Question 2. Evil in Lord of the Flies Lord of the Flies was written following two devastating world wars. The First World War was supposed to be "the war to end all wars", and yet, just twenty years later, the world entered into another war, even more destructive than the first. Many people came to regard human ways differently after this. It seemed that we were innately partly warmongering and bloodthirsty. This negative view of man might be what set the tone for the treatment of evil in Lord of the Flies, where it is presented as the inner qualities that enable you to lose sight of what you originally considered good and virtuous. The setting in William Golding's Lord of the Flies is an idyllic tropical island. Yet, during the course of the novel, the fertile, green landscape is transformed into a blazing, destructive inferno by the arrival of a group of British schoolboys. In the first few pages of the book, the boys run on the beach and swim in the ocean. Near the end, they are less like civilized people and more like savages, with more than one death to their conscience. What brings about the idea of evil on the tropical island is the mention and the following fear of "the Beast". In the minds of the boys, this "Beast" is an actual, concrete entity that threatens the group from the outside. But as Simon decuces, "the Beast" actually lives within them. "The Beast" might then be another term for the evil within the human mind and soul. The characters in Lord of the Flies can be interpreted as prototypes of human behaviour, where Ralph represents civilization and leadership, and Jack represents the savagery within the human soul. In a broader sense, we may consider Ralph as representing "good" and Jack as representing "evil". That is not the same as saying that Ralph is good, and that Jack is evil. Althought Ralph is a sympathetic character, our protagonist and one of the few who seem to take a meditative view of their own actions, he also has evil in his heart, as we see in the case of Simon's death. Although Ralph is in denial about his participation in the event, we see that he is not completely consumed by savagery. Jack is in many ways Ralph's opposite. Where Ralph assumes his leadership because he wants them all to get off the island, Jack wants it to satisfy his own need for being in command. If Ralph represents the democratic ruler, Jack is the tyrant. Because the characters are all children, an extra dimension is added to our understanding of the term "evil". Children are usually represented as innocent creatures in literature. In Lord of the Flies the seemingly innocent boys end up commiting murder and wreaking havoc on the entire island. We also commonly envision children as acting according to their natures to a larger extent than adults, who are usually more doctrined by society's rules. If this interpretation is brought into Lord of the Flies, does that mean that the boys' actions are "true" to their innate behaviour? Is that also why Ralph, Piggy and Simon, who seem the most mature, are the ones who resist this behaviour? Golding seems to imply that what we might call the boys' "evil actions" occur when they abandon their civilized ways and start acting according to their primal instincts. To what extent are the characters responsible for their actions if they all have evil within them from birth? We would find it absurd to point to a pack of wolves, and call their behaviour "evil". Perhaps we expect humans to enter a position in which they critically consider their own actions and choices, rather than being dominated by their own impulses. Ralph makes up new rules, like the rule about having to hold the conch in order to speak in assemblies, and probably expects others to be kept from the society they left, like the rule that you shoul not kill or steal. Ralph and most of the boys see the importance of these rules, because they are enforced so naturally where they came from. In society you must act according to certain rules and laws, and if you break the rules, you are punished. But on the island, there are no consequences if you break the rules. In the case of the boys on the island, they lose their sense of what is right and what is wrong when their own remodelling of society crumbles. It seems that Golding considers evil to be part of what is is to be human, and that an evil streak can be found in us all. Perhaps he also implies that society functions as a constraint to keep our innate savagery at bay, and that our true nature is similar to that of wolves. Then it might be even more important that the characters are all children, because they have yet to understand the workings of society to see why certain rules and norms are necessary. Although the book can be said to end on a high note, we find an apprach to evil in this that is different from many other children's books; all the boys that are left on the island are saved in the end, regardless of how they have behaved and what they have done. Two of the best of them are even dead. Golding telles us that contrary to what many children's stories and fairytales let us believe, good and evil are not objectively defined terms; that good will not always prevail and that those who act on evil will not always suffer for it in the end. When Ralph weeps on the beach, he weeps because he has learnt a hard lesson on what man is capable of doing. Evil in Macbeth The theme of evil is also explored in Shakespeare's Macbeth, in which the main character brings about his own total destruction by giving in to his evil streak. Here, the theme is dealt with somewhat differently than in Lord of the Flies. Macbeth is ever presented as a man acting against his better knowledge, thus is seemingly more able to withstand the evil within than the boys on the island were. Macbeth is constantly bothered by his own ill-conscience, both before and after committing his crimes. Here, evil is brouht about as the result of ambition. In Lord of the Flies, evil occures as a natural part of man once society is stripped from him. Macbeth is an ambitous man who takes his fate into his own hands, and has them covered with blood in the process. He starts out a seemingly good man, but is tempted to betray his own sense of morality by the temptation of power, and ends up a hated tyrant. Both Lord of the Flies and Macbeth implies that evil is part of us as humans, but where Macbeth urges us as readers or as an audience to take care not to act on this evil, Lord of the Flies seems to ask whether we are at all able to. We define what evil is based on what we ourselves consider to be good. The boys on the island would probably have all agreed that it would be wrong, and indeed evil, to kill and torture each other, and be horrified at the idea of organising a hunt for Ralph's head. Yet, because these things happen as the result of a slow evolution in the minds of the boys and the organising of the group, the wrong turns are not as easy to spot. This could be applied to most aspects of life; that it is important to keep a level head, and carefully consider the choices you make and where you stand. Macbeth makes the turn to evil actions in a much more conscious manner than the boys on the island; the turning point was, for him, when he made the choice to kill the good King Duncan in order to make the witches' prophecy come true. A similar turning point is found in Lord of the Flies, when Simon, the only one who seems innately good, is killed. As with the slaying of Duncan in Macbeth, the dectruction of what is pure and innocent seems to be the point from which there is no return. Even though Macbeth's turn to evil is much more decisive than that of the boys, he too finds himself in a position where evil escalates and paves the ground for additional evil acts to be committed. Suitability in primary school Lord of the Flies might be too advanced to read as a whole in the primary school classroom. Although the narrative is relatively straight foreward, without lengty descriptions or long inner contemplations, the complex thematic layers may escape and confuse the child reader, thus creating resentment towards the book. However, certain aspects might be taken from the book and brought into the classroom. One important theme book is that of friendship and loyalty. This theme is ever relevant in the primary school classroom, and in Lord of the Flies we find examples of friendships that are vital to the progression of the story and to the evolution of the characters. The friendship that exists between Ralph and Piggy is that of two halves making a whole. Ralph, with his natural authority and democratic manner, is essential to Piggy, who might otherwise have been completely excluded from the group. Ralph, on the other hand, recognises Piggy's ability for logical and sound thinking and planning. But mostly, they find comfort in each other when everyone else seem to abandon them for Jack and his ways. Friendship is always important to talk about in schools, because it defines the pupils' lives to a large extent. The example of Ralph and Piggy shows that altough we are different, we need all sorts to make up a whole. We all have strengths and weaknesses. In the extention of the topic of friendship, we find the importance of unity. "Together we are strong" might be a phrase the pupils have heard already, and it applies to this book because the crumbling of unity within the group leads to its final destruction. In connection with this, the topic of critical thinking can be brought up. As mentioned earlier in the essay, the boys' deciline into savagery was gradual, and only a few of them managed to predict what their actions might bring about. Primary school should encourage reading and a love of reading over all things. If the primary school teacher does a good job in preparing the pupils by appealing to and expanding their schemata on relevant semtantic fields, at least parts of the novel could be used in the last years of primary school. Whereas some pupils might be motivated to embark upon the entire novel, some might benefit more from reading just a few chapters and otherwise working with the story in different ways. In the end, the teacher knows best how to motivate his or her own pupils, and should consider the body of pupils when choosing literature to use in the classroom.
