Lord Of The Flies Literary Analysis

During the bloodless Glorious Revolution, John Locke wrote that humans were innately good and kind, and usually make mistakes that are the result of bad influences. Thomas Hobbes, on the other hand, being alive during the violent English Civil War, believed humans were evil and cruel and needed dictatorship in order to contain them and their dark tendencies. usually make mistakes that are the result of bad influences. From the 17th century, the ideas of these great philosophers have persisted even into the 20th century literature that we study today. William Golding and Kahlil Gibran, another pair of great thinkers, profess their beliefs on this subject in their works. In Golding’s novel Lord of the Flies, he illustrates that humans are …show more content…
As time progresses, the boys on the island are unable to control the evil inside of them and grow more cruel and savage. For example, the boys start playing a hunting game that quickly becomes violent when they start attacking another boy on the island, and we see the release of the contained savagery in the thoughts of one of the boys as“The desire to squeeze and hurt was over-mastering” (Golding 115) Golding is depicting their utmost desires and tendencies, which are dangerous and cruel. The whole novel clearly draws the conclusion that the nature of man is evil, as said in the last few phrases of the book, “Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart…” (Golding 202). These words express that man’s heart is inherently dark, not affected by bad influences or protruded by evil. Golding reveals this evil through the metaphor of the “beast,” a creature on the island that the boys first think is a physical monster but slowly discover it is attacking them from the inside. This becomes a known fact when discussing the beast, one of the boys realizes, “What I mean is… maybe it’s only us” (Golding 89). According to Golding, the beast is the evil inside of them, and every human. Readers learn it won’t go away and is unable to be destroyed when the beast “talks” to one of the boys, saying, “Fancy thinking the beast was something you could hunt and kill!” (Golding 143) Golding is …show more content…
According to the poet, “Evil” is not the default label when someone is not “good.” He establishes this message in his poem “Good and Evil” through the use of metaphors: “You are good when you are one with yourself. Yet when you are not one with yourself you are not evil. For a divided house is not a den of thieves; it is only a divided house” (Gibran 4-6). Gibran is stating that certain attributes can be good, but if you do not have them that does not make you evil. It is good to be one with yourself, but if you are not for a little while that is okay. A divided house is not good, but that doesn’t make it something terrible like a den of thieves. Gibran explains that a lack of goodness is natural and are usually moments of weakness in life by asking, “For what is evil but good tortured by its own hunger and thirst? Verily when good is hungry it seeks food even in dark caves, and when it thirsts it drinks even of dead waters” (Gibran Line #). Not everyone is always able to be strong and good. Sometimes moments of weakness, or so called “evil,” can help a human grow and change. Gibran gets this idea across by reasoning, “You are good when you are fully awake in your speech, Yet you are not evil when you sleep while your tongue staggers without purpose. And even