What is Piggy's response when Jack says Piggy didn't hunt?
This is a question I got stuck on and I searched for the answer but nothing came up. Please help. Thank you.
Lord of the Flies by William Golding
3 Answers | Add Yours
I believe that the answer that you are looking for can be found in Chapter 4. It is towards the end of the chapter in the part where the boys are eating meat from the first pig that the hunters got.
When Jack does not give any meat to Piggy, Piggy asks if he is not going to get any. Jack says he didn't hunt. Piggy replies that neither did Ralph or Simon. He says that those two did not hunt but yet they are getting to eat some of the meat.
When Piggy says this, Simon gives his own chunk of meat to Piggy.
When Jack tells Piggy that he didn't hunt, Piggy says that Ralph and Simon didn't either and they got meat so it basically isn't fair. This lead to Simon giving a piece of his meat to Piggy and having Jack hit Piggy which results in having Ralph come in a argue with Jack. Jack ends up appoligizing. Ralph then calls a meeting.
In Chapter Four of Lord of the Flies, this question of Piggy's comes after pivotal action in the plot of Golding's narrative. For, while Jack and the older boys hunt for a pig, a ship has passed without knowing anyone is on the island because the signal fire has gone out. Enraged at the careless irresponsibility of the boys, Ralph accuses Jack with costing their rescue because he took them from their task of building the fire. And, when Piggy joins in the scolding, the "wails of agreement from some of the hunters, drove Jack to violence"; he smack's Piggy's head, knocking off his glasses and breaking one of the lenses.
Piggy grabbed and put on the glasses. He looked malevolently at Jack.
Already appearing in a bad light with the others for allowing the fire to go out, Jack is further humiliated when Ralph tells him that knocking over Piggy is "a dirty trick."
So Ralph asserted his chieftainship....Jack was powerless and raged without knowing why.
In an act of defiance, when the boys go to relight the fire, Jack goes to Piggy and takes the glasses from him:
Not even Ralph knew how a link between him and Jack had been snapped and fastened elsewhere.
This newly created division between Ralph and Piggy and Jack is reflected in Jack's telling Piggy that he cannot have any meat. Golding writes that Jack neglects to give Piggy meat just to leave him in doubt until Piggy asks and makes his omission public:
Jack had meant to leave him in doubt, as an assertion of power; but Piggy by advertising his omission made more cruelty necessary.....Numberless and inexpressible frustrations combined to make his rage elemental and awe-inspiring.
It is in his actions towards Piggy that the reader discerns Jack emergence as a savage force in conflict with the rational Piggy who in his response explains to Jack why he wants meat: "There isn't more than a ha'porth of meat in a crab."
Significantly, Piggy and Ralph will soon only have a "ha'porth," half portion of the leadership on the island. Unwittingly, then, Piggy has established his position of the island with his own response. This question, "What is Piggy's response when Jack tells him, 'You didn't hunt'? is, indeed, intrinsic to the understanding of the novel's theme and characters as suggested by chocolate 975's tags below the post.
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.Join eNotes