Controversial Classics: Lord of the Flies

To me, Lord of the Flies was my gateway to literature. As I reached middle school, I had thought I lost my passion for reading. Reading fantasy novels like Harry Potter and Percy Jackson once felt like escapism into a fantastical world. I was utterly swepted into the worldbuilding and excitement. However, as I reached my teenage years, I realized I wasn't losing myself in these worlds anymore. I craved something else in the story; something deeper. I found that in Lord of the Flies, as my eighth grade class had to read it. I was utterly taken by its commentary on human nature, society, democracy, and our world as a whole. It completely rearranged my world and the way I view others. Prior to reading this novel, I did not put much thought into the lives of others, or society in general. I simply decided that some people are mean, and some are kind. Lord of the Flies allowed me to understand that humanity is intensely layered, and rules may just be the thing binding our society together.

The story is set on a deserted island where a group of British schoolboys attempt to govern themselves. They begin by attempting democracy and order, but quickly descends into chaos, fear, and savagery. Unlike other novels that I was used to that relied on external antagonists, the terror of this novel comes from the schoolboys themselves. Golding illustrates his ideology on human nature, which he believes derives naturally from within all humans when restraint is removed.

Needless to say, the novel has has been one of the most banned and challenged in schools, criticized for its graphic violence, bleak view of humanity, and supposed unsuitability for young readers. But to me, this is precisely why it is necessary. Shielding readers from discovering new perspectives on the nature of humanity and shielding depictions of allegorical realities from them only denies them the chance to reckon with the uncomfortable truths it presents.

Philosophically, Lord of the Flies is centered on themes of loss of innocence, civilization versus savagery, and human fear. The "beastie" that the boys all hallucinate and scapegoat represents the projection of their innate darkness. This brought me back to the question, are humans inherently good but corrupted by society (as Rousseau believed), or are humans inherently evil with only societal order to restrain us (as Hobbes believed)? The novel argues the latter, as it is shown with the boys that once structure is gone, savagery emerges. Simon's revelation that the beast is not in fact real but a manifestation of human nature brings this point home, especially as he is murdered when he tries to share this information.

The novel's thematic elements, motifs, and characters also resonates with Freudian theory. Ralph as the ego, with his democracy and order; Jack as the id, with his primal instincts and aggression; and Piggy as the superego, with his rationality and intellect. Their conflict mirrors the internal struggle that exists in every individual. When Jack’s id-like impulses take over, the ego and superego are crushed, leaving only chaos.

Another psychological layer is how group dynamics amplify violence. Alone, none of the boys may have killed Simon. Yet together, under the rhythm of chants and the pressure of belonging, they commit an unspeakable act. This reflects real-world phenomena like mob mentality and deindividuation, where personal responsibility dissolves in the crowd and violence becomes possible.

Ultimately, Lord of the Flies does not simply tell a story of boys on an island. It is a philosophical and psychological warning: civilization is fragile, and beneath it lies a darkness we all share. Golding forces us to confront the uncomfortable possibility that the greatest danger to humanity is not an external beast, but ourselves.