The Spire Both Jocelin and Roger Mason Are Responsible for Pangall's Death Because They Ignore the Warning Signs for Their Own Purposes. Is This an Accurate Assessment of the Situation?

The death of Pangall at the end of chapter 4 in William Golding’s “The Spire” is a critical moment whereby certain themes and plot points come to fruition and others start to develop. It could be argued that Pangall’s death is directly the result of the construction of the spire, and that his life should be tallied along with father Anselm (seeming) friendship and the worker who fell, as non monetary costs of Jocelin’s dream. Golding leads the reader along this line of thought by the combination of premonitory statements uttered in conversations between Pangall and Jocelin “One day they will kill me” Pg. 14, and Jocelin’s devotion (or obsession) with the construction of the spire “Let it be so. Cost what you like.” Pg.35. This Juxtaposition of forewarning and obsession makes it almost impossible not to implicate Jocelin in the death of Pangall or at least make it seem that way!

However it could be could be argued that Pangall as a character was doomed from the start, as if Golding had merely written him in to die. His character doesn’t really develop much from Jocelin’s own appraisal towards the end of the novel “poor Pangall, crouched beneath the cross ways” Pg. 212. His entire presentation is that of a victim, humble and self-abasing “Pangall was looking down. He crept close in Jocelin’s shadow. His dusty thatch, his brown and dung-coloured and dust was six inches below Jocelin’s face, and leaning inward” Pg. 20 which leaves him open to exploitation by the other characters in the novel.

Jocelin had a number of different influences and motives which conspired to prevent him providing sufficient support to Pangall. Firstly there was the huge flaw in his character, which Golding deliberately included as to make him incapable of understanding what Pangall was experiencing. Though he considered himself filled with Christian charity and to be doing “gods work” Jocelin never realised his actions: “He looked down on them, loving them in his joy” Pg. 13, could be considered as extremely patronising. His good Christian Humility was also a hollow thing as many saw him as prideful man who “thinks he’s a saint”. It is these flaws which cause Jocelin to react in the dismissive and uncaring way to Pangall’s complaints. “You are too thin skinned man!” Pg. 19.

Another reason that Jocelin perhaps was loath to try and sort out Pangall’s problem is because of the relationship between Goody and Roger (or the “Tent”). This is an example of how Jocelin’s cynical ulterior motives interfere with what a “good” Christian would be morally obliged to do. Instead of trying to prevent the adultery from occurring Jocelin decided the spire takes precedent, as he knew “she will keep him here” referring to Roger the master builder. It is in this way that it could be considered Pangall’s death was Jocelin’s “sacrifice” to the spire as it was Jocelin’s fault that the “army” was there in the first place to commit the act. This sort of pagan imagry is prevalent throughout the text as demonstrated by Jocelin’s moral degradation and his other “impure” thoughts “like some outlandish rite” Pg. 10.

Roger himself lies implicated also as if the workers were an “army” then he was the general. Roger’s character also had a number of different motivations and motives similar to Jocelin which interfered in his decisions. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, was the relationship between him and Goody. It becomes obvious, even to the unperceptive Jocelin,