of the story is important because it helps create the ironic tension between what the inhabitants should be like and how they actually are.

1. The setting is a "modern" small town for Jackson's time, with a traditional belief system. The beliefs are archaic, however, so the juxtaposition of the happy town, where people gather at street corners to talk of "planting and rain, tractors and taxes", with the ritual sacrifice is the first ironic contrast in the setting.

2. A second important aspect of the setting is that it occurs during the summer, less than a week after midsummer, the summer solstice (when the sun appears to stand still, and when the sun is highest and longest in the sky); midsummer was a time when people gathered together to celebrate the sun and its life-giving power. Yet the ritual the townspeople perform is a stoning. (Biblical allusions abound-the sun/son, life vs original sin and throwing the first stone)

3. The physical setting, the clear, sunny day, with flowers blooming profusely, rich green grass, and children on summer vacation is in direct contrast with the dark deed that the townspeople with participate in.

Probably the first and most important was placing this story in a normal, civilized town. These were people who were going about doing things that everyone does during the day and took a quick break from that to see who gets stoned to death this year.

"but in this village, where there were only about three hundred people, the whole lottery took less than two hours, so it could begin at ten o'clock in the morning and still be through in time to allow the villagers to get home for noon dinner."

Secondly, this lottery is placed as a normal, once a year occurance. Nobody seems to question the fact that the townspeople continue with this tradition. In fact, some go so far as to speak down about other towns who've given up their lotteries.

"The lottery was conducted--as were the square dances, the teen club, the Halloween program--by Mr. Summers. who had time and energy to devote to civic activities."

"Some places have already quit lotteries." Mrs. Adams said.
"Nothing but trouble in that," Old Man Warner said stoutly. "Pack of young fools."

As a third element, Jackson appeals to the family urge in all of us by making sure to include little Davy in the process. We are met head on with the mortifying thought of a small child helping to stone his mother (and the thought that the table could have been reversed with mother stoning son). Again, this all seems like a natural, normal thing.

"The children had stones already. And someone gave little Davy Hutchinson few pebbles."

The biggest thing to realize with all of these examples, is that Jackson made this very real. The appeal of the story is that you could be reading historical fiction. There is debate about whether this story was written mainly as a piece of feministic literature or simply a statement about mankind and our nature to be followers, but the basic appeal of the story is in its "real" nature.

"The Lottery" takes place in a small village, apparently a charming place, with flowers "blossoming profusely"(1), a lovely village square, and grass that is "richly green" (1).  This is a small village, with approximately three hundred people. As the story opens, the scene seems idyllic. 

We know that the village has most amenities, a bank and a post office, a school. It has great activities, square dances, for example, a club for teens, and some sort of Halloween program.  We know there is a coal business, which Mr. Summers owns, so there must be some sort of coal mining in the area.  There is also likely to be some farming, too, since we are told that Mr. Graves has a barn, and there is a grocery store, which belongs to the Martin family. 

In short, this seems to be a lovely little village, a wonderful place to live, with some industry, some farming, and many conveniences.  Opening her story in this beautiful setting contributes greatly to the reader's shock by the end of the story. But ugly events can happen in beautiful places just as well as they can happen anywhere else. 

In terms of what time of year it is, we learn immediately that it is summertime, "June 27th" to be exact. It is a beautiful sunny day, and the flowers are in full bloom amidst the rich, green grass in this town that seems rather simple, tranquil, and idyllic. Because the location is a "village" where everyone seems to know everyone else, we are led to believe that this story takes place perhaps in the early- or mid-twentieth century; the people talk very much like we talk now, yet men and women seem to have their roles clearly delineated by gender—Tessie Hutchinson, for example, does not want to leave her dishes undone before she comes to the lottery—and so the story seems not terribly recent but not terribly old either.

She is also wearing an apron, on which she dries her hands, and this is another signal that we are likely in the early- to mid-twentieth century, when women routinely wore aprons to go about their housework. Men are very much considered to be the "heads of families" who draw, at first, for their entire family, and young men draw for their families if the father is unavailable (rather than the wife). There are "square dances" and a "teen club" as well as a "Halloween program," all leading me to believe that the story is taking place sometime in the early- to mid-twentieth century.

The location seems to be somewhere in small-town America, as people speak English and have a sort of informal and idiomatic way of speaking, like when Tessie says she "Clean forgot what day it was." She also calls her husband her "old man," an old-fashioned phrase from a bygone era. Mr. Summers wants to get started "so's [they] can go back to work'" Also, he asks if "Anybody ain't here?" and recalls of Clyde Dunbar that "He's broke his leg." Making a contraction of the words "so as," using the slang "ain't," and neglecting to properly conjugate the verb in the present-perfect tense are all signs that the story takes place in rural America and within the last century.

One of the weird features of "The Lottery" is that the action seems to be taking place in the heartland of America in the present day. The people all talk and act like rural Americans, like ordinary "folks." They all seem folksy, friendly, and neighborly--which is one of the factors that contributes to the horror of the gruesome ending. The lottery itself seems to be conducted in a characteristically small-town American fashion, with a little awkwardness and confusion and people talking back and forth with their friends and neighbors.

The lottery was conducted--as were the square dances, the teen-age club, the Halloween program--by Mr. Summers, who had time and energy to devote to civic activities.

Both square dances and Halloween sound typically American. Most of the peoples' names sound American, including Summers, Graves, Martin, and Warner.

Old Man Warner sounds the most American of all.

"Pack of crazy fools," he said. "Listening to the young folks, nothing's good enough for them. Next thing you know, they'll be wanting to go back to living in caves, nobody work any more, live that way for a while."

Mr. Warner comes closest to identifying the exact location of this event when he says:

"Used to be a saying about 'Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon.'"

Evidently this lottery ritual is so old that no one really knows how or why it began, but it seems to have originated as a human sacrificial ceremony intended to insure a good corn crop. Now it is only continued because it is a tradition. From this clue as well as the people's speech patterns, it appears that the locale intended by the author Shirley Jackson is the Corn Belt, which stretches from eastern Nebraska through Iowa and into southern Illinois. Most likely this village is intended to be set in Iowa.

When the story was published in The New Yorker in 1948, the magazine as well as the author, received numerous complaints.

After publishing the story, The New Yorker received hundreds of letters and telephone calls from readers expressing disgust, consternation, and curiosity, and Jackson herself received letters concerning ''The Lottery" until the time of her death. (eNotes Study Guide Introduction)

The good people of the Midwest felt that they were being deliberately insulted--and they were probably right. The New Yorker was a sophisticated humor and literary magazine with few subscribers in Middle America or anywhere else besides the New York region. The story seems to be accusing Midwesterners of being backward, superstitious, old-fashioned, and ignorant. Times have changed, of course. The entire nation is becoming more homogenous because of such things as automobiles, super-highways, chain stores, and television; and The New Yorker has been suffering financial problems for years which have forced it to reach out for readers all over America. Interestingly, in 1991 the magazine published a series of excellent stories by Tom Drury about a state very much like Iowa which were collected in a book titled The End of Vandalism (see reference link below). It continues to publish articles about places all over the United States.

Shirley Jackson avoided pinpointing the exact location of her imaginary lottery, but she offers enough clues to make the reader assume that it was taking place right in modern times and either in Nebraska or Iowa.

Jackson's first order of business when writing "The Lottery" was to depict the setting. The first few lines of the story read:

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green. The people of the village began to gather in the square, between the post office and the bank....

This portrays an utterly recognizable environment to the average American reader. We envision a pleasant, pretty, quaint village. The "clear and sunny" weather further magnifies the setting's small-town charm and beauty. Two points are accomplished by setting the story in such a place.

First, the setting has a strong chance of resonating with the reader, perhaps even harkening to our own hometown. This immediately instills a set of expectations and a certain level of investment in the story. We believe we understand what we can recognize and are, perhaps, more inclined to care about the outcome of the story being told. In turn, we can imagine this story taking place in our own communities, which makes the overall theme that much more potent.

Secondly, the picturesque setting of the small village poses a sharp contrast—or juxtaposition—to the tension and grisly violence of the lottery itself. Yet, somehow, this is a time-honored tradition for this town and fits in perfectly into the fabric of the community. This sends a poignant message to the reader about the nature of ignorance and violence. We all have the capacity for great wrongdoing; it can take place in the most pleasant or mundane circumstances. In this way, the setting frames an important conversation about the insidious way such wrongdoing (perhaps even "evil") can establish itself in our own lives.

The setting is a region entirely devoted to agriculture. The main crop seems to be corn, a native American plant associated with the Indians. The lottery depicted in Jackson's story seems to be related to the ancient practice of human sacrifice based on the superstitious belief that this would please certain gods who would then provide good harvests. The superstition may have originated with the really primitive notion that planting nuts and seeds in the ground rather than eating them was a form of sacrifice which resulted in garnering more nuts and seeds as a reward for the sacrifice. This could have led to the generalization that sacrifice of valued possessions, including children, would please the invisible spirits who ruled over everything.

The normalcy of the town belies the sinister end of its annual lottery.  On a lovely June morning, the villagers gather in the town's square, near the post office and the bank for the town's lottery to begin so that the people can go home for "noon dinner."  Children scamper about, happy that school is out, talking quietly among themselves. The girls stand off to the side as the small children play in the dirt or hold the hands of elder siblings. Mr. Summers, who name befits the season, calls people together.

A small town with enough history that it has a town square certainly does not connote a location for the violence of the lottery that it holds each year.  Further, the men who gather, "speaking of planting and rain, tractors and taxes," hardly seem the type to kill someone, nor do the women who call to their children do not seem to be sadistic in any way. Rather, they appear to be  spectators of some parade or event to come.  Indeed, the tranquil setting of a lovely day with serene people deceives the unsuspecting reader so that the actual intention of the town's gathering becomes all the more shocking and connotative of the underlying cruelty of human nature. 

The contrast between the setting of Jackson's story and its characters helps to enhance its meaning and effectiveness.  Jackson's description of the setting is quaint.  There is an "other- world" charm to the small town.  It is a beautiful and sunny June morning.  The children are playing as they have just started summer break and there is an air of pristine beauty in the town's descriptions.  This helps to establish the overall likability of the characters.  Mr. Summers is a likable guy, in how he gives for public service.  He freely chats back and forth with others in the town.  Mrs. Delacroix and even Tessie share humorous insights and a sense of lightness to what is happening.  Even Old Man Warner can be seen as the town curmudgeon, the traditionalist that adds to the town's appeal.

Jackson's purpose in linking such a description of the town and its characters together helps to enhance the overall meaning that cruelty and human evil can be seen in any location and with any people.  First time readers have difficulty comprehending how these characters embrace savagery with an almost blithe and banal approach.  Mr. Summers' matter- of- fact approach to Tessie's stoning is shockingly brutal.  Mrs. Delacroix's zeal towards finding a big stone with which to assault her friend is another example of this pivot between initial description of town and character and individual action.  The bucolic splendor of the town and the charm of the townspeople help to set the stage for atrocity, causing the reader to reflect that if it can happen there and with these folks, evil is a universal reality that must be understood in order for it to be stopped.

"The Lottery" is set in a village of about three hundred people on an idyllic summer day. It is the morning of June 27th, and, though the year is not specified, the story was first published in 1948 and seems to be set in the present or recent past. Since TheNew Yorker did not distinguish between articles and stories at this time, some readers, notoriously, thought they were reading a factual report.

The tranquil, familiar setting lulls the reader into a false sense of security. Many villages have a calendar of official and semi-official events—lotteries, raffles, parades, pageants, talent shows—and over the years, certain rituals build up around these events, helping residents to feel comfortable and secure in their community. When the reader knows how the story ends and looks back over it, there are various indications that the lottery described here may be something more sinister than this. The second paragraph, for instance, describes children making piles of stones and filling their pockets with them. When read for the first time, however, the story seems at first to be describing some charming and peaceful village tradition, making the reader much less likely to guess the ending than, for instance, a dystopian urban setting would have done. The violence is all the more shocking because of the setting from which it springs, particularly if the reader is able to connect the rural community with one they know personally.

The setting is a summer day in an unnamed village, and the tranquil setting makes it hard to predict such a horrible thing will happen.

The description of the village is quite idyllic.  It certainly does not seem like the kind of place where anything bad would happen.  In fact, it seems like a normal, wholesome, old-fashioned village.

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green. The people of the village began to gather in the square …

The fact that it is a summer day adds to the deceptively calm and comforting nature of the setting.  We are lulled into a false feeling of security and peace.  Everything seems to be docile.  School is out, and the children are gathering.  It seems to be a happy time, but there is an undercurrent of unease.

Tradition is very important in this community.  Things are done the way they are because they always have been, and no one dares change things.  The lottery box is a good example.

There was a story that the present box had been made with some pieces of the box that had preceded it, the one that had been constructed when the first people settled down to make a village here.

There is talk about a new box, but no one makes one.  The stool has three legs, but no one replaces it.  The lottery goes on, because no one questions it.  Things are done this way, despite the terrible consequences, because this is the way they have been done in the past.  No one in this town questions tradition.

As we learn about the box and the stool, we might begin to anticipate that things are not quite right.  It is not until the people seem to be uneasy that the reader realizes that something might be wrong.

They grinned at one another humorlessly and nervously. Then Mr. Adams reached into the black box and took out a folded paper. He held it firmly by one corner as he turned and went hastily back to his place in the crowd …

Still, it is subtle.  As the story continues, the reader learns what the lottery is.  The “winner” gets stoned to death.  Why would a community allow such a thing to happen, just in the name of tradition?  The story’s message is clear.  We do many things in the name of tradition that make no sense. 

Although this is an extreme example, there are many cases where prejudice and peer pressure make people do things they would not normally do, or people continue acting in the name of tradition when it is beyond reason.  When you are part of a crowd, or a tradition, you substitute other judgement for your own.

Although the small village in Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" could belong to many parts of rural America, it is most likely that the setting is probably in New England. The author had lived in both New York state and North Bennington, Vermont, and

Jackson has admitted that the village [North Bennington] served as a model for the setting of the story. (eNotes, Shirley Jackson Biography)

No year is given for the time of the story other than it is early June: School has just let out, and the townspeople are turning their attentions to their crops and farms. There are few clues to the true time period: It could be the 19th or early 20th century, but certainly no later than 1948, when the story was first published.

One of the great things about Shirley Jackson's The Lottery is that we don't know when or where it takes place.  From the opening lines we know the date and weather, but these are the only concrete details given in the story.

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green. The people of the village began to gather in the square, between the post office and the bank, around ten o'clock; in some towns there were so many people that the lottery took two days and had to be started on June 2th. but in this village, where there were only about three hundred people, the whole lottery took less than two hours, so it could begin at ten o'clock in the morning and still be through in time to allow the villagers to get home for noon dinner.

Readers contemplate why Jackson would intentionally leave these details of her setting out while giving so many other details.  Most people believe it is because Jackson wants the reader to believe that the events that transpire on this beautiful summer day could happen in any town at any time.  Realizing this, she warns the reader to avoid falling into traditions simply because they've always been done that way the same way the town has.

CORRECTION: Please note that "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson is NOT historical non-fiction as described above. While the story taps into such ancient rituals as stoning and lotteries, it is in fact a fictional tale, a fable, as Ms. Jackson herself explained. You should reference the eNotes Study Guide for "The Lottery" (link below) for a thorough discussion of the story's themes. Additional resources include: Erin McCarthy's June 2014 article, "11 Facts About Shirley Jackson's 'The Lottery'" (link below), and the chapter "Biography of a Story," included in the book Come along With Me: Classic Short Stories and an Unfinished Novel by Shirley Jackson (reprinted by Penguin Classics in 2013 and available through most booksellers). The chapter derives from a 1960 lecture in which Ms. Jackson recounts the events that led to her writing the story and the ensuing effects her story had on readers (including her parents). An excerpt of the chapter is available through Google Books (link below).

The lottery in Shirley Jackson's short story is quite different from an ordinary lottery, which you'd normally want to win. This lottery decides which resident of this small, rural American town is going to be stoned to death. It's implied that this bizarre tradition of human sacrifice is meant to ensure a good crop harvest for the year, but the most of the townspeople don't seem to really understand where this belief comes from—this doesn't make them question their tradition, however.

This macabre lottery works in two parts. First, each family in the town must draw a slip of paper out of a large box. One family will get a paper with a black dot on it, which means it is from this family that the victim, or "sacrifice," will come. Then, a second drawing is held amongst only the members of this family, in which each family member draws another slip of paper. Whichever member of the family draws the paper with the black dot will be the person sacrificed that year.

The "winner" of the lottery does not get a swift, clean execution. Their fate is sealed barbarically, as they are immediately stoned to death by the rest of the community—including their own family—who have, for this year at least, been spared.

This story is about a society that runs a lottery every year in order to determine which community member will be stoned to death.  

The story begins innocently enough.  Members of the community are gathering in a central common area.  Children are playing at the perimeter and gathering stones . . . for some unknown purpose.  The reader catches bits and pieces of conversations that are happening, and everything seems like a typical, happy societal get together.  Attendance is taken in order to make sure that as many community members are there as possible.  Mr. Summers is in charge of the proceedings, and it is his job to make sure that every person and family has a slip of paper in the box.  Eventually Tessie Hutchinson's name is pulled from the box, and despite her cries that it is unfair, the community promptly stones her to death.  

Thematically, the story is about oppression, tradition, violence, scapegoats, violence, and even gender roles.  

The setting of this story is a village with a population of around 300 people. The population is the only information the reader is given explicitly about the setting of the story. We can learn more about the setting by drawing inferences from other information given.

We can tell that the village is in a farming area because the men speak of “planting and rain, tractors and taxes.” (p. 1) The story takes place on June 27th, and we’re told that this is when school has just ended “for the summer.” (p. 1) From this, it is obvious that the story takes place in the Northern Hemisphere, as June in the Southern Hemisphere would be winter.

The characters have names like Baxter Martin, Bill Hutchinson and Dickie Delacroix, which all imply that the story is set in North America or Western Europe. Mr Summers, who runs the lottery, is also tasked with running “square dances, the teen club, [and] the Halloween program” (p. 2) which tells us that the story is more than likely taking place in North America, specifically the USA. In addition to Halloween, there are references to “blue jeans” (p. 3) and “stewed chickweed and acorns” (p. 4) which are both phrases common in US vernacular English.

The setting of this story is left deliberately vague by the author. The reader knows that the story is taking place somewhere familiar but not specific, which adds to the shock when the outcome of the lottery is revealed. The implication is that these events could be taking place in any village in the USA.

All of these factors, the summer setting, the presence of the children, etc., contribute to the ironic nature of the story. Everything leading up to the climax of the story suggests that something good is about to happene. The setting, the presence of the children, and the familiar names of the townspeople give the reader the impression that it's just any small town and they are about to take part in a ritual that any small town might do. Even the title contributes to this. One would usually assume that a lottery is something good; something most people take part in willingly and hope to win. These factors all make the ending ironic, alarming, and disturbing.

Everything is really peaceful in that first sentence.  In the opening paragraph, there is talk of sunshine and flowers.  It is a completely ironic beginning, because the story is actually very dark.  I think the beginning serves to establish a happy mood, to make the reality even more jarring for the reader later.

Yes, these details lull, but only for a short time. In the first paragraph, look at the use of language. Jackson describes the lottery as something the villagers "had" to do. The boys are filling their pockets with stones and guarding a huge stone pile. The men who are gathered, are not loud and talkative. Sure they tell a few jokes, but nobody is laughing; they merely "smile." And then we have the characters Mr. Summers and Mr. Graves--clearly, they are another clue. So, using summer as the setting serves as a foil to the dark clues Jackson sprinkles throughout the story.

eNotes has some great resources for this topic.

The warm summer day has the same effect on the reader as the seemingly pleasant small town atmosphere concocted by Jackson; these details lull the reader into a false sense of security.  One of the reasons why the ending is so shocking is because Jackson deliberately chose such benign and pleasant trappings for her gruesome tale.

The setting of Shirley Jackson's short story The Lottery contributes greatly to the outcome of the story.

First, the setting of the story is ironic.

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green.

Once one comes to the end of the story, they can see how the sunny summer day and referenced to life (flowers blooming and green grass) conflict the death of Tessie. One would not expect such happening on a day as the one described. Instead, one would be able to see the stoning happening on a cold day in winter where no flowers or green grass exists.

Another way the setting impacts the story is the fact that the community is one set in a rural area. Rural areas are set apart from others, typically by many miles. Therefore, the isolation that is embedded is apparent. The rules of rural areas are very different from those of urban ones. Urban areas are more likely to move on from past traditions (at a faster rate). Locations, such as the village in the story, tend to cling to tradition and have a hard time to move away from them. It is simply their way of life and no one (outsiders) is there to contradict their traditions.

The fact that "The Lottery" takes place in a small, rural area is a hugely contributing factor to the outcome.  This type of area tends to be stereotypically isolated both physically and socially, with villagers steeped in traditions and superstitions and suspicious of "outsiders."  It is this isolation that allows the lottery to continue and gives the villagers the reason they need to continue...it's what they've done for decade upon decade, and they feel justified.

The contrast between what happens in the story and the way the setting and characters appear is what makes this such a horror story.

In the story, the village seems so nice and so do the people.  It seems like the classic place that we think of when we think of early America -- a small town with good values and strong traditions.

Now contrast that with what happens.  All these nice people just go ahead and kill one of their fellow villagers just because it is traditional.

So, the contrast is between a seemingly idyllic village with nice villagers and this horrible thing that they are all doing to Mrs. Hutchinson.

The most obvious worldview put forth in Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery" is that any custom practiced in the name of tradition could certainly lead to victimization.

In Jackson's story, the practice of the Lottery consists in the stoning of a member of the village by drawing a name from a box. There is no purpose nor rationale for this morbid form of community "celebration", and there is no point in conducting these actions either.

Although the villagers had forgotten the ritual and lost the original black box, they still remembered to use stones. The pile of stones the boys had made earlier was ready; there were stones on the ground with the blowing scraps of paper that had come out of the box Delacroix selected a stone so large she had to pick it up with both hands and turned to Mrs. Dunbar.

This passage shows how the compulsive practice of something for which there is no clear objective can enslave us into submission to every rule and regulation that the practice entails. In turn, this breaks completely with the normalcy of human interaction.The people have, at this point, forgotten what the lottery is. However, the lottery has turned them into savages. That disgraceful legacy is the only thing that the villagers have kept from it.

Notice how Delacroix and Mrs. Dunbar speak normally to Tessie just like the rest of the villagers speak naturally to each other. However, the practice of the lottery turns their relationship into a barbaric and abhorrent game of hunter and prey...only to repeat the same process in a future occasion.

Therefore, when any practice is accepted blindly and practiced without question, the natural development of things is that the practice will grow until it becomes a habit. Bad habits are very hard to break, and we are its ultimate victims.

This is a great question. The setting of the story does not lend itself to a ritualistic murder. There are at least three points in the setting that fool the readers. 

First, the settling is idyllic and serene. The setting suggests a pleasant story. There is nothing ominous. In fact, the story gives the impression of a perfect summer day. It begins with these words:

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, with the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green.

Second, the children get out of school for vacation. They are excited about summer. The reader gets the sense that they are ready to play. Again there is no sense that the children are actually excited to stone someone to death. 

Finally, as the men and women gather, they do not give the impression that they will be a murder. The men talk of farming and tractors; the women catch up on gossip and other news. 

In view of these aspects of the setting, the reader does not expect the ending of the story. 

Jackson's story caused an uproar when it was published in The New Yorker magazine in 1948, and part of the controversy was a result of the story's setting.

The story begins with a peaceful, pastoral New England village setting:

The morning of June 27th was clear and sunny, and the fresh warmth of a full-summer day; the flowers were blossoming profusely and the grass was richly green.  The people of the village began to gather in the square. . . .

This scene helps establish the reader's comfort and understanding with the characters and plot line of the story.  We are all familiar with such villages and the people who live in them, and there is nothing about the setting to alarm us.  We assume the village is one of hundreds of small American agricultural-based villages that one can find in a number of states, pleasant, family-centered, populated by "salt-of-the-earth" farmers.

This village is characterized by "square dances, the teen club, the Halloween program" and is guided by a "round-faced, jovial man who ran the coal business. . . ."  In other words, the setting is wholesome, purely American, a typical peaceful center of social life for a small group of farming people.  The setting itself sets the reader up for a whopping case of what psychologists and sociologists call "cognitive dissonance" or cognitive equilibrium," a condition in which the mind tries to reconcile the difference between what ought to be and what is--the difference between expectation and reality.

When we finally understand what the lottery is, the sacrifice of a member of the community for the continuation of the community,  we have a difficult time reconciling the idea of this village with the reality of this village.  When we realize that villagers, without any sense of remorse or regret, stone a woman, a mother and wife, to death with no sign of emotional difficulties, we realize that this village is not part of our world, despite the appearance of normality that pervades the story.  The jarring difference between our expectation and the reality we witness hits home like a hammer--in fact, we leave this story with an uneasy feeling that, despite the villagers' horrific ritual, such things might be possible under similar circumstances.  And the pastoral setting, where we expect only life-affirming elements, contributes to our unease.

I think that the setting in "The Lottery" is irrelevant, as far as the characters' worldview is concerned.  Saying that the setting is responsible for the characters' actions is the same as saying every crowded, small town will end up imitating the town's behavior.  And that certainly isn't true.

You can judge their worldview from their actions.  The characters must be intellectually deprived, for instance; somewhat uneducated, in other words.  They must not have access to much information outside of their town or region.  They must live in somewhat of a closed society.  We know this from their actions.

We don't know this from their setting.  To say the setting contributes to their actions is judgmental and prejudicial.  Again, do all crowded, small towns hold human lotteries?  Blaming the setting is giving in to stereotypes that rural people are stupid. 

The point of the story is that normal human beings are capable of atrocious behavior when that behavior is sanctioned by the majority.  The point of the story is not that crowded, small towns lead to atrocious behavior. 

Additionally,

You have instances in the story where not only is the town described as small, but also it is understood between the lines that it was also crowded. A small, crowded town sharing one same mentality is a scary situation.  It is a microcosmic stratus of the world because any place in which there is little room to grow tends to fall into chaos, because there is no organization, and the limitations are extraordinary. When one lives under fear and repression the brain and soul of the individual no longer operates under a normal tandem with the world. It is in constant self defense and preoccupation. When you have a small town full of people that are under those circumstances, the problem is bound to explode.

What you should do when thinking about this question is to think about what the setting is and what sort of worldviews people would have if they grow up in this setting.

The setting for this story is a very small farm village.  We are not told where it is, but there are only about 300 people living in this town.  So what kind of a worldview should we expect of people in such a place.

Stereotypically, people from small places have a very traditional worldview.  All they have been exposed to is their own place and so they think that whatever is done in their place is the right thing to do.  They do not really understand that people in other places would have different ways of thinking or doing things.

I think this comes through in the fact that the people really do not question the idea of a lottery.  This is how things have always been done and that fits perfectly with their parochial worldview.

I would say that one of the larger views of the world that Jackson offers is the "tyranny of the majority."  If the story is considered from Tessie's point of view, Jackson's view of social orders is an oppressive one.  The ending where Tessie's screams are heard while everyone, including her family, picks up stones to pulverize her is a vision where society's potential for oppression is viewed.  For Jackson, the individual needs some level of shields or defenses against a society that has turned against them.  I would say that another view of the world that Jackson offers is how individuals become complacent what what is and what has been.  There is some chatter in the woods that morning about "doing away" with the lottery.  Yet, people like Old Man Warner deride the idea without giving much in way of explanation.  Jackson's view of the world here is one where individuals lack the courage to be able to articulate where a world should be and are more likely to embrace what the world is.  The lack of a creative power or transformative vision that these individuals might be a part of the reason why social practices silence voices as opposed to embracing them.  Finally, I think that an interesting idea about the nature of justice emerges here.  The question that Jackson leaves the reader pondering is whether Tessie is screaming about the "unfairness" of the lottery's practice because it is happening to her or because she legitimately sees it as unfair.  Phrasing this another way, if another person would have been victimized by the lottery, would Tessie still object as vehemently as she did?  I think that Jackson's world view is also present in this idea.  Do individuals speak out against perceived unfairness because their interests are threatened or because a larger interest is being challenged?  How individuals answer this might also reflect much about an individual's own world view as well as the vision Jackson presents in her short story.

A prominent citizen of the village, Mr. Summers owns the coal company, one of the main businesses of the area.  Since he is married to "a scold" and has no children, Mr. Summers is probably not socially active in the community.  Thus, as a businessman who represents cold capitalism and is alienated from the social life by both his economic status and personal situation, Mr. Summers easily can be distant and officious in performing his civic duty.

Dispassionate and businesslike, Mr. Summers concerns himself with the immediate by following procedures.  For example, he has suggested that a new black box should replace the old, worn one.  He has been successful, however, in replacing the wood chips for slips of paper.  He compiles lists of families, heads of families and the members in each family.  In short, Mr. Summers

was very good at all this; in his clean white shirt and blue jeans, with one hand resting carelessly on the black box, he seemed very proper and important as he talked interminably to Mr. Graves and the Martins.

Yet, by the fact that he talks incessantly, there is a hint that Mr. Summers may be somewhat ill at ease about his duties.  Nevertheless, he conducts business:  "...guess we better get started, get this over with, so's we can go back to work.  Anybody ain't here?"  He waits with "polite interest" when Mrs. Dunbar says that her husband is missing, and makes a note on his list.

When Tessie Hutchinson's name is drawn, Mr. Summers's voice is hushed and he says, "Let's finish quickly."  This man without imagination, education, or courage knows only the perfunctory proceedings of business in which he has enveloped himself, so he desires an end to the proceedings to which he has been assigned.