How does Golding use the 'beast' in the novel "Lord of the Flies"?
How does Golding use the 'beast' in the novel "Lord of the Flies"?
Read More:
Age of Chaucer-1340-1400/চসারের যুগ
The significance of the beast within the story is that it's a goat for the real “ beast,” videlicet the boys themselves. The beast is a symbol of the wrong within that's projected onto an external reality that could be real or imagined. One of the themes of LOTF is that wrong is an abecedarian part of “ mortal nature,” but another theme that's a little more subtle, I suppose, is the incapability to really accept our own wrong and the consequent protuberance of it onto commodity differently that's also natural to mortal nature. This vision is veritably settled in the process by which people interact with the world around them. People can see evil, but when this wrong is the result of humanity, people generally concentrate on the medium through which it's seen while forgetting, ignoring, or excusing the true source of it. For illustration, Simon knows there's commodity wrong among the boys. He doesn’t really believe that the beast is real, but he seems to believe that debunking the beast will relieve the islet community of its more dangerous problems. On the opposite hand, Jack wants to kill the beast. Both of these characters want to be savers of a kind, and both are fastening on an imaginary reflection of the boys’ enjoy wrong that itself has done no real detriment to anyone on the islet. Both boys are ignoring the source of the wrong they seek to master-Jack putatively ignorant of it, and Simon is in denial. Supposedly Simon didn’t hear to the gormandizer’s head on a stick veritably well. People in the real world (myself included) do that all the time. I’m always hearing that the wrong in the world is caused by religion, or capitalism, or racism, or communism, or ordnance, and so on and on, but these insensible and/ or abstract effects and ideas aren't projecting wrong into mortal hearts. Quite the contrary, it's ordinary mortal solicitations (for power, wealth, recognition, praise, control, vengeance, etc.) that produce an evil and mortal will that projects it through or onto commodity differently. The wrong within us shines through and distorts the ideals we hold, the associations we belong to, and the conditioning we pursue; but we continually deny or excuse this and condemn the vehicle rather than the motorist. We may negligibly admit the mundane, mortal source of wrong, but our conduct generally contradicts a real acceptance or belief in it. In the book, the protuberance of wrong has a factual voice and is represented by a mocking, tone apprehensive goat (the sow’s head that's emblematic of the real beast hanging the islet and the imaginary bone) that enjoys the incapability of the boys to see ( indeed those that feel to want to see) the true source of their problems. It laughs at Simon while telling him, although kindly cryptically, the verity. It laughs because it knows that Simon, like utmost other humans in his situation, won't really understand or accept what it has to say, despite it giving him a veracious answer as to why everything is a bad business.
No comments: