savagery and civilisation Flashcards
“Which is better- to have rules and agree, or to hunt and kill?”
In his final confrontation with the boys, Piggy desperately asks ‘which is better- to have rules and agree, or to hunt and kill?’. The rhetorical question, posed with urgent simplicity, is a final appeal to reason and order. The juxtaposition between ‘rules’ and ‘hunt’ symbolises the broader ideological clash between civilisation and savagery. Here, Golding uses Piggy as the mouthpiece of Enlightenment values, but with the lack of response or care from the boys underscores the trajectory of the novel: rationality cannot withstand the seductive pull of power, violence and fear. It is clear that Piggy’s moral clarity, though admirable, is powerless in the face of collective brutality.
“The conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist”
Golding portrays the breakdown of civilisation through the symbolic destruction of order when ‘the conch exploded into a thousand white fragments and ceased to exist’. The ‘conch’, a powerful motif of democratic governance and structured communication, is violently shattered at the same moment Piggy is killed- suggesting that the physical death of logic is paralleled by the ideological death of order. The adjective ‘white’, symbolic of purity and innocence, being reduced to ‘fragments’ reflects the disintegration of societal rules. Meanwhile the hyperbole of ‘a thousand fragments’ evokes an irreversible rupture, not only of the object, but of the group’s last link to democratic values. Perhaps, through this metaphorical explosion, Golding is conveying his pessimistic view that civilisation is fragile and easily destroyed when confronted with humankind’s innate savagery. It is also key to note that when the ‘rock struck Piggy’ it was only a ‘glancing blow’, where the indifference of the verb ‘glancing’ acknowledges Piggy’s death as unimportant and normalised.
“We’ve got to have rules and obey them. After all, we’re not savages.”
Ralph’s logical tone and use of ‘we’ creates a sense of unity and democratic hope. The declarative statement highlights his faith in civilisation and structure, even though there are some cracks starting to show. Also, the juxtaposition of ‘rules’ with ‘savages’ emphasises how Golding positions civilisation and savagery as binary opposites, yet ironically this foreshadows the very breakdown of those ‘rules’. It becomes almost naïve in hindsight. Alternatively, it could be reinforcing Golding’s wider critique of society, where real-world civilisations impose ‘rules’ to distinguish themselves from ‘savages’, yet often fail to uphold their own moral codes, just as Ralph does when violence overtakes reason.
“The world, that understandable and lawful world, was slipping away”
Golding personifies civilisation as a world that is ‘slipping away’, implying not a sudden collapse, but a gradual erosion of order. The verb ‘slipping’ also connotes to something uncontrollable, perhaps reflecting how quickly society collapses with no external order. The use of the definitive article ‘the world’ suggests a collective, universal sense of order, now disintegrating, meanwhile the phrase ‘understandable and lawful’ reflects the comfort and structure of civilisation- rules, reason, predictability. This moment therefore marks Ralph’s growing awareness that civilisation is not innate, but fragile and easily lost.
“Kill the pig. Cut her throat. Spill her blood.”
The chant ‘Kill the pig. Cut her throat. Spill her blood’ becomes the boys’ ritualistic mantra that marks their descent into primal savagery. The use of imperative verbs conveys an aggressive urgency, while the graphic and rhythmic nature of the chant mimics tribal incantation, reflecting how violence becomes not only accepted but celebrated. This is emphasised through the simplistic syntax (verb and subject) and exclamations, which helps create a threatening tone. The feminine pronoun ‘her’ may even subconsciously invoke misogynistic undertones, turning the ‘pig’ into a symbol of vulnerability and thus reinforcing the predatory dynamic. This loss of linguistic restraint also parallels the erosion of moral restraint, where Golding highlights just how quickly ‘mankind’ can be swept up in the groupthink of violence and bloodlust. Also, the collective voice dehumanises the ‘pig’ further, as it symbolises the loss of individual moral responsibility, whilst the monosyllabic verbs heighten the brutality and thrill of it all- this savagery has unified the boys, creating a shared identity. It is clear they are no longer hunting for survival, but for violence itself.
“Laughter became a bloodthirsty snarling”
Golding uses animalistic transformation to show the boys’ decent. The verb ‘became’ implies an irreversible shift- ‘laughter’, once innocent, is now violent. The adjective ‘bloodthirsty’ suggests a primal hunger for violence, while ‘snarling’ evokes a wild beast, stripping the boys of their humanity. This shit is rapid and almost subconscious, perhaps representing how thin the façade of civilisation truly is.
“Roger sharpened a stick at both ends.”
The past tense ‘sharpened’ implies premeditation, and the ambiguity of ‘both ends’ alludes to the earlier pig’s head- the implication is now that Ralph is being hunted like an animal. The simplicity of the sentence therefore mirrors the stark brutality it represents, whilst the absence of emotion or explanation reflects how far Roger has descended into this savagery.
“Roger, with a sense of delirious abandonment, leaned all his weight on the lever.”
Golding symbolically represents the culmination of violence and the loss of moral control when ‘Roger, with a sense of delirious abandonment, leaned all his weight on the lever’. The phrase ‘delirious abandonment’ reveals how intoxicating and liberating violence can become when societal rules are removed. Roger, who had once hesitated to throw stones near a littlun (‘threw it to miss’), now enacts murder with calculated force. The use of mechanical imagery, ‘lever’, reduces this act to something industrial and impersonal- suggesting that in war or tyranny, the individual themselves become the tools of destruction.
“At once the crowd surged after it, poured down the rock, leapt on to the beast, screamed, struck, bit, tore”
The series of violent, dynamic verbs (‘screamed, struck, bit, tore’) builds a chaotic crescendo, reflecting the uncontrollable frenzy that leads to Simon’s death. In particular, the list of savage and animalistic acts and lack of individual identification highlights the terrifying power of groupthink. This is displayed by the pronoun ‘it’, which implies inhumanity, and the verb ‘poured’ suggesting they are moving as one fluid creature. This dehumanisation mirrors the ‘beast’ the boys fear, ironically showing that they themselves have become the very thing they dread as ‘teeth and claws’ was only a description previously used about the beast. Golding also describes this in a matter of fact way and not from the point of view of one of the boys, as if he is a dispassionate observer of this savagery.
“Jack was on top of the sow, stabbing downwards with his knife”
The imagery of Jack’s domination over the sow is disturbingly graphic and laced with violence, symbolising the total collapse of innocence and the rise of perverse power. The phrase ‘on top’ implies control and violation, while ‘stabbing downwards’ suggests a frenzied, uncontrolled attack, highlighting how violence is not just survival-driven but pleasurable for Jack.
“The mask was a thing on its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness”
Golding presents the mask not just as face paint, but as a metaphorical shield from civilisation. It becomes ‘a thing on its own’, as if it has agency, separating Jack from accountability. The verb ‘hid’ implies cowardice or secrecy, but the phrase ‘liberated from shame’ reveals the seductive power of anonymity- Jack is freed from the constraints of morality. This suggests that savagery is not only natural, but pleasurable when unrecognisable.
“I’m not going to play anymore”
The childlike diction of ‘I’m not going to play anymore’ is chillingly ironic. The word ‘play’ trivialises the chaos, implying that everything up to this point- including violence- has been treated as a game. However, Jack’s statement also signifies his rejection of democratic structures, marking his transition from a frustrated child to authoritarian leader. The refusal to ‘play’ with the others is a symbolic rupture: he no longer sees himself bound by the rules of society.
“You knew, didn’t you? I’m part of you?”
The Lord of the Flies identifies itself as the beast and acknowledges to Simon that it exists within all human beings: ‘you knew, didn’t you? I’m part of you?’ Here, the second-person direct address implicates both Simon and the reader, forcing an uncomfortable recognition of shared culpability. The interrogative form also adds an unsettling intimacy, as if evil is whispering a truth we refuse to admit. Furthermore, the creature’s grotesque language and bizarre appropriation of the boys’ slang (‘I’m the reason why it’s a no go’) makes it appear even more hideous and devilish, for he taunts Simon with the same familiar, colloquial language the boys use themselves. This therefore emphasises the novel’s central idea: the ‘beast’ is not an external creature, but an internal human instinct.
“Conditioned by a civilisation that knew nothing of him and was in ruins.”
Golding presents civilisation as both distant and destroyed. The word ‘conditioned’ implies the boys’ morality is not natural but learnt, something externally imposed. The reference to civilisation knowing ‘nothing of him’ suggests that the structures designed to protect and guide have failed to truly understand or contain the darkness within. The phrase ‘was in ruins’ implies that ‘civilisation’ is not a permanent force, but something that is easily dismantled. It also reinforces the idea that societal order is an illusion rather than an inherent part of human nature.
“The officer looked at him in astonishment… I should have thought that a pack of British boys… would have been able to put up a better show than that.”
The officer’s disappointment, wrapped in irony, underscores the failure of the boys to live up to the imperial ideals of British civility. The phrase ‘better show’ trivialises the boys descent into savagery, as though it was merely a failed school performance. The officer, representing the adult world, appears oblivious to the true horror of what has happened- highlighting Golding’s view that even civilisation is blind to its own undercurrent. It is also ironic to note that he described them as a ‘pack of British boys’, where the adjective ‘pack’ connotes to hunting dogs, yet when coupled with the noun ‘boys’ suggests that they are innocent and youthful to the brutality they have achieved.
“What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages?”
Piggy’s rhetorical question (‘What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages?’) helps to build tension by escalating through a hierarchy of civilisation. The list foreshadows the boys’ moral decline throughout the book- they are ‘humans’ at the beginning, ‘animals’ in the middle, and ‘savages’ at the end, structuring the novel’s trajectory. The question itself suggests uncertainty and fear, revealing how the boys have lost their grip on their own identity. It is clear they are not just unsure of their morality, but their entire sense of self. This directly links Piggy to his role as the voice of reason, where his question contrasts with the boys who blindly embrace savagery.
3x key ideas: (beg,mid,end)
-
3x key ideas: (key points)
