thor's control； and therefore you might just as well ask whether a man has a right to five fingers on each hand。 This is a thing that happens。 Are you really meaning do I think the critic has； by his nature or by his training； a better chance of saying what's in this book than the author has？ Is that at all it？
Q。： Yes； that's mainly it。 As an artist； do you feel the critics are justified？
A。： Some of them。 As a practical matter some of them say things which I agree with and some say things which I don t agree with。 I don't see there's much generalization that can be made here。 The critic has as much right as any man to get what he can out of a book； and I would say that I think some critics that I've read have been extremely perceptive …or else I've been very lucky…in that they've seemed to put their fingers on certain things which I had deliberately intended and which I would have thought were rather subtle； and they have contrived to get hold of these。 Equally； I would have to say that some critics seem to me to be miles off beam。
Q。： Well； perhaps Mr。 Gindin5 was a little off beam in his article which discusses your use of gimmicks。 He mentions the saving of the boys as a gimmick that didn't quite fulfill the manifestations that were opened in the book 。。。 it didn't resolve diem； I should think； as well as he would have liked。 Do you feel this is justifiable criticism？
A。： I've been haunted by that word； 〃gimmick；〃 ever since I used it in an interview explaining that I liked a sharp reversal at the end which would show the book in an entirely different light so that the reader would presumably be forced to rethink the book； which seems to me a useful thing to do。 I don't know； in that event； whether the saving
5。James Gindin； 〃 'Gimmick' and Metaphor in the Novels of William Golding；〃 Modern Fiction Studies； 6 （Summer； 1960）； 145…152。…Eds。
of the boys at the end is a gimmick or not。 The reason for that particular ending was twofold。 First I originally conceived the book as the change from innocence…which is ignorance of self…to a tragic knowledge。 If my boys hadn't been saved； I couldn't…at that time； at any rate…see any way of getting some one of them to the point where he would have this tragic knowledge。 He would be dead。 If I'd gone on to the death of Ralph； Ralph would never have had time to understand what had happened to him； so I deliberately saved him so that at this moment he could see …look back over what's happened…and weep for the end of innocence and the darkness of man's heart； which was what I was getting at。 That's half the answer。
The other answer is that if； as in that quotation there； the book is supposed to show how the detects of society are directly traceable to the defects of the individual； then you rub that awful moral lesson in much more by having an ignorant； innocent adult e to the island and say； 〃Oh； you've been having fun； haven't you？〃 Then in the last sentence you let him turn away and look at the cruiser； and of course the cruiser； the adult thing； is doing exactly what the hunters do…that is； hunting down and destroying the enemy…so that you say； in effect； to your reader； 〃Look； you think you've been reading about little boys； but in fact you've been reading about the distresses and the wickednesses of humanity。 If this is a gimmick； I still approve of it。
Q。： I think it fulfills what you said about the use of the gimmick at the end of a novel； making a reader go back and take another look at things。
Did the work by Richard Hughes； High Wind in Jamaica； have any influence on your writing Lord of the Flies？
A。： This is an interesting question。 I can answer it simply： I've read this book and I liked it but I read it after I'd written Lord of the Flies。 And if you're going to e around to Conrad's Heart of Darkness； I might as well confess I've never read that。
Q。： Then if you hadn't read High Wind in Jamaica until you'd written Lord of the Flies； how do you feel about the thematic presentation； the parallel between the two works？
A。： There is a parallel； I think； but like so many literary parallels it's the plain fact that if people engage in writing
about humanity； they're likely in certain circumstances io see something the same thing。 They're both looking； after all at the same object； so it would really be very surprising if there weren't literary parallels to be drawn between this book and that。
？？？？？
Q。： I have one more question about Lord of the Flies。 Mr。 Epstein talks about sex symbols in this work。6 You have recently said that you purposely left man and woman off of the island to remove the 。。。
A。： Remove the 〃red herring。〃
Q。： Yes。 I wonder if you concur with Mr。 Epstein's observations。
A。： You're probably thinking of the moment when they kill apig 。 。 。
Q。： Yes。
A。： And I'm assured that this is a sexual symbol and it has affinities of the Oedipadian wedding night。 What am I to say to this？ I suppose the only thing I can really say is there are in those circumstances； after all； precious few ways of killing a pig。 The same thing's just as true of the Oedipadian wedding night。
6。See below； p。 279。…Eds。
The Meaning of It All1
Broadcast on the BBC Third Programme； August 28； 1959
KERMODE： I should like to begin； Golding； by talking about an article on your work which I know you liked which appeared in the Kenyon Review2 about a year ago in which he says many admiring things about all your books but introduces a distinction between fable and fiction and puts you very much on the fable side； arguing； for example； that in Lord of the Flies you incline occasionally not to give a full…body presentation of people living and behaving； so much as an illustration of a particular theme； would you accept this as a fair ment on your work？
GOLDING： Well； what I would regard as a tremendous pliment to myself would be if someone would substitute the word 〃myth〃 for 〃fable〃 because I think a myth is a much profounder and more significant thing than a fable。 I do feel fable as being an invented thing on the surface whereas myth is something which es out from the roots of things in the ancient sense of being the key to existence； the whole meaning of life； and experience as a whole。
KERMODE： You're not primarily interested in giving the sort of body and pressure of lived life in a wide society； obviously not； because all your books have been concerned with either persons or societies； unnaturally isolated in some sense。 It is legitimate to assume from that that you are concerned with people in this kind of extremity of solitariness。
1。The following interview was reprinted in this form in Books and Bookmen； 5 （October； 1959）； 9…10； and is printed in part here by permission of Frank Kermode and William Golding。
2。John Peter； 〃The Fables of William Golding；〃 Kentyon Re…view； 19 （Autumn； 1957）； 577…592。 Reprinted below； pp。 229…234。…Eds。
GOLDING： Well； no； I don't think it is legitimate。 My own feeling about it is that their isolation is a convenient one； rather than an unnatural one。 Do you see what I mean？
KERMODE： Yes； I do see； but I'm not sure about the word 〃convenient〃 here。 Convenient to you because you want to treat boys in the absence of grown…ups； is this what you mean？
GOLDING： Yes； I suppose so。 You see it depends how far you regard intentions as being readable。 Now； you know and I know about teaching people； we both do it as our daily bread。 Well； you see； perhaps； people who are not quite as immature as those I see； but my own immature boys I watch carefully and there does e a point which is very legible in their society at which you can see all those things （as shown in Lord of the Flies） are within a second of being carried out…it's the master who gets the right boy by the scruff of the neck and hauls him back。 He is God who stops a murder being mitted。
KERMODE： Yes； this is why one of your boys； Piggy； often refers to the absence of grown…ups as the most important conditioning factor in the situation。 The argument is； then； that out of a human group of this kind； the human invention of evil will proceed； provided that certain quite arbitrary checks