Gibran And Lord Of The Flies Analysis

737 Words3 Pages
In William Golding’s, Lord of the Flies and Khalil Gibran, The prophet, their extremely different views of good and evil are apparent. Golding proclaims that evil is in everyone and that they are born with it from the beginning. On the other hand, Gibran suggests that everyone is inherently good and born pure, and evil is just being lost or uninspired.

Golding seems to imply that when the group of boys abandon their civilized ways they start acting according to their “primal instincts” or evil ways. Because the boys have realized that there are no consequences to their actions they lose their sense of what is right and what is wrong therefore there remodelled society fails. According to Golding the evil, or beast in his case, has been inside the boys from the moment of birth, but because
…show more content…
Humans? Or animals? Or savages?” (Golding 91) further showing that Piggy’s higher progression in maturity lead him to understand that maybe there is no beast and it was them all along. Golding also places two categorical groups in the boys, one is more of the civilized group which includes, Ralph, Piggy, Samneric, and Simon. On the other hand the wilder group lead by Jack. We can see that Jacks group is larger and more interested in killing pigs than actual rescue. Furthermore enhancing our knowledge of whether the beast is real or not the author places simon in understanding of the beasts true nature in which is not a physical monster but one that is mental. Simon discovers this in a perhaps hallucination of the pigs head stuck to a stick (The Lord of the Flies). ‘Aren’t you afraid of me?...Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill!’ said the head.” (Golding 143) This lead simon to fully understand the beast. But, when returning to tell the rest of the tribe, he gets mistaken as the
Open Document