A Marxist Analysis on Class Conflict in the Novel of Sir William Goldings Lord of the Flies

In My Research Papers & Essays on June 9, 2011 at 6:45 pm

Mahatma Gandhi once declared that; Liberty and democracy become unholy when their hands
are dyed red with innocent blood (Non-violence in Peace and War, 1948).Thus far, Sir William
Goldings Lord of the Flies overarches a premise that humanity is pessimistic and corrupted and
brutally chaotic instincts throughput a characters of children. In order to have a better
understanding, this novel is first Published in 1954 shortly after the WWII and its firmly rooted
in the sociopolitical concerns of its era. It advertingly narrates London Blitz (1940-1941) where
children were evacuated from the metropolitan area: some were sent to Scotland, some to
Canada and Australia (teachrobb.com) and to provide an authentic environment to the text. Thus,
this paper seeks to point out the Ideology of Golding in Lord of the Flies through a Marxist
reading over the Class Conflict.
The Ideology of Sir Golding alludes to the Cold War conflict in between the Liberal Democracy
in his presentation of Ralphs whereas Jack Merridew is the totalitarian communism
(teachrobb.com). Since Marxists do not see any literary works as an aesthetic objects but a
product of the socioeconomic aspects. (Dobie 94) appropriately, the novel of Lord of the
Flies substantiates a Marxist principle elucidated by the Class Conflict throughput the boys
attempts of civilization and devolution. Despite the boys mimicry of the social organization that
they think would reflect the adult world realistically (Article Myriad) it turned into savagery
and bloody violence.
Terry Eagelton had stated that; Marxism is as inseparable from modern civilization as much
part of our historical unconscious (Bressler 161). Therefore, Lord of the Flies as work of
fiction is an applicable text accepts the elemental perspective of Marxism. The story revolves on
a conflict between groups of English boys who trapped on a deserted island with no grownups
survivors. The philosophy of Sir Golding and the historical unconscious of the Cold War
materialized allegorically. Additionally, to know that Sir Golding as a British naval commander
in WWII and to know some of the facts of the British involvement in the war helps in
understanding a relation to the premise of the text (Article Myriad). Thus again, the Children
Conflicts presented all through the struggle among the characters to develop their sociopolitical
system until they get rescued! Yet, Karl Marx proclaimed about the social constructions that:

It is not our philosophical or religious beliefs that make us who we are, for we are not spiritual
beings but socially constructed ones. We are not products of divine design but creation of our
own cultural and social circumstances. (Dobie 92).
Then subsequently the struggle of the groups turned to be a completed dystopian[1]society and
the children alone are the champions.
By scrutinizing the major three childish characters in the Lord of the Flies, Sir Golding uses
Ralph and Piggy together and Jack Merridew along with Roger as major characters to
portray his theory that; when Man is left in certain situations to survive and fend for themselves,
they will ultimately resort to cruelty and evilness (Article Myriad). For Ralph, he is the
embodiment of Democracy and the protagonist of the story. He is one of the oldest boys on the
island and quickly the leader and a Crouch-holder. This young boy is around the twelve years
old, well built and in the novel you would get the impression he might grow into a boxer one day
yet never to a Devil! (qtd. Golding viii). Ralph embodies democracy by the qualities of being
fair, sunny, decent with the other boys, sensible and considerate as well as the quality of
leadership stated in the novel as;Theres another thing. We can help them to find us. If a ship
comes near the island they may not notice us. So we must make smoke on top of the mountains.
We must make a fire. (46; ch.2) and through this; Im chief. Weve got to make certain [that
there is no beast] Theres no signal showing [on the mountain]. There may be a ship out
there.' (98; ch.6). However he does not understand the world around a lot and thats why he
needs the help of Piggy, still as a Democrat he has two things in his mind very clearly fixed:
(1) they will be rescued yet not when and how. (2) In order to be rescued he sees that they must
hang together! These two facts of Ralph is stated as;This is our island. Its a good island.
Until the grown-ups come to fetch us well have fun. (41; ch.2). Although to Ralph calmness
and rationality, with sound judgment and a strong moral sensibility he is yet susceptible to the
same instinctive influences that affect suicide the other boys. It is demonstrated by his
contribution to both Simons death and Piggys, stated at the end of the novel; Ralph wept for
the end of innocence, the darkness of mans heart, and the fall through the air of a true, wise
friend called Piggy. (248; ch.12) which as well shows the shaking base of the Democratic Party
through the Cold War. Nevertheless, Ralph remains the most civilized character throughout the
novel with his strong commitment to justice and equality as described in the novel; Ralph
launched himself like a cat; stabbed, snarling, with the spear, and the savage doubled

up. (279; ch.12) and when the Officer at the novel closing asked; whos boss here? I am,
said Ralph loudly. (283; ch.12).
On the other hand, the character of Piggy is a bit multifaceted, for he represents culture within
the democratic system embodied by Ralph. Although he is described as chubby, awkward, and
averse to physical labor for his asthmatic condition, Piggy still sensitive, conscientious and the
intellectualist of the island (qtd. Golding viii). Piggys intellectual talent endears him to
Ralph in particular, who comes to admire and respect him and make him the Brain Trust.
Piggy is dedicated to the ideal of civilization and consistently reprimands the other boys for
behaving as Savages; Weve got to have rules and obey them. After all, were not savages.
Were English, and the English are best at everything. (40; ch.2).
Yet, on the contrary, is the character of Jack Merridew, the leader of a boys choir; Jack
exemplifies Militarism as it borders on Authoritarianism. He is cruel and sadistic, preoccupied
with hunting and killing pigs, stated: Kill the pig. Cut her throat. Bash her in (75; ch.4). His
sadism intensifies throughout the novel, and he eventually turns cruelly on the other
boys; [Jack and the two hunters] weremasked in black and green.(160; ch.11). He feigns an
interest in the rules of order established on the island, but only if they allow him to inflict
punishment. For he represents anarchy which proved by the rejection of Ralphs imposed
order: Which is better to be a pack of painted Indians like you are, or to be sensible like
Ralph (164; ch.11). But the bloody results of this act indicate the danger inherent in an
anarchic system based only on self-interest. Jacks transformation from civilized bully to
savage killer has begun. Hes obsessed with hunting at the expense of all else, even
rescue; They knew very well why he hadnt: because of the enormity of the knife descending and
cutting into living flesh; because of the unbearable blood. (31; ch.1) Jack fears killing the pig
at first, a fear he overcomes as he sheds civilization and adopts the way of the savage, but; He
tried to convey the compulsion to track down and kill that was swallowing him up. (51; ch.4.).
Thus, his hunting mask has obliterated that small semblance of civility, for Jack had: The mask
was a thing of its own, behind which Jack had liberated from shame and self-consciousness (64;
ch.4).
However, the Children Conflict at Lord of the Flies holds the reader to a critical purpose towards
the childish constructed government that indicates allegorically a relevant of our modern politics.
Sir Golding visualizes the nave; inexperienced boys into a place where there are no adults, no
social institutions and no order yet a try to mimic the social organization that they think would

reflect the adult world faithfully (Article Myriad). The children government is shaped and it is
created out of necessity: they identified a leader by election to be Ralph; All right. Who
wants Jack for chief? With a dreary obedience the choir raised their hands. Who wants me?
[Ralph] Every hand outside the choir except Piggys was raised immediately. (23; ch.1).
Selected an item that give their society-building significance illustrated by the Conch-shell to
be Democracy that brings all the voices together. Established rules to fulfill their basic human
needs; making Fire in order to get rescued by the smoke, warmth and sheltered. Besides
initiating workable relationships with one another stated in the text:
[The boys] found themselves eager to take a place in this demented but partly secure society.
They were glad to touch the brown backs of the fence that hemmed in the terror [of the makeshift
beast] and made it governable. (138; ch.9)
Nevertheless, it starts smoothly at first yet the group moved violently. It emerged first between
Ralph civilizations representative and Jack the incivility transformer, each by his group.
These two groups are fighting each for diverse perceptions of the word Survive and Rescue;
the group of Ralph focuses on Fire, whereas the group of Jack focuses on Meat. At the
beginning of the novel, Ralph has been elected as a chief, and has the majority of the Conch,
an item of power at the novel. Yet, Ralph found Jack unpleasant by the election result so as a
Democrat who seek to please his fellows he gave him the hunters; Jacks face disappeared
under a blush of mortification. He started up, then changed his mind Ralph looked at him,
eager to offer something. The choir belongs to you, of course. They could be an army or
hunters. (23; ch.1). This was a quietly good idea, thus Jack will drive his focus on other
than Ralph being the chief. The materialism along with the thirst of power in Jacks character
prolongs after Ralph and exceeded to thought he was better and the only deserver!
Consequently Jack wanted something just to show that he still had some type of power, so he
started to dominate the Group a bit more than usual (teachrobb.com). Now Jack got the
Hunters Choir and the Meat, he is no longer interested to get rescued, gradually Ralphs loss
of boys and Meat left his slowly weaker and powerless and Jack is capitalizing on the Island,
as stated: Which is better to be a pack of painted Indians like you are, or to be sensible like
Ralph is.Which is better to have laws and agree, or to hunt and kill?' (164; ch.11) in the
quote, Jack was lecturing the other boys and declaring the uselessness of Ralphs Authority.
To sum up the Group Struggle, these boys however young are not innocent. Each of them reflects
the influence of Mans infection of Evilness. They also mirrors the Cold War terror, humanity in

the children turned savagely inhuman, two boys got killed and the others went wild and this all
explained at the end of the novel by:
The officer grinned cheerfully at Ralph. We saw your smoke. What have you been doing?
Having a war or something? Ralph nodded. Nobody killed, I hope? Any dead bodies? [Ralph]
Only two. And theyve gone. [Officer] Two? Killed? Ralph nodded again. Behind him, the
whole island was shuddering with flame. (282-283; ch.12).
To conclude, Lord of the Flies provided a political theme-tale in a children framed society. Sir
Golding alludes to the modern society between the same forces translated through both of
Ralph and Jack (qtd. Epstein 293). So, it is not a book of confrontation but a sample
that; may help few grownups to be less complacent and more compassionate, to support Ralph,
respect Piggy, control Jack, and lighten a little the darkness of Mans Heart. (qtd, Golding xii).
As a permissible perception to the Marxist critic in order to express the personal view of the
Ideology, I agree with Sir Golding attempt to trace the defect of society back to the defect of
human nature stated in; Maybe there is a beast.maybe its only us.' (80 ;ch.5).
Works Cited
Bressler, Charles E. Literary Criticism: an Introduction to Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2003.
Burris, Skylar Hamilton. What Makes Things Break up like They Do? Alternative
Explanations For the Societal Breakdown in William Goldings Lord of the Flie (1999). Web.
<http://www.rbhs.w-cook.k12.il.us/Mancoff/lofancient.htm&gt;.
Dobie, Ann Brewster. Theory into Practice. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2008.
Golding, William. Lord of the Flies. New York: Penguin, 2003.
Harmon, William, C. Hugh Holman, and William Flint Thrall. A Handbook to Literature.Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall, 2006.
Lund, Mark. Literary Criticism: A Primer An English Office Publication. Thesis. Baltimore
County

Public

Schools,

1996.

Towson,

MD.

<http://www.teachrobb.com/documents/Criticism.htm&gt;.
Smith, Nicole. Article Myriad. The Role of Government in Lord of the Flies by William
Golding(2010). <http://www.articlemyriad.com/lord_flies_government_society.htm
[1] In another words, the construction of the novel is an exemplar of Dystopia; an imaginary
place the coral island- where life is extremely difficult and a lot of unfair or immoral things
happen.
https://aalaamj.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/a-marxist-analysis-on-class-conflict-in-the-novel-ofsir-william-golding%E2%80%99s-lord-of-the-flies/ December 28,2014