Lord of the Flies

Lord of the Flies

eGrant Johnson Per 4 Last Draft0- The Allegory of Life William Golding’s Lord of the Flies consistently contrasts with the morality-driven views of the questionable philosopher Frederick Nietzsche. Golding’s allegorical unique tells the story of a group of young boys who stay stranded on an island and left to their own instincts. Golding and Nietzsche would argue the problems the kids face are based upon the morality and nature of man. Ralph, the protagonist, is delegated power by the other boys, while Jack, the antagonist, quickly ends up being envious of Ralph’s power.

In Lord of the Flies, the conch, the masks, and the “lord of the flies” represent civilization, liberty and wicked respectively. Golding supports a Judeo-Christian order, in which society designs morality and evil influences worry; Nietzsche on the other hand argues that guy must follow individual morals which evil will outgrow an ongoing battle for power. Nietzsche would point to the contrast between the people of Ralph and Jack to support his belief that yes-saying ought to prevail over no-saying; that is, individual ideals should take precedent over social perfects.

Golding’s interpretation of the conch, the masks and the lord of the flies contrasts with Nietzsche’s ideas of morality and the nature of guy and of society. Upon getting here on the island, Ralph finds a conch that the boys utilize to call and manage their assemblies. Golding utilizes the conch to represent the society and federal government which the kids construct. At the start of the book, the shell represents their civility and order since they seem to follow and appreciate its powers. “Where the conch is, that’s a meeting … We have actually got to have rules and follow them. After all we’re not savages” (Golding 42).

Unidentified to the reader at the time, this quote is rather ironic as the boys will later on lose control and end up being savages contending for food and survival. Golding believes that civilization offers structure for man just as the conch provides order for the boys. Without civilization, male would rely on his impulses, naturally leaving him fearful in the absence of the morality and standards which have assisted him through life. From worry, Golding argues, evil deeds are dedicated. Golding likewise believes that morality is a social construct which without society morals disappear. These ideas are seen in Lord of the Flies.

When Ralph and Jack split up, separating their society and presenting Jack’s group to savagery, morality and order rupture and gradually fall apart. Jack and his “savages” end up being fixed on the bloodthirsty murder of pigs, constantly shouting, “Eliminate the monster! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!” (G 152), showing they do not have peace of mind and morality, while Ralph and the others that remain stay ethical and “… worked … with great energy and cheerfulness …” However, for Ralph’s people, “… as time crept by there was an idea of panic in the energy and hysteria in the cheerfulness” (G130).

Although Ralph’s people attempts to remain real to the conch, a sense of fear remains as the need for survival boosts. In a final meeting of the 2 people towards the end of the book, it’s clearly evident that society breaks down as Ralph and Jack wind up in a brawl after the conch breaks. “Viciously, with complete intent, he tossed the spear at Ralph. The point tore the skin and flesh over Ralph’s ribs … Ralph stumbled, feeling not pain, however panic” (G 181). Once the conch broke, so did all morality and order. Subsequently, the boys combat to the death.

Golding’s views on civilization that morality develops from community manifest itself in the kids’ use of conch in his book, Lord of the Flies. Nietzsche, straight contrasting Golding, thinks that morality should be determined by people rather of society. “Every choose guy aims instinctively for a castle and a personal privacy … where he might forget ‘males who are the rule”‘ (WP 26). Nietzsche agrees that society forms a sense of morality, but he dislikes this because he thinks that one shouldn’t follow a “herd mindset.” Rather, he advocates setting and following one’s own morals.

However, he comprehends that this is tough, and most of society will follow the established stylish values. Nietzsche thinks that, in this context, being a yes-sayer ways following your own morals and not those set by society. He also thinks that all actions in society must result from the person will to get power. This dispute in between society and individual flexibility plays out through Roger, among Jack’s partners, who early on tossed rocks for enjoyable preventing “a space round Henry, possibly 6 backyards in diameter …” that symbolized, “… the taboo of the old life” (G 62).

Roger avoided Henry out of respect for the social requirements that he followed. However as the book advances, Roger’s animalistic ways take over and “… with a sense of delirious desertion …” (G 180) he murders Piggy, one of the other young boys. For that reason, Nietzsche would approve of Roger, whose actions become based upon a will to power, instead of Golding who would argue that Roger acts out of fear. In several scenes in the middle of the book, the young boys put on masks to cover their unclean faces, allowing themselves liberty from a herd mindset which Nietzsche would authorize of this.

When the young boys place on the masks, they lose their private identities. In essence, they release themselves from the weight of morality, and this permits them to commit otherwise unthinkable acts. “The mask was a thing of its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from pity and self-consciousness” (G 64). Nietzsche would like that the masks enable the kids to follow their own ideas and develop their own artistic path, something he highly supports and says can be achieved “… through long practice and daily work at it” (WP 290). The masks remove the kids’ individual identity, enabling them to disobey civilization’s morals while preventing pity.

However, while Nietzsche would approve of their flexibility, he would the requirement to use the masks. In his view, the boys need to accept their true selves to be complimentary instead of concealing behind the masks. Nietzsche believes that the boys should be yes-saying since they need to be strong adequate act freely according to their own impulses, without regret or pity. Golding believes that the use of the masks allows them to conceal their pity and also allows them to end up being savages. Golding believes that the young boys hesitate of revealing their embarassment so they quelch it by using the masks to prevent the ostracism from society.

The masks give the boys liberty, but Golding believes this threatens due to the fact that excessive freedom gives way to impulses which eventually lead to savagery. While using the masks the boys are “… not much better than uncaged beasts …” (Gen. 22. 13). Golding explains Jack, “… His sinewy body held up a mask that drew their eyes … He started to dance and his laughter became blood thirsty snarling” (G 64). Golding efforts to show how the masks impact the young boys as they lose touch with themselves. Golding would argue that the young boys abandon the need to follow the guidelines when they use the masks.

Without the masks the young boys compulsively feel the need to follow rules. The hierarchy of society keeps guy accountable for his actions, as Jack let the fire gone out Ralph madly states to him, “There was a ship … you might have had everyone when the shelters were finished. But you needed to hunt … there was the brilliant world of hunting, tactics, intense enjoyment, ability; and there was the world of yearning and baffled commonsense … Jack was helpless and raged without understanding why” (G 71-72). Ralph’s management over Jack and the others is evident here as madly resets order, and the others rapidly accept.

Without their masks, Golding would argue that the young boys’ liberty is limited by society; something that he thinks is simply. The sow’s head, called “lord of the flies”, represents the evil that the boys dedicate on the island. “The head hung there, a little blood dribbling down the stick … the Lord of the Flies hung on his stick and grinned” (G 138). Golding attempts to show to the reader that evil exists in all of us. In the mind of Simon, the head comes alive and states to him, “I belong to you … I’m the reason that it’s no go … you know perfectly well you’ll only meet me down there [too] (G 143).

This meeting between the lord of the flies and Simon shows the reader the pig’s evilness as he confesses “I become part of you” and it also underscores Golding’s point: he believes that evil is inescapable; throughout the book, every character devotes acts of evil. Simon is the one exception, whose calm nature can be described as un-human, or god-like, and more mature than the other boys, his eyes “… Dim with the infinite cynicism of adult life” (G 137) showing his overbearing adult-like supremacy.

Many people argue that Simon is a direct parallel to Jesus, as the scene when he talks to the pig is similar to Jesus’ discussion with the devil. Simon is also used as a foil to all the other young boys on the island to reveal their absence of humility and maturity. The kids place the pig’s head on the stick to fend off their fears, ultimately producing worry and fear of survival. The pig embodies the wicked acts dedicated by the young boys out worry. Nietzsche counters these ideas with his belief that fear is weak and that yes-saying morality is essential to avoiding evil.

Nietzsche would concur and disagree with Golding on numerous points relating to worry and evil. Initially, he would argue that male shouldn’t allow worry to manage one’s actions. Rather, guys ought to become yes-sayers and avoid the fear that makes them weak. Male must be strong enough to take control of his life instead of letting fear control him. Nietzsche would agree with Golding that Simon represents a god-like being that isn’t affected by evil due to the fact that he thinks that someone needs to set standards, but one can follow his own path comparable.

Nietzsche alludes to this point by stating, “… simply ask yourself who is in fact ‘evil’ in the sense of morality of ressentiment” (Gen. 22. 3), speaking of his dislike of the adversely driven morality that is produced by lots of societies. Golding’s unique Lord of the Flies utilizes powerful signs to represent the essential cultural attributes of civilization, morality, liberty and evil. Golding utilizes the conch, the masks and the lord of flies to communicate his Judeo-Christian beliefs, which stand in contrast to Frederick Nietzsche’s morality-driven views.

Nietzsche would argue that a person who is strong is someone that can follow their own creative path instead of following society’s path, yes versus no saying. Golding represents these concepts through the conch which the kids use to govern their neighborhood and with the decay of the conch came the decay of order. The masks are used for the young boys to conceal their pity and devote barbarous acts, Golding would argue, while the lord of the flies is utilized to embody the evil that the kids devote on the island. Lord of the Flies is an effective depiction of the very best and worst of humanity that can exposed at all times. Word count: 1,859

This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar