Skip to main content

Lord of the Flies

One of my classes is reading this classic novel by William Golding, who uses it to express the dangers of lawlessness. Set on a lush and isolated island, several boys have flown from Great Britain, in the throes of World War II, only to crash and be left alone. Golding's theme-- that civil behavior between people will dissolve without the structure of rules-- revolves around and is informed by a growing conflict between two boys who represent discipline, on the one hand, and leisure on the other. There is an irony in the characters who represent these two sides, for the one who begins carefree-- the protagonist and "chief," named Ralph-- becomes increasingly preoccupied with maintaining discipline for the sake of rescue; while the other, Jack, is introduced as an exacting and efficient leader of a boys' choir, but whose interest turns almost exclusively to the fun of hunting pig. Ralph's interest in maintaining a smoke signal becomes obsessive, as does Jack's need to hunt pig. These two objects-- smoke and meat-- become symbols of civilization and savagery, respectively, and it is because most of the boys choose the latter that civil behavior breaks down and two of the boys are killed.

One of these two, whose real name is never mentioned but whose weight has led him to be nicknamed "Piggy," is himself a symbol. Derided by most of the others throughout the story for openly expressing his cowardice and for his vocal disapproval of others' behavior, it is Piggy's plainspoken wisdom that keeps Ralph grounded and whose encouragement acts as a buffer against Ralph's own desire to become like the others, the "savages." Piggy thereby represents all that is good in the human heart, and his death later on symbolizes the death of the boys' innocence. Golding says as much on his final page: "Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man's heart, and the fall through the air of the true, wise friend called Piggy." Piggy's death-- he was knocked off a cliff by a tumbling boulder-- was orchestrated by these selfsame savages. Along with Ralph, Piggy acted as the group's conscience. It is telling that the object Piggy so revered as a sign of orderliness and right authority-- a shell, or conch, that Ralph uses to call the others to assembly-- shattered in his hands as the boulder struck and killed him.

Mixed into this plot is a ghost character that acts as yet another symbol. This is "the beast," a fictitious monster that the boys increasingly believe to be present on the island. Their worries are apparently realized when two of the boys discover by night the body of a dead pilot, whose tangled parachute animates him by capturing the wind and lifting him up. It is this certainty that there is now a threat on the island that turns them toward defending themselves with spears, the very weapons they turn in time on each other.

All in all, Lord of the Flies is a warning against unchecked freedom, and seems therefore to be the antithesis to George Orwell's 1984, which is a warning against unchecked authoritarianism. The novel was useful for its message, and Golding characterized the main boys in such a way that you were enthralled by a climax in which they were finally pitted against one another. It is useful to remember, however, that when the two boys are fighting, so are the notions of order and an indifference to order, of humanity and savagery, of light and dark. It is this larger battle-- between the classic but realistic good versus evil, the timeless inward struggle between two natures-- that draws in Golding's reader and compels us to root for Ralph. Lord of the Flies, so named for a pig head that the savages piked on a spear and left as obeisance to "the beast," thus offers a clear warning against choosing to become the savage in all of us.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Heroes

Although we have several examples of heroes in our day, one of the best known is of a woman named Agnes Gonxhe Bojaxhiu (“Gonja Bojaju”), who devoted her life to sustaining the “poor, sick, orphaned, and dying.” Her venue was Calcutta, India, where she served as a teacher until she began to take notice of the poverty there. Seeking to do something about it, she began an organization that consisted of just thirteen members at its inception. Called the “Missionaries of Charity,” the organization would eventually burgeon into well over 5,000 members worldwide, running approximately 600 missions, schools and shelters in 120 countries; and caring for the orphaned, blind, aged, disabled, and poor. As her personal work expanded, she traveled to countries like Lebanon, where she rescued 37 children from a hospital by pressing for peace between Israel and Palestine; to Ethiopia, where she traveled to help the hungry; to Chernobyl, Russia, to assist victims of the nuclear meltdown there; and to ...
2 comments
Read more

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...
2 comments
Read more

Comparative Medical Care

One thing I'd like to understand is why there is such a difference between medical costs here and those in Haiti. At the time the book Mountains Beyond Mountains was written, in 2003, it often cost $15,000 to $20,000 annually to treat a patient with tuberculosis, while it cost one one-hundredth of that-- $150 to $200-- to treat a patient for the disease in Haiti. Even if the figures aren't completely accurate, the sheer difference would still be there. Indeed, the United States pays more per capita for medical care than any other country on Earth. My first guess for why the disparity exists is that there is a market willing and able to pay more for medical treatment, so suppliers see the demand and respond with higher prices. According to at least one doctor (go to http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/what_is_the_cause_of_excess_co.php), part of the reason is administrative prices here. People here have a higher standard of living, and so the cost of care is shifted to ...
2 comments
Read more