MovieChat Forums > Lord of the Flies (1990) Discussion > Conrad or Shelley?

Conrad or Shelley?

posted 8 years ago by abishai_gangulee
1 reply | jump to latest

This film, another adaptation of the Nobel Prize winning story by Sir William Golding, presents the story of academy boys stranded on an island and forced to forge pragmatism philosophies amidst instincts of savagery.

This 1990 adaptation is very well choreographed and mounted, so we can use it satisfyingly to talk about 'pedestrianism academics.'

Was Golding talking about the proverbial 'heart of darkness' (i.e., Joseph Conrad), or was he talking about the mystery of rebelliousness (i.e., Mary Shelley)?

There are two camps formed (in this film), and one is determined to use teamwork as its ethic, while the other prides itself over the successful management of the yearning to hunt and play.

Conrad suggested that our curiosity about self-fulfillment lies at the crux of the anti-social heart of darkness, while Shelley suggested that our interest in perceiving or encountering mysterious beings (or aliens) reflects our fascination with self-criticism and atheism.

Conrad was interested in evil, while Shelley was interested in mutation.

Such a differentiation can be well-discussed (in a classroom) with this engaging film.

====

BOY 1: This island is like paradise, and we must honor it.
BOY 2: This island is a playground, and we should revel!
BOY 1: We must stick together and remain 'mature.'
BOY 2: No, we must indulge in our freedom and imagination!
BOY 1: If we are not practical, we'll become too wild.
BOY 2: If we don't have fun, we'll become like our parents!
BOY 1: We need to consider the benefits of teamwork.
BOY 2: We want to enjoy the fruits of pleasure!

====

😷

Heart of Darkness (Conrad):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Darkness

Frankenstein (Shelley):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankenstein

[–] abishai_gangulee 8 years ago

The tragic character Piggy tries to help Ralph but in the end is devastated by the cruelties of Jack's savage gang while trying desperately to negotiate.

Should Piggy be isolated and therefore protected (given his vulnerabilities)?

This question can help us better discern if this story is a parallel to Conrad's or Shelley's themes.

If Piggy's death is a revelation, then Conrad's approach to isolationism-experimentation holds fruit, but if Piggy's death is to be considered absolutely avoidable, then Shelley's approach to 'live-and-learn' rhetoric may even redeem Jack and his cruelty.

IMO, Piggy serves to remind us that regardless of who is right or wrong or what is being staked, the most important value/virtue in times of struggle is simply self-evaluation.

If we seek self-evaluation and avoid excessive criticisms of others, then each individual's worth rises to the surface.

It's this sort of contemplation which I think is very accessible in this 1990 adaptation of the bright Golding novel.

{paraphrased}

====

PIGGY: Jack has become so savage.
RALPH: He's like the AntiChrist.
PIGGY: Why have we tossed away our Christian values?
RALPH: We've started to think like despots.
PIGGY: I wish Jesus were here.
RALPH: Every person has to find his own virtue.
PIGGY: Yeah, but Jesus would save the day.
RALPH: Talk like that, and they'll call you a 'sissy.'
PIGGY: I'd rather be scared than savage.
RALPH: So would I Piggy, so let's stick together.
PIGGY: I'll keep praying on the hill.
RALPH: I'll keep scheming on how to foil Jack's plans.

====

😷