Sub-Creation in William Golding’s The Inheritors

Abstract

SUB-CREATION IN WILLIAM GOLDING’S THE INHERITORS D A N IE L T IM M O N S University of Toronto I T is an interesting fact of literary history that two of the most widely read works in the English language were each published by an Oxford-educated man in 1954: Lord of the Flies by William Golding and The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien. T.A. Shippey notes that these authors, along with a few of their contemporaries, such as C.S. Lewis and George Orwell, were similar in their “rejection (or ignorance) of recent literary tradition” and in “overall pattern of life-experience” (227). Although there is no clear indication that Golding and Tolkien were personally acquainted, they were both at the famous university at the same time; Golding progressed through an undergraduate degree in English literature at Oxford from 1930 to 1935 (Dick 2), while Tolkien was a professor of Anglo-Saxon (Carpenter 264-65). It is uncertain whether the authors were affected by each other’s work, but in the area of speculative fiction Golding and Tolkien indeed occupy some common ground. Using Tolkien’s theoretical ideas on fantasy literature, we can gain important insight into perhaps Golding’s most enigmatic book: The Inheritors. Critical views on this novel are remarkably diverse. L.L. Dickson thinks that The Inheritors is a modern allegory (27-29), James R. Baker calls it a “fable” (29), and V.V. Subbarao suggests that Golding has created “a myth of his own” (35). Other commentators imply that the book is realistic, a representation of a “lost society” (Dick 31), or even “a complete picture of the Neanderthal’s life on earth” (Rahman 53). Brian W. Aldiss states that The Inheritors is “a marvellous fantasy” (Pringle 2). The terms allegory, fable, myth, realism, and fantasy all have distinct implications with regard to literary theory, but some commentators tend to gloss over their differences, or ignore them altogether.1 In the novel, Golding attempts to portray a primitive world and people, using a peculiar literary technique that draws on aspects of both realism and fantasy. Tolkien provides a perspective on such issues in his essay “On Fairy-Stories” ; he discusses the concept of “Sub-creation,” which he denotes as a work of fantasy that exhibits “ ‘the inner consistency of reality’ ” (44-45). When we look at specific scenes in The Inheritors in the context of Tolkien’s ideas, we see that Golding uses E n g l is h St u d i e s in C a n a d a , 22, 4, D ecem b er 1996 realistic detail to provide the tangible background for his own speculations on primitive life and thought. Golding’s novel, however, does not develop an “ ‘inner consistency of real­ ity’ ” in the Tolkienian sense. Probably all acts of reading involve some sort of textual interpretation, but Golding’s ironic mode requires us to form ana­ lytical perspectives in order to overcome the elusiveness of his work, which is due in large part to its intricate style and its sub-texts. Golding’s technique invites a more detached view, which we use to consider the symbolic and thematic implications of the narrative, than Tolkien’s mode, which encour­ ages us to immerse ourselves fully in the work’s world. Tolkien writes within well-established narratorial conventions, so that his readers are scarcely con­ scious of the interpretative act of reading; Golding deliberately puzzles his readers so that they will be aware of their interpretative activity. While both authors present speculations on past moments in Earth’s his­ tory, Golding is concerned with the development of human consciousness, whereas Tolkien is interested in a mytho-historical account of his native land, England (Carpenter 97-98). Since Golding’s artistic purposes in The Inheritors are different from Tolkien’s in The Lord of the Rings, the set­ ting does not have to be as extensive as Middle-earth in order to represent Golding’s particular literary vision. However, in the final analysis, it is not clear where the world of The Inheritors (to borrow Erich Auerbach’s phras­ ing from another context...