Zafari 1
Sophia Zafari
Mrs. Nienstedt
Honors Civics
17 September 2018
Lord of the Flies Essay
William Gaddis, an influential political writer and critic, once said, “Power doesn’t corrupt people, people corrupt power” (Brainy Quotes). This quote is an example of a frequent motif present in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. In the book, Golding tells the story of a group of young boys stranded on an island, and how inevitably, the true nature of humans comes out, resulting in a disturbing struggle between a tyrannical and a democratic government. The ideas portrayed, such as governments and why they are needed show that Golding, author of Lord of the Flies, was familiar with the ideas of Locke, Rousseau, and Montesquieu because he showed knowledge of Locke’s belief of what occurs in a state of nature, Rousseau’s doctrine of the idea of consent, and Montesquieu’s belief of the common good.
Golding repeatedly demonstrated a familiarity with Locke’s idea of how those in a state of nature would act. For example, in the film, Jack takes Piggy’s spectacles and breaks them as well when he punches him (Lord of the Flies). Locke’s idea of how people in a state of nature would act was that “people who were stronger or smarter would often try to take away the life, liberty, and property of the weak” (We the People 4). Piggy’s spectacles represent his right of property, and Jack taking them away because he is stronger than him shows that Golding understood Locke’s idea since this is how he theorized people in a state of nature would act. In
Zafari 2
addition to showing familiarity with Locke’s idea of the actions of those in a state of nature, Golding also shows understanding of the concept of consent.
Golding also portrayed Rousseau’s concept of consent throughout the film. Rousseau believed that the people gave the government power through their consent, and that without consent, it would not be a proper government (Nienstedt Lecture). In the beginning of the film, the boys give Ralph the consent to govern and be the leader, and he is able to properly set up a shelter and a fire because he was given consent to govern (Lord of the Flies). This shows that Golding incorporated Rousseau’s concept of consent because the boys elected Ralph as their leader, giving him consent. Since they chose him of their own accord, he was able to properly organize the group and get things done without any rebellion. Because of this, Golding undoubtedly portrayed Rousseau’s concept of concept, although he also demonstrated an understanding of Montesquieu’s theory of the common good.
In Lord of the Flies, Golding understood Montesquieu’s theory of the common good. For example, in the film, when Ralph is elected as leader, all of the boys contribute and help to make shelters and the fire, because they are doing it for not just themselves, but the whole group (Lord of the Flies). Montesquieu’s theory of the common good was that people should put aside their personal interests and instead perform duties not just for themselves, but for the whole population to be benefitted (Nienstedt Lecture). Golding incorporated this into Lord of the Flies because the boys making the shelter and fire for all of them shows how they were promoting the common good. They put aside their personal interests in order to perform duties that would
Zafari 3
benefit the entire group, showing that Golding knew Montesquieu’s theory of the common good. However, even it is obvious that Golding knew these ideas, some could argue otherwise.
Others argue that Golding did not know Rousseau’s ideas of consent. For example, unlike Ralph, Jack keeps his power in his government through fear instead of a democracy. When people disobey him, he punishes and publicly humiliates them, showing that he did not govern through consent (Lord of the Flies). Rousseau believed that a government could only rule with the consent of the people (Nienstedt Lecture). Because Rousseau believed a government could only rule with the people’s consent, and Golding, on the other hand, wrote about a government in which the people did not give the government consent, it can be argued that Golding did not know Rousseau’s idea of consent. It can also be argued that Golding in addition did not know Montesquieu’s concept of the common good.
Golding did not understand Montesquieu's concept of the common good. In the film, Jack not only lets out the fire, which was the boys’ only chance at rescue, he also breaks Piggy’s spectacles, which is what allowed them to make a fire in the first place (Lord of the Flies). Montesquieu believed that the common good was something all citizens of a government should support. He believed citizens should help the whole community instead of trying to only benefit themselves (Nienstedt Lecture). Jack selfishly neglected his duties and let the fire go out, which ruined the whole community’s chance at rescue. Also, because of his personal anger, he attacked Piggy, breaking his spectacles, and in return, couldn’t make a fire, also hurting the whole group. Since this contrasts Montesquieu’s beliefs, it can be argued that Golding did not understand
Zafari 4
Montesquieu’s concept of the common good. Although these are good reasons to prove Golding was not familiar with the philosophers, it can be proven that they are defective.
Despite these arguments, there is still more evidence to support that Golding was familiar with Rousseau’s ideas of consent. In the film, the boys agree to let the conch the power of speech, so whoever holds it can speak. Therefore, the conch is a symbol of consent, because the boys gave their consent to it, therefore endowing with the power of speech (Lord of the Flies). Rousseau believed a government could only have power if it had the consent of the people (Nienstedt Lecture). The conch only had that power of speech because the boys gave their consent to it, therefore granting it the power, just as Rousseau believed about government. This evidence proves that Golding was familiar with Rousseau’s ideas of consent. On the other hand, it could also be claimed that Golding did not understand Montesquieu’s concepts of the common good.
One could appeal that Golding did not understand Montesquieu’s concepts of the common good, but more evidence points to say that he did, indeed understand Montesquieu’s concepts of the common good. In the beginning of the film, the boys divide into groups in order to complete tasks, for example one group goes hunting and another builds shelters. Additionally, Jack, along with his group, kills a pig and brings it to the whole group to all eat (Lord of the Flies). Montesquieu believed that citizens of a government should unselfishly perform duties to benefit the whole population, not just themselves (Nienstedt Lecture). The fact that the boys divided into groups to efficiently complete tasks shows that they were putting aside their
Zafari 5
personal conflicts in order to work to benefit the group. Jack killing a pig and bringing it back to the group to eat also is an example of the common good. Instead of keeping it for himself and his hunters, he let all the boys have the food, thus benefiting them all. Hence, it can be proved that Golding did, indeed, understand Montesquieu’s concepts of the common good, and incorporated them into the Lord of the Flies.
In closure, William Golding, author of Lord of the Flies, was familiar with Locke’s ideas of a state of nature, Rousseau’s concepts of consent, and Montesquieu’s beliefs of the common good. As shown by Golding and the philosophers, it is indeed unnerving to see what human nature truly turns into when there is no government.
Zafari 6
Works Cited
Lord of the Flies. Dir. Peter Brook. Perf. James Aubrey, Tom Chapin, and Hugh
Edwards. Two Arts Ltd., 1963.
Nienstedt, Laura. Lecture. Unit 1: Foundations of Government. Jan/Feb 2018.
We The People: The Citizen and the Constitution. Published by The Center for Civic
Education, 1995.
“William Gaddis Quotes.” BrainyQuote, Xplore, www.brainyquote.com/quotes/.
william_gaddis_176230.