I think that it is both Ralph’s and Jack’s fault that thing didn’t go well on the island. In the book Lord of the Flies, Jack and Ralph start to argue: “I’m chief,” said Ralph tremulously. “And what about the fire? And I’ve got the conch- “You haven’t got it with you,” said Jack, sneering. “You left it behind. See, clever? And the conch doesn’t count at this end of the island- (150) They are constantly arguing and they both want to have the authority and power.
I agree partially with what Hani had said, in the fight for power between Ralph and Jack. They are constantly arguing for the authority and this was due to the first solution the boys had suggested at the beginning. It was a good idea that they had democratic elections, but electing only one leader? That was a bit foolish of the boys parts, but it is comprehensible seeing that the oldest of the boys is twelve. For me, a better system would be a council or governing body for the boys. So although Ralph and Jack have a majority of the power, it is all the boys blame.Another point, the boys also begin choosing sides throughout the story and many begin to create anarchy in the society. This division created many problems that the leaders did not want to face, explaining why things did not work out.
I agree with Sergio. The island did not need trouble for power if there were many able boys there to participate in making decisions. They made a big mistake when they excluded Piggy from the leadership part. He was the brains of the place and Ralph knew it. Sadly they could not see past the differences and he ended up dead. Another mistake was Jack wanting more power. He divided the island because of that and caused big trouble.
Things turned out wrong because they were not organized. The part of choosing a chief was a good idea but they they did not know what to do. For instance at the begining Jack said that his choir was going to take care of the fire and when they could get save by the ship they could not get save because the fire ran out. The hunters did not really care and Jack said that they could build it again. That is one reason it did not work.
I believe that all the boys were responsible in the failure mentioned in this novel. They had the option of rebellion or going against things or people they opposed because the role was "democratic". However, the two leaders, Ralph and Jack, had farther responsibility because they governed the savage tribe in the book, and had more power on their "citizens".
I disagree mostly with everyone. Jack's got the fault of why things didn't work out in the island. At the beginning of the story all the kids gather and try to organize themselves by the conch and vote for a leader. When they vote for Ralph as a leader this is where the problem actually begins. Throughout the book Jack has some jelousy towards Ralph and tries to battle Ralph and the conch. This is why things didn't work out in the island.
I agree with Hadar and disagree with Hanggi. Jack did not cause all of the trouble by himself. Yes he was a major exponent in the trouble area, but he did not necesarily hold all the responsibility.
I contradict Hanggi's statements. Hanggi, are the destructions of most empires the fault of their emperor? Well in my opinion, the fault of a failure of a certain group or society is divided equally by its citizens. Of course, in cases of a dictatorship or an absolute rule, the ruler is farther responsible. However, in a democratic government, like Ralph's tribe, the members are allowed to disagree or rebel against a certain action committed by their governor.
I disagree with Hadar and Jimena. I am not saying that only Jack cuased the trouble, but that he started the whole issue of condradicting each other and trying to rebel against Ralph. Jack constatly battles Ralph power draging everyone to the whole issue of who is a stronger leader. Because of this whole discussion Jack and the other boys forget about the rest and that is when things don't work out. They are all caught up in the situation that they forget the human principles.
In my opinion, Jack wouldn't have succeeded without the help of his followers like Roger. He desperately needed the aid of others to rebel against Ralph's tribe. Without the support of his followers, he wouldn't have been able to rub Piggy's glasses that were the key of his success, and the end of his defeat.
I sort of agree with Hadar, but I also think that Ralph is largely responsible for letting Jack seize power. What Jack wanted was power, respect and authority. If Ralph had found a way to control him, things would have gone much better. If it was not letting him hint, or just leave him in charge of the fire 24/7, he needed some way to keep him under control. Ralph had failed to realize this and practically paved the way for his own demise by having done so.
I somewhat agree with Nathan. It was Ralph's weaknesses that cause this whole mess too. He let Jack take over him and intimidate him. He should of been stronger and foughten back. But, I still hold still with the idea that Jack has some of the fault too. He was the one that started this all. If it weren't for him Piggy and Simon would not be dead.
In my opinion everyone was equally at fault, because first of all there were the leaders, Ralph and Jack, they had to obligate the little kids their own tasks. Ralph at some point had to kind of obligate Jack in helping and also colaborating but he was too scared that he didn't so it was his fault too. It was Jack's fault too because he had to be a rode model to his people, whatever he did, his followers did, and because he dind't want to follow Ralph's orders neither did his people, so they also failed, And it was also the littluns' fault for not paying any attention to their leader.
I agree with Hanggi that Jack is the one to blame. All the boys picked Ralph as leader and thats what they wanted. Then comes along a crazy power wanting kid and ruins all of it. Its his fault because he is so crazy about what HE wants and what HE thinks and doesn't really care about what everyone else even if he is enormously outnumbered.
I agree with Kevin. Jack is the reason things didn’t work out. He always intimidated the boys and made them think about bad stuff. For example, Ralph was a natural leader. He kept order, but Jack made him weak by intimidation. That made Ralph loose hope to be a chief and to be saved.If Jack wasn’t there, none of the boys might have become savages. Jack made everyone think they were weak and that Jack was the only hope to survive.
I don't think that jack is to blame for everything. i mean it was his fault too but also Ralph wasn't strong enough. he shouldn't of have let jack intimidated him, he was leader, he had the power, so he is to blame, to not only jack, and the littluns are to blame to, they ALSO HAD TO BE STRONG :), and they should of had listened to their leader. not JACK.
I partially disagree with Kevin. As I said before, the fault of the boys' failure was divided equally between everyone on the island. However, Jack "led the way" to corruption and the development of savagery. He began committing crimes and the obsession of hunting, and the others CHOSE to follow him.
I always believed that Jack had leaded the way. Everyone had the choose to vote either for Jack or Ralph. Either way Ralph won. Because Ralph won Jack felt some jealousy against Jack and started to revolt against his ideas. Because of his revolting he made Ralph unsure of his ideas and made Ralph weaker.
Everyone was to blame for the fact that things were not working out efficiently and properly on the island. The hatred between both Ralph and Jack only contributed to the beggining of new arguments and problems.The other children didn't help either, especially the little ones. On the other hand, the older kids never pushed them into working habbits. Ralph always critized the small children, but he also never encouraged them to help.
I agree with all the points Ahra did and the basic idea that Hanggi seems to have. Everyone else has very good contradictory points, like Hadar and Erika. The thing is that you really can't balme the littluns becuase they are simply to little to really understand anything more than sleep, eat and play. Yes, Ralph may be at fault since he wasn't strong enough, but as you said it is a democracy, and even if he did have Simon and Piggy on his side they never really stood up for him. In a democracy the leader is always going to be more vulnerable because he is suppposed to listen to everyone, right? So then, if Jack had simply accepted defeat and just tried to be succesful as chief hunter and second in command, things would have worked out.
In this situation, it's everyone’s fault because everyone needed to cooperate. The chief was chosen so he could lead it, but it does not mean that if it doesn't work, it's his entire fault. Ralph told everyone what should be done in order to survive. For example, he had mentioned that the fire should be kept on going and to make a lot of smoke. Because Jack and the hunters didn't cooperate, they had lost the chance of being rescued when the ship passed through the horizon. So mainly, it's everyone’s fault because cooperation is what it is needed the most from everyone.
I strongly disagree with Hanggi Lee for various reasons. First of all, Jack has some of the blame for the things that didn't work out, but all the blame doesn't go straight to him because he was not the one who did all the things wrong. Second, kids in this situation should know which side to take in order to be rescued and to be back home as they wanted. Third, kids started to play around when Ralph had asked them to build huts which is not Jack's fault. Moreover, the kids should somehow revolt against Jack after seeing the violence he used against Piggy. So in general, the kids should learn to make their own decisions, and each opinion it's important in these kinds of situations, and they need to cooperate with everyone as I have mentioned.
I agree with won is the sense that it is all of the boy's fault that things did not work out. They all elected a chief and did not follow or try and cooperate with what he had to say. The boys also lost track of goals that were to be accomplished on the island and this led to their downfall.
I agree with Kalif because if the boys were more organized and together the plan could work out and nobody will have been dead and they will accomplish what they wanted. If the leaders supported each other and not only focusing on their work the planing would have been better and they would have been rescued when the ship passed.
Compared to other responses, in my opinion it was mostly Ralph's fault. He was unsure of himself, making things sound like a game to everyone. Like this his authority started to decrease, creating the others to look at Jack as a stronger leader than him. An example showing his weakness could be the quote that hani posted which was in page 150. Notice Ralph's accent while reading the quote. If reading carefully, you may notice the way his voice is trembling and doesn't really seemed to be sure of what his doing. I think it was basically this that creating things not to work out.
I disagree with Paula for several reasons. First of all, if Ralph was the one who is blamable, then what did the other kids do to the things Ralph had told them? Ralph was just thinking about being rescued, but the others were just playing around and hunting all day. This is not Ralph's fault. It's Jack's fault and the little kids for not cooperating and helping Ralph by keeping the fire, building huts, and getting water. He had really good ways of being rescued, but the problem was that everyone didn't help each other out. There wasn't any team work in this story, probably there was some for hunting and other things, but there wasn't team work for making a plan of how to be rescued. This is why I don't agree with Paula.
Alright, I agree on what Won said above. It's true that the boys didn't want to cooperate with Ralph, and that Jack mostly interfeered with Ralph's plan. BUT, I still think that this wouldn't have happen if Ralph had taken his role (in power) more seriosly in the way the boys would pay more attention to him that just dazzling of to play. If he had been more straight and strict, but fun at the same time, like Jack did - but not the violence - maybe things would have had worked out.
I blame it completely on Ralph. It's because he was not a strong leader and was not listening to what the other boys wanted to do. If he had listened to the other boys, then he would have stayed as chief for alot longer, maybe even until the end.What i would have done upon being elected chief, is i would see that there was competition and i would have eliminated that. If you eliminate all competition then you secure your place as a ruler.Then, i would have listened to the boys arguments and decided what to do from there.Personally, i think that Ralph is a weak and unable ruler.
I think that everybody is to blame, but especially Ralph and Jack are to blame. If they wouldn't have argued all the time, then things would n't have fallen apart like they did. If they were so selfish as leaders, then somebody else should have taken control. In my opinion, they were very bad role models for the others, and they didn't care about any of the little 'uns.
Post a Comment