wgolding.lordoftheflies-第44部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


　
　The　fourth　hunt　is　an　electrifying　success；　a　mayhem　acplished　with　no　twitch　of　conscience；　no　element　of　pretense。　The　boys　discover　a　sow　〃sunk　in　deep　maternal　bliss；〃　〃the　great　bladder　of　her　belly　。　。　。　fringed　with　a　row　of　piglets　that　slept　or　burrowed　and　squeaked。〃　What　a　prize！　Wounded；　she　flees；　〃bleeding　and　mad〃；　〃the　hunters　followed；　wedded　to　her　in　lust；　excited　by　the　long　chase　and　the　dropped　blood。〃　The　sow　finally　falters　and　in　a　ghastly　scene　Jack　and　Roger　ecstatically　consummate　their　desires：
　
　Here；　struck　down　by　the　heat；　the　sow　fell　and　the　hunters　hurled　themselves　at　her。　This　dreadful　eruption　from　an　unknown　world　made　her　frantic；　she　squealed　and　bucked　and　the　air　was　full　of　sweat　and　noise　and　blood　and　terror。　Roger　ran　round　the　heap；　prodding　with　his　spear　whenever　pigflesh　appeared。　Jack　was　on　top　of　the　sow；　stabbing　downward　with　his　knife。　Roger　found　a　lodgment　for　his　point　and　began　to　push　till　he　was　leaning　with　his　whole　weight。　The　spear　moved　forward　inch　by　inch　and　the　terrified　squealing　became　a　high…pitched　scream。　Then　Jack　found　the　throat　and　the　hot　blood　spouted　over　his　hands。　The　sow　collapsed　under　them　and　they　were　heavy　and　fulfilled　upon　her。　The　butterflies　still　danced；　preoccupied　in　the　center　of　the　clearing。
　
　The　fifth　hunt；　moving　us　even　closer　to　the　unbridled　impulses　of　the　human　heart；　is　a　fine　amalgam　of　the　third　and　fourth。　This　time　Simon　is　at　the　center　of　the　hideous　circle；　yet　the　pursuit　is　no　more　make…believe　than　it　was　with　the　heavy…teated　sow。　Simon　is　murdered　not　only　without　punction　but　with　orgiastic　delight。
　The　final　and　climactic　abhorrence　is　the　hunt　for　Ralph。　Its　terror　will　not　be　celebrated　here；　suffice　it　to　say　that　one　refinement　not　present　in　the　Simon　episode　is　added　…a　stick　Roger　sharpens　at　both　ends。　It　had　indeed　been　used　for　the　sow；　with　one　point　piercing　the　earth　and　the　other　supporting　the　severed　head；　but　its　human　use　had　not　yet　been　tested　on　that　island　paradise。
　Such　being　Mr。　Golding's　art　and　conviction；　it　is　little　wonder　that　some　readers　have　judged　him　offensive；　revolting；　depravedly　sensational；　utterly　wicked。　He　has　been　impelled　to　say　that　many　human　beings；　left　unrestrainedly　to　their　own　devices；　will　find　the　most　natural　expression　of　their　desires　to　lie　in　human　head…hunting。　Those　who　affirm　that　man　is　made　in　God's　image　will　be　given　some　pause；　but　upon　reflection　they　will　probably　interpret　the　novel　as　a　portrayal　of　the　inevitable　and　ultimate　condition　of　a　world　without　grace。　Those　who　affirm　that　man　is　basically　and　inherently　good…and　being　better…may　simply　find　the　novel　a　monstrous　perpetuation　of　falsehood。
　Golding's　main　offense；　I　suppose；　is　that　he　profanes　what　many　men　hold　most　precious：　belief　that　the　human　being　is　essentially　good　and　the　child　essentially　innocent。　Yet　his　offense；　as　well　as　his　genius；　lies　not　in　any　originality　of　view　or　statement　but　in　his　startling　ability　to　make　his　story　real；　so　real　that　many　readers　can　only　draw　back　in　terror。　I　would　strongly　affirm；　however；　that　Golding's　intention　is　not　simply　to　leave　us　in　a　negative　state　of　horror。　Lard　of　the　Flies　has　a　tough　moral　and　religious　flavor；2　one　which　a　study　of　its　title　helps　make　clear。
　The　term　〃lord　of　the　flies〃　is　a　translation　of　the　Hebrew　word　〃Baalzebub〃　or　〃Beelzebub。〃　The　Baal　were　the　local　nature　gods　of　the　early　Semitic　peoples。　In　II　Kings　1：2　Baalzebub　is　named　as　the　god　of　Ekron。　All　three　Synoptic　Gospels　refer　to　Beelzebub；　in　Luke　11：15　he　is　called　〃the　chief　of　the　devils。〃　In　English　literature　among　those　who　refer　to　him　are　Christopher　Marlowe　and　Robert　Burton；　though　it　is　left　to　Milton　to　delineate　his　character　at　some　length。　Weltering　by　Satan's　side　he　is　described　as　〃One　next　himself　＇Satan＇　in　power；　and　next　in　crime；　/Long　after　known　in　Palestine；　and　nam'd　Beelzebub。〃　His　subtle　services　to　the　great　Adversary　of　mankind　are　well　known。　To　disregard　the　historical　background　of　Golding's　title3　or　the　place　of　the　Lord　of　the　Flies　within　the　novel　is　to　miss　a　good　part　of　the　author's　intent；　it　is；　indeed；　to　leave　us　with　nothing　but　horror。
　
　2。Thomas　M。　Coskren；　O。　P。；　in　〃Is　Golding　Calvinistic？〃　America；　109　（July　6；　1963）；　18…20；　also　speaks　to　this　point　at　length。　The　essay　is　reprinted　on　pp。　253…260　in　this　volume。…　Eds。
　3。　Golding　seems　to　attach　no　particular　significance　to　the　historical　Beelzebub　but　to　regard　him　as　simply　another　manifestation　or　creation　of　the　human　heart。　（See　James　Keating　and　William　Golding；　〃The　Purdue　Interview；〃　p。　192　in　this　volume。）　It　is　difficult　to　see　how　the　〃historical　background〃　for　the　title　enhances　understanding　of　Golding's　basic　fable；　although　it　certainly　figures　as　a　due　to　the　theme。…Eds。
　
　At　the　conclusion　of　the　fourth　hunt；　after　the　boys　have　hacked　the　multiparous　sow；　they　place　its　head　on　a　stick　as　a　sacrificial　offering　for　some　reputedly　mysterious　and　awesome　beast…actually　a　dead　parachutist　who　had　plummeted　to　the　ground；　now　unrecognizable　as　his　body　rises　and　falls　each　time　the　wind　fills　the　parachute　and　then　withdraws　from　it。　Meanwhile　Simon；　whose　love　for　his　panions　and　desire　to　protect　them　instill　a　courage　extraordinary；　leaves　them　to　search　out　the　darksome　creature。　He　finds　himself　confronted　by　the　primitive　offering；　by　〃the　head　grinning　amusedly　in　the　strange　daylight；　ignoring　lie　flies；　the　spilled　guts；　even　ignoring　the　indignity　of　being　spiked　on　a　stick。〃　As　he　is　impelled　to　stare　at　the　gruesome　object；　it　undergoes　a　black；　unholy　transfiguration；　he　sees　no　longer　just　a　pig's　head　on　a　stick；　his　gaze；　we　are　told；　is　〃held　by　that　ancient；　inescapable　recognition。〃　And　that　which　is　inescapably　recognized　by　Simon　is　of　primordial　root。　Its　shrewdness　and　devastation　have　long　been　chronicled：　it　is　on　center　stage　in　the　third　chapter　of　Genesis；　it　gained　the　rapt　attention　of　Hosea　and　Amos　and　the　prophets　who　followed　them。
　As　Simon　and　the　Lord　of　the　Flies　continue　to　face　each　other；　the　nature　of　the　latter　is　clearly　and　explicitly　set　forth　in　an　imaginary　conversation　which　turns　into　a　dramatic　monologue。　The　head　speaks：
　
　〃What　are　you　doing　out　here　all　alone？　Aren't　you　afraid　of　me？〃　Simon　shook。
　〃There　isn't　anyone　to　help　you。　Only　me。　And　I'm　the　Beast。〃　Simon's　mouth　labored；　brought　forth　audible　words。　〃Pig's　head　on　a　stick。〃
　〃Fancy　thinking　the　Beast　was　something　you　could　hunt　and　kill〃　said　the　head。　。　。　。　〃You　knew；　didn't　you？　I'm　part　of　you？　Close；　dose；　close！　I'm　the　reason　why　it's　no　go？　Why　things　are　what　they　are？〃
　
　A　moment　later；　the　Beast　goes　on：
　
　〃I'm　warning　you；　I'm　going　to　get　angry。　D'you　see？　You're　not　wanted。　Understand？　We　are　going　to　have
　fun　on　this　island。　Understand？　We　are　going　to　have　fun　on　this　island！　So　don't　try　it　on；　my　poor　misguided　boy；　or　else…〃
　Simon　found　he　was　looking　into　a　vast　mouth。　There　was　blackness　within；　a　blackness　that　spread。
　〃…Or　else；〃　said　the　Lord　of　the　Flies；　〃we　shall　do　you。　See？　Jack　and　Roger　and　Maurice　and　Robert　and　Bill　and　Piggy　and　Ralph。　Do　you。　See？〃
　Simon　was　inside　the　mouth。　He　fell　down　and　lost　consciousness。
　
　The　〃ancient；　inescapable　recognition〃　is　that　the　Lord　of　the　Flies　is　a　part　of　Simon；　of　all　the　boys　on　the　island；　of　every　man。　And　he　is　the　reason　〃things　are　what　they　are。〃　He　is　the　demonic　essence　whose　inordinate　hunger；　never　assuaged；　seeks　to　devour　all　men；　to　bend　them　to　his　will。　He　is；　in　Golding's　novel；　accurately　identified　only　by　Simon。　And　history　has　made　clear；　as　the　Lord　of　the　Flies　affirms；　that　the　Simons　are　not　wanted；　that　they　do　spoil　what　is　quaintly　called　the　〃fun〃　of　the　world；　and　that　antagonists　will　〃do〃　them。
　Simon　does　not　heed　the　〃or　else〃　imperative；　for　he　bears　too　important　a　message：　that　the　beast　is　〃harmless　and　horrible。〃　The　direct　reference　here　is　to　the　dead　parachutist　whose　spectrally　moving　form　had　terrified　the　boys；　the　corpse　is；　obviously；　both　harmless　and　horrible。　But　it　should　also　be　remembered　that　the　Lord　of　the　Flies　identified　itself　as　the　Beast　and　that　it　too　might　be　termed　〃harmless　and　horrible。〃　Simon　alone　has　the　key　to　its　potential　harmlessness。　It　will　bee　harmless　only　when　it　bees　universally　recognized；　recognized　not　as　a　principle　of　fun　but　as　the　demonic　impulse　which　is　utterly　destructive。　Simon　staggers　on　to　his　panions　to　bear　the　immediate　good　news　that　the　beast　（the　rotting　parachutist）　is　harmless。　Yet　he　carries　with　him　a　deeper　revelation；　namely；　that　the　Beast　（the　Lord　of　the　Flies）　is　no　overwhelming　extrinsic　force；　but　a　potentially　fatal　inner　itching；　recognition　of　which　is　a　first　step　toward　its　annihilation。　Simon　bees；　of　course；　the　suffering　victim　of　the　boys　on　the　island　and；　by　extension；　of　the　readers　of　the　book。4
　
　4pare　Donald　R。　Spangler；　〃Simon〃　on　pp。　211…215　in　this　volume。…Eds。
　
　IV
　
　To　me　Lord　of　the　Flies　is　a　profoundly　true　book。　Its　happy　offense　lies　in　its　masterful；　dramatic　and　powerful　narration　of　the　human　condition；　with　which　a　peruser　of　the　daily　newspaper　should　already　be　familiar。　The　ultimate　purpose　of　the　novel　is　not　to　leave　its　readers　in　a　state　of　paralytic　horror。　The　intention　is　certainly　to　impress　upon　them　man's；　any　man's；　miraculous　ingenuity　in　perpetrating　evil；　but　it　is　also　to　impress　upon　them　the　gift　of　a　saving　recognition　which；　to　Golding；　is　apparently　the　only　saving　recognition。　An　orthodox　phrase　for　this　recognition　is　the　〃conviction　of　sin；〃　an　expression　which　grates　on　many　contemporary　ears；　and　yet　one　which　the　author　seemingly　does　not　hold　in　derision。
　Lecturing　at　Johns　Hopkins　University　in　the　spring　of　1962；　Golding　said　that　Lord　of　the　Flies　is　a　study　of　sin。　And　he　is　a　person　who　uses　words　with　precision。　Sin　is　not　to　be　confused　with　crime；　which　is　a　transgression　of　human　law；　it　is　instead　a　transgression　of　divine　law。　Nor　does　Golding　believe　that　the　Jacks　and　Rogers　are　going　to　be　reconstructed　through　social　legislation　eventuating　in　some　form　of　utopianism…he　and　Conrad's　Mr。　Kurtz　are　at　one　in　their　evaluation　of　societal　laws　which；　they　agree；　exercise　external　restraint　but　have　at　best　a　slight　effect　on　the　human　heart。　Golding　is　explicit：　〃The　theme　＇of　Lord　of　the　Flies＇〃　he　writes；　〃is　an　attempt　to　trace　the　defects　of　society　back　to　the　defects　of　human　nature。　The　moral　is　that　the　shape　of　a　society　must　depend　on　the　ethical　nature　of　the　individual　and　not　on　any　political　system　however　apparently　logical　or　respectable；〃
　William　Golding's　story　is　as　old　as　the　written　word。　The　figure　of　the　Lord　of　the　Flies；　of　Beelzebub；　is　one　of　the　primary　archetypes　of　the　Western　world。　The　novel　is　the　parable　of　fallen　man。　But　it　does　not　close　the　door　on　that　man；　it　entreats　him　to　know　himself　and　his　Adversary；　for　he　cannot　do　bat　against　an　unrecognized　force；　especially　when　it　lies　within　him。
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　
　Is　Golding　Calvinistic？1
　A　more　optimistic　interpretation　of　the　
　symbolism　found　in　Lo