Well every child is different, especially if they are stranded in an island. Most of the children there acted either because of selfishness, hunger for power, or being a follower. The author wants us to see the inner child. For example Jack, he wants power and respect and he does all of the wrong things to get it. Even Piggy wants to be done with Ralph. It is this inner strength that wills them to do and think such things. Some are portrayed as innocent. The Little´uns are not really part of the fights or decisions because they are shunned from it. Some children must learn to survive even if it means being evil. But then again, what is the point of being evil when they could have gotten along perfectly?
First of all I think that in the book Lord of the Flies, the children aren't portrayed as innocent like when they were in the beginning of the book. In responding to Jimena's question, the reason why they couldn't have gone perfectly was because of the desire of power between Ralph and Jack. Being stranded in an island is always going to require competition. This situation can be connected to the outside world. There is always going to be the desire to compete. Therefore, the kids had to choose wether if they wanted to be following Jack or Ralph. Eitherways, they all lost their innocence at some point of the book. An example could be when they kill Simon. They might have not noticed right at the moment that they were being savages but they I think that they were totally inhumane and they had lost control of what was happening.
I completely agree with Hani. At the beginning of "The Lord of the Flies", the children were portrayed as innocent. The boys had recently landed in a desert island and they missed the people they were dependent on (their parents). However, as the plot progressed, the children began losing their innocence. This loss wasn't in vain, for it was interchanged for survival, a key element at being in the island. Survival may indeed involve things that civilization might consider barbaric and very wicked, but what other choice do the children have but to perish?
The innocence and the behavior of a certain infant depends on his or hers surrounding. If a child is raised in a civilized environment, he or she will most likely to be mannered and polite. However, if a kid does not have people who support or guide, he or she is will most likely develop into a corrupt individual. Again, in many cases this theory may not be applied, but it's fairly possible. The Lord of the Flies is a great example in which demonstrates that if infants do not have guidance, they eventually loss their innocence.
I agree with Sergio agreeing with Hani. It is true at the begining of the novel they were innocent. Remember when Jack saw the piglet and was about to hit the piglet, but he hesitated? That symbolizes how Jack at one point scared to lose his innocence. But, again they are not innocent all through the book. When Jack's group starts singing there chant and how they are going to kill the beast, demonstrates how they lost there innocence and are chanting about the los of innocence. "Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!"(186).
The only innocent child on the island was Simon, and look where that got him. Yes, they were innocent in the beginning. But their island underwent a period of very rapid change. The leader of this change was, of course, Jack. Innocence had started an epic battle with guilt. However, most boys tried to keep their emotions bottled up, except for every now and then when they would deny their wrongs, which is just another example of guilt. No one wanted to admit to innocence, because they would be portrayed as weak and undesirable. Such an incident occurred with Simon, when he was on the verge of declaring the others' guilt, and it got him brutally killed,
Some of the kids in Lord of The Flies were innocent but some weren't, for example Jack. I think that at the beginning of the novel, his fist impression in the book didn't help him, because he treated piggy bad, and for me it made him look not innocent, I could tell that he would be rude, and capable of even killing for what he wanted. An example of some innocence would be Simon, and Piggy. At the very beginning of the book they did nothing but listen to their leaders. Piggy for example,when he told his nickname to Raplh and Ralph kind of made fun of it, Piggy didn't throw himself at Raplh, he simply allowed it.
I agree with everyone who says that the children are most definitely NOT innocent. These children have killed animals and eventually humans, like Simon, and have become savage and have painted their faces and enjoy to hunt and chant in a blood-thirsty monotone.
At first the boys are very innocent in my opinion. All except Roger, he always gave me the impression of being an angry loner kind of guy. As the story goes on you see the older childeren like Jack become less innocent, this looks very powerful of course, and perhaps a little cool too. So the the little kids follow along, because they want safety, and to belong somewhere. Overal I think that the childeren at first choose to follow a less innocent person, and in the end they get lost in the idea and become just as wild as the rest. The only person that I don't think lost ANY of his innocense is Piggy, well for Piggy's level maybe. He raised his voice, that must be a big deal for a whimp like piggy.
i disagree with Kevin and kindoff agree with suzy. Not all the kids are guilty. the only people that kill human were JACK and ROGER. and when simon died it was a confusion, because they didn't know. and not ALL of them killed animal. it was just some of them, so i think that some of the kids are innocent.
Only two children are not innocent, Jack and Roger. Since the beginning Jack is portrayed as arrogant, violent and angry. Roger is said to take pleasure in physically hurting other people even before his stay in the island. Asides from them, the rest of the kids are innocent. When Ralph laughs at Piggy's nickname, he does not seem to do it with the intention of humiliating him. Likewise with the other kids, in the beginning they do not intend to hurt others, but once they become "savage" then they do. However, Golding, as Jimena said, wants us to see the inner child, and for him, "evil" was in inside everyone. I agree with him. Even though kids are often seen as innocent, they are capable of doing what moral values and dogmas consider as evil and with intention; "When you are pushed, killing is as easy as breathing." Such is the case of people like Vlad Tepes and Erzèbéth Bàthory, they were cruel and sadistic by nature.
I agree with Sergio and Hani, they are completely right because as the story goes along you can see different events that connect to eachother help them on the way of losing their innocence. For example, Jack´s first encounter with a pig is when he hesitates with killing it and it runs away, that feeling of self dissapointment consumed him and made him crazed about hunting and killing where we see Jack loosing his innocence in a way of not caring about nature or animals. When usually kids are inlove with it.
I partially disagree with Erika. I believe almost all the boys in the island somewhat developed into a not innocent individuals. All of them took an equal part in the murder of Simon. This group crime shows how savage All the boys were
hadar but they didn't know that it was simon, if they did know then they would of stopped. i still think that not all of them were guilty.some of then are innocent. the only one that i think wouldnt care would be jack. he is not innocent. some of the kids ARE innocent.
There is a Guatemalan saying that says: God creates them, the Devil raises them.Although this has a different meaning and is not related to the topic it could be applied to the book.God (the good) creates them as innocent, the Devil (the bad) raises them. They start out good but become bad.
I believe that everyone started as with innocence. By the time they reached the island where they had to kill to survive they lost their innocence. It was crucial for the boys to lose their innocence in order to have had survived the island. I believe all people are born with innocence. But, at certain point of there lives they decide to lose there innocence.
The innocence of the children on the island changes as the story develops and more problems flourish.In the beggining, the children look at the bright side of the accident and try to be positive. However, as hate starts developing and violence starts, the wanting of power makes their "innonce" slowly vanish.
The only children that are trully innocent are those that are ignorant of what is happenning around them, in this case the littluns. Yes its true, Piggy and Simon may also be seen as innocent. As some of you have mentioned, one of the parts in which their innocence is portrayed is when Golding writes "They knew very well why he hadn't; because of the enormity of the knife descending and cutting into living flesh" (31). Sorry, but as much as something is born with innocent it is born with curiosity which leads to temptation. Remember how right after the innocence is portrayed in the quote above, then it is said that "'Next time-!' He snatched his knife out of the sheath and slammed it into a tree trunk. Next time there would be no mercy" (31). This simply shocks me back to the truth, the truth that things are also evil, like in a ying yang where both good and evil balance out.Someone also mentioned the chant, I think it was Hanggi. The point is that it is indeed an excellent point prooving how evil the boys are, including Ralph and Piggy, because they were awake, their eyes were open and there was light for they were dancing around a fire. Nothing justifies their brutal killing of Simon. Children may seem innocent, but just give them the right chance, a certain temptation, and then their evil side shall emerge. That is what Lord of the Flies portrays.
In Lord of the Flies, the children were portrayed as innocent until a certain point of the story. At the beginning of the story, they were innocent. For instance, there wasn't any deaths or killing in the beginning of the story. Everyone would cooperate and would help each other out. But as time passed and Jack wanted to gain more power, the people were turning out into a guilty person. In addition, the boys who supported Jack, helped him chase Ralph and hunt him, they have lost their innocence because they used violence against Ralph.
In a way, the children are innocent because the challenge of being on the island forced them to adapt and do what they had to do in order to stay alive. They had not recieved the guidance and protection of their parents and they were forced to rely on each each and think independantly. These things all lead to them forcefully loosing their innocence.
The children at first are innocent because they didn't really know what was going on. As time passed they lost their innocence as many people said. They are losing it because of power. As it says Jack wants all the power and wants to take the power from Ralph and there is he shows that he is losing his innocent by wanting more.
At first, all are portrayed as innocent. They all act childish by crying for their moms, Ralph talking about his father hoping he save him, and Piggy always bringing up things about his aunti. Later, as the story goes, they start to become more sauvange and barbaric - not innocent anymore - especially Jack - when killing the pig, and the descriptions of being coverd with blood.
The childred were innocent at the beginning but when the line between civilisation and savagery was broken, they immediately lost their innocence to the power of themselves, the power of human nature.
Post a Comment