I thought I would take a break from Herodotus and give Lord of the Flies a re-read. For some reason it’s been coming to mind, and I decided to scratch said itch. It’s been twenty-plus years.
Unlike Frankenstein and The Great Gatsby, I enjoyed Lord of the Flies. That’s not to say there aren’t things about it that I didn’t particularly love. I don’t love the writing. I find William Golding’s descriptions and prose trying. But the story as a whole kept my attention; I guess I found it gripping—compelling!
One thing I don’t agree with is how the novel is generally received. The edition I read (Penguin, 2016) features an afterword by novelist Lois Lowry (The Giver) and a suggested reading list. Both emphasize the novel’s purported glimpse into the dark side of humanity. The suggested reading list includes books on serial killers and police brutality. Lowry assumes the orthodox tone.
Is this what the novel is about? It was certainly Golding’s intention to produce such a view of humanity—“the darkness of man’s heart.” But I ceased caring what artists think many years ago. It’s up to me as to what the text is “about.” When we hear the title Lord of the Flies, we picture chaos and violence. Young boys with their faces painted and total social breakdown. This is not what happens.
Yes, there is violence and painted faces. But things remain relatively well-ordered for 140 pages—of a 200-page book. There is a basic democratic arrangement and a rough division of labor for 70 percent of the book. On page 71, Piggy gets punched in the stomach for running his mouth, and on page 91 Jack delivers the judgment: “Bollocks to the rules.”
That said, it takes 140 pages for the situation on the island to go off the rails. And it does—partly. The problem is the character Jack, who is power hungry, craves status, and fancies himself manly. He then gets a few young boys to fall in with him, because he dangles fun and feasts for their temptation; they (very young boys) get to call themselves hunters, paint their faces, and kill pigs. Is this a glimpse into humanity’s dark side?
Indeed, humans can fall under the spell of awful people. Last November, 77 million Americans made that abundantly clear. But, history is replete with humans supporting the wrong person. Does Jack represent humanity? A prepubescent psychopath?—um … no. And the even younger boys who follow him? Do they represent humanity? Young boys are not exactly known for their critical thinking skills; they are representative of nothing but themselves.
In the second chapter of Rutger Bregman’s excellent book Humankind, he discusses what happened when real boys became stranded on an island in 1965. Referred to as the “real Lord of the Flies,” the boys cooperated, largely got along, and conducted themselves with civility. It crushes the “Lord of the Flies” myth that people in what philosophers call the “state of nature” will tear each other apart.
So, despite the common treatment and the author’s intentions, “Lord of the Flies is a decent read. I especially like the character Simon. His mental interaction with the pig’s head (the Lord of the Flies) is among my favorite scenes in literature.
Friend Michael and I are giving Virgil a break and reading George Orwell’s Homage to Catalonia. Can’t wait.
www.amazon.com/Lord-Flies-William-Golding/dp/0399501487/
