“The Male Human Nature: An Allegorical Analysis of Lord of the Flies”
A tale of human nature, William Golding’s critically acclaimed novel Lord of the Flies explores the effects that surviving on a deserted island without the constraints of society’s rules and obligations has on a group of young boys. Golding argues that moral and societal restraints are learned, not innate, with the adolescent male mind in a more unstable balance between civilization and savagery. For the most part, Flies can be seen as an allegorical representation of society, based upon Golding’s experiences in World War II (WWII) and beyond, assigning a symbolic significance to characters and objects alike, enhancing the overall thematic concepts of the novel. As the novel progresses, the group of innocent survivors is tempted by the evils and dangers that lurk not only in the jungle but within their very hearts. A genius no doubt, Golding utilized his personal experiences from WWII amongst others to forge the symbolic meaning behind Flies. Born to an active suffragette and teacher, Golding was heavily involved in his studies, pursuing a degree in English Literature contrary to his father’s wishes. Like his father before him, Golding went on to become a schoolmaster, teaching classes in English and Philosophy, where he would later draw inspiration from the wayward children and their childish antics for the boys of Flies. Despite his passion for teaching, the increasing global conflict of WWII compelled Golding to enlist in the Royal Navy. While in service, Golding was most notably involved with the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck as well as the storm on the Normandy beaches. Arguably so, the atrocities of war and the neglect of compassion offered Golding a bleak view on the nature of human interaction. John Carey’s comprehensive biography William Golding: The Man Who Wrote Lord of the Flies, reveals that Golding received from WWII “a framework of principles...and it made him see the viciousness and cruelty… as of his own youth” (Carey 82). In an article from the New York Times, Golding said “I began to see what people were capable of doing. Anyone who moved through those years without understanding that man produces evil as a bee produces honey, must have been blind or wrong in the head" (Lambert). Flies largely revolves around the extent that humans, particularly …show more content…
In fact, Jack is fundamentally an antithesis of Ralph. Golding describes Jack as “tall, thin, and bony… his hair was red… face was crumpled and freckled, and ugly without silliness” (Golding 20). Jack does not have the appealing appearance like that of Ralph which is off putting with those outside of the choir group. Speaking of, the choir group who later turn into the islands hunters perfectly illustrate Jack’s authoritarian control over them. Lack of empathy, harsh orders, and demanding obedience are just a few traits possessed by Jack that aim to keep his choir in order. At best, Jack is a hypocrite. During the meeting that outlined the plan for survival and rescue, Jack insists that “We’ll have rules!...Then when anyone breaks em–” (Golding 33). Ironically, Jack is the first to break the rules, with the others soon following suit. Questionably enough, Jack’s call for rules serves as a ploy to enforce punishment unto rulebreakers, furthering his control over the
A tale of human nature, William Golding’s critically acclaimed novel Lord of the Flies explores the effects that surviving on a deserted island without the constraints of society’s rules and obligations has on a group of young boys. Golding argues that moral and societal restraints are learned, not innate, with the adolescent male mind in a more unstable balance between civilization and savagery. For the most part, Flies can be seen as an allegorical representation of society, based upon Golding’s experiences in World War II (WWII) and beyond, assigning a symbolic significance to characters and objects alike, enhancing the overall thematic concepts of the novel. As the novel progresses, the group of innocent survivors is tempted by the evils and dangers that lurk not only in the jungle but within their very hearts. A genius no doubt, Golding utilized his personal experiences from WWII amongst others to forge the symbolic meaning behind Flies. Born to an active suffragette and teacher, Golding was heavily involved in his studies, pursuing a degree in English Literature contrary to his father’s wishes. Like his father before him, Golding went on to become a schoolmaster, teaching classes in English and Philosophy, where he would later draw inspiration from the wayward children and their childish antics for the boys of Flies. Despite his passion for teaching, the increasing global conflict of WWII compelled Golding to enlist in the Royal Navy. While in service, Golding was most notably involved with the sinking of the German battleship Bismarck as well as the storm on the Normandy beaches. Arguably so, the atrocities of war and the neglect of compassion offered Golding a bleak view on the nature of human interaction. John Carey’s comprehensive biography William Golding: The Man Who Wrote Lord of the Flies, reveals that Golding received from WWII “a framework of principles...and it made him see the viciousness and cruelty… as of his own youth” (Carey 82). In an article from the New York Times, Golding said “I began to see what people were capable of doing. Anyone who moved through those years without understanding that man produces evil as a bee produces honey, must have been blind or wrong in the head" (Lambert). Flies largely revolves around the extent that humans, particularly …show more content…
In fact, Jack is fundamentally an antithesis of Ralph. Golding describes Jack as “tall, thin, and bony… his hair was red… face was crumpled and freckled, and ugly without silliness” (Golding 20). Jack does not have the appealing appearance like that of Ralph which is off putting with those outside of the choir group. Speaking of, the choir group who later turn into the islands hunters perfectly illustrate Jack’s authoritarian control over them. Lack of empathy, harsh orders, and demanding obedience are just a few traits possessed by Jack that aim to keep his choir in order. At best, Jack is a hypocrite. During the meeting that outlined the plan for survival and rescue, Jack insists that “We’ll have rules!...Then when anyone breaks em–” (Golding 33). Ironically, Jack is the first to break the rules, with the others soon following suit. Questionably enough, Jack’s call for rules serves as a ploy to enforce punishment unto rulebreakers, furthering his control over the