As much as a happy ending may seem desirable and promising to a person, a happy ending cannot always be plausible. Ironically, however, a somewhat unhappy ending in a novel is what can oftentimes create truly great and memorable literature. In The Lord of the Flies by William Golding, a happy ending gets further and further out of reach as the novel progresses. Many of the conflicts that arise reach a point where they can never truly be resolved. Yes, fortunately, the boys who were stranded on the island do get to return to civilization, but the damage that was done to them physically and psychologically can never be reversed. If great literature is made by resolving the main conflict yet leaving enough unresolved to get a reader thinking,
…show more content…
This is what makes Golding a truly brilliant writer. If Golding had fixed all of the problems that occurred on the island, the book would have done nothing. Maybe it would have been entertaining, but it would have no deeper message. Literature is really only meaningful if it leaves an impression on its readers. By leaving the guilt, violence, and sins behind on the island, Golding makes the reader think. The reader does not walk away from reading The Lord of the Flies thinking that it had a happy ending, as they probably would have had Golding resolved every conflict. Instead, the reader walks away from the novel pondering about humanity itself. The conflicts between Ralph and Jack make a person ponder about the stability of the political system. The conflict with the beast makes a reader analyze their deepest fears. The conflict of inner savagery makes a reader question the human nature that resides in every person. Golding could have simply written a book about boys being stranded on an island and then rescued, but he didn’t want that. Golding wished to create great literature that could change a reader’s outlook on people and life itself, and in truth, real life hardly ever has a happy ending. So why sugar-coat things? In all, by leaving the majority of conflicts unresolved in the end of The Lord of the Flies, William Golding leaves an impression on his
This is what makes Golding a truly brilliant writer. If Golding had fixed all of the problems that occurred on the island, the book would have done nothing. Maybe it would have been entertaining, but it would have no deeper message. Literature is really only meaningful if it leaves an impression on its readers. By leaving the guilt, violence, and sins behind on the island, Golding makes the reader think. The reader does not walk away from reading The Lord of the Flies thinking that it had a happy ending, as they probably would have had Golding resolved every conflict. Instead, the reader walks away from the novel pondering about humanity itself. The conflicts between Ralph and Jack make a person ponder about the stability of the political system. The conflict with the beast makes a reader analyze their deepest fears. The conflict of inner savagery makes a reader question the human nature that resides in every person. Golding could have simply written a book about boys being stranded on an island and then rescued, but he didn’t want that. Golding wished to create great literature that could change a reader’s outlook on people and life itself, and in truth, real life hardly ever has a happy ending. So why sugar-coat things? In all, by leaving the majority of conflicts unresolved in the end of The Lord of the Flies, William Golding leaves an impression on his