Character Analysis Of John Tate's Character In 'DNA'

I think that Kelly is trying to show how when put into a certain situation people’s personality changes or develops. In ‘DNA’ these teenagers are put in a challenging situation and tested to see how they deal with this situation and how it changes them. This is a test on society; it also shows no matter how hard you try to cover up or fix these ‘bad’ things you do, this primal instinct is still inside you and at some point it has to come out. Teenagers make a lot of mistakes, its part of growing up, doing something wrong and learning from it. We mostly make mistakes when we have to do something by ourselves when there is no adult to tell us what to do. Everyone changes in the play but not in the way we first expected.
With Cathy, this is …show more content…
The threats he uses are childish but also intimidating to those he directs it to, “you crying little piece of filth”. The pronoun ‘you ‘refers to a specific person, John is aiming it at one person and that is Brian. To someone like Brian this is a threatening approach and it very direct. “Or something”, Kelly wants to show that John has lost control of his thoughts and the situation. John has insecurity and the only way that he knows how to lead is through fear. This character could link to Ralph in the ‘Lord of the Flies’. This is because both are physically strong leaders but have insecurities about the other characters that they know are stronger. However at no point does Ralph lead through fear, he is the democracy rather than a dictatorship. I think that Golding and Kelly are trying to show that the most physical threatening aren’t always the most mentally strong and that these stereotypes have flaws. The most mentally strong are the ones that you should be frightened of. Kelly presents John Tate in a way that makes you think about primal instincts and that all humans have this, but they try to justify their bad actions and cover up with something good. This is shown when John Tate turns to God, this is a typical example of humans doing something fallacious and trying to replace that fallacious action that they can’t justify within society …show more content…
Phil is a sociopath, he has no care for society, his aim is to get out of the situation the group have found themselves in. he has no interest in interacting with the other characters unless it has the specific purpose of escaping the situation. Phil’s character rarely speaks; usually his actions involve eating, for example ice cream, waffles and starburst, he is made to sound like an introvert. Phil observes all that happens and gives calm and considered instructions to each member of the group as he as he assigns roles and tasks for them to complete. This makes him appear heartless and nihilistic. “I’m in charge. Everyone is happier. What’s more important, one person or everyone?” This comment is important because this is Phil’s most significant quote. This is Phil making them feel that they cannot back out from this situation and that this time they will be responsible for the cold blood murder of Adam. This quotation could link to the one that Piggy said just before he died, in the ‘Lord of the Flies’. Piggy said “Have rules- or to hunt and kill?” Both characters are enforcing that rules are the most effective method to get out of the situation. It ends up that these morals are the things that get them isolated from the other characters. How Phil can come up with that plan on the spot with no hesitation at all, is shocking. It makes the reader question Phil’s character, what average teenager could do that? It was as if