As we examined the aspects of the state of nature that
Hobbes presents, I could not help but draw comparisons to the novel (and later movie) Lord of the Flies by William Golding. This story, renowned
for being the epitome of allegorical books, depicts a group of boys set to fend
for themselves on a deserted island. Surviving a plane crash, the boys find
themselves alone with no supervision. No
rules. No adults. No government.
Hobbes could not have picked a better scenario
in order to explain his premises. Now the boys were exposed (momentarily) to
society and therefore could have had a bias towards the world. However, this
exposure almost entirely disappears once Ralph (the leader of one group of boys
and ultimately the protagonist of the novel) sounds the conch shell.
Immediately, Ralph, emanating as the voice of civilized reason, decides they
need to create shelter. His opposition (Jack), however, deems they must hunt
instead of Ralph’s proposal. This dispute, although seemingly a small matter,
begins to create a split between two groups: the hunters and the builders.
 |
| great portrayal of reason vs. chaos |
Throughout
the novel, the two sides of boys begin to argue about which things they should
care about the most. For example, Jack continues to be obsessed with his new
found power and constantly leads the boys into the forest hunting an unknown
“beast”. Ralph, on the other hand,
focuses on the logical ideas, such as keeping the fire lit in order to help
them get rescued. By presenting these two opposing leaders, the author reveals
a state of nature. Jack and his followers kill, hunt, and take from the other
group. Originally they had formed a truce in which the hunters would get food
while the other group would build and protect the shelters. They broke this
social contract in order to gain for themselves. Having no rules or established
government these actions went unpunished.
At one point in the story, they
kill the helpless boy Piggy in a scene of complete ruthless murder. Piggy, until his death, symbolized civility on
the island. His death represented a complete transformation and regression of
the boys. Truly living on their own and by their own means, they return back to
the state of nature when they kill the only glimpse of the outside world left
(Piggy), they truly became ruthless individuals.
Locke
explains the state of nature as a place in which everyone is entirely free and
equal. Revealing that this is an impossible system, he demands a need for a
monarch. I do not believe that the boys ever truly reached this next step
described by Hobbes. Yeah, sure Jack does seem to be a clear king but I don’t
think this is a valid argument since he never enforces any laws or ensures
social contracts. Instead, I see him as the bearer of temptation for the other
boys. He was the one who led them away from the organized government set up by
Ralph and into a state of nature.
This
state of chaos eventually led to the destruction of the civilized group under
Ralph’s control. One by one, all of Ralph’s faithful followers give into the
temptations of the state of nature and join the ranks of Jack’s killers. This
state does not last long and abruptly
ends when the boys are rescued. Had the boys been trapped there longer, they
would not have been able to stay in this state.
I tend to think about this novel almost every time the
subject of a state of nature comes up in class. I guess I can’t get this story
off my mind because it reminded me of my childhood. No, I was not stranded on
an island, and no, I did not partake in the killing of a helpless boy with
glasses named Piggy. What I meant was that I would always play house or some
other game in which my neighbors and I would designate a “king” and he would
make up the rules. Rules like: you can only move by hopping on one leg, you
can’t touch the sand because it is actually lava, stuff like that. Although I
was never made king (I was the youngest in my neighborhood I was not just a
wimp), I loved playing those games. Now that I look back on it however, I
always wonder what was driving me to listen to the “king”. Why did I not just
pull a Jack, start my own group, and go hunting or something? Besides the fact
that all of the other kids were a lot bigger than me (a few were held back in 2nd
grade), I had no reason to listen to them. This makes me think, if I were on
the island with the other boys, would I obey the leader of the group? Or would
I regress back to the state of nature?
(I apologize for the vulgar language of this clip but this excerpt sums up the story line nicely.)
(I apologize for the vulgar language of this clip but this excerpt sums up the story line nicely.)
Photo and video URL's:
http://eireneeeee.wordpress.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T45MsH6pwM4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqrREfjDS-c
http://www.knealemann.com/2009/07/lord-of-flies-business-model.html
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Piggy-Lord-of-the-Flies/186049811422020
I really like the topic you chose. Lord of the Flies was one of my favorite books that I read in high school, so naturally, i was drawn to your blog.
ReplyDeleteThe parallels you draw between Hobbes state of nature and the conditions on the island, are key to understanding the story. This is probably one of the best examples for teaching state of nature, because it is right aside a controlled state. Furthermore, it shows how an outbreak of a state of nature can weaken the control of the larger, governed group.
Breaking down the specifics of this particular state of nature is important too. Knowing how and when the different aspects of the state of nature developed is crucial to understanding the complexity of the social system on the island.
I also like the highlight on Piggy's death. This was really the moment where things started to get all too real in the book. The use of video shows this to some extent with Jack's reaction to Piggy's death, and the apathy he shows. In my opinion that is moment is where the state of nature gains full control. From this point onward until the surviving children are rescued, every bit of civilized life on the island begins to fade away. Jack and his hunters lose all care for anything outside of the social contract that they were on the same side, and go crazy. Good job in highlighting this all-important part.
I really enjoyed your post. The use of videos and pictures was well spaced, and well selected. The content was relevant, and intriguing. Great post!
I could not agree more. When we were first learning about Hobbes’ state of nature in class, I was immediately reminded of Lord of the Flies. This book is a perfect example to illustrate this state of nature. I read the book in high school and the one thing I remember most about it was Ralph’s overwhelming fear for his life when Jack and his tribe were hunting for him. I remember Ralph hiding under logs and running through the woods listening to the chants of the tribe (I think that happened …it’s been awhile). Self-preservation is very important in Hobbes’ state of nature and predominant in the novel as well. Self-preservation leads a person to fear for his/her life and kill others, which was very prevalent in the book. An example is when Ralph fears that Jack and the tribe will murder him; and more importantly, when Jack and his tribe actually do murder Piggy. I agree with Asniel, you had a very engaging post and I really enjoyed the videos. I also enjoyed your insight about your childhood games. Great job!
ReplyDeleteReading the Lord of the Flies in High School drew me to your post because I am always referring to the book and movie whenever state of nature is brought up, just like you. Just like Asneil had stated in their response, it shows how an outbreak of a state of nature can weaken the control of the larger, governed group. The turning point during Lord of the Flies was when Piggy was killed. Ralph was the left with no true friend and his group would then slowly demolish. Jacks “killers” would then become a stronger more developed group and they would change their prey, from the Beast, to Ralph. Ralph went from feeling like he had all things under control the first few to then feeling alone and helpless, and fearing for his own life. State of nature was presented in Lord of the Flies when piggy died. All civilization was lost and the boys became savages.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your blog a lot and I was glad that you made this reference because I am sure a lot of people were able to relate it to the reading of Hobbes’ too.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI am always inclined to be interested in a blog post about a book I like, and this post was superb in the connection between Hobbesian state of nature and Lord of the Flies. You were spot on in your decision of making Piggy's death scene the symbolic moment in which all hope for civility is lost. Piggy's character as well as the conch shell are both emblematic of a civilized life in which logic, order, and law dictate daily living. However, once Piggy is killed and the conch made obsolete, any hope of a socially organized life is gone. As such, the children are inclined to live in a manner that suits their personal interests best.
ReplyDeleteI think your post could have been made stronger if you commented on the fact that Ralph was actually elected leader by the group with Jack finishing a close second. This is is the initial point in which animosity between Jack and Ralphie formulates, and the first point in which opposing view points are brought into consideration. I think that the transition from an elected leader to a fearful dictator is an interesting degradation of social order to analyze in relation to Hobbes.
Your post was thoroughly insightful and your incorporation of the videos allowed for a greater clarification of your argument. It is much easier to see something visually and hear it when thinking of an example than just explaining it. Overall, I extremely enjoyed your post and the connection you made between the novel/movie and Hobbes's arguments.