In Lord of the Flies, William Golding asserts his view on humanity by placing his characters into what is known as a “Hobbesian trap” (which is the idea that, due to suspicion, two groups tend to both want the preemptive strike, when the better choice would be not to strike at all). In depicting the boys caught in this “trap”, Golding illustrates that because of the savagery and selfishness inherent within all humans, even those who try to cooperate will always lose and forget the flawed idea of civilization in favor of themselves.
In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes writes extensively on what he calls the State of Nature, meaning the way things naturally are. His belief is that all humans naturally work towards their own survival and desire, and humans would forget their pact with the rules of society so long as the laws ceased to exist: They would revert back to suspicion and violence without the fear of repercussions. He writes of how society would be like if there were no government and leader to keep people in line, just as it is in Lord of the Flies. If there were no supreme government, there would be no moral law because, in the State of Nature, there is no right and wrong with no common power: “The notions of Right and Wrong, Justice and Injustice have there no place. Where there is no common Power, there is no Law: where no Law, no Injustice” (Hobbes 57). Hobbes is suggesting that without a “common Power”, a sovereign, government, king, or other, morality would not exist. Morality is merely what causes punishment or reward, and these effects are specified by the sovereign. The common understanding of morality is that people do what they believe is “right” simply because it is. However, according to Hobbes, what is “right” is only right because it is allowed by the overarching authority, and what is “wrong” is only wrong because the sovereign does not permit it.
In Lord of the Flies, Golding creates a microcosm of what society would become with no common power, in essence, it is an allegory of what would happen if the world were put into the State of Nature that Hobbes wrote of. According to Hobbes, people do what is “right” and “wrong” based on the sovereign, and the reason they follow the sovereign is due to fear. That being said, on the island, the boys have no reason to follow the laws they once had, because there are no repercussions for breaking them. Although Ralph, as their selected leader, does attempt to create laws, his laws are but mere words, and “words are too weak to bridle mens ambition” (Hobbes 62). He incites no fear within the other boys; therefore, betrayal defaults as the best choice for both survival and desire. Even if it starts out with people trusting each other, once there is trust, betrayal becomes again more beneficial. With the trust of the other party, it is much easier to betray, and therefore, there is greater reward for doing so. People realize this flaw in creating a “covenant”, and from the suspicion bred from the idea that “he [who] performeth first, has no assurance the other will performe after; because the bonds of words are too weak to bridle mens ambition”, return to working for themselves again (Hobbes 62). The start of this betrayal is small, but it is significant. In the beginning, the boys choose the “rocks beyond the bathing pool as a lavatory”, because it is “sensible” (Golding 80). But eventually, many of them just go wherever is most convenient for them, and when Ralph brings the issue up, they “roar” with “laughter” (Golding 79). They diverge from the “sensible” and logical way by instead drifting towards their own self-serving desires of convenience, relating to Hobbes’ idea that all humans are selfish. Although the reason and logic that make people human cause them to come together when in fear (unified agreement for peace creates peace), humanity's main goal is still primarily to survive and have what they want: People ultimately do what they can for what is good for themselves.
However, by assuming there is unified agreement for peace, beyond fighting each other, cooperation is the most rational course of action: “The passions that encline men to Peace, are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them” (Hobbes 57, 58). Yet, many of the boys, unable to even agree with Ralph on keeping the island clean, are already drifting from sensibility and rationale. This small disagreement is the start of their differing ideas from Ralph, and the eventual betrayal of Ralph’s wish to be rescued. They instead choose to follow Jack “mutinously” (Golding 110). Golding’s use of the negatively connotated word “mutin[y]” suggests that he, besides Ralph, is also the one thinking that, by following Jack, the boys are being mutinous towards Ralph. With Ralph being written as the “sensible” one just trying to get everyone home. The problem is that there is nothing but the boys’ own consciousness and morality that will incite them to follow Ralph, but without society’s rules restraining them, the definition of morality becomes skewed. As Hobbes mentions in Leviathan, morality is created only by what is “good” and “bad” based on the consequences the authority sets. Perhaps their reason for following Ralph’s laws would be the chance of rescue off the island, but that is presuming they would rather go back to the restricting chains of authority than keep their unrestrained fun. As referenced in the “Hobbesian trap”, even if a majority of them did want to leave, with the presence of one who disagrees, suspicion again runs rampant. This challenge in opinions is not referring to normal disagreement: Rather, the opposer must be one who disregards societal morals, and harms for the sake of oneself. In Lord of the Flies, this opposer is Jack, as first shown by his indifference with letting the “irrelevant” fire go out, being too “happy [about hunting] to let it worry him” (Golding 68). He forgoes the “irrelevant” good of the group in favor of what he wishes, and Ralph does not punish him for doing so. From Ralph’s leniency of Jack, and their discrepancy in ideas, the boys become unsure of who to trust, and cooperation becomes yet again near impossible.
Eventually, most of the island end up siding with Jack because he supports what they all want, but not necessarily need. Through this shift in power, Ralph ends up alone, and must also forget his previous ties with society in order to survive, just as Hobbes wrote. Unlike Ralph, Jack is a leader that is able to incite fear within the boys through punishment. Nobody would dare betray him because if there be a “Power set up to constrain those that would otherwise violate their faith”, the fear of punishment is greater than the gain from betrayal since everyone is under the same authority’s law (Hobbes 62). It becomes that morality changes with each society because laws are dictated within those differing societies. For example, torture and murder is not seen as “wrong” in Jack’s society because he does not punish his followers for doing so: When Jack orders his followers to tie up Wilfred so he can beat him up later, Robert admits he “do[es]n’t know” why Jack wants it, but still does it anyway. He even “giggles excitedly” at the scene of Wilfred being “tied up for hours”, demonstrating, not only his compliance from fear, but also his own cruelty emerging (Golding 164). Even Ralph, who tries his hardest to stay rational, begins to forget his true goal. He starts to forget about civilization and must try “indignantly to remember” what is “overwhelmingly good” about “[the] fire” (Golding 168). Piggy constantly reminds him that the fire is there so they can be rescued, and Ralph is persistently in denial about forgetting: “I hadn’t . . . I knew it all the time. I hadn’t forgotten” (Golding 179). His repetition and hesitation suggests that he did forget; he just does not wish to admit that he’s losing hope and becoming like the others. However in the end, Piggy, Ralph’s reminder of civility, ultimately dies along with the “pearly white[] conch”, signifying the final destruction of Ralphs authority over the others along with his thoughts of rescue. By now, there are no more chances of escape, and he need only wait until his eventual death. Samneric end up betraying Ralph’s position to Jack because they fear him, and as mentioned previously, the fear of punishment is greater than the gain from betrayal: With Hobbes’ Fundamental Law of Nature comes that humans avoid punishment “by all means [they] can, to defend [them]selves” (Hobbes 59). Samneric gain nothing for themselves from helping Ralph. Hearing Samneric’s words, Jack sets the forest on fire to hunt Ralph down. Ralph tries to think of what “the sensible thing to do” is, but realizes that there is “no Piggy to talk sense” (Golding 203). With the death of Piggy came the death of Ralph’s main voice of reason. He decides his choices are to “hide” or “break the line” (attack). Although he decides first to hide, shying away from violence like Piggy would, he eventually loses control of the beast within him and “screams” to attack as he sees his weapon is sharpened at both ends, just like the savages’ (Golding 207). His “Feare of Death” takes over because of his desire to save himself. Through Roger and Ralph’s decent, Golding is expressing the same belief that Hobbes had: People will eventually forget their previous pact with the laws of society if it would benefit themselves.
On the other hand, although it can be said that Simon is ‘good’ simply for the sake of being so, it does not mean that he has no “beast” within him (Golding 35). When Simon is listening to the Lord of the Flies, he is specifically just listening. He never says anything in return: “Simon answered him in the same silent voice” (Golding 147). This along with his implied dehydration and epilepsy from his “swollen tongue” and assertion that “one of his times are coming on” suggests that the Lord of the Flies is his hallucination. Meaning that the Lord of the Flies is a figment of Simon’s own mind. It tells Simon that “there isn’t anyone to help you. Only me. And I’m the Beast” as if saying, ‘there isn’t anyone to help you except yourself’ (Golding 147). The beast within Simon is telling him to save himself from the others by letting it (the beast) take over him. Even though Simon hears this, and acknowledges it, he still shakes his head; he refuses to fall into that side of human nature, even if he knows that he, like all humans, has the ability to. Through this decision, he dies, supporting Hobbes idea that in order to survive in the State of Nature, people must always be partial to defending themselves in whatever way they can, disregarding the false notion of morality. On the island, the only real law is Nature, and the Lord of the Flies is representative of that Nature: A pig’s head invoked by Golding with the persona of Beelzebub, the devil in Hell. In other words, the Lord of the Flies is the darker side of nature that Jack “spread[s]” across the island (Golding 148). Therefore, whatever the Lord of the Flies dictates as good and bad is what becomes the truth regardless of previous thoughts. The good and bad of their previous society isn’t destroyed, it is replaced. They are both truths, but of different settings.
At the conclusion of the novel, Ralph, moments away from death, sees a naval officer, and everything grinds to a halt. The boys’ “common Power” arrives, and they revert back to how they were before savagery took over: They go back to having fear of punishment. Even Jack, who was so adamant in having fun and becoming leader, becomes a “little boy who wore the remains of an extraordinary black cap on his red hair” that refuses to step forward and acknowledge himself as the “boss” of the cruel society he created (Golding 209). It is instead Ralph who “loudly” exclaims he is leader; he is proud knowing he tried his hardest to cooperate (Golding 209). Though this pride is somewhat unfounded. If Jack had never set the forest on fire to kill him, he likely would have been killed later regardless because, in the Hobbesian State of Nature, betrayal trumps cooperation. In the end, his righteousness would have caused his death, just like Simon. Jack’s savage forest fire is ironic in that it, not Ralph’s fire, is the one to alert civilization. It is ultimately the beast within humans that rescues them, just as the Lord of the Flies told Simon. It is the savagery within humans that wins out in the end.
Additionally, with the introduction of the naval officer, Golding implies that even with return of authority, nothing changes; the beast within all humans simply becomes disguised. When the naval officer sees that the boys are British, he is disappointed because he thought that they could create a cohesive society: “I should have thought that a pack of British boys . . . would have been able to put up a better show than that” (Golding 209). He thinks this because the English are the “best at everything” (Golding 41). Ralph cuts him off by trying to make the situation sound better than it is. He says that they were “like that at first . . . before things—”, leaving the negativity unsaid, and the naval officer eventually “nod[s] helpfully” (Golding 209). The use of the word “helpfully” makes it seem as if the officer is trying to aid Ralph in convincing him. It appears he succeeds because, finally, the officer says it was a “good show, like the Coral Island”, as if suddenly treating the whole situation as fictional (Golding 209). He is separating himself from what truly transpired in favor of comparing it to Coral Island, a book completely opposite to the views of Hobbes and Golding. The officer is choosing to remain ignorant while implying that the boys formed a civilized community like in Coral Island by referring to it as a “good show” and “fun and games” (Golding 208, 209). The officer is avoiding the subject of evilness within humans even though he knows two boys were murdered. Not just any humans, but British ones. He displays the unwillingness that humans possess in acknowledging that they are wrong, corresponding to what Hobbes wrote in Leviathan: “Men . . . will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves; for they see their own wit at hand, and other men’s at a distance” (Hobbes 55). People constantly see themselves as better than others because they can’t see the thoughts of minds other than their own. Though the boys’ savagery was acknowledged by authority, the beast within all humans again won out.
As the weight of savagery feigns its dissipation, in the safe view of the officer, Ralph begins to cry, weeping for the “darkness of man’s heart”, meaning the beast within them all, and the death of his “true, wise friend called Piggy”, the one who kept reminding him of his goal up until his death (Golding 209). The officer is “embarrassed” by this crying because, to him, the boys’ crying is not as important as the war he is fighting (Golding 209). They are proper British boys and should not cry. He does not realize, or does not wish to realize, the true horror of their situation and instead watches the “trim cruiser in the distance”, focusing his mind on the supposed order of civilization back at home. Though ironically, the war he is fighting is just the same as the war Ralph was fighting against Jack’s group. Golding uses the naval officer to imply that even those who wear a clean attire with “white” purity and “gold[en]” glory are tainted with darkness (Golding 207). In this case, the officer is tainted with war, suggesting that the only difference between the beast within adults and the beast within children is that adults cover up their beast with falsity. Even more ironically, those who fight well in the cruelty of war are rewarded with cleaner and purer looking attire rather than punishment, again supporting Hobbes’ idea that right and wrong is based on the wills of society: The attire is only purer looking; the man under the clothing is just the same as he was.
The island of boys is Golding’s microcosm to the society from which they came. Thus, they end up being rescued by the very civilization they represent: A society made up of humans, and therefore a society just as prone to the selfishness and cruelty present within all humans. In the Hobbesian State of Nature, the reasonable thing to do is to create pacts and work together. However, with even one person promoting suspicion with their illogical acts, pacts are again broken in fear for life because it is impossible to tell exactly who is illogical and who is not. People are often not held accountable for harming in self-defense, but in the State of Nature, where the only law is Nature, defense of one’s life loses much of its meaning. Because of the “Hobbesian trap”, suspicion of others ends up ruling human action, and almost anything can be argued as self-defense. Even if there were cruelty beyond self-preservation, like Jack’s excessive desire to hear pigs screech in fear, it would not matter. Nature is an authority that does not care for society’s distorted views on morality. The only repercussions under its rule are what one brings upon oneself. It does not need to dictate its own rules because it ultimately wins out in the end, regardless of what humans do to themselves. This view on nature is a pessimistic one, but from the events Golding had written, it appears that this is the side of nature he agrees with: Simon, the ‘good’ side of nature was ultimately murdered by the darker side (the beast within humans that he refused to give in to). There is no such thing as complete altruism because those who are truly selfless always lose in the end. Though the boys are rescued, the society, rather, the world they represent, cannot be rescued. This is why Hobbes believes that there must be one absolute ruler. With only one ruler’s ideas, there can be no civil war, and that is the best way to maintain peace.
In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes writes extensively on what he calls the State of Nature, meaning the way things naturally are. His belief is that all humans naturally work towards their own survival and desire, and humans would forget their pact with the rules of society so long as the laws ceased to exist: They would revert back to suspicion and violence without the fear of repercussions. He writes of how society would be like if there were no government and leader to keep people in line, just as it is in Lord of the Flies. If there were no supreme government, there would be no moral law because, in the State of Nature, there is no right and wrong with no common power: “The notions of Right and Wrong, Justice and Injustice have there no place. Where there is no common Power, there is no Law: where no Law, no Injustice” (Hobbes 57). Hobbes is suggesting that without a “common Power”, a sovereign, government, king, or other, morality would not exist. Morality is merely what causes punishment or reward, and these effects are specified by the sovereign. The common understanding of morality is that people do what they believe is “right” simply because it is. However, according to Hobbes, what is “right” is only right because it is allowed by the overarching authority, and what is “wrong” is only wrong because the sovereign does not permit it.
In Lord of the Flies, Golding creates a microcosm of what society would become with no common power, in essence, it is an allegory of what would happen if the world were put into the State of Nature that Hobbes wrote of. According to Hobbes, people do what is “right” and “wrong” based on the sovereign, and the reason they follow the sovereign is due to fear. That being said, on the island, the boys have no reason to follow the laws they once had, because there are no repercussions for breaking them. Although Ralph, as their selected leader, does attempt to create laws, his laws are but mere words, and “words are too weak to bridle mens ambition” (Hobbes 62). He incites no fear within the other boys; therefore, betrayal defaults as the best choice for both survival and desire. Even if it starts out with people trusting each other, once there is trust, betrayal becomes again more beneficial. With the trust of the other party, it is much easier to betray, and therefore, there is greater reward for doing so. People realize this flaw in creating a “covenant”, and from the suspicion bred from the idea that “he [who] performeth first, has no assurance the other will performe after; because the bonds of words are too weak to bridle mens ambition”, return to working for themselves again (Hobbes 62). The start of this betrayal is small, but it is significant. In the beginning, the boys choose the “rocks beyond the bathing pool as a lavatory”, because it is “sensible” (Golding 80). But eventually, many of them just go wherever is most convenient for them, and when Ralph brings the issue up, they “roar” with “laughter” (Golding 79). They diverge from the “sensible” and logical way by instead drifting towards their own self-serving desires of convenience, relating to Hobbes’ idea that all humans are selfish. Although the reason and logic that make people human cause them to come together when in fear (unified agreement for peace creates peace), humanity's main goal is still primarily to survive and have what they want: People ultimately do what they can for what is good for themselves.
However, by assuming there is unified agreement for peace, beyond fighting each other, cooperation is the most rational course of action: “The passions that encline men to Peace, are Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them” (Hobbes 57, 58). Yet, many of the boys, unable to even agree with Ralph on keeping the island clean, are already drifting from sensibility and rationale. This small disagreement is the start of their differing ideas from Ralph, and the eventual betrayal of Ralph’s wish to be rescued. They instead choose to follow Jack “mutinously” (Golding 110). Golding’s use of the negatively connotated word “mutin[y]” suggests that he, besides Ralph, is also the one thinking that, by following Jack, the boys are being mutinous towards Ralph. With Ralph being written as the “sensible” one just trying to get everyone home. The problem is that there is nothing but the boys’ own consciousness and morality that will incite them to follow Ralph, but without society’s rules restraining them, the definition of morality becomes skewed. As Hobbes mentions in Leviathan, morality is created only by what is “good” and “bad” based on the consequences the authority sets. Perhaps their reason for following Ralph’s laws would be the chance of rescue off the island, but that is presuming they would rather go back to the restricting chains of authority than keep their unrestrained fun. As referenced in the “Hobbesian trap”, even if a majority of them did want to leave, with the presence of one who disagrees, suspicion again runs rampant. This challenge in opinions is not referring to normal disagreement: Rather, the opposer must be one who disregards societal morals, and harms for the sake of oneself. In Lord of the Flies, this opposer is Jack, as first shown by his indifference with letting the “irrelevant” fire go out, being too “happy [about hunting] to let it worry him” (Golding 68). He forgoes the “irrelevant” good of the group in favor of what he wishes, and Ralph does not punish him for doing so. From Ralph’s leniency of Jack, and their discrepancy in ideas, the boys become unsure of who to trust, and cooperation becomes yet again near impossible.
Eventually, most of the island end up siding with Jack because he supports what they all want, but not necessarily need. Through this shift in power, Ralph ends up alone, and must also forget his previous ties with society in order to survive, just as Hobbes wrote. Unlike Ralph, Jack is a leader that is able to incite fear within the boys through punishment. Nobody would dare betray him because if there be a “Power set up to constrain those that would otherwise violate their faith”, the fear of punishment is greater than the gain from betrayal since everyone is under the same authority’s law (Hobbes 62). It becomes that morality changes with each society because laws are dictated within those differing societies. For example, torture and murder is not seen as “wrong” in Jack’s society because he does not punish his followers for doing so: When Jack orders his followers to tie up Wilfred so he can beat him up later, Robert admits he “do[es]n’t know” why Jack wants it, but still does it anyway. He even “giggles excitedly” at the scene of Wilfred being “tied up for hours”, demonstrating, not only his compliance from fear, but also his own cruelty emerging (Golding 164). Even Ralph, who tries his hardest to stay rational, begins to forget his true goal. He starts to forget about civilization and must try “indignantly to remember” what is “overwhelmingly good” about “[the] fire” (Golding 168). Piggy constantly reminds him that the fire is there so they can be rescued, and Ralph is persistently in denial about forgetting: “I hadn’t . . . I knew it all the time. I hadn’t forgotten” (Golding 179). His repetition and hesitation suggests that he did forget; he just does not wish to admit that he’s losing hope and becoming like the others. However in the end, Piggy, Ralph’s reminder of civility, ultimately dies along with the “pearly white[] conch”, signifying the final destruction of Ralphs authority over the others along with his thoughts of rescue. By now, there are no more chances of escape, and he need only wait until his eventual death. Samneric end up betraying Ralph’s position to Jack because they fear him, and as mentioned previously, the fear of punishment is greater than the gain from betrayal: With Hobbes’ Fundamental Law of Nature comes that humans avoid punishment “by all means [they] can, to defend [them]selves” (Hobbes 59). Samneric gain nothing for themselves from helping Ralph. Hearing Samneric’s words, Jack sets the forest on fire to hunt Ralph down. Ralph tries to think of what “the sensible thing to do” is, but realizes that there is “no Piggy to talk sense” (Golding 203). With the death of Piggy came the death of Ralph’s main voice of reason. He decides his choices are to “hide” or “break the line” (attack). Although he decides first to hide, shying away from violence like Piggy would, he eventually loses control of the beast within him and “screams” to attack as he sees his weapon is sharpened at both ends, just like the savages’ (Golding 207). His “Feare of Death” takes over because of his desire to save himself. Through Roger and Ralph’s decent, Golding is expressing the same belief that Hobbes had: People will eventually forget their previous pact with the laws of society if it would benefit themselves.
On the other hand, although it can be said that Simon is ‘good’ simply for the sake of being so, it does not mean that he has no “beast” within him (Golding 35). When Simon is listening to the Lord of the Flies, he is specifically just listening. He never says anything in return: “Simon answered him in the same silent voice” (Golding 147). This along with his implied dehydration and epilepsy from his “swollen tongue” and assertion that “one of his times are coming on” suggests that the Lord of the Flies is his hallucination. Meaning that the Lord of the Flies is a figment of Simon’s own mind. It tells Simon that “there isn’t anyone to help you. Only me. And I’m the Beast” as if saying, ‘there isn’t anyone to help you except yourself’ (Golding 147). The beast within Simon is telling him to save himself from the others by letting it (the beast) take over him. Even though Simon hears this, and acknowledges it, he still shakes his head; he refuses to fall into that side of human nature, even if he knows that he, like all humans, has the ability to. Through this decision, he dies, supporting Hobbes idea that in order to survive in the State of Nature, people must always be partial to defending themselves in whatever way they can, disregarding the false notion of morality. On the island, the only real law is Nature, and the Lord of the Flies is representative of that Nature: A pig’s head invoked by Golding with the persona of Beelzebub, the devil in Hell. In other words, the Lord of the Flies is the darker side of nature that Jack “spread[s]” across the island (Golding 148). Therefore, whatever the Lord of the Flies dictates as good and bad is what becomes the truth regardless of previous thoughts. The good and bad of their previous society isn’t destroyed, it is replaced. They are both truths, but of different settings.
At the conclusion of the novel, Ralph, moments away from death, sees a naval officer, and everything grinds to a halt. The boys’ “common Power” arrives, and they revert back to how they were before savagery took over: They go back to having fear of punishment. Even Jack, who was so adamant in having fun and becoming leader, becomes a “little boy who wore the remains of an extraordinary black cap on his red hair” that refuses to step forward and acknowledge himself as the “boss” of the cruel society he created (Golding 209). It is instead Ralph who “loudly” exclaims he is leader; he is proud knowing he tried his hardest to cooperate (Golding 209). Though this pride is somewhat unfounded. If Jack had never set the forest on fire to kill him, he likely would have been killed later regardless because, in the Hobbesian State of Nature, betrayal trumps cooperation. In the end, his righteousness would have caused his death, just like Simon. Jack’s savage forest fire is ironic in that it, not Ralph’s fire, is the one to alert civilization. It is ultimately the beast within humans that rescues them, just as the Lord of the Flies told Simon. It is the savagery within humans that wins out in the end.
Additionally, with the introduction of the naval officer, Golding implies that even with return of authority, nothing changes; the beast within all humans simply becomes disguised. When the naval officer sees that the boys are British, he is disappointed because he thought that they could create a cohesive society: “I should have thought that a pack of British boys . . . would have been able to put up a better show than that” (Golding 209). He thinks this because the English are the “best at everything” (Golding 41). Ralph cuts him off by trying to make the situation sound better than it is. He says that they were “like that at first . . . before things—”, leaving the negativity unsaid, and the naval officer eventually “nod[s] helpfully” (Golding 209). The use of the word “helpfully” makes it seem as if the officer is trying to aid Ralph in convincing him. It appears he succeeds because, finally, the officer says it was a “good show, like the Coral Island”, as if suddenly treating the whole situation as fictional (Golding 209). He is separating himself from what truly transpired in favor of comparing it to Coral Island, a book completely opposite to the views of Hobbes and Golding. The officer is choosing to remain ignorant while implying that the boys formed a civilized community like in Coral Island by referring to it as a “good show” and “fun and games” (Golding 208, 209). The officer is avoiding the subject of evilness within humans even though he knows two boys were murdered. Not just any humans, but British ones. He displays the unwillingness that humans possess in acknowledging that they are wrong, corresponding to what Hobbes wrote in Leviathan: “Men . . . will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves; for they see their own wit at hand, and other men’s at a distance” (Hobbes 55). People constantly see themselves as better than others because they can’t see the thoughts of minds other than their own. Though the boys’ savagery was acknowledged by authority, the beast within all humans again won out.
As the weight of savagery feigns its dissipation, in the safe view of the officer, Ralph begins to cry, weeping for the “darkness of man’s heart”, meaning the beast within them all, and the death of his “true, wise friend called Piggy”, the one who kept reminding him of his goal up until his death (Golding 209). The officer is “embarrassed” by this crying because, to him, the boys’ crying is not as important as the war he is fighting (Golding 209). They are proper British boys and should not cry. He does not realize, or does not wish to realize, the true horror of their situation and instead watches the “trim cruiser in the distance”, focusing his mind on the supposed order of civilization back at home. Though ironically, the war he is fighting is just the same as the war Ralph was fighting against Jack’s group. Golding uses the naval officer to imply that even those who wear a clean attire with “white” purity and “gold[en]” glory are tainted with darkness (Golding 207). In this case, the officer is tainted with war, suggesting that the only difference between the beast within adults and the beast within children is that adults cover up their beast with falsity. Even more ironically, those who fight well in the cruelty of war are rewarded with cleaner and purer looking attire rather than punishment, again supporting Hobbes’ idea that right and wrong is based on the wills of society: The attire is only purer looking; the man under the clothing is just the same as he was.
The island of boys is Golding’s microcosm to the society from which they came. Thus, they end up being rescued by the very civilization they represent: A society made up of humans, and therefore a society just as prone to the selfishness and cruelty present within all humans. In the Hobbesian State of Nature, the reasonable thing to do is to create pacts and work together. However, with even one person promoting suspicion with their illogical acts, pacts are again broken in fear for life because it is impossible to tell exactly who is illogical and who is not. People are often not held accountable for harming in self-defense, but in the State of Nature, where the only law is Nature, defense of one’s life loses much of its meaning. Because of the “Hobbesian trap”, suspicion of others ends up ruling human action, and almost anything can be argued as self-defense. Even if there were cruelty beyond self-preservation, like Jack’s excessive desire to hear pigs screech in fear, it would not matter. Nature is an authority that does not care for society’s distorted views on morality. The only repercussions under its rule are what one brings upon oneself. It does not need to dictate its own rules because it ultimately wins out in the end, regardless of what humans do to themselves. This view on nature is a pessimistic one, but from the events Golding had written, it appears that this is the side of nature he agrees with: Simon, the ‘good’ side of nature was ultimately murdered by the darker side (the beast within humans that he refused to give in to). There is no such thing as complete altruism because those who are truly selfless always lose in the end. Though the boys are rescued, the society, rather, the world they represent, cannot be rescued. This is why Hobbes believes that there must be one absolute ruler. With only one ruler’s ideas, there can be no civil war, and that is the best way to maintain peace.
- 6:05 PM
- 0 Comments
