Monday, July 20, 2015

What advantages do Jack and Ralph have as prospective Chiefs?

Early in the novel, you see the conflict between hunting and keeping the fire going - Jack is for the former, and Ralph for the latter. You see in here, I think, the key differences that Ralph and Jack offer as Chief of the island.

Ralph's approach is undoubtedly the common sense approach. Ralph, thinking long term, is focussed on being rescued, and on getting the boys of the island. This is a clever, and useful thing to do - but unfortunately, it provides no short term returns. It's just an endless watch over the fire, in the hope that one day someone will rescue the boys - and, of course, ironically, it is indeed because of a fire that the boys are eventually rescued.

Ralph's approach to leadership is similarly long-term: rules, the conch, democracy, assemblies, and so on. It's all very worthy, and very grown up - but it bores the boys, and when Jack decides to say "Bollocks to the rules", it's all too easy for them to go with him.

Jack presents an alternative approach to the island. He's not interested in the fire, in the rules, or in democracy - all the things associated with Ralph, and which make him boring. Jack's approach is far more glamorous: the thrilling, heady rush of the pig hunts (which even Ralph is drawn into) which provide a short-term reward to the boys - delicious food. Jack is also impulsive, dark, strong and  brooding - a far more glamorous, scary and charismatic leader than Ralph, who is sensible, but dull.

No comments:

Post a Comment

What is the main function of the fool in "King Lear"? What is the secondly function?

The fool as a character is confusing, but part of this is the difference between the 1600s and today, as well as the difference in place. If...