Character Analysis: Maurice

In William Golding's Lord of the Flies, the character Maurice, while not as prominent as Ralph, Jack, or Piggy, serves a crucial function in illustrating the psychological and social descent that Golding portrays throughout the novel. Maurice's role is multifaceted—he exists as a secondary character who contributes to the thematic exploration of civilization versus savagery, the fragility of moral conditioning, and the loss of innocence. This essay examines the narrative function, symbolic significance, and broader implications of Maurice in the context of Golding's allegorical novel.

Maurice is introduced early in the novel as one of the older boys who aligns himself with Jack and the choristers. He is physically described as broad and smiling, giving off a sense of good-natured mischief rather than overt cruelty. Initially, Maurice is one of the boys who participate in the more structured and civilized aspects of island life. He follows Jack, who initially leads with some discipline, and he partakes in the building of shelters and attempts at cooperation.

However, as the story progresses and the influence of societal rules wanes, Maurice's actions begin to reflect the group's overall descent. One notable moment in the narrative that showcases this shift is when Maurice and Roger destroy the sandcastles built by the littluns. While Roger displays outright cruelty, Maurice, after kicking sand into a little's eye, feels a sense of guilt and walks away. Golding writes, "Maurice still felt the unease of having done wrong." This reaction is critical—it demonstrates that Maurice is still influenced by the internalized norms of the society he came from, particularly the fear of adult authority and punishment.

Despite this early sense of morality, Maurice continues to follow Jack as the group fragments and descends into savagery. He becomes a member of the hunters, participating in the wild dances and rituals that culminate in violence. Though not singled out as a central actor in the murders of Simon or Piggy, Maurice's presence within Jack's tribe aligns him with the forces of chaos and regression. His trajectory mirrors the group's collective psychological transformation and the overpowering lure of belonging and conformity.

Symbolically, Maurice represents the transitional state between civilization and savagery. Unlike Piggy, who remains steadfast in his belief in rules and order, or Roger, who embraces cruelty and destruction, Maurice exists in the middle ground. He is a reflection of the average individual, neither inherently evil nor heroically good, but one whose actions are shaped by the surrounding environment.

Maurice's guilt over hurting the little one is symbolic of the remnants of societal conditioning. His internal discomfort suggests that morality, for many, is not inherent but learned, maintained through the expectation of consequences. Once those consequences are removed, as they are on the island without adults, that morality weakens. Maurice's eventual immersion in Jack's tribe and participation in the hunters' rituals symbolize the ease with which the average person can be drawn into collective behavior, particularly when it provides a sense of identity and security.

Furthermore, Maurice represents the concept of "ordinary" complicity. In many ways, he is a stand-in for the bystander—the person who does not actively lead evil but who participates in or allows it to happen through inaction or silence. His smiling, cheerful demeanor juxtaposed with his eventual alignment with the violent hunters underscores the unsettling idea that those who contribute to harm are not always malevolent in appearance or intention.

Maurice's character invites readers to consider broader questions about human nature and the structures that govern behavior. One of Golding's central theses in Lord of the Flies is that civilization is a thin veneer that, when stripped away, reveals a darker, more primal human instinct. Maurice's gradual moral erosion supports this idea. His journey suggests that the average person, when removed from societal norms and placed in an environment without accountability, can easily abandon ethical principles.

Maurice's development can be read through the lens of psychology, particularly the theory of moral development proposed by Lawrence Kohlberg. According to Kohlberg, individuals progress through different stages of moral reasoning, from obedience to avoid punishment to adherence to universal ethical principles. Maurice appears to operate at an early conventional stage, and his behavior is guided by the desire to maintain approval and avoid disapproval. When external authority is removed, his ability to act morally disintegrates.

Maurice also serves to highlight the failures of the educational and social systems that shaped the boys. As a product of British society, Maurice likely attended a strict, possibly religious school, and yet these institutions failed to instill a resilient moral compass. Golding critiques the idea that civilization alone is sufficient to suppress humankind's baser instincts. Maurice's transformation suggests that without an internalized, principled sense of right and wrong, societal influence remains effective only as long as the structures of power remain intact.

In conclusion, Maurice may not be the most prominent character in Lord of the Flies, but his presence and transformation are crucial to the novel's exploration of human nature. He embodies the everyman, a figure influenced by environment, susceptible to peer pressure, and morally ambiguous. Through Maurice, Golding illustrates how ordinary people can become complicit in cruelty, not through inherent evil, but through a gradual erosion of conscience and a desire for social belonging.

Maurice's role in the narrative, his symbolic representation of the average person, and the broader philosophical and psychological questions he raises contribute significantly to the thematic depth of Lord of the Flies. In a world where structures can collapse and norms can vanish, Maurice reminds readers that the battle between civilization and savagery is not just external, but one that exists within each of us.

Other characters in the book: