Through a close reading of the aforementioned texts, the reader can arrive at the conclusion that these Christ-like figures’ demise is brought about by their own sins. Clear is this in The Great Gatsby, where Gatsby’s defining moment of sacrifice is also a misdeed on his part. When Gatsby accepts responsibility for Daisy’s killing of Myrtle (Fitzgerald 137), he is lying about his involvement by taking the fall. Lying is considered a sin, and is forbidden by the Ten Commandments. While Jesus died for the sins of others, he did not lie to do so. Rather, he was falsely accused and accepted his execution because it was part of God’s plan. In fact, theologians have rifled through scripture and found zero instances of Jesus ever lying (Apologetics …show more content…
Obviously, his murder of the Arab is a sin, one that results in his arrest and eventual execution. Looking deeper into Meursault’s psyche, though, the reader sees that he cares little for human life. In fact, upon hearing about his mother’s death, he comments that it “doesn’t mean anything” (Camus 1). This stands in contrast to the Christian interpretation that "Human life is sacred… involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator" (Catechism 2258). It is his lack of compassion for human life that allows him to so easily be drawn to murdering the Arab. His opposition to basic moral values is what is ultimately responsible for his ironically Christ-like …show more content…
Simon is the traditional moral Christian character while Jack is a raging savage. In psychology, the id is the impulsive part of the human psyche, while the superego is the conscience, and the ego mediates between the two, manifesting appropriate actions (Freud). So from a Freudian perspective, Simon is the superego of the schoolboys while Jack is the id. We can look at these characters as representing the struggle within every one of us and thus treat them as one. The rest of the boys represent the more rational brain that is the ego. Knowing this, It is clear that Jack’s sins lead to Simon’s death. Jack is the one to whip up the other boys into a frenzy of destruction. He leads the boys in the brutal slaughter of a pig, shoving a spear “right up her ass!” (Golding 138) after the pig is already long dead. The hunt is no longer just about having meat to eat—it is about uncontrolled and over-the-top behavior and the use of excessive force. This contravenes the doctrine of Christianity where love and compassion are among its foundational pillars. Jack also uses the artificial concept of ‘the beast’ to play on the boys’ fears (Golding 126). For Jack, the beast is an opportunity to make himself appear stronger and braver than Ralph; he uses the polarizing topic of the beast to draw attention to himself, capitalizing on the boys' fear of the unknown and dark jungle paths. Here he exhibits
While Jack and Ralph represent the distinct polarization between civilization and savagery. Simon is separated from both of these dimensions. Simon represents built-in goodness. The other boys who hold on to their sense of morality only do so because society has conditioned and trained them to act in a certain way. They do not have an innate sense of morality. Unlike the other boys on the island, Simon does not act morally because an external force has compelled him to do so, instead he finds value in performing good actions.
The truth was that Jay Gatsby of West Egg, Long Island, sprang from his platonic conception of himself. He was a son of God-- a phrase which, if it means anything, means just that-- and he must be about His Father's business, the service of a vast, vulgar, and meretricious beauty. So he invented just the sort of Jay Gatsby that a seventeen-year-old boy would be likely to invent, and to this conception he was faithful to the end (99).
Daisy, and George are morally responsible for the death of Gatsby. & nbsp; Tom, because of his tattling on Gatsby, can be morally blamed for his slam. the murder of Gatsby. When George talked to him, Tom told George it was Gatsby's car hit Myrtle, but he failed to mention that it was Daisy. driving. Even though it was never directly mentioned, it is shown that Tom knew Daisy was the one who killed Myrtle when Nick said, ".and anybody." would have said that they were conspiring together," (p.146) when referring. to Tom and Daisy talking in their house. This "conspiring" was probably a. plan to get Daisy away from the whole incident. Furthermore, Tom and Daisy leave town the next day, proving Tom's knowledge of Daisy's guilt by just trying to escape with her. Even knowing this, Tom still had the indecency. to tell George it was Gatsby's car. Tom can also be morally blamed for the killing of Gatsby because of his affair with Myrtle. George killed Gatsby not only because he thought he killed Myrtle, but also because he was under the impression that Gatsby was the one having the affair with his wife.
The impact of Jack’s savagery on the island leads to the boys forgetting the real truth about about themselves. The boys on the island are able to explain that human are evil from the beginning and that they aren’t impacted by society. The boys see the island as a place where they are free from the adult world and without any rules. The boys don’t realize that a world without rules causes the chaos on the island and the savagery within the boys. Jack’s authoritative power forces him to push the rest of the boys out of their comfort zone by making them evil being that was not there true identity before. Upon realizing that the savagery they had obtained was only destroying themselves they “wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man's heart”(202). The power that was developed by Jack impacts everyone and destroys all of the lives that rejected him. Piggy who was the most knowledgeable character and also the weakest character was often disrespected by Jack because he opposed Jack’s power and recognizes that his power not voted for. As as result, Piggy is killed by Jack’s own boys because they too have been impacted by brute force. They killed piggy just like how they hunted pigs. Next, Simon's death reflects the rejections of religion and the idea that the
Noel Coward said, “The higher the building, the lower the morals.” In the book The Great Gatsby this is the case. The individuals that are considered “upper class” are more willing to sacrifice their morals then the people that are in the “lower class.” However, the lower class is not perfect either. A theme for The Great Gatsby is people may be willing to sacrifice their morals to achieve what they think they want. Jay Gatsby, Daisy and Tom Buchannan and Nick Carraway are just four examples of people that are willing to sacrifice their morals to get what they want.
In the novel, Jack began as a confident, adventuresome young boy, but as time progressed, he sunk to a level of savagery where he could hardly be considered human. The excitement was fresh on the first day when Jack, Ralph and Simon went out
In conflict with the law enforcement, Meursault feels no remorse for his past murder of the Arab. Although, he does realize that he has done something terribly wrong according to society. Unable to feel any emotion, he personally lists it as a burden for others. He believes what he did was not that serious and did not think about it twice when he committed the crime . He does not care for society's approval and has never cared for it.
... his mother and the idea of God which is again supported by his close relationships. Those relationships are with people who don’t believe in a higher being or who show no true morals. Camus accommodates white with many objects and people, yet purposely excludes Meursault and refers to him as dark. All of these techniques show Meursault as a nonreligious man with potential to harm without remorse. This leads up to his interaction with light where he feels uncomfortable just as he does with God. Meursault’s history and personality lead up to the murder of the Arab, the distraction of the light, and in the end, accusing God, “the light”, for his criminal behavior. Human nature needs moral standards or the world would be as corrupt as Meursault’s life.
When he reached up to the mountain, he saw the pilot’s dead body. Next to it he saw a parachute that was tangled in rocks. By seeing the parachute going up and down because of the wind, Simon realized that him and the boys had mistaken about the beast. Simon untangles the parachute, freeing the parachute from the rocks. After realizing that there is no beast, Simon starts going down the mountain towards the fire at Jack’s feast to tell the other boys about what he had just seen. Ralph and Piggy both attend the feast with the hopes to have some control over events. At the feast, the boys are laughing and eating the roasted pig. After the big meal was over, they all set in a circle by the fire. Jack orders his tribe to do their wild hunting dance. The other boys started chanting and dancing with them, even Ralph and Piggy. They decide to reenact the hunting of the pig and became very loud and energetic. suddenly , the boys saw a shadowy figure coming out of the forest (it was Simon). They didn’t recognize Simon and started yelling, “Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!” as stated in document D. All the boys started to tear simon apart with their bare hands and teeth. Simon tried to tell them what had happened and remind them of him but the boys were not willing to listen to him. Then suddenly the storm became worse and all the boys started run to get under
“I couldn’t forgive him or like him, but I saw that what he had done was, to him, entirely justified. It was all very careless and confused. They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made… I shook hands with him; it seemed silly not to, for I felt suddenly as though I were talking to a child” (187-188).
At first glance, Meursault could be seen as an evil man. He shows no grief at his mother’s funeral, worrying more about the heat. His first reaction to his mother’s death is not sadness, it is a matter-of-fact, unemotional acceptance of the situation. “Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don’t know.” Later on in the story, Meursault kills an Arab on the beach, and his only concern is that he has ruined the calm, pleasant day he was having. When he is in jail, the magistrate comes in an attempt to save Meursault’s soul, but instead of cooperating, Meursault simply confounds the magistrate by refusing to believe in God. Even at his trial, Meursault doesn’t show any remorse for having killed the Arab. Based on this evidence alone, how can we not see Meursault as evil?
Jack’s negative effects on others are shown when “Maurice pretended to be the pig and ran squealing into the center, and the hunters, circling still, pretended to beat him” (75). This quote displays Jack’s evil influence because he has made perfectly normal British boys act like mindless savages and participate in this sadistic ritual. The hunters seem to regress to more prehistoric times as they enjoy performing this act. Jack also changes the boys’ behavior when, “The beast struggled forward, broke the ring and fell over the steep edge of the rock to the sand by the water. At once the crowd surged after it, poured down the rock, leapt on to the beast, screamed, struck, bit, tore. There were no words, and no movements but the tearing of teeth and claws” (153). This quote is essential because it conveys that Jack has altered the boys’ minds to such a degree, that they are blinded by their bloodlust and can’t even tell that the “beast” that they are mutilating is really Simon. It also shows how delirious Jack has made these once civilized children. As you can see, Jack is not a necessarily evil person, but he creates evil
Jack corrodes the group using the beast as during the meal Jack screams “Kill the beast! Cut his throat! Spill his blood!” Jack didn’t care to first scout out or pursue who the beast was and ended up killing Simon, who just came to explain his discovery of the beast. In this incident Jack caused the group to cross the boundary line to savages who lack rational thinking because of they had murdered Simon.
.... He wanted to file a legal appeal but he knew they would all get rejected. Meursault was not sentenced to death because he killed the Arab but because of his absence of emotion to his mother’s death. The people wanted him dead because he posed a threat to the morals of the society. But when he accepts the fact that he is going to die he feels a sense of freedom and he looks forward to his execution. By rejecting to believe in God, it shows that he does value any hope of life after death. Then when he accepts his death sentence, he also takes the punishment away from it either. He is neither depressed nor hopeful when it comes to his death, which overall proves how he lacks morality in the story.
The conflict is established at the end of Part I, when Meursault kills an Arab; an action not uncommon in Algiers during this period of social unrest (the 1930’s). He does not do it intentionally, but rather because of the intensity of the moment and the blinding sunlight reflecting off of the Arab’s blade. The fact that Meursault kills an Arab is of little importance in this novel. The jury and the general population despise him because he is different, not because of the murder. Even Meursault’s lawyer predicts that the punishment will be minimal. Throughout the entire trial, the prosecution stresses Meursault’s lifestyle and his indifference to everything. They bring up his mother’s funeral and say that he showed no signs of emotion. To make things worse, he went to a Fernandel comedy and had sex with Marie on the very next day. The prosecutor once states, “...all I see is a monster.”