Hi everyone, it's Mr. Chandrapala, and I'm really looking forward to being able to talk to you about "Lord of the Flies" today.

Specifically, we're gonna be thinking about Jack as an antagonist, a villain within Golding's novel.

Jack is such a crucial figure within the text, as I'm sure a lot of you know by now.

He is a leader, but he is also somewhat of a dictator, and Golding uses him over the course of the text to really grapple with what the issues of a dictatorship are.

Let's see what we can say about him today.

Let's dive in.

Our outcome today is that we can describe how Jack is presented as an antagonist within the novel.

Our key words include the noun antagonist, which is a character who opposes the protagonist.

They are more of a villainous character.

They are going to be more associated with the evil within the text.

We're gonna be considering the verb to manipulate, which means to control or influence someone so that they can gain an advantage, often in an honest or, sorry, dishonest or amoral way.

We're gonna be considering the noun egomaniac, which is someone who considers themselves to be very important and able to do anything that they want.

We'll consider the adjective dictatorial, which is typical of a ruler with total power.

And finally, we will be considering the concept of barbarism, the absence of civilization or the presence of considerable cruelty and brutality within a society.

So let's start off by discussing Jack, the leader.

So first of all, all I would like you to do is turn to the person next to you, or if you're working by yourself, just write down a couple of ideas, couple of adjectives that you would associate with a good leader.

Once you've done that, hit play.

What I really loved about your discussions were how many of you were getting into thinking about real leaders.

I am something of a football fan, so I know if I'm thinking about good leaders, I may talk about someone like, as an Arsenal fan, I may talk about someone like Martin Odegaard.

And I may say how he is energetic, incredibly intelligent, charismatic, determined in the way that he does his work.

He's hardworking.

But you may have come up with other adjectives such as brave, moral, selfless, intelligent, honest, fair, confident, decisive.

Again, all adjectives I would associate with Martin Odegaard, to be fair.

But which of these qualities is the most important, and why? Pause the video again, and again discuss with your partner or choose a specific example or quality that you might have mentioned, or one that you have added from the list that's on the board.

And explain why you think that particular quality is so important.

Why is it important to be intelligent or why is it important for us to be fair or honest in our leadership? Explain that because it's really important that we can see that, not only for understanding the text, but also for ourselves.

Pause the video, have that discussion, make those justifications.

And when you're ready, hit play.

Excellent work there, everyone.

I really like the fact that you were thinking about what actually is the most important thing.

It's very hard looking at the list which is just on the board, but I know that I always think it's so important for people to be honest and fair.

Being honest is so critical to developing a sense of trust, isn't it? As is being fair.

So actually I would say that they are far more important than someone necessarily being particularly brave or selfless.

Sometimes, leaders make selfish decisions, but as long as they can explain why they've done that, that may have to be the case.

So let's just quickly think about which of these qualities Jack has, which does he lack? Does he lose any of these qualities or gain any of them throughout the course of the novel? Pause the video, see which ones you would say he has or doesn't have.

And when you're ready, hit play.

Really good work.

And I loved how many of you were going back to the text to justify your ideas about Jack.

Lucas was thinking about how Jack is really intelligent.

He's very bright and knows how to manipulate others.

So that's why I was thinking actually I wouldn't say intelligence is one of the most important things because if you're intelligent and are able to manipulate it to suit yourself, that can be really negative.

It's not a sign of a good leader.

He's very confident and decisive, but he lacks many of the most important qualities such as morality and selflessness.

If Jack had been chosen as a leader instead of Ralph, do you think things might have been different.

Why or why not do you think that's the case? Again, pause the video, or if you're working by yourself, just jot down some ideas.

Why do you think that the novel would've worked out differently if Jack had been the leader instead of Ralph? Once you've done that, hit play.

Some really interesting ideas there, everyone.

I really liked the way that you were thinking about that and considering almost the different timing points that the novel could have gone through at key moments.

So Lucas again says, "I don't think he would've been a better leader than Ralph.

"Even in the beginning of the novel "before Jack leans into savagery, "he does not possess good leadership skills.

"Jack is described as controlling the choir, "shouting at them, humiliating a poorly chorister.

"From the beginning of the text, "Jack is characterised as unpleasant and mean-spirited, "who enjoys having control over others." These are not the associations that we make of good leaders, is it? And so we can't think that Jack actually would've been a good leader, and actually things may have gone really quite worse, quite quickly, had Jack been left to his own devices as a leader.

Ralph strives to establish a democratic leadership style from the beginning of the text.

He cooperates with his opposition and listens to others' suggestions.

What kind of leadership style though does Jack exhibit? If Ralph is trying to be democratic, what can we say about Jack? Pause the video.

See how you would describe him.

When you've done that, hit play.

Really interesting ideas there, everyone.

So pleased to hear the range of thoughts you all had.

So it is very clear that Ralph and Jack have opposite leadership styles.

Whilst Ralph tries to be fair and listen to other's suggestions, Jack rules without consideration for others.

Whilst Ralph accepts power because he was elected into it, Jack uses fear and manipulation tactics to forcibly take power.

And it's that manipulation again, because he is so intelligent, that is such a problem.

The fact that Jack is not just, he's not only not selfish, he, sorry, he's not only not selfless, he is actively selfish.

He's looking to benefit himself at several points.

Jack is therefore viewed as a dictatorial leader, almost a total opposite to Ralph's democratic leadership style.

But let's just think here, what makes a dictator? Can we think of any famous dictators? Pause the video and discuss with the person next to you.

What famous dictators can you think of? If you can think of a couple, what do we associate with them? What traits do we associate? When you've done that, hit play.

A really interesting range of ideas there.

So a reminder that a dictator is a ruler with total power over a country, and typically one who has obtained control by force.

Well, one of the most famous dictators in history was Adolf Hitler.

Some people believe that the character of Jack was based on the real life dictator Adolf Hitler.

Why might people think this though? Pause the video, and consider what are the relationships between Jack and Hitler? How are they similar or different in terms of their behaviours? Once you've done that, hit play.

A really interesting range of ideas from all of you there.

I'm so pleased.

Let's discuss further what those links could be.

You might have said, we know that Golding witnessed extreme violence and destruction while serving in the Second World War.

And the novel was published in 1954, just nine years after the Second World War finished.

Golding, like the rest of the world, would've been very familiar with Hitler's dictatorial leadership style.

And we know that Hitler relentlessly persecuted Jewish people and people belonging to other minority groups, such as those with disabilities.

So due to the similarities in their leadership styles and their persecution of specific groups, so, for example, someone like Piggy, there are similarities between Jack and Hitler.

Do you think Golding is celebrating this dictatorial style, therefore, or do you think he's actually condemning it? Is he trying to say that we should be more like Ralph? Or is he trying to say that actually we should avoid being like Ralph at all costs? Select one which you think is more correct, and explain why.

Once you've done that, you may want to take a note in your notes.

And then hit play.

A really interesting range of ideas there.

So I would argue that he is not trying to celebrate this dictatorial style.

He's actually trying to warn us, trying to show that actually if we are not careful, these sort of dictatorial figures can easily take control, can easily gain more power, and that we should be deeply fearful of them.

We should be watchful of the way that they use their power.

So through the character of Jack, Golding celebrates dictatorial leadership.

Are we saying that this is true or false in this check for understanding? Pause the video and select.

And once you've done, hit play.

And really well done there, everyone.

We know that it is false, but can we justify our answer now? Is it A, because Golding celebrates dictatorial leadership through the character of Ralph, whose selflessness and empathy is typical of a dictatorial leader? Or is it B, Golding condemns dictatorial leadership through the character of Jack, whose cruelty and violence allows him to maintain his regime of fear.

Pause the video again, select which option, and then hit play.

Really good work there, everyone.

We know that Ralph isn't a dictatorial leader.

Yes, he is selfless.

Yes, he is empathetic.

But he is a democratic leader, and therefore we know that B is the correct answer there.

Well done to all of those of us who got that right.

So we're just gonna practise our understanding of Jack as a leader here.

I'm gonna ask you to discuss in your pairs, or if you're working alone just by yourself, I want you to take notes, what do you think Golding's message about dictatorial leadership styles is? What threat does an egomaniacal personality like Jack or Hitler pose to civilised society? And what do we learn about human beings and, or society from the character of Jack? I want you to take notes after you've had that discussion.

And once you've done so, hit play.

Well done, everyone.

All I would like you to do is just to take an extra minute just to edit your work so that you are including these phrases.

The one that I'm really going to point you to is from Jack, we learn.

I think it's really important that we use that phrase because it immediately gets us into authorial intention and thinking about the wider message of the text.

Once you've edited those phrases in, hit play.

Really lovely work there.

Let's take some feedback.

So some ideas you may have wanted to include.

You may have wanted to say, arguably Golding's message about dictatorial leadership is that it poses a distinct threat to democracy, which in turn poses a distinct threat to civilization.

This perhaps echoes the concerns of democratic countries in the post-World War II, World War era, following the rise dictatorial leader Adolf Hitler and his role in World War II.

You may have wanted to also say figures like Jack or Hitler in real life pose a considerable threat to individual people's freedom and autonomy.

Dictatorial leaders act selfishly to further their own agendas.

They are often ruthless and cruel, establishing and maintaining power through the use of fear, manipulation or intimidation.

This novel reinforces Golding's belief that democracy is the best way to maintain a civilised society and prevent future war or conflict.

What we're now going to have a look at is Jack as an antagonist.

So in a text, the protagonist is the lead character who drives the narrative forward.

In "The Lord of the Flies," our protagonist is Ralph.

On the other hand, the antagonist is the primary opponent of the protagonist.

So they are often the barrier, the block, often a villainous figure.

In "Lord of the Flies," this is Jack.

Why do you think Jack is the antagonist in the novel? How specifically does he oppose Ralph? Pause the video, and see if you can remember any specific ways that he opposes Ralph.

And when you've done so, hit play.

Really good work there, some really thoughtful examples being given, which we will start to go through.

So Jack is Ralph's political opposition in the novel.

Although Ralph is elected leader by the group, Jack continues to challenge Ralph's authority and tries to snatch power from him.

This makes him Ralph's primary opponent as he tries to undermine Ralph's leadership at every opportunity.

So Jack is constantly challenging Ralph, constantly trying to take control for himself, and that is what makes him the real antagonist within the novel.

If there's anything you want to take note of, please take that note.

Once you've done that, hit play and we'll continue.

So let's have a quick check for understanding here.

Two of our Oak pupils were discussing Jack as an antagonist.

Which one would you say is right? Sam argued, "Jack is the antagonist of the novel "because he is the most dislikable character.

"The protagonist is always "the most likeable character, Ralph, "and the antagonist "is always the most dislikable character, Jack." Izzy, on the other hand, is saying, "Well, Jack is the antagonist of the novel "because he is the character "who challenges and opposes the protagonist, Ralph.

"Jack positions himself as Ralph's opponent "at every opportunity in the novel, "making him the antagonist." Pause the video now and select which one you think is correct, remembering our previous definitions of the word antagonist.

Once you've done so, hit play.

Really good work there, everyone.

We know that Izzy is correct.

It's the fact that Jack is an opposition, a blocking figure to Ralph that makes him a antagonist, not the fact that he's so dislikable.

There are hero or heroic characters or protagonists who are sometimes dislikable.

And so we would not say that Jack is a antagonist purely because he's dislikable.

He happens to be dislikable, but that is not the reason that he is the antagonist.

So what does Ralph represent in "The Lord of the Flies?" Pause the video now, and see if you can get any initial ideas.

Once you've done so, hit play.

A really interesting range of ideas there.

Let's see what we can say.

So Ralph arguably represent civilization, morality and democracy in the novel.

But then what does Jack represent? He's the opposite of Ralph.

So if Ralph is representing democracy and civilization, what do you think Jack represents? Pause the video now and see if you can come up with a couple of ideas with your partner or by yourself, just jotting them down onto your paper.

Once you've done so, hit play.

Really good work there, everyone, really careful thinking.

So if we're thinking about a democratic leader in Ralph, we're thinking actually that Jack is a representative of savagery, wickedness and dictatorship within the novel.

So ultimately, do we think Jack is evil or immoral? What might the difference be? Pause the video here, and I want you to really think about what is the difference between someone being evil or someone being immoral.

There is a difference, but it sometimes gets conflated.

We sometimes confuse the two.

Often, they are linked, but there is a difference.

Pause the video now, have that discussion.

And when you've done that, hit play.

Really good work there.

I can see people really grappling with the difference between those two terms. So whilst Ralph tries to maintain control of the group by gaining their respect, Jack snatches power by creating a culture of fear to get the boys on side.

Here, I want you to consider how does Jack create a culture of fear within the group? What does he do to create that culture of fear? Can you give me any specific moments? Pause the video, select your moments.

When you've done so, hit play.

Really interesting.

I'm really pleased to see that so many of you are using specific parts of the novel to back your ideas up.

So we could have talked about how in the beginning of the text, one of the littluns has a dream about a snake-like beastie.

Both Jack and Ralph dismiss the littluns fear, arguing there is no such creature on the island.

But over the course of the boys' time on the island, Jack begins to recognise the power of fear.

In chapter three, Ralph remarks that Jack has noticed the boy's fear of the beast.

Jack slowly but surely begins to reinforce the idea of the beast.

Having initially dismissed it, he suggests that the beast is now real, positioning himself as a hunter, so he can make the littluns think that he can protect them from the beast.

Meanwhile, Ralph continues to deny the existence of such a beast.

If we're thinking about it from the perspective of a littlun, someone who is incredibly scared at this point, who's looking for guidance from an older boy, what we're actually thinking about here is even though Ralph may be objectively right, if we're constantly controlled by our fear, we're going to side more perhaps with the person who is validating our feelings, saying that they are going to protect us from it.

In that case, Jack.

So why do we think the boys' loyalties begin to shift? Why do we think they start to move away from Ralph and towards Jack? Pause the video now.

Have that discussion.

Maybe jot down some ideas.

And when you're ready, hit play.

Really good work there, everyone.

Yeah, exactly that idea that actually because Ralph is denying the existence of such a beast, the boys don't feel that maybe he's taking or listening to their concerns as reasonably.

Whilst Jack, because he is showing that actually he's strong, he's going to be the hunter, he's immediately sort of presenting himself as a solution to an imagined problem.

So this fear of the beast and the belief that Jack can protect them from it drives the boys into Jack's political camp.

So throughout the novel, Jack becomes increasingly disrespectful of the rules of the conch.

I would like you to find two examples of Jack disrespecting the rules of the conch.

Pause the video now, check back through your work, check back through your resources.

And when you've done so and found two examples of Jack disrespecting the conch, hit play.

Excellent work there, everyone.

So we could have said that we see Jack disrespecting the conch in chapter five when Ralph emphasises that he was chosen as chief, to which Jack responds that it shouldn't make a difference who was chosen.

Jack proceeds to speak without possession of the conch and shout at Ralph, dismissing the rules and exciting the littluns into a frenzy.

He breaks down societal barriers, he breaks down what our expectations are by breaking these rules.

Why is Jack therefore undermining the rules so publicly, and why is it so dangerous to the society that Ralph is trying to build? Pause the video, consider that question.

And when you're ready, hit play.

Really interesting work there, everyone.

I'm really glad to hear such a range of ideas.

Yeah, absolutely, he is publicly doing that so that he can show that he is challenging the status quo, and actually allows him to create this sense that actually there shouldn't be trust in the current status quo, that actually people should follow him.

Some other ideas include, as Lucas says, "By disregarding the rules of the conch, "Jack is undermining Ralph's leadership, "by showing that there are no consequences "for breaking the rules outlined." And Laura points out, "In disregarding the rules and Ralph's authority, "Jack presents himself as more powerful.

"Jack undermines the democracy that Ralph has established "by creating a culture of disobedience and disrespect." So we've looked now at how Jack challenges Ralph politically, how he challenges democracy.

But we're also going to have to understand how he challenges challenges the civilization Ralph has tried to build.

Laura points out, "It's terrifying how quickly "Jack simply shrugs off civilization "in favour of complete savagery.

"He is unrecognisable as a human being "by the end of the novel.

"His devotion to barbarity is utterly horrifying." What is your opinion though of Laura's statement? Do you agree with it? Would you disagree? Pause the video and explain why you would agree or disagree.

See if you can use any parts of the text to back your ideas up.

Really interesting work there, everyone.

I'm really pleased to see so many of you really grappling with Laura's view.

I personally really agree with it, that we are meant to be horrified by it, that we're meant to be terrified of the fact that Jack has so clearly shrugged off the memories of civilization.

And we're meant to be concerned at what this maybe reflects about our own selves, about what we would be like in this sort of situation.

So let's just have a quick check for understanding here.

Which of the following tactics does Jack use to gain followers? Is it A, he bullies Piggy and Roger, sneering and laughing at them? Is it B, he exploits the littluns fears of the beast.

C, he physically threatens those who don't vote for him as a leader.

Or D, he publicly disrespects and disregards the rules of the conch.

Pause the video, select two options.

And once you've done so, hit play.

Well done, everyone.

We can clearly see it is B and D.

He does explore the littluns fears of the beast, making himself out to be the hunter to suggest that he can protect them, but he also publicly disrespects and disregards the rules of the conch to make sure that it's clear that rules have no application to him, and to undermine Ralph's leadership.

So we're just going to now practise putting our understanding of Jack together.

I'd like you to track Jack's dissent into savagery throughout the text using the timeline below.

So I want you to use quotations from the text to support your opinions.

One example, for example, is to say in chapter one, Jack is controlling of the choir but accepts his defeat to Ralph because he has been given power over the hunters.

And then by the very end of the text, chapter 12, Jack has ordered the murder of Ralph using wild signals to command the savages in his tribe.

He's described as a terror by Samneric.

I want you to pause the video here, and I want you to notice that actually we're using quotes and then we're explaining why this has happened and maybe linking it to plot details.

Pause the video, and I want you to go through the text and spot how Jack descends into savagery.

Once you've done so, hit play, and we'll take some feedback.

Really well done to everyone for making sure that you're really actively checking back through the work, checking back through the text and linking your ideas together.

I was really pleased to see so many of you going back to even elements of the text that we had already discussed in today's lesson.

I think that's a really smart choice.

Both the conch and the creation of fear are key ideas to consider here when thinking about the descent into savagery.

Let's take that feedback then.

So some key moments that you might have mapped onto your timeline or might want to include in a different colour pen include in chapter two, Jack dismisses the rules of the conch when Piggy holds it, arguing that they do not apply to the peak of the mountain.

When reprimanded by Ralph, Jack then immediately agrees with Ralph that the rules must be obeyed.

Ironically, joking that the boys are English and not savage.

Here, we see Jack obeying the rules when they suit him.

He manipulates the rules of the conch to serve his own interests, which are primarily to ostracise and humiliate Piggy in this particular moment.

If there's anything you need, pause the video and make sure that you've got that note.

Otherwise, hit play.

In chapter three, you may have wanted to talk about the fact that Jack fails to kill the pig at the beginning of the chapter.

He seems to take this as a personal weakness and compensates for it by devoting himself to hunting.

In chapter four, Jack proudly announces that he delivered the pig's final blow.

In chapter seven, Jack reenacts the killing of the pig by using Robert as the pig.

He jokes around with Robert, but ends up hurting him.

He jokes about killing a littlun instead of a pig.

We see Jack's violence towards people escalating as he begins normalising it publicly.

Again, if there's anything that you haven't gotten already, just make sure to add it now, and when you're ready, hit play.

In chapter nine, you may have wanted to discuss how Jack separates himself from Ralph and establishes himself as an alternative leader.

He recruits some of Ralph's boys into his tribe and sneers at Ralph's reminder about the conch.

When Ralph raises concerns about the safety of the boys in Jack's camp, Jack riles them up, using his chant, drowning out Ralph's logical concerns.

He's manipulating the boys to almost taunt Ralph.

And in chapter 11, Jack's tribe murder piggy and smash the conch.

Jack then with intention injures Ralph with his spear.

Whilst previous deaths such as Simon and the littlun could be said to be an accident, the intent that Jack demonstrates here marks his descent into utter savagery and barbarism.

Take any notes that you need from here, and when you're ready, hit play.

So as you can see, there is so much that we can say about this descent into savagery.

And we can link it consistently to key quotes, really short quotes that actually exemplify these key plot events.

But our final question now is for you to discuss at which point in the novel do you think Jack fully turns? What's the key turning point where he turns his back on civilization? At what point do you think he truly embraces savagery? Pause the video now.

See which part you would select.

And when you're ready, hit play.

Interesting ideas.

I heard several people going all the way to chapter 11.

I heard several people going towards chapter nine.

Some people even going right at the start of the text where he questions the genuine nature of the conch.

Any of these could work.

I personally really like chapter nine, the fact that he actually separates himself.

But you could also go slightly earlier in the text where he is trying to question Ralph's leadership, or even the fact that he begins to hurt other members of the party by trying to reenact the slaughter of the pig.

So let's have a quick summary of today's lesson, focusing on Jack as the antagonist in "The Lord of the Flies." Jack is the novels antagonist because he opposes Ralph both personally and politically.

He arguably represents dictatorial leadership and savagery.

And Jack creates and maintains a culture of fear and intimidation, which give him power and authority.

Jack repeatedly undermines Ralph, Piggy and the rules of the conch, showing his lack of respect for democracy.

Jack's devotion to barbarism and savagery by the end of the novel illustrate the great cruelty and wickedness man is capable of, something that Golding really wants us to consider in the post-war era.

You've been absolutely fantastic today.

None of you have been Jack, you've all been a bunch of Ralphs.

It's been a real pleasure working with you.

Thank you so much for joining me, and I hope to work with you again very soon.

Bye for now.