Hit enter after type your search item

Roger and Jack in Lord of the Flies

/
/
/
8 Views

Roger and Jack in Lord of the Flies

Golding’s novel, “Lord of the Flies,” shows that evil is inescapable in human nature. It shows that a specific gotten rid of from civilization will allow their evil instincts to manifest themselves, as one ends up being increasingly savage. This is demonstrated through 2 characters, Roger and Jack. Both Roger and Jack act impulsively, in order to quickly fulfil their requirements and desires. Both likewise show an affinity for violence.
As Roger and Jack are introduced in the unique, a sense of evil is suggested. This is first demonstrated by the characterization of Roger, “There was a minor, furtive kid whom no one knew, who kept to himself with a strength of avoidance and secrecy,” (18 ). Golding’s use of the word, “furtive,” implies that Roger was trying to prevent attention, in expression of his covert intentions. It is also shown that he is a peaceful kid, as he, “muttered his name was Roger and was silent again.” The exact same sense of evil is revealed when Jack is presented, “The kid himself stepped forward [] and peered into him was nearly complete darkness Ralph, noticing his sun-blindness, addressed him,” (16 ). Golding intentionally utilizes the darkness of Jack to juxtapose Ralph’s sun-blindness, to reveal the brightness of the island, stressing the darkness that is explained to be Jack. In addition to this, Jack was dressed in a black cape. Figuratively, a cape might be anything that disguises or conceals something. This symbolizes that Jack is secretive.
In the future, the evil within Roger and Jack is highlighted through their actions and objectives. In chapter one, Jack, “raised his arm in the air,” prepared to bring a blade to kill the piglet. Nevertheless, “there came a pause, [] long enough for them to understand what an enormity the down stroke would be,” (28 ). At that moment, there was enough time for Jack to recognize that he had done not have hunting experience, leading to the escape of the piglet. The boys around Jack knew why he did not have the nerve to eliminate the pig, “They knew extremely well why he had not: because of the enormity of the knife [] the unbearable blood,” (29 ). Together with hunting, came the taboo that haunted him from his life back in the house, where killing living animals was considered unacceptable, and was not socially authorized. This very same factor avoided Roger from harming a living creature, however instead of an animal, it was Henry; one of the littluns.
Prior to this, Roger emerged from the forest and, “led the way straight through the castles, kicking them over, burying the flowers, scattering the picked stones,” (62 ). This demonstrates Roger’s vicious and hostile character, and how he acts impulsively, in order to instantly fulfil his desires. However, much like Jack, he is likewise haunted by the taboo of his old life. He, “stooped, got a stone, aimed, and threw it at Henry– tossed it to miss out on.” This shows his aversion to aim straight at Henry seeing that there was an, “invisible yet strong,” taboo of his old life surrounding the littlun. Despite this, Roger did not harm Henry. Golding shows Roger’s ability to injure him by stating that he intentionally, “tossed it to miss out on,” but due to the forcefield-like taboo, “the security of moms and dads and school and cops and the law,” (65 ), he does not exhibit evil.

This div height required for enabling the sticky sidebar