The truth is that the author despises the boys [in Lord of the Flies]…. [His] knowledge and understanding are tarnished by cynicism, the product of a limited vision of human nature, a partial view of history and a schoolmasterish tendency to denigrate children. Cynical contempt appears time and again in the novel, characteristically in the form of gratuitous judgment by an adult observer. (p. 103)
Mr. Golding, in leaning too heavily on [an idea], causes it to split apart at the seams. The death of Piggy is an emblem of the Fall—the later reference to it makes that interpretation indisputable. But the power of Mr. Golding's art depends also upon the show—the shown significance of the 'grunt' (which 'means' more than the author's clever sneer), the smashed conch and the spilt brains…. The alert pupil is expected to register through those carefully presented symbols the ultimate fragility of the boys' tenuous grasp on sense, order and legitimate behaviour. That the falling Piggy, representative of intelligence and the rule of law, is an unsatisfactory symbol of fallen man seems not to worry Mr. Golding, whose willed insistence on administering the pill and leaving the sugar to look after itself—who hears the grunt or sees the conch disintegrate?—exposes his art as the incoherently conscious thing it is.
This is a free excerpt of 214 words. There are 441 words (approx.
1 page at 300 words per page) in the full critical essay.
Read the rest of this Criticism with our Golding, William 1911–: Critical Essay by A. C. Capey Access Pass.
