simon Flashcards
“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.
“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.
“Maybe it’s only us.”
The statement ‘maybe it’s only us’ could be considered Simon’s moment of profound insight, in which the simplicity of it belies its weight: he suggests that the real beast is not a external creature but a metaphor for the evil within humanity itself. The hedging word ‘maybe’ reveals his inner uncertainty, but also the difficulty of articulating and grasping an idea of there even being a truth that is so disturbing. Therefore, this line is a clear embodiment of the novel’s allegorical nature: Simon functions as a Christ-like figure, offering revelation and moral clarity, but is tragically ignored. Golding implies that society’s greatest threat lies not in mythical monsters, but in the collective failure to confront our own capacity for cruelty.
“Softly, surrounded by a fringe of inquisitive bright creatures…Simon’s dead body moved out toward the open sea”
Golding uses almost divine imagery to describe Simon’s death, with ‘a fringe of inquisitive bright creatures’ gently carrying his body to sea. The adverb ‘softly’ coupled with ‘fringe’ contrasts the brutality of his murder, creating an eerily peaceful moment. Rather than signifying isolation or separation, the ‘fringe’ creates a protective or gentle border, almost as though nature is honouring Simon in his final moments. This could reinforce him as a Christ-like figure; nature appears to sanctify him. Alternatively, it might even evoke a metaphorical audience observing (‘inquisitive’) the consequences of the boys’ actions, reflecting humanity’s struggle with accountability. Also, the passive construction ‘Simon’s dead body moved’ removes human agency, perhaps suggesting that in death, Simon transcends the boys’ savagery and becomes part of something purer.
“You’ll get back to where you came from”
Simon’s repeated reassurance to Ralph, ‘You’ll get back to where you came from’, carries a haunting prophetic weight. The modal verb ‘will’ gives it a quiet certainty, but it also foreshadows Simon’s own death- he doesn’t include himself. This creates dramatic irony, as the reader senses Simon’s fate long before it happens. It also reintroduces a flicker of hope amidst the chaos, suggesting that innocence may survive, even if Simon- a symbol of goodness- does not.
“That was Simon. That was murder”
The blunt statement ‘that was Simon. That was murder’ represents the boys’ fleeting moment of moral clarity. The repetition of ‘that was’ emphasises their need to name and face the reality of their actions, acknowledging the gravity of what happened- it wasn’t an accident or a game. Meanwhile, the use of the word ‘murder’ (a legal term) breaks the illusion that the boys are just playing a game, and reintroduces adult consequences. Yet the brevity of this realisation, followed by denial and justification, exposes the irreparable damage savagery has caused.
Simon became inarticulate in his effort to express mankind’s essential illness
Golding highlights the difficulty of confronting evil when ‘Simon became inarticulate in his effort to express mankind’s essential illness’. The abstract phrase ‘essential illness’ conveys the novels central theme that there is innate moral corruption within all humans, with the adjective ‘essential’ perhaps even emphasising the fact that ‘mankind’ cannot be without it. Moreover, Simon cannot find words for it (‘inarticulate’) reflecting that the truth is so disturbing or profound that language itself fails to contain it. This could suggest that fear distorts reality, while truth is difficult to confront.
