Back in April I posted on Majorie Barnard’s short story “The lottery” for Kaggsy’s and Simon’s 1937 Year Club. Commenting on that post, my American friend Carolyn said that in looking for Barnard’s story she found Chekhov’s “The lottery ticket”, written fifty years earlier in 1887. Of course, I had to read it too. There are enough similarities to make us think that Barnard very likely had read Chekhov’s story, but had decided to put her own spin on it. Whether we are right or not, the two stories make for an interesting comparison. I will try to discuss them without spoiling them, but there will be hints.
Both stories deal with a married couple and their reaction to the idea of winning a lottery, and both stories are told third person from the husband’s point of view. Marjorie Barnard’s is set in suburban Sydney, and explores what happens when a wife wins the lottery. She doesn’t tell him immediately so he finds out from others who had read it in the newspaper. On his way home from work, he thinks about what it all means, how “he” might spend it, and he then starts to find fault with his wife. She “wasn’t cheery and easy going” and hadn’t aged well (not as well as he had, anyhow), and so on. It ends, however, with the wife having the upper hand. Barnard’s story reflects her interest in gender, in how little agency women had, and how constricted their lives were.
This is not Chekhov’s prime interest. He is writing in a different place and time. In his story, it is also the wife who had bought the ticket, but it’s the husband who checks the newspaper and sees that there’s a “probability” that her ticket had won. However, rather than reading on and confirming whether that’s the case he suggests they wait:
Looking at his wife, Ivan Dmitritch gave a broad, senseless smile, like a baby when a bright object is shown it. His wife smiled too; it was as pleasant to her as to him that he only mentioned the series, and did not try to find out the number of the winning ticket. To torment and tantalize oneself with hopes of possible fortune is so sweet, so thrilling!
The hope of course is that they will have a lovely dream about the possibilities, those dreams we all occasionally have (even if we don’t buy lottery tickets!) But, if you know Chekhov, you’ll know that he is unlikely to be interested in unrealistic dreams, but in how ordinary people traverse life and their relationships. So, he lets Ivan dream – of “a new life … a transformation”. “That’s not money,” he says, “but power, capital!” He imagines paying off debts, buying “an estate”, going abroad. Occasionally, he notices that his wife is also dreaming. But, it comes to a head when he realises she’s dreaming of going abroad too. What? She’d be no fun to go with. She’d just talk about the children, complain about the cost of the food, not to mention want to spend money on looking after her relations,
And for the first time in his life his mind dwelt on the fact that his wife had grown elderly and plain, and that she was saturated through and through with the smell of cooking, while he was still young, fresh, and healthy, and might well have got married again.
So the story continues with this man who was, at the beginning, “very well satisfied with his lot” – including presumably, having his wife at home, cooking his meals, caring for the children – feeling very different about his life by the end.
The irony, in Chekhov’s as well as Barnard’s story, is that the lottery ticket was the belittled wife’s. Barnard, however, gives her wife agency, whereas Chekhov’s focus is on how money and greed can destabilise (or, is it reveal?) one’s values. However, the little point is still there, in the irony, in that early description of the husband with his “senseless smile, like a baby when a bright object is shown it”, and in so many of the husband’s attitudes towards his wife. Gender issues are not so forward in the resolution, but they are part of the picture.
Anton Chekhov
“The lottery ticket”
First published 1887
Available online at Classic Shorts
Whispering Gums 
I love your comparison of the stories. I imagine Barnard reading Chekhov’s story and thinking, “I’ll set you straight and tell you why the wifey bought the ticket in the first place!”
Haha… Yes, Carolyn. Well said.
And I agree with Carolyn that Barnard wanted to add her own spin.
I agree too M-R. And I enjoyed how she did it.
Funny how stories seem to be connected. I always thought Ian McEwan was based on Mary Wesley’s Camomile Lawn. So similar. Everything cycles around I guess. When I hear the word the Lottery I can’t help but think of Shirley Jackson. Never forgot it after reading it in high school. It’s probably on the banned book lists of America now. Speaking of lottery, amazing an Australian man wins 150 million in the Powerball lottery. They should instead give 150 people one million instead. Many could use it. Have a good week.
Thanks Pam. Yes, I thought of Jackson too though I only read that in the last few years. It is of course a different dort of lottery so I left it alone.
Agree re that Powerball win, but that’s the lottery for you isn’t it? I hope he donated a lot to social causes. That would be better perhaps than lots of people winning $1 million.
I haven’t read this one but I will. I love lottery stories.
Thanks Guy … they are a good set-up for exploration of all sorts of things aren’t they. I guess we don’t talk about “the lottery of life” for nothing, do we!
Have you seen The Syndicate series (I-IV)?
No, sorry Guy. Haven’t even heard of it. Is it a Netflix series? Sounds like it’s about a lottery syndicate?
It’s British. Each series has various groups of people who as a betting syndicate win the lottery jointly. For example, in one series, the group is made up of people who work in a shop.
I find it fascinating. It shows how people go mad w spending–a yacht, a mansion, expensive rings etc. Plus they suddenly have friends and relatives who want to cosy up.
Oh that sounds a great idea for a series/drama.
I thought of Shirley Jackson each time, too. Even though I should have figured it out by now. Several years back, Patricia Wood’s The Lottery (a novel) was nominated for the Women’s Fiction Prize and that was not a Shirley-Jackson-esque lottery-story either!
Ooh, what sort of story was it Marcie? And is she Canadian?
Even though most of the women’s prize nominees back then were British, it seems she’s American? I see there’s a fledgling category at the bottom of this Wikipedia link, to literature about lotties. Guess it’s a Thing then. heheh
I was starting to wonder whether there was. BTW it drives me batty that those categories don’t seem to be visible/accessible when you use Wikipedia on a device like a phone. Every now and then I go looking but I just can’t find them. Do you use it on your phone? (I do quite a lot) And do you find the categories?
Those categories are displayed a little oddly, somewhat below the regular article on Wikipedia, so I can see where that would change how a mobile interacts with them but, no, I don’t use my phone to browse. I’m wary of the magnetic field that surrounds cell phones (it’s actually written into the iPhone manual not to press it against your body…the way some women tuck it into their bra for instance, when jogging, but I don’t jog, so that solves that, phew lol) so I use it for brief texts, photos, and emergency calls, maybe weather checks, that kind of thing. But I love the idea of building out that lottery category, maybe I should practice my Wikipedia-ing skillzzzz there.
Yes I know where they are on the laptop/desktop browser. I use them a lot… They (some) are so useful, but I can’t find them on my phone or tablet. It’s mostly when I’m out and about that I browse… If there’s something I want to check. (My phone is carried in my handbag! I don’t jog either and if I’m walking my phone is in a bag not a pocket.)
I had a look at the lottery category and would love to expand it but also to enhance the existing entries in the list because it contsins the lottery, the lottery, lottery, and maybe the word novel os somesuch after (because it’s part of the article title) but which one is it? Is it Chekhov? Is it Barnard? Is it Jackson? You have to click on each one and go to the page to find out which one is which but I don’t think there’s much to be done as the list is generated by the category structure.
When I read that last block quote, I immediate thought, “What an ass.” What makes a man think he has some sort of vitality compared to anyone else? Ugh.
I was curious if these stories had any connection, a tradition carried on, if you will, in Shirley Jackson’s “The Lottery,” but it seems the only thing in common is the title.
Love that response Melanie. Because he’s a man – particularly of that time, eh?
And yes, I think it is just the title really.
I enjoyed reading your comparison of these two stories. You reminded me that I planned on doing something in this vein for Katherine Mansfield’s The Child Who Was Tired story and the related Chekhov story, Spat khochetsia…
Thanks Brona. I could have done a lot more in the comparison… So many things to tease out… I wonder how many stories were possibly inspired by Chekhov.
I’m beginning to suspect, quite a lot!
Absolutely… But who wants to spoil everyone else’s fun in thinking about it themselves!