| المستخلص: |
As old as Abel and Cain the dichotomy of good and evil has been concentrated on. Such a dichotomy is repeated throughout history, specifically during and after wars. As a result of World War II, abhorrence and violence are shown in people’s behaviour broadly. It is thought that people’s behaviour is affected by the nature of the environment they live in. However, other factors like the political system or the society are blamed for these evils too. Good and evil are represented in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies (1951) in a unique way to prove that the eternal battle between them continues. The two concepts are first introduced, followed by analyses of the most important characters and the impact of nature and nurture on the events. The purpose of such analyses is to discover and comprehend the background of people’s behaviour and the motives that lead people to behave badly. Hence, through a critical analysis to the novel, the individual’s responsibility towards evil will be expressed and a society change by transforming the individuals will also be shown Good and evil are two concepts dealt with by each person every day; often unconsciously. However differently each person perceives them, sometimes one happens to wonder where one’s sense of morality comes from, and what the source of one’s particular actions or beliefs is. Furthermore, there is a question of why one should try to be good, for every person has limitations and somewhat tends to act wrongly. As Oswald Chambers remarks: “All noble things are difficult,” and one naturally and inevitably fails in one’s struggle for goodness. Nonetheless, it seems that it can provide one with a sort of deep, inner happiness-it seems to be worth it, although it is impossible to achieve. Morality is one of Golding’s concerns; good and evil are most visible in the actions of characters. Golding states in his essay Fable that “man produces evil as a bee produces honey”. Evil is a part of man’s nature.(73) The genre of Lord of the Flies: fable-like-or parable-and mythic-like-narrative, presents a challenge both to the reader and the critic regarding content. With some unanswered questions, with difficult symbols, and with no clear conclusion, it is not easy to decode William Golding’s specific message of a story like this. Nevertheless, this does not have to be a bad thing, for this kind of writing, demanding the reader’s part in interpreting the story. Kinkead-Weekes and Gregor comment that “even in his first novel, it is not explanation and conclusion, but imaginative impact which is finally memorable” (64). Without imagination there will be no clear comprehension to the whole events. Golding’s writing as well as his life experience will be explained further. To begin with, Golding’s intention of writing LORD OF THE FLIES is to shed light on “an attempt to trace the defects of society back to the defects of human nature. The moral is that the shape of a society must depend on the ethical nature of the individual and not on any political system however apparently logical or respectable” (qtd. in Spitz 22; Epstein). In other words, man must be aware of different kinds of powerful effects. Likewise, man, to Golding, has to be ethical by himself; his morality must not be imposed upon him by any social, political, or religious authority.
|
