English coursework, James Luxton
Explore the ways in which bullies and victims are presented in Lord of the Flies and DNA. Bullies and Victims play essential roles in both the unique and the play. The authors, Golding and Kelly, both put their characters through similar trials. In Lord of the Flies, Golding’s characters turn from typical school young boys, to savages who are prepared to eliminate one another to get power. Golding recommends that under specific scenarios, people will naturally begin to become more violent and savage.
In DNA the characters are thrust into a world of secrecy where they need to cover things up to conserve themselves, Kelly himself wrote this; ‘I do not believe I write characters who are bad, I think I compose characters who are attempting to do the best thing, however are failing’. Kelly provides no description to the lives of his characters before the death of Adam, suggesting that they might have lead innocent lives, but they have actually been thrust into a world of violence that spirals out of control. In Lord of the Flies, Golding impresses upon the reader how children’s judgements of their peers are based around their physical appearance which will straight affect whether they are seen as possible leaders or victims. On the other hand, Kelly offers us no description of his characters’ appearance and uses no genuine clear reason that Adam is the victim; in this way the violence is less easily understood, and eventually more frightening. Golding plainly shows to the reader how physical appearance effects a character’s treatment in the opening chapter of Lord of the Flies.
Even though they have simply endured an airplane crash and are obviously the only survivors on the island, Ralph continuously snubs Piggy; based upon the reality that Piggy is fat, has asthma, and likewise wears glasses. Ralph avoids him, in spite of Piggy being incredibly intelligent, and it is Piggy who recommends most of the important things for the kids to do, such as using the conch to call an assembly. Ralph doesn’t realise the real value of Piggy until after his death. ‘There was no Piggy to talk sense’ reveals Ralph’s misery. When he actually required assistance, Piggy was constantly there to offer guidance, whereas now, after his death, Ralph does not understand what to do. Through this Golding is inferring that people judge others exclusively on their appearance, and individuals who appear weak will always be targeted by society, no matter how intelligent they are. In total contrast, Kelly offers the reader no description of any character in DNA, and in truth no description of the scenery.
Kelly provides no clear sign of why Adam is the victim, which suggests that any other one of the characters in the play might have been the victim, and on a much broader scale, it suggests that anybody in society might be prone to ending up being a victim; this makes the violence that the group inflict on Adam a lot more frightening, due to the fact that we are more likely to believe that this could even happen to us. Kelly shows us through his representation of Adam simply how desperate some people are to enter into a group. Adam should constantly show loyalty to them all in order to feel safe. They become so desperate to be popular and accepted by individuals, they are willing to do anything for the group or the people in power; to the point where they are actually willing to risk their lives. Kelly likewise illustrates just how far a group of ‘bullies’ will go to check loyalty. The group made Adam ‘run across the motorway’ and ‘nick some Vodka’; these criminal and lethal activities were readily carried out by Adam despite the fact that Jan acknowledges that ‘you might inform he was scared’. Amazingly, the group were just testing ‘how far he’ll go’. Kelly shows how groups can manipulate people and exploit their fear and desperation to belong rather than be alone. Kelly shows this through Mark when he says ‘we can make him do, we can make him do-‘ Mark’s repletion and incomplete sentence recommends that he was possibly so uncomfortable with what was done that he struggles to completely acknowledge it.
Although he claims that they were ‘having a laugh, really, he was chuckling’, his words provide him away. He sounds as if he is trying to encourage himself and the separation of the word’ actually’ makes him sound desperate. Golding also recommends to the reader just how desperate people are to enter into a group, and how in some circumstances, entering into a group might actually be a life and death decision. Ralph, Jack and Simon set out to explore the island, and Piggy recommends to Ralph that he ought to go too, because he ‘was with him when he found the conch’ and he ‘was with him before anybody else was’. Ralph apparently attempts to put Piggy down gently by stating ‘you’re no good on a job like this’ indicating, once again, since Piggy is fat and has asthma, he will not be able to maintain and he will be a burden to the other boys. On the other hand Jack is blunter with Piggy. He just says ‘we don’t desire you, three’s adequate’. In this, Jack shows obvious contempt for Piggy. When he firsts speaks to Piggy all he has to use is ‘you’re talking too much, stopped talking fatty’. Jack’s apparent loathing of Piggy appears throughout the novel.
Through Jack’s first contact with Piggy it strengthens the concept that children judge people entirely on looks, and as well as this it is apparent that the constant name calling and bullying of Piggy will render him the victim of the kids throughout the book. Both Golding and Kelly alarm their readers with evidence of real violence from the bullies to their chosen victims. Violence with stones occurs both in Lord of the Flies and DNA, but they have different consequences. In Lord of the Flies the violent acts starts with Maurice and Roger kicking through the littleuns’ sandcastles. Before the arrival of Roger and Maurice, the littleuns’ seem material with being removed from the other young boys. 3 kids played on the beach, ‘if not happily, a minimum of with soaked up attention’. Golding recommends that the littleuns’ had nothing else to do besides consume, sleep and play, so the novelty of the being able to do anything has actually diminished, but ‘with absorbed attention’ indicates they still posses the innocence of childhood, so they carry on playing regardless. On the other hand, as soon as Roger and Maurice had actually kicked over their sandcastles, the littleuns’ seemed indifferent, ‘so they made no demonstration’. Maurice kicks sand into Percival’s eyes, and his response to doing this is interesting. Maurice feels guilt through the description of his actions. Rather of sticking with Roger, ‘he whispered something about a swim and burglarized a trot’. Making use of the word ‘whispered’ is substantial since it infers that Maurice is trying to produce reasons for himself, which shows unease at his actions. In his decision to run to the kids who are swimming, Golding reveals that Maurice wishes to separate himself from Roger. It is also notable that he escapes from Roger towards the other kids, inferring that Maurice wants to distance himself from Roger and the possibility of further actions.
Johnny, among the other littleuns’ messing around the sandcastles, then begins to copy the actions of Maurice; he begins to toss sand into Percival’s eyes. This is similar to the Bandura experiment of 1977, in which he put an adult in a room with a young child. The grownup was offered a Bobo doll, which he was informed to abuse consistently in the presence of the child. The adult then left and the Bobo doll was given to the kid. Gradually the kid would start the re-enact the actions of the adult, the kid would begin to abuse the Bobo doll; this suggests that kids are affected by a person in authority, and that they will copy their actions. Johnny repeats the actions carried out by Maurice, and this recommends that natural order on the island is beginning to weaken, which hostility and violence is taking control of, now even the youngest children on the island are starting to experiment with violence. Golding then demonstrates this experimentation of violence through Roger’s ‘stalking’ of Henry, the third littleun’ that was playing around the sandcastles. Henry ‘strayed along the beach’, he separates himself from the rest of group, in this sense his exposes himself and leaves himself vulnerable, but in doing this it reveals the reader that he still posses youth innocence and naivety. Roger follows Henry, hiding in the shadows along the beach. Golding creates and air of hazard around roger through his ‘stalking’ of Henry.
Along with this he suggests to the reader that Roger has no worry, when coconuts ‘as huge as rugby balls’, ‘fell about him with a series of difficult thumps’. This lack of look after his own security is frightening because he does not think in the expected way of a kid. The violent acts Roger then devotes are frightening due to the fact that they are merely not expected of a young child. Roger ‘got a stone, intended, and tossed it at Henry-threw to miss’. However then he does not stop there. He continues with these violent acts, he collects ‘a handful of stones and began to toss them’. Roger’s violent acts tell the reader that now practically all of the expected childhood innocence has gone, and that the victims are starting to become apparent. The young, weaker children will be picked on due to the fact that they are ‘batty’ and even some of the older boys such as Piggy and Simon will be targeted by looks and characters. The violence on the island ends up being more real and far more terrifying because the violence that would normally be expected of adults is being carried out by kids. In DNA using stones is much more violent, to the point where it causes a death. The group continue to humiliate Adam, and they continue to evaluate his commitment to the group. They ‘increased the grille.’ They force Adam to climb up a fence and go walk over a grille covering a hole. This alone is possibly life threatening to Adam. The group see that he is scared, and the group mind set is merely to taunt him and to embarrass him. They then being to begin ‘pegging’ stones at him. The use of the word ‘pegging’ is essential since it recommend to the reader that the group are actually attempting to strike Adam ‘just for a laugh’. Even when the stones hit Adam directly on the head, they carry on making fun of him, because ‘the shock on his face is so … funny.’
When Adam slips and falls into the hole underneath the grille, that’s when it becomes apparent that Mark, the character explaining the ‘stoning’, realises the repercussions of their actions. He duplicates ‘so he’s …’ a variety of times. It is clear that he is unable to come to terms with the reality that he has participated in a murder, and it takes John Tate, the assumed leader of the group, who earlier banned the word ‘dead’, to finish Mark’s sentence. ‘Dead. He’s dead’. In Lord of the Flies the exact same violent symbol is utilized by Jack and Roger. The sharpening of a stick at both ends. The sign first enters into use after the ‘hunters’ kill a pig. He orders Roger to ‘ram on end in the earth’. After doing this, Jack, who has beheaded that dead pig, then ‘jammed the soft throat down on the pointed end if the stick’ this is the very first genuine indication that the kids have transcended into savages. Jack then says ‘it’s a present’ for the monster. Through this it suggests that the kids wish to calm the ‘beast’, and in eliminating the pig and using its head it’s practically as if they are worshiping it, as if it has become like a god in which they need to pay tribute to. When Roger hones the stick at two ends, the significance of this is much more enormous. The boys have actually now developed into savages, after the deaths of Piggy and Simon, Jack is determined that Ralph must be captured, and it appears that Ralph will eventually be eliminated after torture if he is captured. Ralph is hiding from the rest of the boys, but he meets Sam ‘n’ Eric one night so he can discover what will occur to him.
At first the twins hesitate to inform him what Jack has actually planned, but then came ‘the incomprehensible reply’, ‘Roger sharpened a stick a both ends’. Ralph is unable to see the true significance in this, however it is obvious to the reader that Jack desires the same fate for Ralph, as the pigs head earlier in the novel. Roger throughout the novel exists as the callous bully, from when he was tossing stones at Henry, he was the one who launched the rock that eliminated Piggy, and now it is clear that he has actually been ordered to literally bring back Ralph’s head. The most frightening minute in DNA comes as a risk from Cathy once she has actually found Adam. She finds him ‘living in a hedge’ and after she attempts to coax him out, Cathy openly admits that she ‘used violence’, she ‘threatened to gouge among his eyes out’ this is a referral to Shakespeare’s King Lear when Goneril and Reagan remove Gloucester’s eyes. Cathy throughout the play is revealed to be the most frightening character. She is exclusively motivated by ending up being well-known through interviews after Adams memorial, she says ‘it’s quite interesting’, recommending that she takes pleasure in the violence of the scenario and she is taking pleasure in the spot light. She has no consideration for Adam’s well being, she is self soaked up.
In Richard’s speech at the end of the play, he tells Phil that Cathy is ‘ridiculous’, which ‘She cut a first year’s finger off’. Cathy and Roger are comparable in that they both seem to enjoy causing pain on other individuals; they both discover as sadists. Their actions are terrifying to the audience since their severe acts of violence would typically have actually been performed by grownups, however due to the fact that they are both kids, and Roger being so young, the violence is a lot more frightening. In Richards’s final speech in DNA, he is being in a field talking with Phil. This reminds us Leah, who throughout the play has long monologs when she is talking at Phil, in hope of a reaction. Phil blanks Richard, which tells the audience that he shuts out everybody, which his silence wasn’t individual to Leah. The scene also suggests that absolutely nothing has actually altered, and it makes the audience assess the characters. Golding’s portrayal of the boys stays clearly on the exact same route. It’s suggested that Jack is evil which evil continues through the unique, whereas Kelly makes us keep in mind in the last scene of Leah, through Richard, and that Kelly wants to make us assess our views of each character, due to the fact that they might be interchangeable, and they can represent anyone in society.