Sunday, February 17, 2013

Prompt Revision: Prompt #4

1983. From a novel or play of literary merit, select an important character who is a villain. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the nature of the character's villainy and show how it enhances meaning in the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.

                In the novel, Lord of the Flies William Golding uses the story’s villain, Jack to emphasize the meaning of the work: without the laws of society, humans would be evil in nature. He does this by eliminating the influence of society from a group of boys by marooning them on an island, and then by having the villain’s character start out as an innocent boy, develop a thirst for blood, and finally transition back into the mere boy when civilization returns.
                By introducing Jack to the story as an innocent choir boy, Golding emphasizes the transition that takes place in his character. For example, when the book begins and the boys all find each other on the island, Jack is all for maintaining order within the group. He even volunteers to be the leader, although Ralph beats him out for the position. As the story continues, however, Ralph becomes more involved in hunting and eventually becomes obsessed with power and control. Because of this, he goes from being a mere boy, to becoming a ruthless leader within his domain on the island. This emphasizes the idea that people would be evil without society because Jack becomes this way because of the absence of civilization. Since he is a young boy, it is easier for him to forget the once obvious rules of which society holds while in the complete isolation of the island, thus allowing him to re-inhibit his natural state of an inherently evil nature.
                Golding also emphasizes the meaning of this novel by having Jack become bloodthirsty, violent, and threatening. At the beginning of the novel when Jack is still just a boy, he fears killing a pig—even if it is just for food. As the story progresses, however, he becomes obsessed with hunting whatever he can get his hands on, and even kills the baby pigs for sport. Even still, that is not enough for him. At a feast he convinces the other boys to attack, and ultimately kill Simon, one of the only boys who remember to uphold the rules of civilization. This is the first instance in which a character is murdered and shows how truly evil Jack has become. He later goes on to instruct his followers to kill Piggy in what is, perhaps, the most brutal scene of the book. These acts of violence were tools used by Golding to show how evil the villain has become. In doing this it brings the reader back to the easy transition from good to evil in the absence of society.
                Golding continues to support the idea that society is what keeps people from becoming evil by having his villain return to his more innocent state upon rediscovering civilization. This occurs just after the climax of the novel, when Jack decides to burn down the entire island in hopes of killing Ralph. A naval ship discovers the fire and an officer finds the boys. As soon as they are found, Jack goes back to behaving like his original self—the choir boy. This transition back into what society originally made him further emphasizes Golding’s message.
                The villain's character changes from good to evil, and then from evil back to good, as well as the violence that they entailed are used to enhance the meaning of the novel, Lord of the Flies. These transitions show how Jack evolves in the absence of civilization from an evil being, to rediscovering his original form as an innocent boy when reintroduced to society. This embodies the basic meaning of the work as a whole—that without society, humans would be evil in nature.

Sunday, February 10, 2013

Response to Course Material #6


                Over the past few weeks we have spent our time finishing up Hamlet and beginning Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. I personally found what we did with Hamlet for our final exam to be really interesting. Having to interpret a scene multiple ways forced me to read more into the lines of the characters in order to pull out evidence for both sides. I think that this is going to end up being really helpful for the AP essays as well as essays for other courses because often times my point of view doesn’t seem to have the most textual support and now I know how to work well with the opposing interpretation. That last Hamlet film was pretty interesting as well. I’m not sure that I agree with the director’s take on any of the scenes, but it was intriguing to see them attempt to make Hamlet more relevant in today’s society (although I still don’t find it relatable to my own life at all), but I do think it took away from the message that fate and revenge should be left up to God.
                I’m really glad that we have begun Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead for a lot of reasons—the biggest being that I can understand the lines of the play. Although Shakespeare’s words sound pretty, I often find them nearly impossible to translate. I also find the whole concept of the play to be really interesting. Throughout the entire time we studied Hamlet I never really looked at Rosencrantz and Guildenstern as characters. Stoppard’s representation of them really exposes how little we know about those roles and opens up a lot of possible explanations for why that might be. I also like reading this play because like Hamlet, there are a lot of hidden meanings within the lines. I think that working with pieces like that really helps us interpret literature because the more we are exposed to those hidden meanings, the easier they become to spot—something that I think will prove to be very helpful on the AP exam as well as in future courses.