Lord of the Flies: a banned book

by Alessia Vannelli, student intern 

Lord of the Flies is a renowned novel that has been subjected to being a ‘banned book’ for harsh themes, such as graphically described acts, negative themes, and overall ‘offensive’ content. I disagree with many of the reasons backing the ‘banning’ of the book, especially considering it is a commentary on how humans would function when they lack societal expectations to hold them up, specifically affluent prep school boys. I believe this discussion on human nature and comparison to their real lives versus the lives they found on the island is what William Golding offers on the thin line between disarray and order. We see this frequently through the power struggle between Jack and Ralph – Jack representing the urges against order while Ralph, as chief, represents the persistent need for rules and general lawfulness. Golding explicitly shows this during many of the assemblies, but he also uses symbolism consistently throughout the book, such as the conch. He continues the narrative on what drives human nature and what inevitably drove the boys to become brutes; Golding implicates fear, disagreement, and isolation as main drivers of what caused the boys’ spiraling fall into savagery. 

I believe fear is one of the strongest factors that caused the line of humanity to disappear, specifically the weaponizing of fear by Jack towards many of the boys. The concept of a beast on the island had always stemmed from a person in a twisted view – beginning with a Littlun seeing Simon walk around at night to the dead parachutist looking warped in the night. In some way, the boys knew this, as Piggy himself states that there is no beast and no reason for fear besides fear of people, though the boys view this as ludicrous (pg. 113). Yet Piggy’s statement proved true through the course of the book. Instead of the fear being left to its own devices, Jack used this to turn the boys against Ralph and compromise Ralph’s democracy in exchange for his dictatorship. After the transfer of support from many of the boys, the island seems to fall into more chaos, and fear is used to commit gruesome acts, such as the murder of Simon; those who partook claimed they thought he was the ‘beast’. 

Jack’s weaponizing of fear is what ultimately led to the failure of society on the island; this can compare to real life, which is why I believe it can be read as a political piece that should not be constrained by facing challenges. Jack’s act of rallying the boys together by using fear to convince the boys that the beast has priority over a smoke signal can be comparable to the use of propaganda during wars used to rally people in support, although the government may be lying about exact circumstances. Viewing these actions as more political can help put more perspective as to why the book has faced challenges in Canada and the United States, although it doesn’t justify censorship because a warning of what happens when fear is turned into a disease and the wrong person steps up to contain it is a pointed warning.

You can purchase a physical copy through Bookshop.org  or as an audiobook on Libro.FM and support Peninsula Book Collaborative.