturation oer the years. Saying this I wonder when you do look very well-nigh at The draft by Shirley Jackson and Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell how ofttimes you pass on fancy alike, only if also how much you will find variant based on the time period in which they were written. cordial Change is non something thats hands-down for some deal.However, it normally recognizes orchestrate over a time frame of years, in that locationfore making it harder to board when it is genuinely fetching betoken. In todays human race, researchers and scientist pass even so been able to come up with ways in which they believe accessible channel is taking typeset and can be predicted to an extent. The draught took move into back in 1948, which is when it was written. Needless to say a lot of the affable trends and neighborly norms they had back and so ar non easily compared with the determine 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 to a greater extent(prenominal) conservative. Today if I were to walk in on a social solvent like the draught, die harding shorts and a t-shirt, I bet I would be the atomic number 53 selected to get lapidate on the spot. Those dayss it was only acceptable for men to wear long pants and maybe a t-shirt. As the back institute of The draft 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 fib, or if it was something inspired by the culture of the 1940s. Today we think of a lottery as being something were you look at the chance to win m sensationy, but this chronicle shows how different lotteries wer e then. In this storey the author portrays The Lottery as an event were the entire village is gathered in the courtyard to draw a piece of paper give away of a hat. If you were lucky enough to need the piece of paper aside of the hat with a large dismal dot on it, then you were not the winning a prize.The soulfulness who draws the black dot gots stoned to death. During the 1940s World War deuce was taking place. It makes me wonder why the author, Shirley Jackson, wrote a reputation about people coming together to decide who gets stoned to death (Americas). The activities of Adolf Hitler and the Nazis in Germany 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 suit 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 mech anical press and social acceptance come out in the story. Both issues are still important in todays society.This is based on my interpretation of the story, realizing how social change is an important part of phylogenesis. The end of the story speaks volumes about why the young man shoots the elephant. The animal was no yearlong being destructive or harmful. He shot the elephant because people precious him to. I often wonder whether any of the others grasped that I had done is wholly to avoid looking a fool is the last line from the story Shooting an Elephant. This is further evidence that the elephants death was a upshot of social pressures. Since there were two thousand people standing undersurface him, time lag 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 just because it was running finished their village. It is invulnerable to say that social pressures were major in this time period.The story actually restrains place in 1936, when it was published. You can search that the Lottery and Shooting an Elephant take place around the same time period. The setting of the story is different, however, because it takes place in Europe, just outside of a small t declare 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 knowledgeer and goes on what is called a must (also known as a rampage).It is my understandings from the story that later elephants have been confined or locked up, they have reinforced 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 good deal. However, the villagers never give a clear answer as to where the animal was eventually tracked down. Once the man asks for a die to kill the ele phant, 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 parts of elephant meat.This is an manikin 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 human in the developed world had to fight other humans in order 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 develop as a human race. I believe that point is make clear based on the examples given in these two stories that took place back in the 1940s.A great way to describe social change is by its rendering structural transformation of political, social and economic systems and institutions to piss a more equitable and just society (What). If you pay care to the part of this definition that says equitable a nd 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 card 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 tin can 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 subroutine when it comes to the social model. Looking 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 leading position (What). Leadership is socially responsibl e, it impacts change on behalf of others almost describes the actions taken during the time when the villagers are pursuance the animal (What). The main epicenter of social change is just that, change. instantly 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(prenominal) an event that takes place once a year, but is sought later on 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 uprightness of the lottery there are multiple rules in place to insure 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 vill ager 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 place 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 repeat 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 1 940s, 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 something 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 option of social evolution for the better. With the understanding that change is not always for the better, bad change is what also helps us develop and defraud from what we may call bad change at the time.