William Golding’s Lord of the Flies is a direct refutation against R. M. Ballantyne’s famous book, The Coral Island: A Tale of the Pacific Ocean (1857). In that book, Ballantyne presents three young English boys, trumpeting the British lifestyle and its Victorian ethos to then eager young readers. Assuming that a dozen children around the age of 8~12 were indeed stranded on an island, what do you think will realistically happen? Compare and contrast what you think will actually happen with what happens in Lord of the Flies. Discuss important themes such as survival priorities (rescue vs. food), power dynamics and conflict resolution, and finally, whether you think they will denigrate into savages. Remember to identify the factors that support your stance whether they will retain their civility and humanity or descend into chaos.
Will young boys around the age of 8 to 12 be able to survive on an island and still stay rational and true to their original selves? Probably not. I agree with William Golding and believe that the children will lose their civility and rationality in a severe situation like this. In the book, William Golding shows the process of noble boys becoming savages; the boys kill each other and start adapting to the uncivilized conditions. Some might say that his portrayal is too dramatic or exaggerated. However, I agree with Golding’s idea and believe that it will be hard for children to maintain humanity.
The island they are stranded on is an uncivilized island with no residents or traces of recent civilizations. When humans are put in a new situation or environment, they will adapt to the new environment. This is human nature. They adapt to new conditions to survive; we have been adapting ever since the start of human history. If they are kept in a civilized and noble environment, we will behave in a civilized manner to survive. If kept in an uncivilized environment, one will become uncivilized, too, since they are in contact with nature. So, when they are left with no food and shelter, they will have to adapt and become more like the animals who live there. They will naturally forget about the laws and regulations they had in the past. So, it is reasonable for the boys to become savages. I do not believe that the act of slaughter or murder is moral, but it is a natural thing in a harsh environment like where the boys were in.
Savagery and incivility are sometimes needed for survival, too. Humans cannot always stay as polite, developed beings. When they are faced with a harsh condition where necessities are not prepared for them and instead have to get on their own, they have to throw their civility away and use the barbaric methods used by primitive men: hunting, slaughtering of animals, and even murder. Again, I do not support these methods, but it is natural for the children to feel satisfaction from these actions since they have earned something to help their survival.
Finally, savagery will help one gain power and support from others. A perfect example of this is Jack. He is power-hungry and tempts most of the children with food. He promises to keep everyone happy by offering them food. In fact, I think this is a smart decision since the top priority of the children is to survive on the island. In order to keep his promise, he hunts and kills animals. In contrast to Jack, who uses savagery, Ralph fails to gain the support of the majority. Therefore, to gain power and high status in this condition, savagery is crucial.
The Lord of The Flies portrays the savagery humans withhold inside them. Some might argue that this is impossible and that its portrayal is too dramatic. Yes, this is true. Young boys becoming savages and murdering each other might be hard to imagine, and in fact, doesn’t happen very frequently. However, this is always possible; even the most civilized humans might turn into uncivilized savages if kept in a barbaric environment.
Comments