FOLIA 175 Annales Universitatis Paedagogicae Cracoviensis Studia Anglica IV (2014)

Małgorzata Kowalcze Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland A ‘KNIGHT OF ’ LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE : EXISTENTIAL TRANSFORMATION OF DEAN JOCELIN FROM WILLIAM GOLDING’S THE SPIRE

Abstract The Spire presents to the reader a surprisingly true to life story ‘knight’ through William ‘being’Golding in his novel ‘self’ by means of intricate relationships with other people of a man who undergoes an existential transformation from Kierkegaard’s whoSartre’s follows the arriving path of at an Levinas’s existentialist, undergoing the process of a profound alteration of and a process of painful himself-discovery. Jocelin, the main character of the novel, is a man personality. He begins as a Kierkegaard’s ‘knight of faith,’ perceiving himself as a God’s Tool, and ends up as a Sartre’s ‘existence’ aware of his abandonment and consequent responsibility. In different moments of his makeover Jocelin embodies the contrasting concepts within existential philosophy, the theistic and atheistic ones, which are woven around the themes of self-examination, free will versus determinism, humility and pride, as well as the enigmatic Keystruggle words: of good , and evil within the Other, a human transformation being.

William Golding is the author whose gloomy account of human nature, permeating spirit of doom and what seems to be a programmed lack of happy endings in his novels gained him the name of a downright pessimist, and it seemsWilliam that the Golding. writer, Thewho Man in his Who private Wrote journal Lord callsof the himself Flies, claims ‘a monster,’ that such would a self-assessmentnot deny that. John might Carey, be the author of his most recent biography edited in 2009, entitled a result of the war atrocities he took part in or his destructive behavior towards his son David, but it might also be a result of the fact that Golding was a profoundly monstrous,introspective in andhis imagination.”‘self-blaming’1 man who, as he kept repeating, “saw the seeds of all evilThe in confidencehis own heart, with and which who Williamfound monstrous Golding struggledthings, or thingsfor literary he accounted success obscures the uneasiness which accompanied him while waiting for critics’ reviewsJ. Carey,after publishingWilliam Golding. his novels. The Man Whether Who Wrote it was Lord the of traumathe Flies he experienced 1 (London, 2009), Chapter 19. [30] Małgorzata Kowalcze with Lord of the Flies being rejected by numerous publishers before finally Charles Monteith, a former lawyer who had been employed in Faber and Faber as an editor

The Spire, was written at the time when for just a month, noticed the potential of a provincial schoolmaster, is extremely difficultindependent, to know could for abandon sure. His his fifth position novel, of a teacher and focus on writing. That Golding, having gained readers’ recognition as a writer and becoming financially critical reception of his works, and although the first draft of The Spire was written amount of free time made him even more self-examining and apprehensive about the 2 in just a fortnight, the following fine-tuning of the novel was lengthy and laborious so that it had a much more “tormented birth than any of his previous novels.” claimMark Kinkead-Weekesthat The Spire and Ian Gregor, the critics whose study of Golding’s novels3 is still regarded as the most comprehensive introduction to the author’s fiction, was a novel which revealed Golding’s unparalleled artistry. Golding did not provide any help for his interpreters, as his comments on his work are rather reticent and superficial. What the author used to say in the interviews is referred to by Carey as ‘a gramophone record put on for an interviewer’ the aim of which was to ‘keep the world at bay.’ This does not, however, discourage critics from4 facing Golding’s monsters as his novels ‘constitute a major achievement in contemporary English literature and deserve to be better known than they yet sameare.’ Hopefully,time feared a itcloser more look than at anything one of his else. novels presented in the following paper will bring the reader closer to the writer who craved human contact, but at the can recognizeA haggard him beggar to be is the wandering former dean along of the a local streets Cathedral of a quaint Church medieval of Our Lady,town trying to discover the whereabouts of a man named Roger Mason. Hardly anyone whichJocelin, recently the clergyman has been could in the not centre expect of kindnessthe whole and community’s respect on attention the part dueof his to acongregation massive spire for being it was built the Dean on the who top. initiated And if anybodythe building was of able the toimmense identify edifice Dean despite the lack of proper foundations. Now the shaky construction poses a threat to the whole cathedral. What is more, there are rumors of some pagan rituals being performed by the workers hired to build the spire; the cathedral’s sacristan, who child.had been Although constantly the Dean persecuted has not by left the the workers premises for of his the impotence, cathedral finally for months, vanished his into the blue and his wife died at childbirth while giving birth to the master builder’s him from his function. The old man, whose tuberculosis-affected spine makes him bentmadness double, has beenis now reported literally to thrown the church into authorities the gutter whoby the have angry decided mob. to Begging remove other people’s mercy, Jocelin is in stark contrast to the proud clergyman who used to perceive others from the height of his elevated position. Ibid. 2 P. Redpath, William Golding. A Structural Reading of His Fiction 3 H. Babb, The Novels of William Golding 4 (London, 1986), p. 205. (Columbus, 1970), p. 2. A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [31]

The Spire, is a cathedral dean who

The main hero of William Golding’s novel, believes that God has assigned him a mission to build a spire at the top of the cathedral’s roof. The spire would supplement the temple so that it would represent ‘the pattern of worship’ recognizable to all believers:5 “The building is a diagram of prayer; and our spire will be a diagram of the highest prayer of all. God revealed it toprofoundly me in a vision, transforms his unprofitable the Dean servant.”in three aspects: The risky his venture, self-perception, however, nothis relationshiponly changes with the appearancepeople and hisof the notion cathedral of God. as such, but even more importantly, philosophical theories, but existential philosophy deals with the issue in These three spheres of man’s life are subjects of multiple, often contrasting, a particularly personal way by putting an individual in the centre of their discourse. atheisticDuring the theory process of Jeanof his Paul makeover, Sartre. Jocelin The clergyman embodies the two reader extreme is introduced concepts within to on the existential philosophy, namely the theistic model of Søren Kierkegaard and the “knight of faith,”6 the initial pages of the novel appears to be a perfect exemplification of Kierkegaard’s a relentless servant of God, determined to fulfill his master’s will. awareAs the ofplot his progresses, weakness and however, ontological the main abandonment, character asalters well so as dramatically responsibility that he towards the end of the book Jocelin resembles more Jean Paul Sartre’s ‘existence,’ cannot disavow. For Kierkegaard each human being is ontologically dependent theon andexistence directed of atowards higher power:God, thus “[…] he anyone must bewho perceived stands alone only infor the any context length of God’s existence. Similarly, every individual7 has a natural inclination to recognize astime an soon unconditioned discovers that existence. there is The a God.” two concepts,Sartre presents extreme the as opposite they are, view; focus since on there is no God, a human being is alone in the universe and must be thus regarded the struggle between free will and psychological determinism. These concepts at thecertain same common time constitute themes concerning major themes human of The life, Spire such. as self-discovery of man and

A Kierkegaardian Man of Faith

The existential approach of Søren Kierkegaard emerged as a reaction to the holistic philosophy of Georg Hegel’s. The Danish thinker wanted to underline the meaning of an individual man, who in the universal system of Hegel’s occupied a minor position of a mere element of the pervasive Zeitgeist, ‘The Spirit of the Times.’ What Kierkegaard wants to stress is that an abstract system encompassing Kierkegaardthe totality of wanted reality to:is not “find applicable a truth which to dealing is true with for the me dilemma that individuals encounter throughout their existence and leaves them with no moral guidance. – the idea for which I can W. Golding, The Spire 5 S. Kierkegaard, and Trembling (London, 1980), p. 121. 6 Ch. Moore, Provocations. Spiritual Writings of Kierkegaard 7 (Cambridge, 2006), pp. 63–70. (Farmington, 2007), p. 5. [32] Małgorzata Kowalcze

what I am to do, not liveaction. and The die thing […] What is to understand I really lack myself, is to be to clear see what in my God mind really wishes me to do.”8 what I am to know, except in so far as a certain understanding must precede every

Kierkegaard’s philosophy would, therefore, focus on specific actions undertaken by a human being, which aim at discovering his own meaning. The word ‘discover’ is not accidental here because the philosopher’s Christian theism entails the presumption that man, as God’s creature, has a pre-established sense and purpose. Kierkegaard defines an individual, first of all, by his freedom of choice. Man’s choices determine one’s life, and since every action is an act of choosing something isand the rejecting outcome something of a battle else, between performing God evaluativeand the world acts ofwhich choosing takes is, place in fact, within what man’s life consists of. Kierkegaard accentuates the fact that every single decision the ability to choose is the most profound risk that man is in a position to take. man’s ; since the result of choosing can be either10 the salvation fundamental or condemnation, choice that9 a human being has to make is that of choosing God or rejecting Him, and it has the Sinceform of“God “either is the – or”; one no who compromise demands absoluteis possible love,” here:

quality,But genuine or no religion quality has at anall; inverse either relationshipwith all your to heart,the finite. all yourIts aim mind, is to andraise all human your strength,beings up or so not as toat all.transcend Either all what of God is earthly. and all Itof isyou, a matter or nothing of either/or. at all! 11 Either prime central problem of his theory is the process in which man becomes a genuine self. The philosopher’s approach stresses the individuality of man, therefore, the “spheres of existence:”12 the aesthetic, the ethical and the religious; to become truly Kierkegaard enumerates three possible stages on life’s ways, or what he calls andhuman impulses, one has which to move refers towards not theonly final to their stage, physicality, transcending but the feelings two previous and intellect ones. The aesthetic lifestyle describes individuals who aim at satisfying theirThe desires Spire that stage is represented by the workers and particularly by the master builder, Rogeras well; Mason, they arewho, spectators although initially and tasters, profoundly but not rational, true participants. in the end surrenders In to the importance of restraining their desires and fulfilling their moral obligations.13 feelings, desires, and momentary pleasures. In the ethical stage man recognizes

The ethical mode of living is the one represented by the members of the Chapter bywho Jocelin. define The Christian religious conduct stage requires as strictly man observing to transcend the institutional Ten Commandments. religion; Finally, what Kierkegaard calls the ‘religious sphere of existence,’ is personified Moore, op. cit 8 Ibid., pp. 10–11. ., pp. 9–10. 9 Kierkegaard, op. cit., p. 64. 10 Ibid., p. 18. 11 Ibid., pp. 45–47. 12 Moore, op cit 13 ., p. XXI. A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [33]

Notone alwaysis independent is ethics ofable any to pre-establisheddeal with exceptional laws ofsituations moral behaviour and complex and dilemma stays in whicha direct man relationship encounters with and God, thus, who according himself to providesKierkegaard, him awith true moral Christian guidance. is not the one who zealously adheres to ethical principles, but the one who is determined faith is – a paradox that is capable of making a murder into a holy act well pleasing to risk transgression in order to fulfill God’s will: “[…] what a prodigious paradox 14 to God, a paradox that gives Isaac back again to , which no thought can laybreak hold the of fifth because commandment, faith begins “You precisely shall not where murder.” thinking15 leaves off.” God’s request to sacrifice Isaac as a bloody offering, demanded from Abraham that he Contradictory as God’s dictates appear, they point to the fact that God as a creator of moral imperatives abandonexists above the them,safety andof ethics. is thus Faith, in power according to repeal to Kierkegaard, them. Abraham’s is a paradox, individualism in the and exceptionality of his faith surfaced as he proved to be courageous enough to ethicalsense that may the be individualsuspended as for the him. particular16 is more important than the universal, is justifiedFaith is over therefore against a it, kind is superior of leap andwhich not necessitates subordinate losingprecisely the becausegrounds the of the doctrine and rationality and surrendering one’s will to the will of the higher power: “Faith, therefore, requires a leap. It is not a matter of galvanizing the will toexistence believe issomething rationally there uncertain.” is no evidence17 Jocelin for, is the but one a leap who of decidescommitment. to make ‘The a “leap leap is the category of decision’ – the decision to commit one’s being to a God whose of faith” in response to what he perceives as God’s call. The Dean jeopardizes his reputation, respect and position and follows the vision, which others regard as ‘Jocelin’s folly.’ Since God is approachable by way of avid, undivided commitment, the Dean evades fulfilling his priestly duties such as prayer and confession, thereunderstanding a shred of thatdoubt these whether are unimportantany of his undertakings activities whichis in accordance distract him with from the dogmawhat should of the be Church. the object No longer of his does undivided Jocelin attention. treat himself Nowhere separately in his from reflections his task; is he and his mission become “a necessary marriage,”18 and since God has assigned to him a new task, and thus has privileged him with a new status, the Dean feels that he is no longer bound by the previous obligations. Hence lack of support from the cathedralDuring the Chapter process does of building not undermine the spire Jocelin’s it turns conviction; out that not on theonly contrary, is there nohe stonegains certaintyto constitute that proper he must foundations, follow God’s but instructions also that thedespite earth all under the adversities. the spire is

Kierkegaard, op. cit., p. 46. 14 Exodus, 20:13. 15 Kierkegaard, op. cit., p. 54. 16 Moore, op. cit 17 Golding, op. cit. 18 ., p. XXV. , p. 93. [34] Małgorzata Kowalcze

For Roger Mason, the master 19 moving “like porridge coming to the boil in a pot.” 20 Jocelin, builder, this occurrence is unambiguous and self-explanatory: “It stands to reason. Now we must stop building […] Do more and the earth’ll creep again.” manifesthowever, His does power not let by himselfa miracle be of distracted holding an by enormous rational arguments.building up Theas if lackin the of solid foundations is perceived by him as a proof of the greatness of God who will21 air: “You see, my son! The pillars don’t sink! […] I told you, Roger. They float!” isLack an ofindispensable rationality is element yet another of a truly element Christian of the ‘leapattitude. of faith’ The thatabsurd the isDean not atakes. rare occurrenceWhat can be that observed certain here human is the beings absurdity happen of tofaith experience, that according but the to exact Kierkegaard object of existence in time, that God has come into existence, has been born, has grown up, faith: “What, then, is the absurd? The absurd is that the eternal truth has come into from any other human being.”22 , therefore, relies upon the absurd and has come into existence exactly as an individual human being, indistinguishable argument and relying on the absurdity of his belief in the impossible makes him an as such requires a believer to trust the absurd. Jocelin’s deafness to any reasonable uncompromising“[…] the master builder fanatic. often To him looked Roger’s at things rationality without limits seeing his them; spiritual and thensensitivity again, andhe would understanding look at a thing of the as extraordinaryif he could see eventsnothing that else, take or hear place or aroundfeel nothing him: else.”23 Whereas Roger Mason represents reason and cool calculation, Jocelin reflects passion and engagement, which are the only ways of coming to terms with the absurd of faith. As it has already been mentioned, for a Christian who has stepped into the religious sphere of existence the conventional ethics does not pose a point of thatreference an ethically as far as wrong solving deed moral will problems be regarded is concerned. as a right Since one simplyGod is abovebecause ethics, God He is also the one who establishes the moral value of deeds. It is therefore possible 24 has demanded it. That is why Abraham, from the ethical point of view, is a would-be murderer, although the Bible presents him as “the father of all those who believe.” Similarly, Jocelin is ready to bear the cost of his conviction which includes making an offering of human lives. He lets the workers persecute Pangall, the sacristan, knowing that the brutes need a scapegoat to ‘keep off bad luck.’ At one point in the novel he admits that the marriage of the beautiful Goody and the sexually impotent Pangall was in fact arranged by him and from the very beginning was likely to finish in misery for both. When Pangall’s wife and Roger Mason become increasinglyIbid attracted to each other, Jocelin refrains from intervention, although 19 Ibid., p. 83. ., p. 79. 20 Ibid., p. 102. 21 Moore, op. cit., p. 71. 22 Golding, op. cit., p. 36. 23 Romans, 4:16. 24 A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [35] he senses that the hazardous relationship would result in their ultimate fall since they were caught up “in some sort of tent that shut them off from all other people, and he saw how they feared the tent, both of them, but were helpless.”25 Deep down 26

Jocelin loves Goody passionately and watching idly as she gives herself to another man causes him unbelievable pain, which he considers to be his own bloodless hissacrifice; actions he is knows, indispensable however, to that accomplish the presence the goal; of Goody he regards will keep it as Mason “the coston the of buildingjob. The material.” Dean cherishes27 The ethical a deep as conviction well as the that rational all the are suffering suspended, resulting and Jocelin from has a feeling that he stands alone in front of God, answering to no one but Him:

He made no sense of these things, but endured them with moanings and shudderings. Yet like a birth itself, the words came, that seemed to fit the totality of his life, his sins, This have I done for my true love.28 and his forced cruelty, and above all the dreadful glow of his dedicated will. accusations of insanity and disrespect on the part of his own congregation. He lacksFor sleep his and ‘true proper love,’ feeding; which ishe God,joins Jocelinthe workers undergoes and works the torturearduously of day constant after day being aware of the fact that he is the only one who believes that building the spire is not a downright madness. He experiences acute solitude as, having looked for men of faith to be with him, he could find none. What he believes, however, is that having resigned29 everything infinitely, he will seize “everything again by virtue of the absurd.” increasinglyAlthough doubtful initially and deeply fearful. convinced He begins about to feel the the rightness rift between of his what undertakings, he claims andas appalling what he actually events take desires place deep and down ghastly and spiritsas he no haunt longer him, feels Jocelin certain becomes about his own interpretation of reality, the clergyman begins looking for a different one. Jocelin initially interprets the spiritual presence he feels as a guardian angel that the angel becomes more and more unpleasant, more and more painful: “Often his angelwas sent stood to him at his by back; God in and order this to exhausted support him. him, Gradually, for the angel however, was a thegreat presence weight of

30 gloryThe presence to bear, andof the bent angel his spine. is intermingled Moreover, afterwith awhat visit Jocelinby the angelexperiences – as if to as keep the him in humility – Satan was given leave to torment him, seizing him by the loins.” presence of a devil, and from that moment on these two characters appear always together.Golding, It is only op. cit in., p.the 57. tenth chapter of the novel that it becomes clear who the 25 Y. Sugimura, God and Escalation of Guilt in the Novels of William Golding p. 13.26 (Otaru, 1990), Golding, op. cit., p. 126. 27 Golding, op. cit., p. 137. 28 Kierkegaard, op. cit., p. 34. 29 Ibid., p. 188. 30 [36] Małgorzata Kowalcze struck him from arse to the head with a whitehot flail.”31 angelJocelin really that heis: has“Then been his deluded angel put by away“Satan the who two transformed wings from himself the cloven into hoofan angel and of light.”32 It becomes apparent to

The moment of the angel’s metamorphosis seems to be the climax of the novel and the climax of Jocelin’s transformation. When Jocelin recognizes the hell.”demonic33 nature of the whole venture, suddenly the floor in the crossways of the metamorphosiscathedral where as he well. received34 the vision becomes “hot to his feet with all the fires of Although As the angelboth turnsSØren into Kierkegaard a devil, Jocelin and Jean-Paul undergoes Sartre spiritual are andreferred existential to as existentialists, they constitute two extremes as far as the ontological premises of their theories are concerned. Kierkegaard’s theory is grounded on the concept of a fearsome God permeating man’s existence, whereas the fundamental principle of Sartre’s philosophy is that the universe is devoid of any kind of divine presence. typeSartre’s of being differentiation is unaware between of its existence two kinds and unableof being, to alter‘being-in-itself’ itself; all the and inanimate ‘being- for-itself’ introduced an irreconcilable division in the world of things. The first and animated objects that are deprived of consciousness exist in this mode. ‘Being- for-itself’ is a type of being which is aware of its existence, and establishes itself by means of existing and choosing freely; this is the way of existing of a man. In the light of Sartre’s theory, God is, therefore, a contradictory concept. If he existed, God would have to be both kinds of beings at the same time. Being an established contradictoryexistence, he would that such at the a being same couldtime have exist. awareness and the property of creating himselfWilliam by means Golding of exercisingand Jean-Paul his awareness.Sartre were It both is, according in their twenties to Sartre, when logically they faced the outbreak of the Second World War and it is highly probable that the distrust towards human nature results from a similar experience of war atrocities which had not taken place to such a high extent ever before. Jocelin’s actions, previously interpreted as exemplifying the attitude of Kierkegaard’s ‘knight of faith,’ an ideal servant of God, when analyzed on the basis of Sartre’s philosophy, being,present be him it God as or a self-deludedman; he focuses individual, on fulfilling devoured his own by will his regardless egotistic desires. of the cost His selfishness makes him unable to become involved in a relationship with any other solitude and a profound belief that his existence has no pre-established purpose and the means. Jocelin’s subconscious is dominated by an overwhelming feeling of constructing the meaning of his life. or sense. All his actions, therefore, serve exclusively the aim of finding or rather Ibid., p. 165. 31 2 Cor, 11:14. 32 Golding, op. cit., p. 157. 33 34 “Theory and Practice in English Studies” p. 162. P. Ráčková, “The Angel with a Hoof: Metamorphosis in Golding’s ‘The Spire’”, [in:] P. Drábek, J. Chovanec (eds.), , Vol. 2 (Brno, 2004), A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [37] A Sartrean Being-for-itself

Since there is 35 no God, no source of principles or values and no definition of a human being can be found: “Values are valid only because we have chosen them as valuable.” If there was a God, the author and creator of all existence, a humanconcrete being formula, would a ready-madebe an object objectmade according which has to a definitea pattern shape established and purpose. in God’s36 Whatmind. SartreEach individual, emphasizes therefore, is that an would attempt be toa realizationfind any pre-established of a certain conception, definition of man is futile. His famous statement existence precedes essence37 expresses the aview conception that only of by it existing […] Man is is man nothing able to else shape but himself that which and createhe makes his ownof himself.” personal38 definition:The “abandonment” “Thus, there of man is nostems human from nature, the fact because that there there is no is higher no God power to have to is he, therefore, absolutely free, but he is freedom; he is condemned to be free, becauseappeal to, he since finds God himself does innot a exist,state inman which has nohe cannotmoral directives but choose to and follow. his choiceNot only is absolutely free. withJocelin’s the human life community is characterized or is able by to constanttruly communicate and overwhelming with others. feeling Neither of particularlyinadequacy. giftedHe considers nor well-educated, himself a changeling, he finds himself he never an importantexperiences figure any inunion the

Church hierarchy. The inferiority complex that he is driven by makes him search willfor a supplement reason for his the undeserved cathedral ofelevation. which Jocelin Eventually, is a dean. he develops The belief a conviction that he is that‘the he has been given a divine revelation in which God orders him to build a spire that assimilate into a human community. chosenAlthough one’ seems a clergyman, to enable thehim Dean to come struggles to terms with with the the idea fact that that there he cannot is no thatGod Jocelin and consequently finds it unbearable no objective to exist principles in the full to follow,consciousness which is that why the he human clings to the delusion of God’s providence that takes care of his life. Sartre would say faith with an illusion that he has been entrusted with an extraordinary task. The ideacondition that one involves is left existential alone with solitude, no principles and thusto guide tries him to underpinin the world, his unstablethat one has to create himself by means of continuous choosing and, what is more, bears protection to the point of imagining that an angel was sent to comfort him in the full responsibility for his deeds is indeed appalling. Jocelin believes in God’s for his freedom of choice; the Dean hides in the cathedral, hides in the Church, hides difficult moments. The illusion lets him avoid realizing and taking responsibility

N. Greene, Jean-Paul Sartre. The Existentialist Ethics 35 J-P. Sartre, Existentialism Is a Humanism (Ann Arbor, 1960), p. 46. 36 J-P. Sartre, Being and Nothingness (Meridian, 1989), pp. 2–3. 37 Greene, op. cit., p. 3. 38 (New York, 1992), p. 60. [38] Małgorzata Kowalcze

in Christianity, claiming that all his deeds aim at39 fulfilling God’s will. The cathedral serveslife. He himtries as to a make ‘coat’ his that life he meaningful puts on himself; by performing his position an extraordinary of a dean, however, feat, and is just a cover for what he does, and what he does is trying to make sense of his own in order to accomplish that aim he needs to have some powerful defender, the one that everyone is subordinate to – God. ‘It’s senseless, you think. It frightens us, 40 and it’s unreasonable. But then – since when did God ask the chosen ones to be reasonable? […] The net isn’t mine, Roger, and the folly isn’t mine. It’s God’s folly.” Jocelin is deeply convinced that by choosing him, God has also given him the right to go beyond the conventional values in order to accomplish the task. In that way Jocelin avoids what is crucial atin the Sartre’s same philosophytime responsible and inextricably for all the choices joined he with makes. the freedomSince man of possesses choice – himself,responsibility. the accountability It is significant for his in deeds, Sartre’s for philosophy his existence that as man, such, free is placed as he solely is, is man is responsible for what he is.”41 Not only, like God, does Jocelin want to exceed ethics,upon his but own also shoulders: like God he “If, wants however, to be it free is true from that the existence need to explain is prior the to essence,reasons for his choices. Jocelin involves masses of people in the process of fulfilling ‘his mission,’ bringing their lives to a ruin, and then refuses to take responsibility for excusesthe outcome himself of his by actions, maintaining claiming that that his the own whole role venture is that ofwas a merein fact tool ‘God’s fulfilling work.’ Jocelin lends to building42 theAccording spire a divine to Sartre, authority man thattends cannot to justify be questioned his decisions and by claiming that they are indispensable consequences of his social role or that the will of the Divine. exceptional circumstances left him no other choice. This ‘false consciousness,’ bearinghowever, full cannot responsibility free man for from the results the burden of his with actions. which his whole existence is marked,Physicality the burden and ofthe finding experience his own of values,spirituality making are the inseparable world meaningful faculties and of attitudean individual, towards free his and own conscious body isself. the Downgrading aspect of his any personality of these two that aspects strongly of human condition results in the state of a distorted existence. Jocelin’s peculiar influences his manner of perceiving the external world.

downThe earth there is anda huddle drunk of men noseless lie in men the gutter. grinning There upward, is no theregood thingare gallows in all this everywhere, circle but the blood of childbirth never ceases to flow, nor sweat in the furrow, the brothels are

Golding, op. cit., p. 8. 39 Ibid. 40 op. cit., p. 3. 41 J. Costin, “The Spire: A Construction of Desire”, [online:] http://openpdf.com/ 42 Sartre (1989), viewer?url=http://www.william-golding.co.uk/F_costin.pdf. A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [39]

the great house, the ark, the refuge, a ship to contain all these people and now fitted with a mast.43

The Dean seems afraid of humanness, his own in particular, and regards everything related to human condition as defiled and sinful, low and contemptible. consideringSince physicality himself is despicable, to be the only the Deanone who struggles is free desperately from the earthly to elevate defilement, himself to what he perceives as a more spiritual realm. Jocelin compares himself to Noah, onlyand asfrom such the the height only of one the able spire, to whichcontact makes with himthe separatedAbsolute. Hardlyfrom the ever experience does he leave the premises of the cathedral, and he observes the life of ordinary people bodyof everyday and conceals life of thehis physicalcongregation. appearance The statement of man; Jocelin saying wants that theto be cathedral physically is ‘like a coat’ to Jocelin, seems then to have yet another meaning. A coat covers the lets him treat himself as no longer a physical being. invisibleAlthough to the the external Dean finds world himself and his unable newly to assumed accept what personality is human of aand ‘holy secular, man’ his life is influenced by the secular to a large extent. His position is only due to a sinful relationship since Jocelin becomes a cathedral Dean thanks to his aunt, buildingAlison, who the spire, as the hoping king’s that mistress, in return managed she will tobe buried persuade in the the cathedral monarch among to do her nephew a favor. What is more, it is Jocelin’s promiscuous aunt who finances themanner. saints And and yet nobility. he accepts The Dean the money. abhors44 the idea of being associated with his aunt’s misdeeds so he evades her, dismisses her letters and treats her in a condescending Jocelin lives in a delusional world that he has himself created. Never is he open to any rational argument and seems to reject the rational world in a similar way in which the rational world rejects him as ‘God’s chosen one.’ the DeanOne ofis confrontedthe pivotal momentswith the reflection in Jocelin’s of transformation his physical self: comes when working in the spire he actually sees his mirror image in a metal sheet; that very moment Yet before the sun had gone, he found he was not alone with his angel. Someone else was facing him. This creature was framed by the metal sheet that stood against the sky opposite him. For a moment he thought of exorcism, but when he lifted his hand, the figure raised one too. So he crawled across the boards on hands and knees and the figure crawled towards him. He knelt and peered in at the wild halo of hair, the skinny arms and legs that stuck out of a girt and dirty robe. He peered in closer and closer until his breath dimmed his own image […] He examined his eyes, deep in sockets

over which the skin was dragged […] the nose like a beak and45 now nearly as sharp, the deep grooves in the face, the gleam of teeth […] Well Jocelin, he said soundlessly to the kneeling image; Well Jocelin, this is where we have come. Golding, op. cit., pp. 106–107. 43 Babb, op. cit., p. 140. 44 Golding, op. cit., pp. 154–155. 45 [40] Małgorzata Kowalcze when he faces his own physicality. His inability to recognize himself in a mirror reflectionJocelin’s suggests transformation the extent to into which a responsible he has drifted self-aware away from existence what is human. begins On seeing his physical appearance, Jocelin realizes that although he has always avoided the secular, he has always participated in it by the sheer fact that he is a physical creature. It is not until several people lose their lives and Jocelin himself balances on the verge of lunacy that the Dean is finally able to exceed his previous narrow perspective, and limited understanding. He has striven for illumination thatfrom the the Deanvery beginningattains, but of thehis worktruth inabout the cathedral,the weakness but theof his knowledge human condition. he hopes Jocelinto possess learns is different that: “it is from not bythe turning one he backcomes upon to finally. himself, It butis not always spiritualization by seeking, beyond himself, an aim which is one of liberation or of some particular realization, that man can realize himself as truly human.”46 beings becomes apparent to him as well. Jocelin soon realizes that other people are indispensableAs Jocelin’s to awareness him so that of he his could physicality reconcile grows, himself his to affinity the truth with about other himself. human being-for-himself, man is at the same time a being-for-others According to Sartre’s philosophy, apart from being a condition for my being-for-myself.”: “[…]47 finally, Not only in my is essentialtherefore being, man responsibleI depend on thefor himself,essential but being since of the he Otheris a constituent […] I find that of being-for-othershumanity and his appears actions as are a necessary causally linked with the actions of other human beings, he is also responsible for the existences of others: “And, when we say that man is responsible for himself, we responsible for all men.”48 do not mean that he is responsible only for his own individuality, but that he is Initially, Jocelin fails to recognize the fact that ‘no man is an island’ and behaves as if he was spiritually and mentally separated from his community. He also seems convinced that his elevated position of a God’s servant has granted him a mandate to coerce people into performing certain acts without taking into consideration their own individual rights, plans and desires. Jocelin exploits people by treating them as his tools; he perceives them as elements of himself in the way that his pride preys on other people’s fragility and imperfection. Only after having experienced the state of an absolute solitude does the Dean gradually realize other people’s worth and importance. Not until the end heof thethen novel himself does responsible Jocelin appear for his to adoptown deeds, the attitude but also of for an the existentialist other people proper: whose he realizes that no divine power can ever excuse him for his decisions; not only is lives are affected by his actions.

op. cit., p. 15. 46 Sartre op. cit., p. 322. Sartre (1989), 47 op. cit., p. 3. 48 (1992), Sartre (1989), A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [41] Levinasian Self

centralA prominent issue of philosophy. representative For him of the philosophy Me-You relationship of dialogue, is Emmanuel of ontological Levinas, and studiedmetaphysical relationships nature and between since individualsthe encounter in greatwith anotherdetail, regarding man always them refers as the to the ethical sphere of our existence, ethics, which regulates human relations, is the heart of philosophical thinking. It is the encounter with the Other that teachesface of the us how to live ethically, how to exist in the manner appropriate for a human being. What influences one’s existence in particular is an encounter with thevisage refers toOther. “seeing The andword being ‘face,’ seen.” however, in the sense Levinas uses it, means more than just one’s physical appearance; 49in French, which Levinas spoke, the word One’s face is their self-presence, which is performed by the gaze or appeal directed towards us. The philosopher claims that one’s questionssubjectivity which is formed are crucial through to his his subjected-ness existence; answering to the Other, these who questions perceives shapes him in a specific way. The Other’s face questions him and demands that he answers the andhis existence:this urgency “The of facethe response I welcome – acuteness makes me of pass the frompresent phenomenon – engenders to me being for in another sense: in discourse I expose myself to the questioning50 of the Other, responsibility; as responsible I am brought to my final reality.” It is the presence of the Other that makes one’s life meaningful, that reveals to man the truth about himself. What Levinas stresses in his writings is that one’s responsibility for the Other is not a matter of a subjective decision nor does it depend on their commitment or lack of it, but is deeply rooted within one’s human constitution: from“The unlimitedthe non-present responsibility par excellence in which […] I priorfind myself to or beyond comes essence.”from the 51hither side of my freedom,The face from of the a ‘priorOther to calls every one memory’ to responsibility an ‘ulterior which to every lets accomplishment’him understand the meaning of his existence and the existence of other entities; at the same time man is not free to reject this responsibility itself: “[…] it is not free to ignore this meaningful world into which the face of the Other has introduced it. In the welcoming of the face the will opens to reason.”52 The phenomenon is particularly well presented towards the end of The Spire in the scene in which Jocelin, who is lying on his deathbed, suddenly recognizes Father Adam, whom he previously depersonalizedFather Adam calling raised hishim head. ‘Father He smiled. Anonymous,’ Jocelin sawto be at aonce distinctive how mistaken person: they were

who thought of him as faceless. It was just that what was written there, had been written small in a delicate calligraphy that might easilyThe be Cambridge overlooked Companion unless one to Levinas49 B. Waldenfels, “Levinas and the face of the other”, [in:] Totality and Infinity (Cambridge, 2002), p. 64. 50 Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence E. Levinas, (Dordrecht, 1991a), p. 178. 51 op. cit 52 E. Levinas, (Dordrecht, 1991b), p. 10. Levinas (1991a), ., p. 219. [42] Małgorzata Kowalcze

engaged oneself to it deliberately, or looked perforce, as a sick man must look from his bed.53

dialogueThe Otherwith the escapes Other, the because understanding only in that of one’sway canself, one speaks gain toknowledge it ‘from above,’ about oneself;he demands only thatin that one way go doesbeyond he exercisehis limited his perspective human nature. and On open seeing oneself the faceto the of the Other, Jocelin suddenly feels the existential bond connecting him with other humans, which is not something established by man, but it is an element of his life in the right light, the Dean realizes the ontological responsibility that he has human condition. As his folly gives way to reason so that he is able to see his own accessbeen oblivious to transcendence; to through it nearly is therefore all his impossible life. to enter into a relationship with God ifLevinas one is suggestsalienated that from it humanis through community: the encounter “The withother the is not other the that incarnation man has of God, but precisely by his face, in which he is disincarnate, is the manifestation 54 through other men can he get to know God, arises not only from recognizing Father of the height in which God is revealed.” Jocelin’s awareness of the fact that only

Adam’s face, but also from the painful realization that it is impossible to separate the sacred from the secular, which he was zealously trying to achieve, because theseapproaches two spheres to torment merge him. together The Dean in the recognizes form of man. that itIt isis the not secular to God’s that messenger, he must comebut to back the humanto since face the spiritualof the Other world that is nohe longercries out safe, for no help longer as predictablethe ‘dark angel’ and

Although a perfect parallel between philosophy and literature is impossible becauseno longer of available different to written him. forms and language styles that they adopt, it is often ideas to the point that “image becomes concept and concept image.”55 Such an theembodiment case that ofcertain a philosophical figures and idea events can benot found only symbolize,in The Spire but in fact personify his physical self, Jocelin becomes aware of his existential union with other people and the responsibility for others, which is a part of his human condition.. Having recognizedHe realizes that as the cathedral lacks proper connection with the earth, he lacks connection with the physical world. His image of other people had been occluded by his mono- perspective ‘vision’ and ‘enlightenment’ which turned out to be blindness and ignorance. Saying that: “I was a protected man. I never came up against beldame” ofJocelin the complexity admits that of his human post nature.of a dean56 prevented him from meeting the face of the Other and thus facing the truth about himself; his ‘protection’ made him ignorant

Golding, op. cit 53 op. cit ., p. 196. 54 Theory of Literature (London, 55 Levinas (1991a), ., p. 79. R. Wellek and A. Warren, “Literature and Ideas”, [in:] Costin, op. cit., p. 8. 1966),56 p. 123. A 'KNIGHT OF FAITH' LOOKING INTO THE FACE OF THE OTHER: EXISTENTIAL... [43] consciousness back in his room in the cathedral. He no longer feels presence of Having collapsed after being persecuted by the crowd, Dean Jocelin regains toeither paradise angel unlessor devil, he it enters is Father it together Adam who with takes the peoplecare of he him has now ruined. and who Balancing offers to “help him into heaven.” Jocelin, however, understands that he will have no entry and supernatural images mingle into an irrational amalgamate; sacred and secular arebetween no longer sanity distinguishable and madness, tothe him Dean as hasGod visions seems toin permeatewhich pictures the physical from his world past last words are “God! God! God!” and although it is unclear whether he addresses Godon the or oneFather hand Adam, and humanityit seems that reveals when its the spiritual young priestdimension lays the on theHost other. on the Jocelin’s dead

Jocelin’s tongue, the Dean is for the first time worthy of accepting it. Bibliography The Novels of William Golding. Columbus. William Golding. The Man Who Wrote Lord of the Flies. London. Babb, H. 1970. Carey, J. 2009. Costin, Jane. “The Spire: A Construction of Desire”. http://openpdf.com/viewer?url=http:// The Spire. London. www.william-golding.co.uk/F_costin.pdf Yearbook of Golding, W. 1980. Research in English and American Literature Grabes, H. 1997. “Literature and Philosophy – A Relationship under Debate”. Jean-Paul Sartre. The Existentialist Ethics. Ann Arbor. . Vol. 13. Kierkegaard, S. 2006. . Cambridge. Greene, N. 1960. Totality and Infinity. Dordrecht. Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence. Dordrecht. Levinas, E. 1991a. Moore, Ch. 2007. Provocations. Spiritual Writings of Kierkegaard. Farmington. Levinas, E. 1991b. BRAC University Journal Manzoor, S. 2007. “The Prometheus Myth in the Novels of William Golding”. , Vol. IV, No. 2. Theory and Practice in English Studies Ráčková, P. 2004. “The Angel with a Hoof: Metamorphosis in Golding’s ‘The Spire’”. In: Eds. Redpath, P. William Golding. A Structural Reading of His Fiction. London. P. Drábek and J. Chovanec. . Vol. 2. Brno. Sartre, J. P. Existentialism Is a Humanism. Meridian. Being and Nothingness. New York. 1989. Sartre, J. P. 1992. The Cambridge Companion to Sugimura, Y. 1990. “God and Escalation of Guilt in the Novels of William Golding”. Otaru. Levinas. Cambridge. Waldenfels, B. 2002. “Levinas and the face of the other”. In: Theory of Literature. London.

Wellek, R. and Warren, A. 1966. “Literature and Ideas”. In: [44] Małgorzata Kowalcze „Rycerz wiary” patrzący w oblicze Innego: egzystencjalna metamorfoza Jocelina w powieści Williama Goldinga Wieża

Streszczenie Wieży Williama Goldinga jako procesu egzystencjalnej przemiany z “rycerza wiary” Kierkegaarda w “byt- Celem niniejszego artykułu jest interpretacja historii głównego bohatera dla-siebie” Sartre’a. Jocelin przeobraża się ostatecznie w “Ja” Levinasa, istotę świadomą faktu, że człowiek odnajduje siebie w twarzy Innego. Ów proces przemiany głównego bohatera przebiega w drodze zawiłych relacji międzyludzkich, zmagania się z własną wiarą i pragnieniami oraz bolesnej autorefleksji. W rezultacie dogłębnej przemiany osobowości i postawy światopoglądowej, Jocelin przestaje postrzegać siebie jako narzędzie Bożej woli i uzmysławia sobie swoją egzystencjalną samotność. Uświadamia sobie także fakt, że stanowi część społeczności ludzkiej, za którą z racji samego tylko bycia człowiekiem jest odpowiedzialny. Na różnych etapach swojej przemiany Jocelin ucieleśnia dwie skrajne koncepcje istniejące w ramach egzystencjalizmu: teistyczną i ateistyczną, które dotykają takich zagadnień istnienia ludzkiego, jak samowiedza, wolna wola i determinizm, pokora Słowai pycha, kluczowe: a także problem walki dobra i zła w człowieku.

egzystencjalizm, Inny, bycie, przemiana, wiara