|
Post by 2cjamesquah28 on Apr 10, 2008 5:15:45 GMT -5
Hi guys, attempting Question 1 now,
Question 1
Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face?
From my point of view, i think that Jack's personality changes mainly because of his morphing moral character which is unavoidable.
Firstly, when Jack actually applies coloured clay to his face, he is in reality, wearing a "mask". A mask which symbolises a cover for shame and self consciousness. This can be seen from page 80 "and the mask was a thing on itws own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness."
How do we prove then, that Jack's moral sense and justification were actually degrading and being replaced by more sinister senses such as savagery. Jack was becoming a blood-thirsty monster with no goals except to hunt. Here comes the interesting part, how do we prove this? If you read carefully from the book. There are phrases that actually depicts Jack as a "dark and sinister character".
1) "When Roger opened his eyes and saw him, a darker shadow crept beneath the swarthiness of his skin; but Jack noticed nothing"
- We can infer from this that a darker "thing" was overtaking Jack. This "thing" might just as well be that savagery sense all of us are talking about. However, Jack does not notice anything about this at all. Thus, we can infer further that Jack was actually becoming more "obsessed" to this savagery sense and being overtaken by it.
2) "Jack, concealed from the sun, knelt by the pool and opened two large leaves that he carried."
- In this part, the author allows us to visualise this image by his form of writing. Hence, the main idea that Jack, concealed from the sun appeals to us that Jack is actually becoming more and more "dark" within his inner self.
To sidetrack a litte, i would like to bring to everyone's attention that the clay's colour might actually play a part. As you notice, the coloured clay Jack applied to his face only consisted of RED, BLACK, and White.
-Red, symbolising danger. -Black, symbolising sins and negativity. -White, symbolising death itself.
Hence, i think that William Golding actually chose this 3 colours to further allow us to conceive an image of "Mad Jack".
Lastly, by applying this "coloured clay" to his face, besides his personality changing from one end to the other extreme end. The 'clay mask' actually signifies a mask or mass negativity and instills fear.
This can be supported by the following quote on page 80. This is when Jack was confronting the twins SAMnERIC.
"Come on! I'll creep up and stab-----" The mask compelled them
Hence, i conclude that Jack's personality changes as he applies to coloured clay to his face as the "clay" masks his inner justified moral sense. In absence of this, the mask actually kind of takes control of Jack, and makes him into this savage beast.
Cheers, James Quah 2C28
|
|
|
Post by Sean Lee 2A16 on Apr 12, 2008 5:24:20 GMT -5
1) Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face? 2) The older boys call the small boys "littluns". What is the function of this label? What does the fact that they basically remain nameless convey about their purpose in the story? (1) I think that the coloured clay changes his civilised schoolboy personality to that of someone savage and imitating a tribesman hunter. (2) The label "littuns" is to identify the smaller boys who were also trapped on the island. The fact that they remain nameless tells us that they would not make much of a change to the whole plot of the story, even if names were given to them.
|
|
|
Post by 2cisaacng23 on Apr 12, 2008 8:32:25 GMT -5
Hey all. I'll be attempting Question 2.
Question 2: The older boys call the small boys "littluns". What is the function of this label? What does the fact that they basically remain nameless convey about their purpose in the story?
The function of this label of "littluns" is to generally differentiate the older and younger boys into groups. Smaller boys being called "littluns"; Could be due to convenience as there is quite a number of the kids around on the island, as mentioned in an earlier chapter that Piggy could not take down all their names the be accountable for their welfare as they were easily excitable and extremely active. This label could also be to impose their authority on the "littluns", to show that they are superior in knowledge, maturity and experience.
The fact that they remain relatively nameless aside from one or two "littluns" who are given names, suggests that they are of relative less importance than the "biguns". The small children tend to blend into the background, and are the "society" on the island, kids who are emotional and impressionable. For example, as assemblies, they are the ones that are most excitable and reactive to whatever suggestions and opinions whoever makes. However, the "littluns" play quite a deciding factor in the political society on the island between Ralph and Jack. With the older kids in leadership and important roles, the "littluns" serve little more than a common society and community on the island, other than accepting and facilitating instructions of the older children.
|
|
|
Post by 2candrewwong01 on Apr 13, 2008 4:09:08 GMT -5
Hi, will be responding to question 2: 2) The older boys call the small boys "littluns". What is the function of this label? What does the fact that they basically remain nameless convey about their purpose in the story? Personally, I feel that this label also has another political meaning to it. The ¡®normal¡¯ meaning is just to convey that this group of young children who are never able to keep still and never serious, always wanting to play and have never contributed a single thing to any of the assemblies. Hence, I think that William Golding does not want to give them all names and generalize them instead as a whole cohort is mainly to express the insignificance of their roles in the story other than complaining. The political meaning conveyed is that the ¡®littluns¡¯ also represent the general public while Jack and Ralph represent the 2 leaders of their political parties. The ¡®littluns¡¯ are easily swayed and their allegiance and cannot really stick to any one leader for a long time. It is a lack of devotion, much shown in the real world. Whenever one has something better than another, they follow that special one. In this case, when Jack realized his skills and addictedness to hunting and managed to get a lot of meat, the ¡®littluns¡¯ immediately followed him, forgetting all about Ralph who was the one who got them all together. There wasn¡¯t anything called gratitude. The author is probably trying to say that this bunch of kids cannot really make up their minds for themselves and require the leaders to provide the ¡®carrot-and stick¡¯ idea where unless there are any incentives, they would pledge their allegiance to that person for the time being¡ Thanks. Andrew Wong, 2C01
|
|
|
Post by 2cisaacng23 on Apr 15, 2008 7:38:05 GMT -5
Hey all. I'll be attempting Question 1.
1) Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face?
In this question, I feel that the coloured clay serves as a facade and a mask to hide Jack's savageness that had crept into his being gradually from the start of the story.
I agree with Jie Hui's point about how Jack went off track from civilisation, and I would like to add another point that hints at Jack's savage 'instincts'. In Chapter 3 (Huts On The Beach), it is mentioned that Jack had a certain desire to kill and hunt animals, with the obsession that was evident in the way he spoke and his eyes. It was described as a certain kind of madness that he thought he might kill. This underlines a certain stage of savageness that Jack had came to at this point in the story, and it should worsen to become more of a senseless savage.
Jack nearly loses all sense of civilisation the moment he applies the coloured clay to his face. This is evident from the way that he carries himself and becomes unable to see any sense in the long term goal of getting rescued by making fire and smoke, to short term goals such as killing and hunting to survive of the island on a day-by-day basis. He had already been rash and thoughtless before he came to the island, and the factors that surrounded the environment; Fear, survival and power, just made it worse and developed into the critical point when he applies coloured clay to his face, just like savages.
Jack's personality already had flaws that threatened his sanity, and the smearing of coloured clay together with the other negative aspects of the island just accelerated his progress towards utter savageness.
Thanks all.
|
|
|
Post by 2czhengxuan26 on Apr 18, 2008 9:38:05 GMT -5
1) Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face? heyall =D i am here to answer question 1... so here goes. so basically, after jack looked at his reflection in the water, he started dancing and SNARLING bloodthirstily. the mask was like an item used to hide the savagery that Jack was presenting: his desire to kill and hunt, as Jack would have been shameful and haunted by his self-consciousness if he had done it in his civilisation. like what isaac said, he has lost his "sanity" in a way, he does not care much about getting rescued, just hunting and killing, and after he puts on the clay, this personality becomes more obvious, and Jack is basically on the path to savagery. Jack was quite a reckless and "powerthirsty" person, and could be seen from the start of the book, from how he ran off with the children after Ralph decides to make a fire on the mountain, and also how Jack wanted to be leader at the start of the book. Thus, to conclude, Jack's personality actually does not take a big "change", it just escalates, and turns him into a even savager, bloodthirstier person than before, and is using the clay "mask" as a MEDIUM to hide the shame and self consciousness, that still BUGS him, the things that exist in the laws of civillisation that still affect him, although these were lost in the later part of the book. THanks
|
|
|
Post by 2bterrechua29 on Apr 18, 2008 10:24:11 GMT -5
Hey all,
I will be attempting to answer question 1
Question 1
Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face?
This is beacuse Jack discovers the other side of a mask’s power — the power to liberate — when he applies the clay and charcoal camouflage: “the mask was a thing on its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness.”
While the masks of polite society leash our evil nature, Jack’s mask of colored clay unleashes it.
The mask — or the transformation it invokes — frightens the hunter Bill, who initially laughs but then backs off into the jungle, and it compels the twins to abandon their fire tending duties, a symbol of how they are being drawn away from all of the civilized domesticity and common hope for rescue, ehich is represented by the fire.
Jack refers to the mask as “dazzle paint,” the camouflage used in warfare, clearly linking his new identity as a shameless killer with those adults fighting the war.
Cheers, Terre Chua 2B29
|
|
|
Post by 2btaytianwen28 on Apr 19, 2008 4:31:20 GMT -5
Hi all,
I disagree with terre on his point that the mask unleashes our evil nature to a certain extent.
“the mask was a thing on its own, behind which Jack hid, liberated from shame and self-consciousness.”
Shame and self-consciousness ae emotions that enable us to "think before act" . These serve as chains in today's society that keeps the way civilisation, its standards, its role and its puropose should be.
To be "liberated" from shame and self-consciousness, is correct to a certain extent, is to be free of the dreadlocks of civilistion, and this enables us to unleash the evil within us. But, in this context, this applies to a mask. A mask is usually associated with hiding away from truth and purity, and to show some form of "morale" strength.
To be liberated from such shows that Jack has a weak personality, for he easily descends into svagery just by the killing of pigs and the sight of blood ( minor cause, though) and easily spiritually dominated by the Lord of the Flies.
Thus, to be liberated from such shame and self-consciousness potrays Jack's weak personality, rather than the evil within him.
Do post any comments.
Thanks,
Tian Wen
|
|
|
Post by 2balcanderseah01 on Apr 19, 2008 4:37:41 GMT -5
Quoting from Tian Wen's post that also, the term "littluns" also conveys the message that they are weak mentally and physically, which is quite true and can also be supprted by textual evidence. I do not think that it conveys the message that they are weaker than the others. Yes, they are weaker to a certain extent but the reason that they sway from one side to another is for the sake of their own benefits and safety as evident in when they are willing to put aside their discontent regarding Jack to ensure protection from the beast. You claimed that it can be supported by contextual knowledge. Perhaps you can clarify on this. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by 2bwenkang04 on Apr 19, 2008 9:00:58 GMT -5
Hi, I am sitting on the fence between this arguement. Terre said that the mask unleashes evil nature. I agree with this to a certain extent, because the mask sort of acts as a shield, a shield protecting the bearer from shame, which leads on to Terre's inference. Hence, I think that he is missing a part out which made Tianwen think otherwise. On to Tianwen's point, I agree to a certain extent to his post, but I think that Jack does have a strong personality. Jack enthusiasticly volunteered himself to be chief. Jack was very dominant in his social game, interacting with everyone else (the hunters and even Ralph, except Piggy, whom he was disgusted with). Jack was also very popular and often stole the limelight from Ralph, hence I think that Jack has a strong personality. The most probable reason about Jack flinching at blood and killing (at first) was that he was still civilised, he did not have any experience, and he was still young and innocent. However, I agree that the littleuns are weak mentally and physically. This can be shown in the text, in which the littleuns cried when talking about the beast and their home and their family etc. This strongly highlights that the littleuns have seriously no self-control. Hence, they are weak mentally. Even though they have boundless of energy running about, the littleuns only channeled that energy into playing, making sandcastles and enjoying themselves. They did not make any significant contribution to camp well-being at all. Thus, they can be seen as physically weak, by lying and lazing. However, I disagree with Alcander's point about the littleuns swaying from one side to another is for the sake of their own benefits and safety. I think that the main reason why the littleuns sway from side to side because they are innocent, they are immature. They do not understand what's going on. They're only 6 or 7. They obviously do not know the political system on the island. Most probably they listen to the more dominant speaker, which is Jack. That is why they sway side to side. Furthermore, they play and giggle during the assembly. This shows that they're not concentrating at all. Thank you. Regards, Wen Kang.
|
|
|
Post by 2btaytianwen28 on Apr 19, 2008 22:09:23 GMT -5
Hi all,
Yes, Wen kang, you are right. That has been exactly what i had been trying to put across. Here's a summary to sum up Jack's personality
Civilised Boy --- Weak personality
1. Easily spiritually dominated by the LOTF 2. Flinching at sight of blood 3. Hesitated when about to kill the pig 4. easily descended into savagery
Civilised-Savage Boy --- Strong Personality
(refer to Wen Kang's post on my comments)
Thanks,
Tian Wen
|
|
|
Post by 2candrewwong01 on Apr 20, 2008 3:47:36 GMT -5
i am going to post about Q.1...
1) Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face?
When Jack decides at this moment to paint his face, he basically ¡®throws away¡¯ his civilized self and adopts one of a sort of barbaric tribal hunter. This also has both a big change in his physical appearance and his psychological side. By painting himself, he makes himself so scary that Bill ran away after looking at Jack. Jack also perceives himself as a savage hunter, a change from an innocent arrogant schoolboy. By painting his face using so much red clay, that could have represented in a keen and longing bloodlust. His bloodlust formed after he realized his love for hunting and after he didn¡¯t manage to kill the first pig. So during this hunt, Jack was pumped with determination and was desperate to kill a pig and was very serious. By painting his face, he hopes to make himself look savage and merciless so that probably that will reflect in his mind when he is about to kill the pig. He could have been telling himself¡±I am a savage hunter. I am going to kill this pig without any mercy without hesitating. I am not going to be afraid like last time.¡±
|
|
|
Post by 2cleeyiren16 on Apr 21, 2008 10:08:48 GMT -5
1) Why do you think Jack's personality changes when he applies the coloured clay to his face?
Personality is defined as "the type of person you are, which is shown by the way you behave, feel and think:"
Jack's personality changes in terms of: the type of person---British boy to savage behaviour---civilised to babaric, bloodthirsty and commanding feeling---weak and timid to strong and violent thought---maintaining fire signal for rescue to hunting meat for survival
At first, Jack claimed that the mask was to camouflage himself for hunting. However there were deeper emotions in this action. He was astonished when he first looked at himself. He thought the image was no longer himself but at an awesome stranger. The word "awesome" describes that he felt proud of the new mask. He was more happy and proud to be a savage than a British boy. This shows the beginning of his savergy instinct and the downfall of civilisation instincts. The mask gave him an identity of a savage. The change in identity made him excited and he danced and laughed wildly like never before. Turning from a British boy to a savage immediately gave him freedom like never before. The mask no longer just serves as a dazzle paint but liberated him from shame and self-consciousness. He relished every moment of freedom to be savage in the absence of adults. The colours of the clay on his face black, red and white amused Bill at first but scared him later. Jack later turned more fierce and the mask compelled the rest to follow. One by one savagery in the mask swallowed the civilisation the boys once knew.
2) The older boys call the small boys "littluns". What is the function of this label? What does the fact that they basically remain nameless convey about their purpose in the story?
The boys being isolated on the island is trying to recreate the basix structures of civilisation on the island. They even begin to develop their own language, calling the yuounger children "littluns". The word "littluns" sound like a noun of little. The fact that the young children are being called 'littluns' instead of their names tells us that they are looked down at. They are regarded as little childish kids that has no ability. Some older boys such as Roger and Jack continuoualy teased and tortured them. The littluns may also represents the citizens and public. They are like the chess pieces that are easily commanded and swayed by the players or older boys. Their support represents power. The boys tried to recreate a political stage through democratic voting. The littluns are people to give their support. As the 'political leaders', Ralph and Jack advanced into conflict, the littluns turned chaotic. The fact they remained nameless means they are insignificant and are just masses of power the leader wields.
|
|
|
Post by 2bmarcel16 on Apr 25, 2008 7:55:57 GMT -5
2)The older boys call the small boys "littluns". What is the function of this label? What does the fact that they basically remain nameless convey about their purpose in the story?
The label is there to show the reader that the littluns were basically just the little boys. Let's look into the word. Why do the older boys not call them by their own names, or by a more normal term-Junior? One will actually see that the word "littlun" is not a correct English word and hence shows the boys deviation from civilized actions on the island.On the other hand, it might be that as littluns refer to the general group of little boys, calling them littluns rather than Juniors would let the older boys have a significantly higher measure of control over them.By calling them Juniors, the boys would think themselves as on the same level as the biguns, which was not what some of the biguns wanted.
Now onto the second part of the question.The fact that they remain nameless throughout the whole story tells me that the littluns were more significant when called by a group. Why is that so? In the story, few of the littluns were identified by name, hence they could be said to be basically having no bearing on the behavior of the biguns. The biguns were the focus of the story and generally the littluns were also there to show the contrast between Ralph and Jack and their aims and foreshadow the eventual joining of Jack's side. One example would be that when Jack goes to hunt, the littluns are persuaded to join Jack's side of the argument as they are motivated by the normal human desire to eat. Hence, the littluns are also there to lend a human touch to the story. Notice the lack of normal human desires from Ralph and Jack throughout the whole story. The littluns are also motivated by the children desires for fun. Thus, we can say that the littluns were basically there to show contrast between Ralph and Jacks' aims and to foreshadow the separation and to lend a humane touch to the story.
|
|
|
Post by 2btaytianwen28 on Apr 25, 2008 8:50:08 GMT -5
Hi all,
i disagree with marcel's point that hat the littluns were basically there to show contrast between Ralph and Jacks' aims and to foreshadow the separation and to lend a humane touch to the story, to a certain extent.
Yes, only a few littluns were named -- Simon, Percival, Samneric, just these three out of all the littluns had the “honour" and "privilege" to be called by name. However, these littluns played vital roles in developing the story -- Simon's connection with nature, his death, Percival breaking down during the assembly , the symbolism of percival forgetting his own name, and the importance of Samneric in Ralph's tribe. Thus, it would be wrong to only say as so.
However, you are also correct, to a certain extent, as you have already stated yourself.
Do post any comments.
Thanks,
Tian Wen
|
|