Comparing Pi And Lord Of The Flies

Human nature encompasses a duality of light and dark impulses, resulting in an inner conflict between good and evil. The texts Life of Pi by Yann Martel and Lord of the Flies by William Golding explore the internal conflict between our civilised self and animalistic savagery. The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas by Ursula Le Guin and the Strange Case of Dr Jekll and Mr Hyde by Robert Stevenson convey the inner moral conflict caused when our conscience opposes our desires. These texts reveal the duality within us and its inevitable inner conflicts.

While we may try to oppose and hide it through civilisation and rationality, we possess an innate savagery like animals. This creates internal conflict as our natural savagery counteracts our civilised

Pi recounts, “I [went] from weeping over the muffled killing of a flying fish to gleefully bludgeoning to death a dorado.” The use of “weeping” and “killing” creates a combined tone of sadness and pain, showing how Pi’s civilised side is still aligned and present. This contrasts the use of diction in “bludgeoning,” creating a sense of violence that juxtaposes with the joyful tone in “gleefully.” We see how Pi’s actions no longer align with his civilised side, reflecting his savage side instead. Martel conveys the takeover of savagery in Pi, overcoming his civilised side. He warns us of the dangers of our savagery due to its ability to overtake our rationality and suddenly normalise itself into our lives. Furthermore, Pi says, “I ate like an animal, that this noisy, frantically, unchewing wolfing down of mine was exactly the way Richard Parker ate.” The parallel structure in the listing gives the sense that every aspect of Pi has been altered to become like an animal. Richard Parker, the tiger, symbolises the animalistic savagery within Pi. As Pi becomes more similar to Richard Parker, the author conveys how he conforms more to his inner savagery, replacing the civilised Pi in

In our lives, we experience situations where we have to choose between pursuing our desires or maintaining our conscience, creating a battle within us. In The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas, the citizens of the supposed utopian society live in prosperity with one exception; the happiness of everyone is based upon the singular pain of one child. The narrator says, “The child used in our story must spend its life doing so. It cannot even do anything about its predicament. They all know it is there, all the citizens of Omelas.” The author uses modal verbs like “must” and “cannot” to highlight the child’s involuntary enforcement. The desire for a utopian society results in the unjust treatment of a child, sparking moral debate. Choosing to do nothing is an action, letting their desires roam free over their conscience. However, a few people also walk away, prioritising conscience over desires. The people of Omelas as a collective show the existence of this internal conflict. Guin crafts language so that the narrator remains neutral, showing how the decisions where there is no definitive right and wrong are the ones that spark fierce internal conflict. This idea is further shown when the narrator says, "They all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city, the tenderness of their friendships, the health of their children. depend wholly on this child’s abominable misery." The use of a