Category: Fight Club

Fight Club is a 1996 novel by Chuck Palahniuk that recounts the experience of an unnamed protagonist who struggles with insomnia. The central character gains inspiration from his doctor’s comment that insomnia is not a kind of suffering leading him to find relief in the impersonation of a terminally ill individual in several support groups. The protagonist then encounters a mysterious man called Tyler Durden and the two forms a secretive fighting club for cathartic reasons. Tyler works several night jobs that allow him to demonstrate his contempt for the establishment, corporatism, consumerism, and hypocrisy. One of Tyler’s jobs is soap making where he creates expensive, luxury soaps the extracts of liposuction. Soap, which is a cleaning agent in real life, has been used as a symbol of cleansing and renewal in the world of Fight Club.

In the novel, Tyler works several night jobs where he disrupts companies and harms their clients to display his contempt for the consumerist culture and corporatism (Palahniuk). One of Tyler’s jobs is making soap making where he creates expensive, luxury soaps that he markets to high-end retailers who, in turn, sell to high-end customers. Tyler despises wealth and vanity that characterizes the upper-class society and explains that his soap-making venture is an act of resistance and cleansing because it cleans and renews the morally corrupt members of society (Palahniuk).

Tyler explains to the narrator of the novel that ancient civilizations would make human sacrifices and the run-off from the furnaces would be discharged to water sources like rivers (Palahniuk). Tyler explains that the discharge from the human sacrifices contained lye that would make clothes cleaner than water from any part of the river’s course. The locals then used the discovery of lye to invent soap that is actually used to clean clothes. In Tyler’s perspective, without human sacrifice, there would be no progress in humanity and he tells the narrator, “You have to see how the first soap was made of heroes”(Palahniuk).

In Fight Club, soap and soap making have been used as a manifestation of cleaning and renewal. Tyler explains that the process of manufacturing soap is brutal and demands sacrifice because animals have to be slaughtered in the process and bodies harvested to generate the state of cleanliness. The process of making soap thus signifies the brutality that exists in the world. The product, which is the soap that washes away all the dirt from people’s lives, is also symbolic of the pain and sacrifice that has to be made to keep the world evolving. Tyler says to the narrator, “Think about the animals used in product testing. Think about the monkeys shot in space. Without their death, their pain, without their sacrifice, we would have nothing” underpinning the sacrifices that have to be made to keep the world clean(Palahniuk).

In the narrator’s world, soap has a crucial role and Tyler’s description of the manufacturing process takes a sinister tone as he talks about glycerin, which can be weaponized by mixing with other compounds. Tyler says that “You can mix the glycerin with nitric acid to make nitroglycerin”, which is a compound that has a burning effect(Palahniuk). The narrator demonstrates the incendiary nature of nitroglycerin when he starts burning his own hands, a move that is symbolic of the theme of sacrifice in the book.

Marla Singer, who is a woman whom the narrator meets during a support group, brings him her mother’s fat to be used for operations. In this sense, Marla’s mother is one of the sacrifices that have to be made for the soap product that cleanses and renews. In Tyler’s perspective, fat is emblematic of the excess of everything that the rich have and he uses the fat derived from rich women’s bodies to make the best soap. Tyler resells the soap back to the rich indicating how blind the rich are because they are buying back what they paid money to get rid of through liposuction.

Tyler came up with the recipe for the soap and opted to use human fat because it has the right salinity (Palahniuk). Tyler and the narrator sneak to a liposuction clinic to pick the discarded fat from the bins and return to their laboratory to prepare the soap, which is the cleanser for all that is bad and evil in the world. Tyler claims that “With enough soap, you could blow up the world” thereby underpinning the importance of soap in making the world anew (Palahniuk). Soap has been used as a large-scale cleanser for tearing down the whole world to rebuild it afresh.

The narrator recounts how soap has become an explosive material that can be used to instigate terror attacks in a scheme called ‘Project Mayhem’ that would see the destruction of financial institutions that have been characterized by greed (Palahniuk). Tyler uses the same ingredients used to make soap to create the explosives that he would use to bring down the institutions representing all that is wrong with the world. Tyler thus justifies the terror attacks on the financial institutions by analogizing the anarchy and violence that brought about social change in ancient civilizations and the discovery of soap to his current cause.

Soap is thus a symbol of cleansing one’s self and the society in Fight Club. The Fight Club members use the soap to wash away the blood and dirt from their bodies after the cathartic fights that they engage in to restore and assert their masculinity at a time when there are no great wars to fight or overcoming their mindset (Palahniuk). The fights are also a representation of the members’ resistance to the idea of being cocooned in the society because it strips away their fear of pain and the material things that people use to assert their self-worth. After the fights, soap is used to wash away the dirt and symbolize the renewal of the members as they can now experience feeling in a society where they would otherwise be numb.

Tyler refers to soap as a tool of attaining civilization claiming “Project Mayhem will breakup civilization so we can, make something better out of the world”(Palahniuk). Tyler sells soap to department stores because it was beautiful and was the cleansing agent for all the consumerism and hypocrisy in the society. In real life, soap is used during the cleaning process to wash clothes, clean the dishes, or wash the floor. In the world of Fight Club, soap serves the same purpose as it is sold as a cleaning agent to retailers who further sell it to customers. The soap also doubles as a cleansing agent to tear down the world and build it anew with the formation of explosives from the same material used to manufacture soap. Tyler uses the same cleaning properties of soap as a metaphor for cleaning the society and ridding it of consumerism and hypocrisy, which he is against.

Soap, which is a cleaning agent in real life, has been used as a symbol of cleansing and renewal in the world of Fight Club. Soap is made from the extracts of liposuction where overweight people have fat extracted from them in a surgical process. Tyler views the liposuction process as a human sacrifice that must happen to obtain soap and likens it to the sacrifice that people used to make in ancient civilizations leading to the discovery of soap. Soap, which the members of the Fight Club use to clean themselves after attaining a higher state of mind, turns into a large scale cleansing agent that can be used to purge society of hypocrisy and materialism.

Works Cited

1. Palahniuk, Chuck. Fight Club: a novel. WW Norton & Company, 2005.

Directed by the Academy Award winning David Fincher, the 1999 film Fight Club is a must watch classic for this generation; A thriller, filled with dark humor, drama, but most importantly—the reason it’s a must watch: the legendary performances by Brad Pitt and Edward Norton, along with philosophical content that pushes boundaries in today’s society.

In the thriller, Ed Norton stars as an unnamed character simply known as the Narrator, struggling through life working as an automobile recall specialist while suffering from depression and insomnia. But don’t get the wrong idea. The movie isn’t too dramatic. David Fincher’s injection of dark humor in certain areas makes it hilarious. Like the way the story starts at the climax of the movie with Brad Pitt’s role Tyler Durden, asking the Narrator if he has any last words to say, in which he can only muster up mumbling sounds— while his voice announces in the background “with a gun barrel between your teeth, you speak only in vowels”- like fun fact guys, even though I’m about to die, Im thinking about my grammar… A comment that diffuses the tension of the scene while keeping your eyes glued like a thriller should.

In another scene, the Narrator starts to explain how it all began: finding solace from insomnia from crying in a support group for men with testicular cancer, noting that his crying partner “had b*tch tits” and that “even babies didn’t sleep that good” after. Ed Norton’s cynical voice narrates from beginning to end, giving an edgy vibe to the film while keeping you firmly entertained. The plot continues with the Narrator meeting Tyler Durdan, a part-time soap salesman (that he makes from stealing human fat from liposuction clinics), a part-time movie projectionist where he splices pictures of male genitalia in between scenes for audiences to witness, and part time waiter, who doesn’t serve a soup that he hasn’t urinated in.

In simple words he is what the Narrator is not, a rebel, and non conformist. After they met on a flight home, the Narrator goes back to his apartment to find its been blown to bits from a gas leak. He calls up Tyler and meets him at a bar and afterwards in the parking lot Tyler initiates a fight with him, and they both like it. He moves in where Tyler squats (an abandoned old house), and they beat each other bloody every night outside the bar. Eventually more and more people join and it grows into the Fight Club.

As intriguing as the story is, the concepts introduced in the film are cherry on top. They spark a revolutionary theme. Among them are eye opening views on society’s flaws, consumerism, and modern-day slavery. The theme largely originates from the author of Fight Club (the book) but is set in stone in the motion picture and is highly influential coming from rebel antagonist Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt). They’re quotes meant for our time. “You’re not your job, you’re not how much money you have in the bank, your not the car you drive, your not the contents of your wallet, your not your f**king khakis. Your the all-singing, all-dancing, crap of the world.” In an age where so many are obsessed with what other people think, the film is a direct jab these cultural norms.

Furthermore, the Narrator’s apartment, in which he describes it as his “Ikea nesting instinct,” is filled with everything from furniture to dish ware from Ikea catalogs, almost as if it fills his soul. Tyler responds to the Narrator’s irritation from his apartment being blown apart by saying “F**k off with your sofa units and green stripe patterns. I say never be complete. I say stop being perfect. I say lets evolve, let the chips fall where they may.” Consumerism in US is at a peak, and these call outs for change would make many wonder how they live their lives. Its why many consider the film a must-watch.

Lastly, Edward Norton and Brad Pitt’s spectacular duo is the glue that holds the film. From little details, to ways they went above and beyond, they lived in their roles. The film is filled with impromptu, in the part where Tyler initiates their first fight, he asks the Narrator to punch him. In the script, Norton was supposed to punch him lightly in the shoulder, but instead hit him hard in his ear delivering the reaction from Brad, “you punched me in the ear??” Along with Edward apologizing, it was all real. In scenes where they were drunk, they actually got drunk. They made their fighting as realistic as possible by actually using boxing, martial arts and Ultimate Fighting Championship moves on each other. Their physiques were sculpted to fit their characters, as the movie progressed, Brad bulked up to show how involved Tyler was in the fights, and Norton got skinnier, starving himself to show how the Narrator’s mental state was deteriorating.

In one scene, Norton literally beats himself to pulp, throwing himself against a book shelf, punching himself in the face, and falling down on a glass table, smashing it. It was all for the act, and he spared nothing, not even his own body.

Brad really knew how to turn something beautiful (himself) into something ugly (Tyler). When he’s squatting in his abandoned house, the sense of how repulsive his character was shone through his acting. After seeing him bike around his flooded kitchen in nothing but a pink robe with a lit cigarette in his mouth and then falling face first into brown ankle deep water, you were no longer looking at Brad Pitt all, it was pure Tyler Durdan.

The fusion of the two (Brad and Norton) really brought the movie and their characters to life. Without them, the film’s powerful impact would have surely diminished.

To sum it up, if theres any classic that should be watched, its Fight Club. Not only does it satisfy as a thriller and dark comedy, but adds whip cream on top with philosophical quotes and brings it home with full throttle acting from Ed Norton and Brad Pitt. I guess I’ve broken the first two rules of fight club, which is that you don’t talk about fight club. But it was worth it, this movie cannot be missed.

The film ‘Fight Club’ is based off a book by Chuck Palahniuk. On first glance, the movie would not seem to hold any philosophical meanings. However. it does seem to advocate violence, toxic masculinity and gender segregation. But after a slight deeper analysis, it can be easily read as a parody of the same. Even its philosophical concepts become much clearer. The film surely makes its audience think and connect the dots. Despite the film and book being released years ago, it is still very relevant to today’s times. The film tackles concepts such as identity, consumerism, and beauty standards. The Narrator of the film acts like our guide, we all are essentially the Narrator. The film is basically through his eyes. We too are taken on the path of enlightenment by the choices the Narrator makes.

John Zavodny’s writing, “I Am Jack’s Wasted Life: Fight Club and Personal Identity” starts off strong and direct, he almost seems to declare his thesis right in the beginning. John calls the Narrator as ‘Jack’ due to a reference made in the film while also noting that he has no real identifying name throughout his entire journey. His namelessness could be interpreted as him representing us. This way it would become easier for the audience to relate and connect to the Narrator/Jack. From the start until end he continues to connect the film to philosophy and the meaning of life. Jack’s existential crisis is clearly highlighted right in the beginning. Zavodny starts off with the motif of consumerism and a good example of this would be the iconic line Jack says, “I’d flip through catalogues and wonder, what kind of dining set defines me as a person?’. The opening scenes of the film made clear that Jack spends a lot of time going through catalogues to buy things for his flat and himself. Zavodny sees this as Jack trying to seek peace and some sort of connection in his life. Jack is so desperate to feel alive that he turned to materialistic goods to fill the void in his life. The film also shows us the effects of capitalism and all of it has emasculated Jack, since the film considers going through catalogues is a female thing to do. Jack says, ‘I had it all. I had a stereo that was very decent, a wardrobe that was getting very respectable. I was close to being complete.’ This ties in with the fact that Jack had alienated himself; he had no friends nor a love life. He did not enjoy the job he had either, but the only things that kept him going were his work and consumer lifestyle. Jack truly identified with everything he owned, and we are reassured when he says, “That was not just a bunch of stuff that got destroyed – IT WAS ME!”. Also, the mention of retail store IKEA in the film, is ironic since all goods sold there are mass-produced, and the fact that Jack wants something that relates to him, raises the idea that he too is just as standard as the rest of society. Therefore, this can be interpreted as we too are made to follow norms that does not really let us live the way we truly want. Unless we are a part of the minority that live life like Tyler (in the moment).

Throughout the film Tyler seems to portray a person who is the literal definition of masculinity. Tyler makes it known that he does what he wants, when he wants to. Something that stood out was the scene on the bus when Jack questions an advert that had the image of a fit and muscular male and asks Tyler, “That’s what a man should look like?” Tyler dismisses the ideology of that being the ideal picture of what a man should look like. However, Tyler does seem to fit society’s criteria of what a man should look like (other than his questionable dressing sense, which he still manages to pull off). Does Jack hint that he thinks by living up to these standards he would find satisfaction and meaning to life?

Tyler’s attitude toward life and his surroundings are the complete opposite to Jack’s. A good example of Tyler’s ‘live in the moment’ attitude would be when they steal a car and drive it recklessly. Jack could not wrap his head around what was happening was trying his best to control the situation. It is here when Tyler highlights that the possibility of death should make us appreciate the present more. Another example of Tyler teaching Jack a lesson, was when he causes a chemical burn on Jack’s hand. This was meant to encourage Jack “to pay attention both to his immediate experience” (Zavodny 52). Through his actions Tyler becomes the natural leader of the fight club despite the fact it was co-founded by Jack. This shows us that Tyler is in control of his life.

Zavodny connects Tyler to, “The Romantics’ legacy” that was prevalent in America. He goes on to describe it as, “a transcendental spiritualism that encourages personal renewal by getting in touch with nature-nature as in animals and wilderness, yes, but also conscious nature as spirit manifested in one’s own distinct and inherent personal human nature.” (Zavodny 53) Zavodny sees Tyler as a modern Romantic, he is self-reliant, and he also helps Jack to try and connect with his own primal urges. In other words, he wants Jack to be a ‘Man’ and take responsibility for his own actions. Tyler emphasises to Jack, “You are not your job; you’re not how much money you have in the bank. You’re not the car you drive. You are not the contents of your wallet. You’re not your fucking khakis.” It is here Jack realises that “his consumption-based bid at meaning and identity.” (Zavodny 51) is meaningless and is headed nowhere.

As the film unfolds, we see Jack go through changes. Zavodny points out, “Since Fight Club began as a way for Jack to better understand himself, it only makes sense that its development mirrors Jack’s own personal growth.” (55) Jack’s own self-destruction is a part of his growth according to Tyler and Jack at one point is convinced of this. Tyler’s charismatic personality works like a charm on Jack. We also see Jack also starting to turn into Tyler. Could this be the reason why Tyler encouraged Jack to let go of his old self? This makes sense as during this point Tyler was moulding Jack into a new person. We also see Jack’s feeling of hopelessness and meaninglessness of life evaporate. But towards the end for the film Jack breaks free from the trance he seemed to be in and tried to stop ‘Project Mayhem’. We see Jack reject what he had come, and he also appears to kill Tyler. We were meant to see this as experiences shape you as a person. Tyler wanted jack to think for himself and break free from what society expects you to do. But did he know this would backfire since Jack starts to see himself as independent. Zavodny says, “Maybe Jack’s original ideas of personal identity didn’t fail Jack. Maybe Jack failed his ideas. (56) This can be interpreted as maybe Jack’s original state was best suited for him, but the way he went about to achieve and live in that state was wrong, therefore maybe after living like Tyler Jack realises his mistakes.

Another take on Jack’s existential crisis can be spoken about through the lens of Susan Wolf’s views. “Meaning in Life” is written by Wolf and in this she advocates the concept of meaningfulness in life. Wolf’s theory includes 3 elements i) One must have strong attachment to the project ii) One must contribute actively to the project iii) The project must worth and value. We now know that in the beginning of the film Jack is desperate to find comfort and connection and thus indulges in buying goods that are advertised to him. But Wolf would not encourage this behaviour. Jack have a strong attachment and might actively seek out to purchase these goods. But does it really hold value? Despite him spending so much he does not find what he is searching for. His actions do not hold value at the end of the day. The fact that Jack does not enjoy his job is made very clear in the film, Wolf would not approve of him living like that, she would essentially see it as meaningless (the same way Jacks feels about his life). Wolf might also point out that she does not approve of his solitary lifestyle. She would encourage Jack to have relationships that are meaningful. In the film, Jack finds himself oddly attracted to Marla Singer, Wolf would encourage him to pursue that. She would also expect him to do something other than following his mundane routine, she would want him to focus on, “the cultivation of personal virtues” (Wolf 209) This is where ‘Project Mayhem’ comes in. The 3 elements could be tied to ‘Project Mayhem’ in Fight Club. The main goal of the project was to bring down modern civilisation. But it did follow her 3 elements. Jack had strong sentiments for the project, he put in a lot of work and commitment, and he even considered it to be of high value. Wolf would probably be okay with this, or maybe not. Harm would not necessarily negate meaning for the pursuer but since at the end of the end it would cause harm to others, it would unethical to pursue. Jack and Wolf’s view could go hand in hand if Jack is willing to go through a complete lifestyle change, this could be possible since he already had a change when he started to behave as Tyler. In the end, Jack rejects ‘Project Mayhem’ and tries to stop it from happening. It is here Jack rejects his Tyler-self, he does not see it as useful to him anymore. Maybe him experiencing life as Tyler was the changing point that he needed in his life to find meaning. Wolf’s ideas can be considered a bit extreme especially since she categorises them so rigidly. Projects that bring joy but do not really have value should not be discredited.

We now know that one way of interpreting Fight Club is that Jack is a visual representation of all of us, and that he is portraying “what is wrong with our culture” (Zavodny 59). The film shows Jack livening in monotony which is a hint at how a majority of our society live. Many are made to feel that by focusing on main goals that have an outcome will bring you satisfaction and joy. This is similar to how Wolf thinks the meaning of life can be attained. However, many feel satisfaction doing things that do really have a valuable outcome (according to the rest). For example, if someone likes to paint in their spare time, they should not be discouraged from doing so just because it does not hold societal worth. However, it may hold worth to the one painting. Doing things, you enjoy and that make you happy should be a part of what makes the meaning of life. Often people who do not have access to doing what they love, alienate themselves from the rest. The same way Jack is shown doing in the film. But the film also shows good solutions to alienation. While the film points out that most people spend a majority of their life work for the material goods advertised to them, it also shows us that due to this people tend to forget the true meaning of life. While striving for a materialistic life, many feel incomplete and too focused on goods. This results in people working tirelessly for little to no outcome. When Tyler comes into the picture, we see that he instils fear into Jack’s life so that he can learn to live in the moment and not take life too seriously. This is a major hint at what can solve alienation. Learning not to take life for granted is something we all must know. Life could always be worse than it is, being happy for what you have in that moment should be kept in mind.

Introduction

“You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else, and we are all part of the same compost pile.” Said Chuck Palahniuk in novel fight club 1996. Fight club is a 200 page novel which revolves around a young men who struggling with insomnia. Here Chuck Palahniuk, through words would have portrayed the formation of a new personality by the protagonist to escape his mind prison that rages war between good and bad in this fore-fathers illustrated world.

Brief

The author here paints the concept of the lifeless life run by people in the illusions created merely by the 5% of people for their benefits , “God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables, slaves with white collars, advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don’t need. We’re the middle children of the history man, no purpose or place, we have no Great war, no Great depression, our great war is a spiritual war, our great depression is our lives, we’ve been all raised by television to believe that one day we’d all be millionaires and movie gods and rock stars, but we won’t and we’re slowly learning that fact. And we’re very very pissed off.” A quote from the novel

Key points

• The life we live saying we live to the fullest is merely a simple fulfilment of the appetite of greediness of the corporate masterminds.
• Our desire leads to surrender, Our surrender motivates their power.
• Self-knowledge is a conundrum for people those who haven’t been in a fight.

The insomnia protagonist in the novel gets addicted to crying off on people shoulders with real pain by faking sickness and running into support group for the sick for he finds the cure for insomnia . The protagonist’s unique treatment works until he meets Marla Singer, another ‘tourist’ who visits the support group under false pretenses. The possibly disturbed Marla reminds the protagonist that he is a faker who does not belong there. He begins to hate Marla for keeping him from crying, and, therefore, from sleeping. After a confrontation, the two agree to attend separate support group meetings to avoid each other. The truce is uneasy, and the protagonist’s insomnia returns.

The protagonist then runs into the character Tyler Durden at a public place where they exchange cards, which helps him finds a place to bunk with Tyler Dyden after his condominium catches fire Tyler agrees, but asks for something in return: ‘I want you to hit me as hard as you can.’Both men find that they enjoy the ensuing fistfight. They subsequently move in together and establish a ‘fight club’, drawing numerous men with similar temperaments into bare-knuckle fighting matches. A mechanic of the same temperament suggests “nobody is the centre of the fight club except for the two men fighting, and the fight club will always be free”.

As fight club becomes a nationwide presence, Tyler uses it to spread his anti-consumerist ideas, taking fight club’s members to participate in increasingly elaborate pranks on corporate America. He eventually gathers the most devoted fight club members and forms ‘Project Mayhem’, a cult-like organization that cultivates itself as an army to bring down modern civilization.

Moment of twist towards the end

Regarding the book has to end somewhere. The protagonist then learns that he himself is nothing but Tyler Durden. The formation of a new personality by the protagonist to escape his own mind prison

As the narrator’s mental state deteriorated, his mind formed a new personality that was able to escape from the problems of his life. The protagonist being clueless asks the Project Mayhem members, And they tells that the protagonist and Tyler are in-fact the same person. The protagonist’s bouts of insomnia had been Tyler’s personality surfacing; Tyler was active whenever the protagonist was ‘sleeping’. The Tyler Durden personality not only created fight club, this character was which blew up the protagonist’s condo, as an act to free him from illusions in the world.

Conclusion

The happiness and happenings you read in your life is the ones that can’t be unread. It’s basically everybody’s personal call on how they sketch their life, it’s up to them. The manifestation of our desires should be unanticipated rather than being scheduled, by someone who say themselves that they have the authority.

Some people can find happiness in anything while others spend their lives seeking it and the later type of individuals often takes a path which can make them monsters in the eyes of our society. A very similar story is portrayed in the novel Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson in 1886 and the movie Fight Club directed by David Fincher in 1999 which makes them an ideal comparison for this paper. In both the film and the novel, the character named Jekyll and the unnamed narrator were unhappy with their daily lifestyle. Although they were leading a normal life according to society, they were suffering from the crisis of happiness. This paper will discuss what causes this crisis even when the characters in both the novel and the film has everything in life and how these persons becomes monsters in society. Boredom causes unhappiness in life which can have adverse psychological traumas in the person experiencing it. Which explains why the characters in question are considered to be psychopaths.

Evidences of Jekyll’s advantages in life and his dissatisfaction can be found in many references throughout the novel Strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, Jekyll mentions about his background, “I was born in the year 18 to a large fortune, endowed besides with excellent parts…fond of the respect of the wise and good among my fellow men…honourable and distinguishable future”(Robert pp. 75). It is clear from this statement that Jekyll had a clear advantage in life as he was financially better off from most of the people. Jekyll’s expression of his dissatisfaction with life can be found in his statement “I found it hard to reconcile with my imperious desire…I stood already committed to a profound duplicity of life…I regarded and hid them with an almost morbid sense of shame”(Robert pp. 76). Here he clearly states that although he had a good and normal life, he still was not satisfied and that he is just trying to cope with his position and status like a role play but not at all happy with it even though any normal person in society would love to be in his position. He also illustrates the cause of his dual nature that provoked or acted as the catalyst for his attempt to gain pleasure through transforming. Jekyll states, “It was thus rather the exacting nature of my aspirations…served in me those provinces of good and ill which divide and compound man’s dual nature.”(Robert pp, 76). Jekyll mentions about his first encounter with dual nature led by his dissatisfaction or rather his crisis that forced him to push his boundaries into dual nature. This also proves one of Cohen’s seven theses, “monsters are the harbinger of category crisis”(Cohen pp. 4) it means that monsters emerges from some kind of crisis, to be exact when the crisis is huge and in order to fill up the crisis a person is ready to cross any boundaries to pursue what they want.

Like Jekyll the protagonist in the film Fight Club, was also unhappy with his life in spite of having success that not many can achieve. According to critics Fight Club tells the story of an insomniac white-collar worker named Jack, who seems to lead an isolated life and gains pleasure from consuming material objects (Fincher). This shows the unnamed narrator in Fight Club is indeed having a normal life with a job but was not happy with it. The imaginary friend of the protagonist of the film reveals himself on board a flight, Norton’s character revels in the fantasy of a mid-air explosion where he enjoys the spectacle of the cabin of the plane being torn apart, and he strikes up a conversation with what he believes to be a ‘single-serving’ friend ( Kinder et al. pp. 541-556). The presence of an imaginary friend indicates the absence of any real friends which suggest that the unnamed narrator may feel pretty lonely in life. The section of the film where Jack first encounters his imaginary friend, it also shows that Jack is beginning to pursue his happiness. The dialogues from the unnamed narrator that says I am Jack’s… complete lack of surprise…I am Jack’s wasted life…I am Jack’s smirking revenge(Fincher) further proves that he was not happy with his life. But the destructive nature of his imaginary friend causes Jack to rethink their relationship and the latter realizes Tyler as his double (Cartmell & Whelehan, 96). Here unlike Jekyll, the unnamed narrator realizes that he has a double which can also be found in other gothic fictions.

It is evident from both the novel and the film that they both follow the trend of gothic fiction and both are connected to Cohen’s monster theory. Both have had a similar crisis where they were bored with their regular life which can have adverse psychological effects (James, pp. 281-91). As a result, both Jekyll and the unnamed narrator developed dual personality disorder.

Research suggests that bored people are more prone to unhappiness without even realizing themselves (Diener el al, 47, pp 1105-1117). And individuals who are prone to boredom often attempt to engage themselves in highly stimulating activities, in particular aggression and violence are extreme examples of radical behavior that serves to get rid of the state of boredom (David et al. 1995). This shows why Jekyll and the unnamed narrator who had nothing interesting in life, ended up becoming a psychopath walking the wrong road. The fact that the unnamed narrator later in the movie realizes he was wrong proves the actions of Tyler (his imagination) were also wrong. Therefore boredom, which can cause unhappiness, can eventually lead to monstrous activities in individuals. This proves Cohen’s third thesis which states that monsters are created from a category crisis which in these two cases are unhappiness (Cohen pp.4).

Some scholars argue that boredom can also bring positive aspects in life such as personal growth and can help to construct a meaningful life (Elpidorou, pp 5). But it is up to every individual as to which direction they want to take when they are at their limit and individuals taking the path of crime and destruction ended up becoming as monster; this also supports Cohen’s seventh theory that states monsters stand at the threshold of becoming one(Cohen pp. 12). Therefore it can be concluded that extreme boredom which can cause unhappiness can sometimes create monsters in our society.

The first support group that Jack joined was for people diagnosed with testicular cancer. These groups are the lone way the narrator is capable of getting any sleep. By visiting various support groups for people with terminal illnesses, and assuming false identities, he can find a sense of belonging that is otherwise missing in his life. This specific support group is a place in which he feels sheltered and where he can let go of his emotions and connect, Jack found freedom because to him: “losing all hope was freedom”; essentially this is what the surrounding people were feeling. It was something that brought him ease and helped with his narcolepsy even going as far as implying that: “babies don’t sleep this well.’ He could realize human connections without the effort, rather immediate acceptance: “Bob loved me because he thought my testicles were removed.’

Generation X felt trapped in their jobs and material lives, and bought what society wanted them to, but rarely did these things bring meaning to their lives. Project Mayhem was a sort of rebellion that took the form of a group identity, but they become lost once again as they are now part of yet another group with the same conforming rules as the norm in society that they resisted. In their mission to bring down different organizations, they become one themselves.

Masculinity is often related to strength, self-confidence and independence, money and a well-respected job to define a man’s identity. These typical ambitions are commonly defined as the American dream for males, but does following society’s standards make a male masculine? This first scene demonstrates how they were taught to suppress their emotion and the support club is a manifestation of genuine feelings that were not encouraged.

Jack referred to Marla as his “tumor”, she is a character put into place which is his guilt and remorse, a manifestation. It seems plausible Marla Singer materializes to remind Jack he is exploiting these therapy groups: “Marla Singer didn’t have any diseases and she ruined everything, her lie reflected my lie” Suddenly he felt nothing and couldn’t cry and once again he couldn’t sleep. They’re both alike, Even when Marla enters, she says, ‘This is cancer, right?’ nobody responds. The overly-civilized and feminized Jack invents Marla, a symbol of his guilt, and steers her toward outlets for his condescension toward the order of society. Marla is self-destructive, manipulative, and a kleptomaniac. Later on, Jack invents a hyper-masculine Tyler who is outwardly destructive, blatantly honest, and disregards materialism.

Tyler represents Jack’s suppressed anger and disillusionment, Marla represents the guilt, regret, and pain that has been holding Jack back. Therefore, Marla and Tyler are two parts of Jack’s brain, fighting for dominance. Marla shows up at the support group, and Jack reverts to insomnia; with his pain and guilt staring him in the face, Jack can’t cry and therefore he can’t sleep. Once Tyler is fully formed and in control, he weakens his regret, pain, and guilt, that being Marla. Tyler preaches

to Jack that the faults he sees in himself lie in society as a whole. Jack creates the notion of “In Tyler we trust”, and Marla gets weaker and weaker. Marla’s limitation is characterized by her progressively difficult time controlling, or even talking to Jack.

Marla talks to Jack about the death of Chloe, he tries to defend himself from the resurfacing of his guilt and pain. When Jack feels as though Marla is too much for him, he resorts back to Tyler, who informs him what to say to get out of the situation. Marla is rejected, even saying “I just can’t win with you, can I?”, and leaves, defeated once again.

Where is My Mind by the Pixies is perfectly suited to the last scene as it gives the ending a weirdly fairy-tale-like feeling, where despite shooting himself Jack does not. die, and despite everything Marla has been through due to Jack, She is still alive and willing to be with Jack. It almost seems as if this would be the ending Jack would have chosen for his story if he were given the chance; that is because it is a fantasy. He imagines that Marla is a real person, a love interest, where all the consequences of Jack’s actions are either forgotten or forgiven, and it seems as though Marla and Jack will go on to lead a relatively happy and normal life.

Tyler Durden was all about letting go of yourself and just letting yourself exist at a primal, survivalist level. It portrays a world turned upside down, Essentially it sums up the plot, through the medium of music. someone who’s gone slightly insane, and does not care what happens anymore, they could kill themselves, and they wouldn’t care, but they are aware of their insanity. If you have ever tried to delve into your mind and follow each tangent that another thought brings up, you soon see that your mind is too complicated and too diverse to step back and look at. So you wonder “Where is my mind” much like how Jack wonders where his mind is at. This song captures that randomness, that infiniteness, in such a good way that you could just float on the feeling of knowing how random your mind is, and not caring about anything else. “Your head collapses If there’s nothing in it, and then you’ll ask yourself, where is my mind?’, figuratively speaking means you’re choosing a path in life that isn’t considered normal like Jack detaching yourself from the norms of generation X.  

Palahniuk depicts how the narrator, in pursuit of rejecting society’s ideologies about these concepts, begets toxic behavior. Satire is a miscellaneous genre that exploits irony, exaggeration, and humor pragmatically and constructively to mock or taunt the diabolic vices and absurdity that have plagued society. Although satire utilizes a comedic approach to address toxic ideologies and norms, the primitive purpose is to employ laughter as a weapon to penetrate sensitive social taboos. Through the witty facade of entertainment, satire effectively educates the public and coaxs a subliminal awakening, prompting individuals to confront the injustices and predicaments that exist in society, in an effort to evoke potential transformation.

The author of Fight Club(1996) satirizes various topics which are modern masculinity, capitalism, and consumerist culture to name a few. It delves into problems of individuality and identity. Palahniuk illustrates how the narrator’s pursuit of rejecting society’s notions regarding the above topics which leads to destructive behavior. Fight Club presents a crisis of masculinity in contemporary society.

The crisis was caused by the lack of traditional male role models and the societal pressure of advertising and consumer culture.

Satire can be defined as a diverse and complex genre that criticizes people’s stupidity or vices through humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule. A satire employs a comic approach to confront toxic injustices and issues in their society, its goal is to use laughter as a weapon to break down societal taboos. Satire efficiently educates the audience and coaxes a subliminal awakening, forcing individuals to confront the injustices and predicaments that exist in society to elicit potential transformation through a clever veneer of entertainment.

“You buy furniture. You tell yourself, this is the last sofa I will ever need in my life. Buy the sofa, then for a couple of years, you’re satisfied that no matter what goes wrong, at least you’ve got your sofa issue handled. Then the right set of dishes. Then the perfect bed. The drapes. The rug.

Then you’re trapped in your lovely nest, and the things you used to own, now they own you” (Palahniuk 1996: 25). This simply implies that modern society emasculates males by forcing them to live consumerist lives focused on shopping and physical attractiveness.

‘All I do is want and need things,’ (96), This merely reveals how the narrator is consumed by consumerist behavior. The traits fostered by a capitalist society, are engendering an emasculated culture of manhood.

When the narrator sees Walter, he says:

Here’s a young guy with perfect teeth and clear skin and the kind of job you bother to write the alumni magazine about getting (33). This backs up the notion that men adapt to socially enforced masculinity ideals, which define a man based on certain attributes like stabilization, physical beauty, and charm rather than vigor.

“The gyms you go to are crowded with guys trying to look like men’ (30), This shows how physical attractiveness is closely tied to modern masculinity, urging men to conform to the gender stereotype that muscularity is a required male feature.

demonstrates how physical attractiveness is inextricably linked to modern masculinity, encouraging men to conform to the gender stereotype that muscularity is a necessary male trait.

Masculinity, or ‘manhood’ in the novel is linked to male genitalia (the testicles and phallus). Bob represents both literally and figuratively emasculated males. Bob is a former bodybuilder whose excessive usage of steroids resulted in the development of testicular cancer, which necessitated the removal of his testicles (5). In his pursuit of the perceived desired physical features of perfect masculinity, Bob, on the other hand, lost a prominent component of his genitalia that is viewed as an essential masculine quality. The narrator repeatedly says, ‘Bob cries’ (6); this public display of emotion emasculates Bob because sentimental behavior is seen as a feminine trait. Bob not only has a feminine demeanor, but he also has a unique feminine physical trait — ‘Bob’s new sweaty tits hung excessively.’ (4).

Bob’s character is satirized because he is utilized to deny and mock the idea of hegemonic masculinity.

To reject any links to femininity and embody raw primordial masculinity, the narrator co-founded Fight Club with Tyler. During fights, men were able to break free from the false masculinity created by today’s society by demonstrating tremendous violence and aggression.

Fight Club suggests that in current society, masculinity has become a ‘brand’, an ideal. Men are expected to look and behave in certain ways therefore they decide to destroy the society that encourages a consumer culture and revert society to a more primitive state, an almost prehistorical lifestyle, where men can be “hunters” and fight and kill for survival. They engage in behavior that is considered toxic, emphasize traditionally “masculine” traits like violence, aggression, and dominance

I just don’t want to die without a few scars, I say. It’s nothing anymore to have a beautiful stock body. You see those cars that are completely stock cherry, right out of a dealer’s showroom in 1955, I always think, what a waste’(28) This type of activity bestows a sense of hypermasculinity on a male trying to show unpolished masculinity, the narrator’s remark emphasizes how physical aggression brings personal fulfillment.

“You live anywhere like you are living club’ (30), This demonstrates how ego and a sense of authority are acquired through savagery; males use violence as a means of expressing their suppressed, unrefined, yet seemingly functional male sentiments and behavior.

This indicates how macho and a sense of power are gained through savagery; men use violence as an avenue to express their suppressed unrefined apparent functional male sentiments and behavior.

The Narrator describes the men at Fight Club as “What you see at Fight Club is a generation of men raised by women” (29). This implies that the men in Fight Club are estranged from or unaware of their fathers. Because they grew up without a male role model, these men build a masculine identity by copying masculine stereotypes.

You see a guy come to fight club for the first time, and his ass is a loaf of white bread. You see this same guy here six months later, and he looks carved out of wood. This guy trusts himself to handle anything” (30) This suggests that Fight Club has the power to transform ‘boys’ into ‘ men,’ as well as to challenge them to retreat from society and form their own culture.

Summary:

The novel tells the story of an unidentified narrator combating sleep disorder the unnamed narrator, suffering from chronic insomnia, is attending support groups. Not for insomnia, but for diseases he doesn’t have such as tuberculosis, and testicular cancer. the narrator meets a man with giant breasts at his testicular cancer support group named Bob and learns how to cry. he also meets a woman named Marla, he calls her a faker, a tourist, because she goes to support groups for diseases she doesn’t have. exactly just like him, and he can’t take it. he suggests to her that They should divide up the support groups so they never have to see each other again. since Marla causes the narrator to be unable to sleep once again. On a business trip, the narrator meets Tyler Durden, a salesperson. once the narrator returns home, he has no home to come back to. His flat has burst, then He calls Tyler Durden the soap salesperson, and grabs a drink with him. Tyler agrees to let the narrator stay at his house, but first, he asks him for a favor: ‘I want you to hit me as hard as you can.’ The two fight in a parking, then return to Tyler’s house. the two begin a secret club referred to as Fight Club. Men gather at secret locations to interact in fighting.

Book vs movie/similarities and differences:

the movie follows the same plot as the book and it has the same characters, although there are a few differences, In both the book and the movie, Marla notices that the narrator has stopped showing up to the support groups. Needing to urge his consideration, she overdoses on benzodiazepine and calls him. In the movie, the narrator picks up the phone and tunes in to Marla’s conversation for a bit,Tyler then picks up. In the novel, the narrator never picks up the phone. In the book, the narrator blacks out after he shoots himself and wakes up in a mental hospital, but The novel closes with the narrator waking up in the hospital with the employees telling him that Tayler might come back .in my opinion, the movie takes the story much further than the book does but The original book ending is considerably better than the movie ending.

Written by Chuck Palahniuk in 1996, Fight Club follows a dejected man suffering from chronic insomnia who meets a peculiar man named Tyler Durden. The nameless Narrator soon finds himself living in Tyler’s condemned house after his perfect apartment is destroyed by a mysterious explosion. The two jaded men form an underground club with stringent rules and fight other men who are fed up with their tedious, button-down lives. Their perfect friendship frays when Marla Singer, a fellow support group crasher, entices Tyler’s attention. The culminating result could mean the annihilation of society as we know it. Throughout the book, Palahnuik utilizes instances of death and violence to prove his point about the downfall of society. Destruction and mayhem go a long way in changing what one sees as important in life. Only through pain and struggle can one experience life in its wholeness. In this novel, Palahnuik expresses how experiencing pain, violence, and death is the only way to achieve spiritual reawakening and change the world.

Palahniuk uses the theme of death multiple times throughout the novel, starting at the very beginning. In the second chapter the Narrator is attending the Staying Men Together, a support group for men with testicular cancer. Though the Narrator is not ill, he attends multiple meetings that support people with terminal ailments, typically set in church basements. He uses these meetings to find emotional cleansing and catharsis to help ease his intense, chronic insomnia. ‘It’s easy to cry when you realize that everyone you love will reject you or die” (Palahniuk, 176). This quote, along with much of the language used throughout the novel, portrays his nihilistic point of view. To sleep at night, the Narrator needs to cry and lose himself in his despair. Only by letting go of any hope can he rest. In the Narrator’s mindset, we are all destined to die and there is nothing any of us can do about it. This attitude also suggests that the Narrator has fallen into a cycle of self-pity. This quote re-affirms the Narrator’s worldview and prevents him from moving out of this mindset. This helps to perpetuate the upcoming onslaught that creates an underground lair of mayhem and destruction.

Just over halfway through the novel, the Narrator and a few members of Project Mayhem are in a car, traveling down a dark stretch of freeway. The driver swerves into oncoming traffic. The car sideswipes a tractor-trailer, tossing the Narrator around the car, and bashing his forehead against the steering wheel. The Narrator did not experience fear, but instead an exhilaration of a near-death experience. “The amazing miracle of death, when one second you’re walking and talking, and the next second, you’re an object” (Palahniuk 146). By confronting death so closely, the Narrator seems to have shed his existential hopelessness and sought to be the exacter of such despair on the rest of society.

“On a long enough timeline, everyone’s survival rate drops to zero” (Palahniuk 176). It is easy for the Narrator to separate Project Mayhem from realism when its members are nameless and detached. However, this changes when Bob joins the organization. Bob was a member of Staying Men Together, where the Narrator and he met. This is the moment when the Project becomes personal for the Narrator. Bob’s death makes the philosophical extremity of Project Mayhem a reality for the Narrator. When Bob dies during a mischief mission, the Narrator finally decides that Project Mayhem must be eliminated. Bob’s death is primarily distressing as he had come to represent innocence early in the novel. Without Bob and his ultimate sacrifice, the Narrator may never have realized the true destruction Project Mayhem is capable of.

When Bob joined Project Mayhem, he gave up his name, as do all members. After Bob’s death, which was the first known death within Project Mayhem, his name was restored to him. “Only in death will we have our names since only in death are we no longer part of the effort. In death, we become heroes’ (Palahnuik 178). This indifference for the loss of life passed down to members of Flight Club from Tyler, is disturbing to the Narrator because it does not run on par with his principles but was still created from somewhere in his subconscious. This dichotomy represents Tyler as a dissolute creation that has gained its individuality and now is working to eliminate the originator of the mission. Realizing that many people may die due to the events he has put into play, the Narrator tries to shut down the fight club, but his attempt is met with resistance – from Tyler, and himself. Project Mayhem has moved beyond the Narrator and can continue without him, creating a path of death and destruction in its wake.

Death, violence, and destruction repeat throughout Fight Club on most pages of the novel. Even the first line of the book depicts this recurring theme: “Tyler gets me a job as a waiter after that Tyler’s pushing a gun in my mouth and saying, the first step to eternal life is having to die” (Palahniuk 11). This, along with the consistently dreary and loathsome setting creates an overall chaotic and melancholic tone to the story. By starting the fight club, with the intent to experience and inflict pain, the Narrator and Tyler are trying to feel “real” and “alive.” The book ends with the Narrator’s attempted suicide. He wakes up in a mental institution, however he believes he is dead and in heaven. He finds it boring, but he can finally sleep. Palahniuk leaves it to the reader to decide if the Narrator ever truly achieved the enlightenment he sought, or how much more destruction project Mayhem had in store for the rest of society.                                                   

Question: How do the novel ‘Lord of the Flies and the film Fight Club employs techniques to illustrate the dispute between the human instincts leaning toward savagery and the rules implemented to contain it by civilization?

Author William Golding and director David Fincher largely convey the conflict between innate human instincts of savagery and the civilized disciplines maintained by society in the novel Lord of the Flies and the film Fight Club respectively. Although the setting of the two texts and the modes in which they convey this notion differ to an extent, the overarching theme of civilization versus savagery is pervasive throughout both. Lord of the Flies is a fictional novel written by William Golding and takes place during the event of a war in which a group of British schoolboys are deserted on an uninhabited island after a disastrous plane crash. The novel follows the struggles of the young boys as they attempt to maintain order by developing their own civilization which ironically ensues to their gradual succumbing to their savage instincts; deluded by the fear of a figment ‘beast’ which is embodied by the Lord of the Flies. Meanwhile, Fight Club is directed by David Fincher and is set in an unnamed city inside the mind of an unnamed protagonist who suffers from chronic insomnia. The protagonist encounters a man by the name of Tyler Durden, who is later found to be an alter ego fabricated by his schizophrenia, with whom he creates the ‘Fight Club’; an underground association with the purpose of gratifying men’s masculinity through fighting others. The film progresses as a flashback showcasing a transition from the protagonist’s monotonous life governed by consumerism to his leisurely lifestyle after forming the Fight Club; an outlet for his savage tendencies. The use of dialogue in the two texts conveys the notion that chaos is created through the misuse of savage instincts that are unleashed when an individual diverges from the order maintained by civilized society. Fincher also employs cinematography and personification in Fight Club, while Golding makes use of metaphors in Lord of the Flies to illustrate how innate savage instincts overtake the minds of individuals. Symbolism is another technique applied in the two texts and demonstrates the increase in the prevalence of savagery throughout both.

Through the implementation of dialogue in their respective texts, Golding and Fincher have created an emphasis on the proposition that an individual’s deviation from civilization will result in the misuse of savage instincts, causing chaos and entropy. The unnamed protagonist from Fight Club is comparable to Jack from Lord of the Flies as the two are able to suppress their savage tendencies initially, although as a result of differing rationales. Early in the plot of Lord of the Flies, Golding illustrates that providing methods of subdual for savage tendencies is an essential function of society. Jack’s inceptive proclivity towards hunting pigs exhibits this idea as his hostility is redirected into a productive task; providing the group with necessary food through his judgment shaped by civilization. Fincher on the other hand, distinctly indicates that consumerism and conformity are the main oppressive influences that heavily impede the outbreaks of savagery within society. The protagonist’s influence under civilization even after the creation of the Fight Club is a clear illustration of this point and is communicated by the protagonist himself through the use of dialogue “Nobody takes this more seriously than me, that condo was my life, okay? I loved every stick of furniture in that place. That was not just a bunch of stuff that got destroyed, it was me!” [0:57:14] implying that his judgment is still guided by his former heavily consumerism-driven lifestyle. Jack’s early decision-making is of a comparable fashion to Fight Club’s protagonist when he is unable to kill the piglet as it would be considered an immoral act in the eyes of society; “They knew very well why he hadn’t: because of the enormity of the knife descending and cutting into living flesh; because of the unbearable blood.” (Golding, p. 41). Both texts, therefore, convey that exposure to civilized society, whether it be influenced by consumerism in Fight Club or heavily based on establishing order on the island in Lord of the Flies, allows for individuals to mitigate their initial savage instincts through their judgment formulated by the rights and wrongs within society.

The novel and the film’s take on the concept of civilization versus savagery diverges as the plot progresses. In Lord of the Flies, Golding suggests that the repercussions of savagery are a conspicuous endorsement for civilized society; for it is when Jack contravenes the efficacy of civilized judgment after being isolated from civilization on the island, that the unfolding of his vicious characteristics occurs. For instance, Jack’s deviation from civilization is demonstrated when he is finally able to kill a piglet “Jack found the throat and the hot blood spouted over his hands. […] Jack stood up, holding out his hands ‘Look.’ He giggled and flicked them while the boys laughed at his reeking palms.” (Golding, p. 168). It is evident through this dialogue that Jack is not driven to kill the pig by his civilized judgment of providing food for the group, but rather for the thrill of the hunt; viewing his bloody hands as validation of his masculinity as was the Fight Club for the unnamed protagonist.

In contrast to Golding’s clear encouragement of the civilized ways of society, Fincher demonstrates the notion – “excess of anything is bad” in Fight Club, as initially consumerism suppresses the protagonist until his masculinity and sense of self become challenged; leading to the creation of his rebellious alter ego – Tyler Durden. However, as the protagonist begins to reject the validity of societal beliefs, Tyler’s uninhibited violent tendencies correspond to Jack’s vicious rebellion against Ralph’s authority over the group in Lord of the Flies, and cause him to initiate an epidemic of rebellions against society known as ‘Project Mayhem’. Tyler’s master plan was to cause explosions in buildings of credit card companies, thinking “it’ll create total chaos” [1:01:41], hence implying that his overarching goal is to convert all of society to the ways of savagery as opposed to the initial goal of the Fight Club; allowing the protagonist to realize the negative impacts of the emasculating and oppressive aspects of civilization. Although the two texts diverge their respective ideas of civilization versus savagery, Golding and Fincher both impart the overarching idea that an increase in savagery within society causes major disruptions within civilization.

Through the use of cinematography, metaphors, and personification, Fincher and Golding demonstrate how savagery is an inherent human characteristic; overtaking individuals’ minds from within. Golding suggests that savage instincts gradually overtake judgment in the absence of civilization as is evident from the deterioration of Ralph’s democratic society and inversely equivalent upspring of Jack’s savage hunters in Lord of the Flies. Meanwhile, in Fight Club, Fincher proposes that excessive societal oppression unleashes the once inhibited savagery within individuals such as the protagonist, engendering to the proliferation of his psychotic episodes and the creation of Tyler Durden. ‘The Lord of the Flies’, otherwise known as ‘the beast is a figment of imagination fermented by the boys’ unguided minds in the absence of civilization and is a metaphor for the thirst for violence and inclination towards savagery that resides within the minds of all individuals as an inherent primal human instinct. The fear of the beast causes the boys to essentially worship and obey its “commands”, becoming increasingly inclined towards acts of savagery involving hunting and sacrifice. Tyler Durden is a similar figure to the beast from the Lord of the Flies as he is a personification of the protagonist’s suppressed savage instincts. In Fight Club, however, the cause of Tyler’s creation is not the protagonist’s deviation from civilization, but instead, his psychosis induced by oppressive consumerism and conformity within society as evinced through Fincher’s employment of cinematography in the film. For example, Tyler’s arrival into the protagonist’s life is abnormal as shots of him flash into random scenes during the early film for a short duration before his character is even introduced to the audience, indicating that he is a result of the protagonist’s schizophrenia. In accordance with this concept, the fallacy of the Lord of the Flies is evident during the scene where Simon converses with the beast who states “There isn’t anyone to help you. Only me and I am the Beast. […] Fancy thinking the Beast was something you could hunt and kill! […] You knew, didn’t you? I’m part of you?” (Golding, p. 177). Through these lines, it can be perceived that Simon is in fact experiencing a delusion and instead speaking to one of his inner personas, who attempts to convince him to embrace savagery by taking the form of the Lord of the Flies. Throughout the two texts, Golding and Fincher how the boys in Lord of the Flies and the protagonist in Fight Club experience an altered sense of reality when exposed to excessive savagery, resulting in the deterioration of the world around them.

Both Lord of the Flies and Fight Club use the technique of symbolism to convey the deterioration of civilization and hence the uprising of savagery. In Lord of the Flies, Golding has implemented the conch shell, while Fincher employs Tyler’s soap as the main symbol within the two texts to signify the increasing prevalence of savagery within the two texts, although in a contrasting manner. The conch shell in Lord of the Flies symbolizes the presence of democracy and civil structure on the island and its importance is expressed near the beginning of the novel where it is described as invaluable “—a conch; ever so expensive. I bet if you wanted to buy one, you’d have to pay pounds and pounds and pounds—” (Golding, p. 21). Although the conch allows the boys to initially establish a form of civilized society of their own, as the contentions between Jack and Ralph aggravate causing Jack to stray towards his savage instincts, Jack begins to repudiate the significance of the conch shell, and its symbolism – civilization itself when he states “We don’t need the conch anymore. We know who ought to say things. […] It’s time some people knew they’ve got to keep quiet and leave deciding things to the rest of us.” (Golding, p. 18). Jack’s denial of the civil structure maintained by Ralph ensues to the beginning of his violent rebellion.

Unlike the conch in Lord of the Flies, the soap Tyler produces in Fight Club is symbolic of his rebellion against society as he illegally uses human fat removed through liposuction as the main ingredient in the soaps which are sold back to rich people who undergo the procedure; selling the fat they paid to remove back to themselves. Although the significance of the two symbols differs largely in their respective texts, by using human fat in his soaps, Tyler is rebelling against the ethical beliefs of modern society and acting as an abnormal vigilante in a similar manner to Jack in Lord of the Flies who ultimately causes the conch to shatter during the scene of Piggy’s death. The destruction of the conch is indicative of the absolute overrule of civilization and upsurge of savagery on the island, which is evident as Jack attempts to murder Ralph, “Viciously, with full intention, he hurled the spear at Ralph. The point tore the skin and flesh over Ralph’s ribs, then sheared off and fell into the water” (Golding, p. 223), which demonstrates the extent of appalling violence committed by Jack who is now free from the constraints of civilized judgment; becoming the new leader on the island. A comparable theme is present in Fight Club as Tyler uses the same ingredients from his soaps as a part of Project Mayhem to detonate the multi-story skyscrapers in the film’s final scene in contrast to his initial harmless rebellion. This contrast symbolizes Fight Club’s transition from a mere outlet for savage instincts to Project Mayhem; essentially an oppressive society where its members are forced to discard their identities. Thus, through the use of symbolism, Fincher and Golding illustrate that rebellion against civilization originating from savagery ultimately devolves into a similar tyrannical society as that which is initially disputed.

In summation, the novel Lord of the Flies and the film Fight Club explore the dispute between human instincts leaning toward savagery and the rules implemented to contain it by civilization with the aid of several literary and film techniques. Dialogue is used by Golding and Fincher in their respective texts to communicate the havoc caused by the misuse of savage instincts as societal influences become diminished. Furthermore, Golding uses metaphors, meanwhile, Fincher employs cinematography and personification to demonstrate the deterioration of civilization and rise of savagery. Through the use of these techniques, Fight Club and Lord of the Flies illustrate the theme of civilization versus savagery in ways that have been compared and contrasted.