Cart

Lord Of The Flies (educational edition) PDF, ePub eBook


Hot Best Seller
Title: Lord Of The Flies (educational edition)
Author: William Golding
Publisher: Published 2012 by Faber and Faber (first published September 17th 1954)
ISBN: 9780571295
Status : FREE Rating :
4.6 out of 5

39910621-lord-of-the-flies.pdf

In order to read or download eBook, you need to create FREE account.
eBook available in PDF, ePub, MOBI and Kindle versions


reward
How to download?
FREE registration for 1 month TRIAL Account.
DOWNLOAD as many books as you like (Personal use).
CANCEL the membership at ANY TIME if not satisfied.
Join Over 150.000 Happy Readers.


A plane crashes on a desert island and the only survivors, a group of schoolboys, assemble on the beach and wait to be rescued. By day they inhabit a land of bright fantastic birds and dark blue seas, but at night their dreams are haunted by the image of a terrifying beast. As the boys' delicate sense of order fades, so their childish dreams are transformed into something A plane crashes on a desert island and the only survivors, a group of schoolboys, assemble on the beach and wait to be rescued. By day they inhabit a land of bright fantastic birds and dark blue seas, but at night their dreams are haunted by the image of a terrifying beast. As the boys' delicate sense of order fades, so their childish dreams are transformed into something more primitive, and their behaviour starts to take on a murderous, savage significance. First published in 1954, Lord of the Flies is one of the most celebrated and widely read of modern classics. Now fully revised and updated, this educational edition includes chapter summaries, comprehensive questions, discussion points, classroom activities, a biographical profile of William Golding, historical context relevant to the novel and an essay on Lord of the Flies by Golding entitled 'Fable'. Aimed at students at Key Stages 3 and 4, it also includes a section for advanced or A-level students.

30 review for Lord Of The Flies (educational edition)

  1. 5 out of 5

    Silvana

    This book is horrifying. I'm scared like hell. Totally. I was expecting an adventure book telling about some children who got stranded in an island, but ended up with goosebumps. A bit of synopsis: A number of English school boys suffered from a plane accident causing them to get stranded in an uninhibited island. The period was maybe during the World War II. Trying to be civilized, they elected a leader for themselves as well started the division of tasks (hunters, fire-watchers, etc). Things tur This book is horrifying. I'm scared like hell. Totally. I was expecting an adventure book telling about some children who got stranded in an island, but ended up with goosebumps. A bit of synopsis: A number of English school boys suffered from a plane accident causing them to get stranded in an uninhibited island. The period was maybe during the World War II. Trying to be civilized, they elected a leader for themselves as well started the division of tasks (hunters, fire-watchers, etc). Things turned bad when there's a power struggle between the group leaders, worsened by various sightings of a monster in the island. No, don't think about "Lost" because this is way different. No wonder I had goosebumps at the end, because this book is so true to what happens in the world today. When men tried to govern themselves (and started the whole process with goodwill inside), but blinded with egotism and lust for power, tragedy and destruction in society are inevitable. Human nature is corrupt, it only takes a trivial thing to make its nature controlled by nothing but malice. This book represents a perfect allegory for men. Culture fails repeatedly and no matter how hard we can repress it, nothing will ever stop the drive to become savages. Despite its length and easy-to-read narration, this is certainly one of the most haunting, powerful books I've ever read. Now I know why this book is listed in so many lists of greatest books in the 20th century.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Nora

    I read this book a long time ago, long enough to where I barely remembered anything past the basic premise. So I picked it up again, only to wish I hadn't. There's a reason why they teach this book in middle school--in order to enjoy this book, one's intellectual cognizance must be that of a child, because otherwise you'll spend the entire time picking out everything that's wrong with the book. And there's a lot to pick out. From what little of the story that is actually coherent, I can see why t I read this book a long time ago, long enough to where I barely remembered anything past the basic premise. So I picked it up again, only to wish I hadn't. There's a reason why they teach this book in middle school--in order to enjoy this book, one's intellectual cognizance must be that of a child, because otherwise you'll spend the entire time picking out everything that's wrong with the book. And there's a lot to pick out. From what little of the story that is actually coherent, I can see why this book has had a lasting effect on social commentary since it's initial publishing. The overlying illustration of how easily man can devolve back to his feral instincts is striking, yet could have been infinitesimally more effective in the hands of a decent writer. See, I would have cared a bit more about the little island society of prepubescent boys and their descent into barbarism if you know, any of the characters had been developed AT ALL. Instead, we're thrown interchangeable names of interchangeable boys who are only developed enough to conform to the basic archetypes Golding requires to hobble his little story along: The Leader, The Rebel, The Fat-Kid, The Nose-Picker, etc. Were he born in this time, I believe Golding would have done brilliantly as a scriptwriter for reality TV. And the plot? There's a plot? I'm guessing so, since things seem to happen, but it's kind of hard to tell since he spends pages describing irrelevant events that are never incorporated, characters that possibly exist yet probably don't, and using words that don't mean what he thinks they mean. And as the main characters are a bunch of kids not worth caring about, thus goes the way of the story. And the prose? Dear God, the prose! Get it away! It burns us! So yeah, this book sucked. It had potential. There were even a few parts I internally squealed at in hopeful anticipation. But whatever potential it did have was hopelessly squandered by a man who wrote like he'd never written anything before in his life. Don't waste your time.

  3. 5 out of 5

    Emily May

    Kids are evil. Don't you know? I've just finished rereading this book for my book club but, to be honest, I've liked it ever since my class were made to read it in high school. Overall, Lord of the Flies doesn't seem to be very popular, but I've always liked the almost Hobbesian look at the state of nature and how humanity behaves when left alone without societal rules and structures. Make the characters all angel-faced kids with sadistic sides to their personality and what do you have? Just your Kids are evil. Don't you know? I've just finished rereading this book for my book club but, to be honest, I've liked it ever since my class were made to read it in high school. Overall, Lord of the Flies doesn't seem to be very popular, but I've always liked the almost Hobbesian look at the state of nature and how humanity behaves when left alone without societal rules and structures. Make the characters all angel-faced kids with sadistic sides to their personality and what do you have? Just your average high school drama, but set on a desert island. With a bit more bloody murder. But not that much more. In 1954, when this book was published, Britain was in the process of being forced to face some harsh realities that it had blissfully chosen to ignore beforehand - that it is not, in fact, the centre of the universe, and the British Empire was not a thing of national pride, but an embarrassing infringement on the freedom and rights of other human beings. Much of British colonialism had been justified as a self-righteous mission to educate and modernise foreign "savages". So when put into its historical context, alongside the decolonisation movements, this book could be said to be an interesting deconstruction of white, Western supremacy. This is not a tale of "savages" who were raised in poor, rural villages... but a story about upper middle class, privately-educated, silver-spoon boys. I can understand why some people interpret this book as racist. The racial aspect is a big factor, Golding establishes from the very first page that Ralph is not only white, but WHITE. And Piggy even asks "Which is better - to be a pack of painted niggers like you are or to be sensible like Ralph is?" I'm not going to argue with anyone's interpretation, it would be difficult to say exactly what Golding intended, but I think there is room to see this as the opposite of racism. For me, I always saw it as Golding challenging the notion of savages being dark-skinned, uneducated people from rural areas. With this book, he says screw that, I'll show you savages! and proceeds to show us how these little jewels of the empire are no better for their fancy education and gold-plated upbringing. I think that seemed especially clear from the ending when the officer says "I should have thought that a pack of British boys - you're all British, aren't you? - would have been able to put up a better show than that." Golding's way of saying that human nature is universal and no one can escape it. Some readers say that you have to have quite a negative view of human nature already to appreciate this book, but I don't think that's true. I'm not sure I necessarily agree with all the implications running around in the novel - namely, the failure of democracy and the pro-authority stance - but it serves as an interesting look at the dark side of human nature and how no one is beyond its reach. Plus, anyone who had a bit of a rough time in high school will probably not find the events in this book a huge leap of the imagination. The fascinating thing about Lord of the Flies is the way many historical parallels can be drawn from the messages it carries. You could choose to view the charismatic and manipulative Jack Merridew as a kind of Hitler (or other dictator) who takes advantage of a group of people at their weakest. Dictators and radicals often find it easy to slip in when a society is in chaos... we do not have to assume that Golding believed that everyone everywhere is evil, only that we all have the capacity for it when we find ourselves in unstable situations. Still a fascinating book after all these years.

  4. 5 out of 5

    Nancy

    Lord of the Flies is one of the most disturbing books I've ever read. It was required high school reading and since then, I've read it four more times. It is as disturbing now as it was then. Using a group of innocent schoolboys stranded on an island, the author very realistically portrays human behavior in an environment where civilization no longer has meaning.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Huda Yahya

    لا أظن أحدا درس الإنجليزية ولم تمر عليه هذه الرواية كنتُ في عامي الرابع وقت دراستها ومن أول وهلة جذبتني وبينما كان زملائي يهتمون بما سيأتي منها في الامتحان كنت أنا ألتهمها التهاما لن أنسى ما حييت شعوري وأنا أقرأ الحوار ما بين سيد الذباب وسايمون ثم مقتله بعدها المرة الأولى كنت بجوار دكتور المادة أمام الجميع أقرأ هذا الجزء على زملائي -ولم أكن قد وصلت له بعد في قراءتي المنزلية ولكن بما أنه المشهد الأهم-ويحمل لغز اسم الرواية الغريب- فقد ارتأى الدكتور قرائنا له ومن ثم مناقشته بتمعن أذكر يومها أنني اهتز صوتي لل لا أظن أحدا درس الإنجليزية ولم تمر عليه هذه الرواية كنتُ في عامي الرابع وقت دراستها ومن أول وهلة جذبتني وبينما كان زملائي يهتمون بما سيأتي منها في الامتحان كنت أنا ألتهمها التهاما‏ لن أنسى ما حييت شعوري وأنا أقرأ الحوار ما بين سيد الذباب وسايمون ثم مقتله بعدها المرة الأولى كنت بجوار دكتور المادة أمام الجميع أقرأ هذا الجزء على زملائي -ولم أكن قد وصلت له بعد في قراءتي المنزلية ولكن بما أنه المشهد الأهم-ويحمل لغز اسم الرواية الغريب- ‏ فقد ارتأى الدكتور قرائنا له ومن ثم مناقشته بتمعن أذكر يومها أنني اهتز صوتي للمفاجئة التي حلت علي استطعت السيطرة على نفسي حينها وتخبئة ارتعاشة يدي ثم تناسيت الأمر مع الصديقات عند انتهاء المحاضرة وعندما عدت لمنزلي انخرطت في بكاء مرير رائية لحال سايمون المسكين -شخصيتي المفضلة ‏ والذي لم أكن أتوقع له هذا المصير أذكر أنني نظرت بسذاجة إلى أمي(رحمها الله) المندهشة نائحة: سايمون ماااااااات عااااا ‏:‏D أثر في حديث رأس الخنزير مع سايمون كثيرا كنت وقتها في العشرين ولا أظنني قرأت مثل ذلك الحوار كثيرا‏ ‏ كنت أرى المشهد أمامي متجسدا ولا أعلم الآن هل ذلك بسبب براعة الكاتب أم شدة تأثري‏ ذلك أنني لم أعد قراءتها مجددا ----------- تحدث فرويد قبل وفاته بقليل عن الغريزة التدميرية في البشر ‏ عن حب الإنسان للقتل والعنف والدمار‏ والرواية صورة مصغرة لذلك المجتمع البشري الذي يترنح‏ ما بين الفطرية والبدائية، والتمدن والتحضر يجد أطفال ما بين الثامنة والثانية عشر أنفسهم في الطبيعة‏ بمعزل تام عن قوانين الكبار ‏ وبالطبع يكون همهم الأول هو البقاء على قيد الحياة راح المؤلف يستخرج خبايا النفس البشرية بإظهار وحشيتها وقابليتها للشر متناولا صراع الانسان الأبدي بين الغريزة والسلوكيات المدنية المكتسبة ‏ ‏(لقد شارك جولدنغ نفسه في الحرب العالمية الثانية كضابط في البحرية البريطانية واشترك في معركة إغراق أقوى بارجة ألمانية -بسمارك )‏ يفترض جولدنج اندلاع حرب تتعرض فيه انجلترا لضربة نووية ويفترض وجود طائرة انجليزية قامت بإجلاء مجموعة من الفتية إلى خارج ‏البلاد (بهدف لإنقاذ حياتهم والحفاظ على النسل الانجليزي من الاندثار‎) وعندما تسقط تلك الطائرة فوق جزيرة نائية ينجو الأطفال فقط ويقتل الطيار اثناء محاولته النجاة بالمظلة يبدأ هؤلاء الصبية ببناء مجتمعهم الجديد (المصغر) ‏ ويدور الصراع بين السلطة المدنية المتمثلة في رالف‏ والمعارضة المسلحة (السلطة العسكرية) المتمثلة في جاك‏ ‏ ‏ ‏-وفوق كل ذلك فنحن لسنا همجيين، لأننا إنجليز، والإنجليز هم أفضل الناس في جميع ‏ دائما ما تنقلب تلك النظرة الاستعلائية الشوفينية على أصحابها في كل زمان ومكان ‏ لقد تحول الأطفال إلى مسوخ همجية تستلذ القتل والعنف‏ ينقلب مجتمعهم الصغير إلى مجتمع وحشي همجي ‏ رالف هو الشخصية المحورية في الرواية تعطيه وسامته سمة استعلاء ‏ وكعادة الرفاق يسخر من بيجي بسذاجته الطيبة رالف يبدو مثالي المظهر لكنه يعوزه الذكاء ‏ هذا الذكاء يعوضه بيجي (وهو إسم تدليل يعني الخنزير الصغير)‏ بيجي هو ذلك الطفل السمين الطيب الظريف ‏ ‏-شخصيتي المفضلة رقم2- ‏ الذكي برغم سذاجته في تعامله مع رفاقه ‏ بالإضافة إلى إصابته بالربو وقصر النظر الحاد وبنباهته يقترح على رالف استخدام الصدفة (بدلالاتها الرمزية) وتحويلها إلى بوق بصفيره يستطيع ‏عقد الاجتماعات ومن ثم اعتبرها الجميع رمز السيطرة والحكم_ ومن يحملها هو فقط من يستطيع التحدث كما أن بيجي هو من استخدام نظارته- بإيعاز من رالف الساخر- لتكثيف أشعة الشمس وذلك لإشعال ‏النار ‏ ‎ بيجي هو صوت العقلانية المكروه من الغالبية ‏ ويعتبره البعض رمزا لطبقة المفكرين والمثقفين ‏ الذين لا تستمع إليهم الدول المستبدة ‏ بل تحاول بشراسة القضاء عليهم جاك يتسم بالدموية والوحشية من البداية وهو يؤمن بالقوة ويتلذذ بالدماء الأحداث تتسارع في الصراع ما بين قوة المنطق ومنطق القوة وجاك يقوم بانقلاب عسكري يطيح به برالف وتصير له الغلبة ‏(ربما أراد جولدينج أن يشير إلى أن الهيمنة واليد العليا دوما تكون ‏للاأخلاقيين والدمويين ‏‎ حتى ذلك اليوم الذي يرى فيه الأطفال من بعيد جثة الطيار مع مظلته على أحد الجبال فيظن الجميع ‏أنه وحش الغابة فيصطاد جاك خنزيرا بريا يقطع رأسه وينصبه على رمح في أعلى قمة الجبل كرمز لقوة فريقه ويبدأ الاحتفال بهذه المناسبة بشعائر كطقوس للصيد ‏ يطلي الأطفال وجوههم بدم الخنزير المذبوح متحولين إلى برابرة‏ وفي ظل هذا الجو المشبع خوفا وقهرا وعويل بربري يضل سايمون طريقه‏ فيجد نفسه أمام رأس الخنزير المعلق الحائم من كان حوله الذباب (سيد الذباب) ‏ وهنا يبدأ سايمون في الهذيان(أفضل وأقسى مشاهد الرواية)‏ ليدور الحديث بينه وبين سيد الذباب الذي يسخر منه ومن أمله في الخلاص وفي صلاح الأحوال‏ وعندما يعود سايمون شبه مترنح وجريح إلى الجمع يهجم عليه الجميع قاتلين إياه ظنا منهم أنه ‏الوحش بصراخه غير المفهوم وتغير هيئته ‏‎ ‎ وهكذا لم يأت الشر بفعل الوحوش ‏ بل من البشر أنفسهم ----------- الرواية تستحق القراءة بكل تأكيد كما ان هناك أكثر من فيلم يحكي قصتها وإن لم أشاهد اي منهم حتى الآن ولكنها حالة مختلفة لن أستطيع نسيانها

  6. 5 out of 5

    Bookdragon Sean

    “We did everything adults would do. What went wrong?” For me, this quote sums up the entire book. It’s a powerful exploration of humanity and the wrongness of our society and it also demonstrates the hypocrisy of war. Adults judge the behaviour of children, but are they really any better? I think not. The scary thing about this book is how real it is. The Lord of the Flies bespeaks the brilliance of realistic dystopian fiction, it gives you a possible world scenario, a bunch of very human cha “We did everything adults would do. What went wrong?” For me, this quote sums up the entire book. It’s a powerful exploration of humanity and the wrongness of our society and it also demonstrates the hypocrisy of war. Adults judge the behaviour of children, but are they really any better? I think not. The scary thing about this book is how real it is. The Lord of the Flies bespeaks the brilliance of realistic dystopian fiction, it gives you a possible world scenario, a bunch of very human characters and then it shows you want might happen when they are thrown into a terrible situation: they act like monsters (or humans?) What Golding shows us is that we are not so far from our primal nature, from our so called killer instincts, and all it takes is a little push out of the standard world we live in for us to embrace our darker side. The boys act in accordance with what they have seen in the world (though they don’t understand limits.) Power creates authority and violence is a way to achieve the peace you want. Sort of ironic isn’t it? They go to war amongst themselves and in doing so lose all sense of childhood innocence. They grow up. They learn what humans are capable of doing when pushed. They become ‘savages’ and reject civilisation and create their own sense of community, though in another display of irony this in itself becomes a mini-civilisation- just a one of their own accord without any rules and a nasty child tyrant enthroned as chief. “What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages?” The novel is rich in allegory to the point where it has been interpreted in so many different ways over the years. Like all great literature, it could mean lots of things and nothing at all. It’s a very clever piece of writing and it got me thinking a great deal about children and how we protect them from the realities of the world. It sort of says something to me, a quiet acknowledgement about how messed up things can be given the right circumstances and these children are so very quick to embrace it with unflinching enthusiasm (at least, when one of them leads the way.) It’s a good book with a lot of ideas though at times I found the prose a little hard to follow. The dialogue is confusing at times and many of the children fade into the background with only a small few developing distinct personalities. I found the first part of the story particularly difficult to read, so in terms of the actual execution I think it could have been done a little better. I found myself wanting to edit sections of the text, which is not a place a reader should ever be in especially with a novel this revered by so many enthusiastic readers, critics and students. Maybe I’m just a little picky with word placement. Overall though, I’m glad I spent the time to revisit it. There are so many pop-culture references to this that a reminder was needed.

  7. 4 out of 5

    Mk

    I hated this book. First off, as I remember, it talks about humans failure to govern ourselves, or more broadly the failures of human nature. There are a few reasons why I think simply dropping a group of kids on a desert island does not in fact prove anything. 1) These kids were raised in a capitalist, nominally demcratic society. The first thing they do is appoint leaders. As someone who spends my time working in consensus based groups seeking to challenge hierarchical structures, I have a stro I hated this book. First off, as I remember, it talks about humans failure to govern ourselves, or more broadly the failures of human nature. There are a few reasons why I think simply dropping a group of kids on a desert island does not in fact prove anything. 1) These kids were raised in a capitalist, nominally demcratic society. The first thing they do is appoint leaders. As someone who spends my time working in consensus based groups seeking to challenge hierarchical structures, I have a strong belief that this is not how things need to be. It takes a bunch of unlearning and relearning to use these formats - simply being in a new space or being a child does not do this work. The author and the children he writes about are a part of a specific culture, and it's incorrect to generalize these values to a broader concept of human nature. 2) They're all boys! Again, socialization (yes, even of a 6 year old) plays a huge role in what behavior we see as appropriate. While it's quite true that men (or at least masculinity) control government, it's ridiculous to use only boys to extrapolate what ways of governing ourselves are possible. I read this book in 1996 when I was a freshman in highschool, so maybe there's something I missed. Or maybe my memories are being colored by just how gross the pig's head descriptions were. If so, feel free to correct me. For now though, I have to say that this book is offensive and makes dangerous assumption.

  8. 5 out of 5

    Virginia Ronan ♥ Herondale ♥

    ”They accepted the pleasures of morning, the bright sun, the whelming sea and sweet air, as a time when play was good and life so full that hope was not necessary and therefore forgotten.” So this was a book many people had to read when they went to school and in some way this already says a lot about “Lord of the Flies”. Like so many of the books that are required to be read during people’s educational careers this one wasn’t only full of serious topics but also dealt with ethical values. I mean ”They accepted the pleasures of morning, the bright sun, the whelming sea and sweet air, as a time when play was good and life so full that hope was not necessary and therefore forgotten.” So this was a book many people had to read when they went to school and in some way this already says a lot about “Lord of the Flies”. Like so many of the books that are required to be read during people’s educational careers this one wasn’t only full of serious topics but also dealt with ethical values. I mean we have boys between the ages of 6 and 12 who are stranded on an island after they had a plane crash. There is no adult who would force them to stay in line; there is no authority that would tell them what's right or wrong. They are left to their own devices and even though they were doing as good as you would expect schoolboys to do, they still were fairly decent at the beginning of the book. “I agree with Ralph. We’ve got to have rules and obey them. After all, we’re not savages. We’re English; and the English are the best at everything. So we’ve got to do the right things.” Oh, how often I thought back to this quote when I read on with horror, every new chapter revealing another aspect of the dark abyss of human kind. The morale dilemma of Ralph and Piggy was so intense that I couldn’t help but feel with them whenever something bad and terrible happened. They were the only ones that tried to get order into the chaos but on an island without any rules only the strongest remain. ”I got you meat!” Numberless and inexpressible frustrations combined to make his rage elemental and awe-inspiring. “I painted my face – I stole up. Now you eat – all of you – and I –“ The fight of savageness vs. civilisation was so tangible it hurt and I constantly found myself sitting at the edge of my seat hoping against all hope, that civilisation would actually win. It doesn’t take a genius to know that it didn’t. Why hold on to moral standards? Why listen to reason if you can have a kingdom of your own? Why should you accept someone else’s opinion if you’re stronger and can force them to obey your own rules? You know it better than the others, right?! ”If I blow the conch and they don’t come back; then we’ve had it. We shan’t keep the fire going. We’ll be like animals. We’ll never be rescued.” I know I’m being provocative here but it is how it is. The strongest will always try to rule the weak. It’s been done for centuries and I doubt that it will ever stop. It’s as much a part of human nature as breathing and let’s face the bitter truth: There’s darkness in all of us. We can only decide if we fight it or let it in. ;-) ”Look, Ralph. We got to forget this. We can’t do no good thinking about it, see?” “I’m frightened. Of us. I want to go home. O god I want to go home.” ”The thing is – fear can’t hurt you any more than a dream. There aren’t any beasts to be afraid of on this island.” If you ask me there certainly was a monster on the island or should I rather say that there were monsters? Plural. It weren’t monsters that had been there all along though. No, it were the monsters that had fallen from the sky, claiming the island as their own, doing as they pleased because they could do so without anyone to stop them. The monsters on the island came from the outside and despite their claims to want to get off of the island they all knew that they actually wanted to stay. ”I’m scared of him,” said Piggy, “and that’s why I know him. If you’re scared of someone you hate him but you can’t stop thinking about him. You kid yourself he’s all right really, an’ then when you see him again; it’s like asthma an’ you can’t breathe.” So in the end things took their natural course and got worse and worse. The descent into savageness was inexorable and the book ended on a heavy note. I can only speak for myself but the ending was brilliant. Brilliant and shocking and so very, very realistic that it caused me to ache even more. Those stupid boys... those stupid, stupid little boys. *shakes head* Anyway, if you want to read a really good book which will haunt you days after you finished it, this should be your choice. *lol* After all I finished “Lord of the Flies” almost a week ago and I’m still thinking about it. ;-) Happy Reading! I hope you’ll enjoy it as well! (view spoiler)[Those are two quotes that were perfect and moved me so damn much when I read the book. Because they would spoil too much and would give away some crucial parts of the plot I didn’t write them down in the actual review though. Anyway if you read the book already you might as well enjoy them now: ”Piggy.” “Uh?” “That was Simon.” “You said that before.” “Piggy.” “Uh?” “That was murder.” ”And in the middle of them, Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart, and the fall through the air of the true, wise friend called Piggy.” (hide spoiler)]

  9. 5 out of 5

    Andrew

    I was tempted to give this five stars, since in so many ways it strikes me as the kind of masterpiece, like Heart of Darkness, that I imagine will retain its horror and readability for centuries. The prose veers (or as Golding would say it, "tends") from plain to painterly. The story is well known: a sort of allegorical morality play set in modern times -- fancy English boys left to their own devices don't so much as revert to darkness as discover primitive outlets for the darkness reflected in I was tempted to give this five stars, since in so many ways it strikes me as the kind of masterpiece, like Heart of Darkness, that I imagine will retain its horror and readability for centuries. The prose veers (or as Golding would say it, "tends") from plain to painterly. The story is well known: a sort of allegorical morality play set in modern times -- fancy English boys left to their own devices don't so much as revert to darkness as discover primitive outlets for the darkness reflected in their greater society. This is what I love about Heart of Darkness: try as one might, Kurtz cannot be pigeonholed into good or evil. He is excellent at what he does, and what he does is evil. Kurtz is a true reflection of what excellence was to Colonial Europe, and in so far as Colonial Europe was good, cultivated, honorable, and esteemed, so is Kurtz. Kurtz isn't good or evil; he is true. Golding's version is darker. It centers mostly around the corrupting power of urges to overwhelm social order. Freudian criticism abounds, but the parallel I kept coming back to was Rome. I found that Piggy, no matter how truly annoying he is (another brilliant stroke by Golding is to make Piggy strangely unsympathetic), recalled those numerous Republicans of the Early Empire who advocated in a shrill but useless manner for a return to Senate rule but were shunted aside and usually killed by deranged sociopaths who behaved quite like like Jack. But be it Freudian or historic, any framing of this book feels cheap and hollow because the story has such a complexity of primal urges that it feels almost biological. Golding said he came up with the idea of book after reading his children "Treasure Island or Coral Island or some such Island" in the years of the hydrogen bomb and Stalin and asked his wife, "why don't I write a children's story about how people really are, about how people actually behave?" To me that's a chilling question and it reveals an architecture not based on rigid Freudian or historical or symbolic parallels. Its portrait of sadism could have been lifted out of the newspapers; its struggle for dominion over the weak is an almost sexual frenzy recalls everything I know about torture in the dungeons of Argentine or US military prisons. In this respect, I think the book, like Heart of Darkness, is timeless. But I chose not to give it five stars because at the center of Golding's book is a kind of rigid Christian iconography, like that you find in the Poisonwood Bible, that offends me, perhaps because it reminds me of the way I wrote my Freshman year of college, or perhaps because that rigidity, that allegiance to a=b symbolic logic insults my intelligence. The martyrdom of Simon, I felt, demeaned the human quality of Simon. I liked him best because he struck me as the most shrewd and practical. Reducing him to an icon transforms him into a variable: Simon = Paul or Peter or whomever, but ergo facto Simon ≠ Simon. When he comes down to the beach mutting "something about a body on a hill" Simon ceases to be a reflection of human complexity, or biological completeness, and instead becomes a rehashed precedent from Sunday school. I've often felt that Heart of Darkness' genius was that it somehow reflected the effect of Darwin and modern thinking on the antiquated ideas of Colonial Europe, ie Kurtz isn't good or evil because good and evil are artifices that wilt beneath analysis. When Golding adheres to this materialist perspective, the book is masterly. When he swears allegiance to worn out Christian parables, that complexity is reduced to slips of paper.

  10. 5 out of 5

    Lisa

    "We did everything adults would do. What went wrong?" You did everything adults would do. That's what went wrong. There is much to be said against this novel, and it has been said, eloquently, poignantly, many times. Let me make a case for keeping it on the curriculum despite the dated language, the graphic violence, the author's personality... There are two myths about adolescents, and this novel does away with them in a - admittedly - drastic way. First of all, there is no general innocence in a "We did everything adults would do. What went wrong?" You did everything adults would do. That's what went wrong. There is much to be said against this novel, and it has been said, eloquently, poignantly, many times. Let me make a case for keeping it on the curriculum despite the dated language, the graphic violence, the author's personality... There are two myths about adolescents, and this novel does away with them in a - admittedly - drastic way. First of all, there is no general innocence in adolescents. They do what grown-ups do, but in a less mature and experienced way. That means they cheat, lie and steal, and use violence to achieve their goals, and they are vain and interested in dominating and manipulating others. But they are also caring, loving and resourceful, and willing to serve the community in which they participate. The second myth regards the helplessness and general dependence of adolescents, which is also only true as long as they have grown-ups around. Leave adolescents alone, and they will organise themselves. The best example of what happens to a group of teenagers left alone is shown if a teacher in a (civilised) school in a (civilised) country leaves for just a couple of minutes. If you have never experienced the amount of destructive power that is possible in that short time-span, you might think Golding exaggerates. Unfortunately, I can see any group of students turning into the characters in The Lord Of The Flies if they are put in the situation. I even know who would be the leaders, who would fight, who would bully, who would play along, and who would go under. Add teenage girls to the mixture and hell breaks loose. Reading this novel with teenagers - if it is done with a big heart for their developmental stages and their hormonal glitches - gives them an opportunity to discuss a topic they already know everything about from their own lives but often keep hidden from naive, romantic grown-ups: the heart of an adolescent has dark corners, and it is important to shed light on the pain young people are able to cause each other if they are under the impression that they are not seen by the higher authority of the grown-up world. Teenagers are grown-ups in training, and they make all the beginner mistakes without having the perspective to see the end of the tunnel. Reading offers perspective!

  11. 4 out of 5

    Cecily

    A hard book to rate as although its well written and is very thought provoking, the content gets unpleasantly graphic and some aspects are awkwardly dated (eg the assumption the British boys should be jolly good chaps - “we’re not savages, we’re English”). Plot It starts off as a conventional adventure: a mixed group of boys (some know each other; many who don’t) survive a plane crash on a desert island and struggle to survive. It is somewhat confused and confusing at first – perhaps to make the r A hard book to rate as although its well written and is very thought provoking, the content gets unpleasantly graphic and some aspects are awkwardly dated (eg the assumption the British boys should be jolly good chaps - “we’re not savages, we’re English”). Plot It starts off as a conventional adventure: a mixed group of boys (some know each other; many who don’t) survive a plane crash on a desert island and struggle to survive. It is somewhat confused and confusing at first – perhaps to make the reader empathise with the boys’ confusion. From the outset there are issues of priorities (Jack’s instant gratification of hunting or Ralph’s long term need for shelter and maintaining a fire signal) and leadership. It’s inevitable that standards of “civilization” will slip. There is also an infectious fear of “the beast”, although whether one interprets it as animal, airman, hallucination, or symbolic may vary at different points in the story. Certainly the tone of the book changes after Simon’s first encounter with Lord of the Flies. Group Dynamics Eventually the boys split into two groups: hunters who become ever more “savage” in appearance and behaviour, and the remainder who want to retain order, safety, common sense – and their lives. Why do the obedient and angelic choir turn to savagery - does the fact they have an identified leader, who isn't the overall leader once they're on the island, contribute? One also wonders how the story might be different if it was a mixed sex group, or even an all girl group. Very different, certainly, and I suppose it would provide a distraction to what Golding was trying to say about human (or just male?) nature. It illustrates how petty bullying can be condoned and encouraged within groups (exacerbated by rituals, chanting, body markings etc) and how it can escalate to much worse. Nevertheless, one of the main victims, Piggy, is proud of his differences, demonstrates knowledge and intelligence and actually grows in confidence as his leader loses his. Milgran, Zimbardo, Christianity... It questions whether it is power or the environment that makes some of the boys so bad (echoes of Zimbardo’s prison experiments and Milgram’s obedience experiments - if a book can echo things which came after it was written). In fact, Golding "experimented, while a teacher at a public school, with setting boys against one another in the manner of Lord of the Flies"! See http://www.theguardian.com/books/2009... (thanks Matt). The more Christian concept of original sin runs through it, which was probably Golding's intention (his editor made him make Simon less Jesus-like), along with other Christian analogies relating to snakes, devils (aka Lord of the Flies), self sacrifice, and redemption/rescue. And then there are the conch and fire as symbols of order and god, respectively, in total contrast to the warpaint etc of the warriors. Lots to think about, but more the stuff of nightmares than dreams. Compared with The Hunger Games It's interesting to compare this with The Hunger Games, which modern teens probably find much easier to relate to (see my review HERE). I think one problem Lord of the Flies has is that the period is tricky: too far from the present to seem "relevant" (though I think it is), but not long enough ago to be properly historical. Compared with I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream For another dysfunctional group trying to survive a very different ordeal, see Harlan Ellison's horrific short story about an evil supercomputer, which I reviewed HERE.

  12. 4 out of 5

    Ahmad Sharabiani

    508. Lord of the flies, William Golding Lord of the Flies is a 1954 novel by Nobel Prize–winning British author William Golding. The book focuses on a group of British boys stranded on an uninhabited island and their disastrous attempt to govern themselves. عنوانها: سالار مگس ها؛ خداوندگار مگسها؛ بعل زبوب؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ (بهجت، ابتکار، افراشته، آپادانا، ابر سفید، رهنما، امیرکبیر)؛ ادبیات انگلستان عنوان: سالار مگس ها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: حمید رفیعی؛ تهران، بهجت، 1353، در 3 508. Lord of the flies, William Golding Lord of the Flies is a 1954 novel by Nobel Prize–winning British author William Golding. The book focuses on a group of British boys stranded on an uninhabited island and their disastrous attempt to govern themselves. عنوانها: سالار مگس ها؛ خداوندگار مگسها؛ بعل زبوب؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ (بهجت، ابتکار، افراشته، آپادانا، ابر سفید، رهنما، امیرکبیر)؛ ادبیات انگلستان عنوان: سالار مگس ها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: حمید رفیعی؛ تهران، بهجت، 1353، در 372 ص؛ چاپ سوم 1385؛ شابک: 9646671918؛ عنوان: بعل زبوب ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: محمود مشرف آزاد (م. آزاد)؛ تهران، ابتکار، 1363، در 270 ص؛ عنوان: سالار مگس ها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: رضا دیداری؛ تهران، افراشته، 1363؛ در 282 ص؛ عنوان: سالار مگس ها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: سوسن اردکانی (شاهین)؛ تهران، آپادانا، 1363؛ در 336 ص؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، ابر سفید، 1390، در 327 ص؛ شابک: 9786009254552؛ عنوان: سالار مگسها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: مژگان منصوری؛ تهران، پرگل، 1379؛ چاپ دیگر: تهران، رهنما، 1382؛ در 443 ص؛ شابک: 9643670937؛ چاپ دیگر: 1385؛ چاپ بعدی 1388؛ شابک: 9789643670931؛ عنوان: خداوندگار مگس ها ؛ نویسنده: سر ویلیام گلدینگ؛ مترجم: جواد پیمان؛ تهران، امیرکبیر، چاپ دوم 1395؛ در 287 ص؛ شابک: 9789640018743؛ از جمله آثار برجسته ی کلاسیک جهان، که ویلیام گلدینگ در آن شور و هیجان را در یک قصه ی تمثیلی، با قدرت و صداقت توصیف کرده، داستان ماجرای شگفت آور گروهی پسر بچه است در مدرسه ای انگلیسی، که در طی جنگ هسته ای و خانمانسوز، عازم منطقه ای امن میشوند. ولی سقوط هواپیما، آنها را ملزم به اقامت در جزیره ای استوایی میکند. در آغاز همه چیز به خوبی پیش میرود، و آنها بی دغدغه و سبک بال، جزیره ی خوش آب و رنگ و سرسبز را، درمینوردند. اما اندک زمانی پس از آن، شرارت و تندخویی پسرها، بهشت زمینی را به دوزخی از آتش و خون مبدل میکند، و تمامی مظاهر خرد و پاک اندیشی از وجودشان رخت برمیبندد. کشمکش درونی نیروهای متضاد خیر و شر، درون مایه ی داستان را شکل میدهد. ا. شربیانی

  13. 4 out of 5

    Henry Avila

    A British airplane, on fire, crashes on a deserted, isolated, South Sea's island, in the middle of an atomic war, set in the near future . All the grown-ups are killed, and only children , 12 and younger survive, how are they to cope (basically an allegorical story of what is human nature , good or evil ?) . Ralph is chosen leader,"Piggy", his intellectual sidekick, he wears glasses, this beautiful , green, tropical coral isle , with a blue lagoon, magnificent palm trees, better yet, coconut tre A British airplane, on fire, crashes on a deserted, isolated, South Sea's island, in the middle of an atomic war, set in the near future . All the grown-ups are killed, and only children , 12 and younger survive, how are they to cope (basically an allegorical story of what is human nature , good or evil ?) . Ralph is chosen leader,"Piggy", his intellectual sidekick, he wears glasses, this beautiful , green, tropical coral isle , with a blue lagoon, magnificent palm trees, better yet, coconut trees too, and plenty of yellow bananas, other fruits are seen. Wild, numerous pigs in the forest, plenty of fish in the ocean, so no worries, right...Wrong! Ralph has a rescue fire set, which goes sadly out of control , and one of the boys is never seen again, Jack doesn't like playing second fiddle to Ralph. He takes his group of choirboys followers and leaves, to form a new, fierce, warrior tribe on Castle Rock, painting their faces and becoming great hunters....Since Piggy's eye glasses are the only way the kids can start a fire, Jack raids Ralph's shelter and steals it, the poor, helpless boy, can't function without them, blind as a bat ( I know it's a misnomer, but it sounds great). Complicating the situation is the mysterious "Beast," on the mountain, is it real? Or just a legend...Earlier Simon sees the evil head of a large boar on a stick , in the middle of the forest (Lord of the Flies). He has a haunting vision and flees towards the children, scaring them all. In the darkness they believe it's the beast and have to defend themselves, with whatever weapons they possess ..a tragedy occurs. Later the two"tribes," struggle for supremacy on the island....Will the wicked inherit the Earth? And maybe the last outpost of civilization left, is here... This novel is a superb narrative of today's nations, wars of conquest, anything is good , as long as your side wins...

  14. 4 out of 5

    Yulia

    I was Piggy (well, in personality at least, though not in portliness). I hated everyone who picked on him. I still do. Should people be forgiven for what they do on a deserted island? That depends on whether you think their true nature has revealed itself, or their humanity has been corrupted by circumstance and stress. In a world where almost every human trait is now considered a product of both nature and nurture, would Golding have written his tale differently today? No, I don't believe so. H I was Piggy (well, in personality at least, though not in portliness). I hated everyone who picked on him. I still do. Should people be forgiven for what they do on a deserted island? That depends on whether you think their true nature has revealed itself, or their humanity has been corrupted by circumstance and stress. In a world where almost every human trait is now considered a product of both nature and nurture, would Golding have written his tale differently today? No, I don't believe so. He was quite ahead of his time to believe some of the boys, though certainly not the majority, still remained moral despite the situation. The question is, what would have happened to me? It was impossible not to wonder after I read this book.

  15. 4 out of 5

    Helen (Helena/Nell)

    Over the years I must have read this book five or six times. Last night I was reading it on a train with a highlighter in my hand, because I decided to teach it this year again. Teachers wreck books, of course. We all know that. On the other hand, whatever you have to study-read, you tend to carry a bit of it with you. You don't forget that book, at least. Although I must add, that it's quite risky introducing to a Scottish classroom a book with the memorable words: "The English are best at ever Over the years I must have read this book five or six times. Last night I was reading it on a train with a highlighter in my hand, because I decided to teach it this year again. Teachers wreck books, of course. We all know that. On the other hand, whatever you have to study-read, you tend to carry a bit of it with you. You don't forget that book, at least. Although I must add, that it's quite risky introducing to a Scottish classroom a book with the memorable words: "The English are best at everything...." I wasn't sure how much it would have dated. I must have read it for the first time 30 years ago. Published in 1954, the phrasing would have been pretty modern then. Even now, most of it has work well. The phrase that jumped at me -- and it only appeared once -- was when Piggy (I think) compared the boys detrimentally to 'niggers', instead of just 'savages'. Ouch. Mental note to make them look hard at this bit. After all this is such a horrible little group of boys. As complacently white as can be, one group of them from a choir school (or a public school with a choir), no less. And Ralph, the 'hero', son of a naval officer. Golding, as a teacher in an upmarket school, presumably knew those sort of boys all too well. The boys being prepared to carry the empire forward. Except the setting suggests the empire may not be going forward. Somebody somewhere is fighting a war that is evidently nuclear. It's never quite clear what is going on or how the officer turns up cool as cucumber on a naval cutter at the end. Most of the young people in my class this year have (sigh) seen the film, so they know what happens. The group of boys marooned on an idyllic Pacific Island first start off having a sort of cheery adventure. There are references to Coral Island, Swallows and Amazons and Treasure Island too. They want to have fun, and one of their number -- Jack -- talks a great deal about 'fun', though his idea of fun is killing pigs. They arrive a fairly civilised little group but they gradually degenerate. Golding's moral message is about the "darkness of man's heart" and it's a good moral companion to Heart of Darkness now I come to think about it. The boys natural fears escalate and the younger children create a mythical 'beast', which then seems to materialise as a fact when the body of a dead airman, killed a war fought in the skies overhead, floats down to the island in a parachute. But the real beast is their own desire for control and domination, as well as an interesting bloodlust -- the word 'lust' is used of this, and the killing of the first pig is certainly described with unmistakable sexual resonance. One of the boys pushes a sharpened stick "up her ass". There are no girls in the group -- what a different novel it would have to have been if there were! -- but the pig they kill is a sow, and they interrupt her in suckling a brood of piglets. What a strange, strange thing to put into your novel. Not just the killing, but the slaughtering of a mother pig and a kind of sexual frenzy. Yuk! But hey -- he's intending to shock. He's intending to show that this blood lust thing isn't far away from human kind, or male human kind at least, and that it doesn't take much to call it out. Even Ralph, the Aryan protagonist, feels himself getting caught up in it. Paint your face, start whooping and chanting and you can do, it seems, almost anything. The kind, poetic, imaginative Simon gets butchered (teeth and nails at this point -- not spears). PIggy is despatched by Roger, the executioner. The whole of their little society is clearly turning into a Stalinist regime, with each boy taking his place, as prescribed by Golding, which is what you get to do when you write an allegory. It's a powerful read, though more repetitive, in linguistic terms, than I remembered - almost as repetitive as D H Lawrence in places. At the highpoint, towards the end, when Ralph is completely isolated and being hunted down, the word 'ululation' is done to death. But at least you can't read this book without learning what it means! What I both like and don't like about it is the way it makes me want to argue. The whole thing is completely manipulated. Is this what would happen? Would the darkness of man's heart take over? I have not much doubt that man's heart is dark, I guess, but when I got off the train I left my very lovely reddy-orangy furry scarf, and the chap who was sitting opposite me (I didn't speak to him during the journey) ran after me with it. It brightened my day. Perhaps he was a 'Simon' and would quickly get trampled if our civilisation were to decline. But look Golding, my lad -- that bit where you allow the man in the parachute to get dumped, dead, on the island, scaring the boys out of their wits -- if that hadn't happened -- your choice plot element -- well, the three boys Jack, Roger and Ralph, would have established Absence of Beast. It might all have turned out very differently. If Piggy hadn't been wearing glasses, there would have been no fire.... If it had started raining sooner.... If Ralph had been a bit more intelligent.... If the pigs had been a bit better at getting away.... On an island, living on fruit and getting scratched and cut, one or two of them would have developed fatal infections and their main enemy would probably have been illness and death, which would have drawn them together a bit. Even the biting insects would probably have driven them potty. One or two of them, it's my bet, would have descended into depression and just dwindled away. It wouldn't have been like The Coral Island, but it wouldn't have been the inevitable collapse of civilisation either. Steven King likes this book. It fits beautifully with his love of dramatic thriller, increasing isolation of central brave character, and underlying opposition between good and evil. Here evil wins, though. Ralph is about to be exterminated when the officer arrives, so the deus ex machina is just there as an ironic way to end the book. That bastard is even 'embarrassed' when Ralph bursts into tears. That's British stiff upper lippery for you. I don't believe, in the boys' behaviour. I don't believe that Jack, the killer (I nearly said Jack the Giant-Killer), is there just below the surface, although I do believe that wars bring out the worst in us. I don't believe that Roger -- just a little boy -- is the natural henchman, with a desire to execute his peers running just below his veneer of civilisation. But then perhaps I do. I've seen it, haven't I? Seen nasty young people doing nasty young things nastily. Conditioned into that, in their turn, by not very delightful adults, damaged adults. Oh bloody Golding -- go away! I put my money on man's intelligence. You gotta use your head to survive, whichever allegory you seem to be inhabiting. And sometimes you do survive and sometimes you don't, but the 'darkness of man's heart' is offset by the light, which always returns. The trouble is, the dark heart goes for power - doesn't it? And the desire for power and control over others can be wielded quickly and wrongly by just a few people. It's what's happening all over the world at this minute. And yet -- the majority are good-hearted souls, who will pick up your scarf on a train and return it to you. There are more good guys than bad ones. Some of them are quietly and happily reading books at this minute. Otherwise, what would be the point?

  16. 5 out of 5

    David

    I just don't buy it. This book is famous for unmasking what brutes we are, just under the surface, but, well, for all the hype, it just isn't convincing. People--even teenage boys--just aren't as savage as Golding seems to want us to believe, and nothing in this book persuades me otherwise. Perhaps if I'd gone to English boarding school I'd feel differently--but then that's the real irony of this book, that the brutality from which the British Empire was supposed to save so many people and culture I just don't buy it. This book is famous for unmasking what brutes we are, just under the surface, but, well, for all the hype, it just isn't convincing. People--even teenage boys--just aren't as savage as Golding seems to want us to believe, and nothing in this book persuades me otherwise. Perhaps if I'd gone to English boarding school I'd feel differently--but then that's the real irony of this book, that the brutality from which the British Empire was supposed to save so many people and cultures was in fact the Brits projecting their own savagery onto others. But the rest of us, no, we aren't monsters underneath. A little messed up, maybe, a little more raw, but nowhere near the kind of brutes that Golding wants us to believe.

  17. 5 out of 5

    Lyn

    Years after I read this masterpiece, it is still chilling. Golding spins a yarn that could have been told centuries ago, primal human nature unmoored from civilization does not take long to break away and devolve into a feral thing. As good today, and as haunting, as it was when it was published in 1954. This should be on a list of books that must be read.

  18. 4 out of 5

    Aj the Ravenous Reader

    I only know that Lord of the Flies is an extremely popular classic book but I have zero idea on what it’s about and I must say, this is completely unexpected and until now I’m not sure if that’s in a good way or bad. ^^ The premise is without a doubt ingenious- a group of kids castaway in an island? Sounds like a partaayy! Tom Hanks would have loved to jump in if only he weren’t an adult.^^ And party it was at the greater half of the book which mostly consisted of: 1. Purposeless assemblies 2. A lo I only know that Lord of the Flies is an extremely popular classic book but I have zero idea on what it’s about and I must say, this is completely unexpected and until now I’m not sure if that’s in a good way or bad. ^^ The premise is without a doubt ingenious- a group of kids castaway in an island? Sounds like a partaayy! Tom Hanks would have loved to jump in if only he weren’t an adult.^^ And party it was at the greater half of the book which mostly consisted of: 1. Purposeless assemblies 2. A lot of giggling 3. Pig chase re-enactments 4. Touch the conch game.^^ 5. Laughing fits mostly at the expense of Piggy. (Poor, Piggy) *sniffs* But the party suddenly turns into savagery (See this is why you can’t join in, Mr. Hanks) and eep! enter the gloomy themes and deeper darker messages of the novel that allegedly gave inspiration to the phenomenal dystopian trilogy that is the Hunger Games and undoubtedly several other dystopian novels that capitalize on brutality and murdering children. (Kidding.^^) For a proper, more eloquent, far more meaningful review that will tackle the themes, the writing and other important elements of the novel that I shamelessly neglected, do read my beautiful friend’s, (Ate) Sabah’s review. Also, it’s her birthday today! HAPPY BIRTHDAY, Ate Sabah! I hope you have a wonderful day with loads of love and surprises! I couldn't find a paperback copy of Jane Eyre. I hope this'll do. <3

  19. 5 out of 5

    Glenn Sumi

    LORD OF THE REREADINGS A couple of months ago, I picked up To Kill A Mockingbird, a book I last read in high school. What fascinated me about the exercise was how much I remembered and how much I didn’t, what I appreciated as a child and what I do now. After that, I began wondering how I would respond to the other books I had to read and analyze as a youth. Hence my rereading of Lord Of The Flies. It’s equally powerful – shocking, even by today’s standards. And it’s all very efficiently done. Both LORD OF THE REREADINGS A couple of months ago, I picked up To Kill A Mockingbird, a book I last read in high school. What fascinated me about the exercise was how much I remembered and how much I didn’t, what I appreciated as a child and what I do now. After that, I began wondering how I would respond to the other books I had to read and analyze as a youth. Hence my rereading of Lord Of The Flies. It’s equally powerful – shocking, even by today’s standards. And it’s all very efficiently done. Both books are deserved classics. I don't regret a moment spent rereading either one. So… perhaps this will become a series. What’s next: Catcher In The Rye? A Separate Peace? Anyhow, on with the review... and keep in mind that if you weren't forced to read this back in school, THERE BE SPOILERS AHEAD (or A-HEAD - if you'll excuse the pun). What do I remember from my first reading? • The set-up, of course. After a plane crashes, a group of English boys finds themselves stranded on an island and, with no adults to guide them, form a kind of society that quickly breaks down, resulting in madness and murder. • The symbols, among them: the conch (for order and civilization, I suppose, since if one holds it one can speak in front of a group); the glasses (or “specs”), which help create fire and, since they belong to the nearsighted, brainy yet mercilessly bullied Piggy, might also represent intelligence; the idea of monsters. • I remember being entertained by the nickname Piggy – what a childish thing, but it is memorable and symbolic in its own way. What a smart move on author William Golding’s part to call him that. • The ending. I knew a couple of children died, and that eventually the rest were rescued. What don’t I remember from that reading? • I’d forgotten that many of the book’s “hunters” were (back in civilian life) members of a choir! • I’d totally forgotten about the young twins, Sam and Eric, whose names are blended by Golding into the very contemporary-sounding name Samneric. • I should have, but didn’t realize, the book took place during some unspecified war. What do I appreciate now? • The economy and compactness of the book. There’s very little fat in it (besides the fat dripping from the roasted boar). And though there are lots of vivid descriptions of clouds, forests and sun glinting on sand, nothing is gratuitous. • How beautifully Golding captures children’s behaviour, especially in groups. This was Golding’s first novel, and he knew boys so well. (Perhaps he was raising sons at the time.) • There are lots of characters with Anglo names that sound a lot alike (Ralph, Jack, Roger, Robert, Simon, Henry – something that instantly "dates" it, I suppose), but Golding gradually fills you in on them. It took a while for me to understand Roger’s sadistic nature, for instance. • The theme of bullying, which is as relevant as ever. Is this a fact of nature? Does every species find someone/thing among them to tease and ridicule? Piggy is overweight, unathletic, myopic and has asthma (and another thing I didn’t notice: his speech places him in a slightly lower class than everyone else), but he’s also very smart. He can see things that the charismatic, initial leader Ralph doesn’t, which is why they make a good pair. But the fact that everyone, from the oldest to the youngest, teases him, is very disturbing. • The hallucinatory scenes with Simon (often thought of as the book’s most intuitive character) and the “beast,” which gives the novel its title. I wasn’t prepared for the sheer nightmarish horror of these episodes. No wonder Stephen King was so influenced by this book (he borrowed the novel's “Castle Rock” and uses it regularly as a setting). • The political/social allegory at its centre. How do we make a society work? Is hunting (to feed us) more important than providing shelter or coming up with a way to be rescued? What happens when people don’t pull their weight? • All of this is done so very subtly. There’s a moment when “chief” Ralph is gradually losing his power, and Piggy suggests he blow the conch to form an assembly. And Ralph knows that if he blows the conch and no one comes, it will be irrevocable. Brilliant observation. • The idea of the “beast.” Is the idea of the “other” something intrinsic and primitive? Or do we create monsters as a mere projection of our own fears? • The little visual details, like Ralph pushing the hair out of his face. It’s both a naturalistic detail and one that points out how all the boys are becoming savage (funnily enough, Piggy’s hair doesn’t grow) • I had no idea how exciting the plot got in the last couple of chapters. Golding cranked up the tension to 11. Even though I knew how the book ended, I was still turning every page, heart thumping, hoping Ralph survived being pursued by Jack and his gang. The few things that didn’t work this time around: • The line “Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart…” in the penultimate paragraph of the book seems way too on the nose. I can imagine a million students underlining that with a big "Aha!" • I forgot Piggy used the N-word. Really. It's there. *** I recalled a lot more of this book than Mockingbird. Once read, it has the power and heft of something that is so true and essential that it must have always been around. (I’ve felt this way about other literary works, like Shirley Jackson’s short story “The Lottery,” for instance.) But, and here's the weird thing, I think this book is better appreciated as an adult. Younger people are so caught up in the immediacy of every complication. I remember studiously talking about themes before I fully understood them from life. Adults, because we've lived through decades, can recognize the patterns of behaviour, the archetypal figures looming behind bullies and visionaries, both in private and public life, that emerge so strikingly in this book. Finally: why haven't I read more William Golding?

  20. 5 out of 5

    Ginger

    DAMN!! I think reading this book as an adult affects me more. You come to realize that things and circumstances can change drastically with no rules or repercussions. I really loved Lord of the Flies and think everyone should read this one day. It's not a long book but it will make an impression on you. It makes you think and dread what would happen if... “Maybe there is a beast… maybe it's only us.” The writing of William Golding was well done and detailed on the breakdown of humanity and sensibilit DAMN!! I think reading this book as an adult affects me more. You come to realize that things and circumstances can change drastically with no rules or repercussions. I really loved Lord of the Flies and think everyone should read this one day. It's not a long book but it will make an impression on you. It makes you think and dread what would happen if... “Maybe there is a beast… maybe it's only us.” The writing of William Golding was well done and detailed on the breakdown of humanity and sensibility. With no rules to govern, you can easily see how a group will follow the stronger and more manipulative leader. Let it be a lesson to us all to always have a sense of morality and know when as a society we've crossed the line. Recommended to everyone!!

  21. 5 out of 5

    Scarlet Cameo

    Lectura con el grupo PopSugar Reading Challenge en Español En este mundo hay libro de los que nunca se duda el porque son clásicos y éste es uno de ellos. Con una premisa que ha sido explotadísima durante años: cómo hace un grupo de personas para sobrevivir en un ambiente aislado y reducido en recursos; hoy en día tenemos ejemplos como TWD y Lost para alimentarnos de esta idea germinal, pero ninguno de ellos logra lo que Golding hizo en este libro, que es mostrar claramente como se va perdiendo l Lectura con el grupo PopSugar Reading Challenge en Español En este mundo hay libro de los que nunca se duda el porque son clásicos y éste es uno de ellos. Con una premisa que ha sido explotadísima durante años: cómo hace un grupo de personas para sobrevivir en un ambiente aislado y reducido en recursos; hoy en día tenemos ejemplos como TWD y Lost para alimentarnos de esta idea germinal, pero ninguno de ellos logra lo que Golding hizo en este libro, que es mostrar claramente como se va perdiendo la humanidad y la cordura. Esta historia es para pensar, para medir y para plantearte quien eres en realidad. Cuando leí El día de los Trífidos comentaba que pareciera que las convenciones sociales son tan antinaturales que son olvidadas al primer segundo de desesperación, pero aquí es todo más sutil, más lento, la degeneración de la civilización como institución y ente rector es progresiva, pasando de momentos donde los símbolos lo son todo, el mostrar aquello que mantiene a flote a estos niños es el aferrarse a sus costumbres, pero Golding no se limita a darnos ese lado de la moneda, sino que nos muestra que ante la desesperación las personas se entregan a la locura, al instinto de supervivencia y al miedo, además de como colisionan ambas actitudes en un espacio tan cerrado. La historia es intensa, y no da un sólo momento de descanso. Primera página y el autor ya nos tiene encerrados en la isla y ante la perspectiva de estar solos, pero conforme avanzamos párrafo a párrafo nos encontramos con quienes serán nuestros líderes, Ralph y Jack, y nuestras voces de la razón, Piggy y Simon, si bien hay muchísimos niños en la historia ellos cuatro representan la naturaleza primordial de los enclaustrados, mientras que "los peques", niños de alrededor de 6 años, representan lo infantil, lo despreocupado y las masas, son la prueba irremovible de que quienes están dirigiendo son sólo niños, niños que tratan de sobrevivir pero al final del día infantes. Es fácil ver está historia y estremecerte, no sólo tienes el enorme simbolismo presente desde el título, sino que para este punto todos sabemos que el ser humano que no esta regido bajo una sociedad bien establecida siempre regresará a sus orígenes, a la salvajidad que lo llevo a sobrevivir por siglos y que sin una autoridad bien definida irá cual depredador destrozando todo a su paso y tomando lo que necesite. Les presento al Señor de las Moscas, igual conocido como Belcebú (o Belzebú), Señor de los ejércitos para los cananeos y Príncipe de los demonios en la religión cristiana Pero esta historia es mucho más que la metáfora de la pérdida de la inocencia y la actitud civilizada, contiene un trasfondo político interesante por decir lo menos, donde muestra tanto a dirigentes como a los consejeros sabios y realistas que muchas veces son prescindibles en la teoría pero en la práctica son mas que necesarios, y que por lo mismo son a quienes con más fervor se desea mantener o eliminar, porque son la base, la idea y el concepto. En este libro esos aspectos son tangibles, presentes y necesarios, así como la sensación de enemistad y rivalidad que el libro transmite desde que comienza. Si bien la historia es representada por niños, todos los temas que toca son adultos, y por lo mismo el tono carece de infantilización, narrándose de manera cruda y dura, pero adecuándose a como actuaría un infante. Incluso los líderes, que son de los mayores dentro del grupo, actúan conforme a su edad, y aquí no niego que de repente pareciera que logran arreglar las cosas de manera muy simple, pero me pongo a pensar que el libro se publico en los 50's, una época en la que los niños eran llevados a los scouts, tenían mejor condición física e incluso más imaginación dado el tipo de educación que recibían y notó que no es ilógica la manera en que actúan para su doce/trece años: tienen miedo, pero saben que deben actuar para lograr ser rescatados. Si bien la historia tiene problemas como el hecho de que muchas veces se narran partes que parecen ser inconexas, cómo que provienen de la nada, especialmente en la primera mitad, y que de repente desconciertan, pero no se puede negar la maestría con la que el autor la trato y llevo a buen puerto, desnudando (figurativamente) a los protagonistas hacia el final: sin importar lo que pase, ya nada será lo mismo para ellos. Intensa y terrórifica, es un imprescindible si es que te gusta conocer acerca de la naturaleza humana. Comentario random: Esta historia inspiró la canción Lord of the Flies de Iron Maiden que, sin contar la trama, captura la naturaleza de la misma

  22. 5 out of 5

    Gothadh

    I absolutely hated this book. That's my over-riding memory of it I'm afraid. I had to read it in secondary school when I was about 12 and I never remember disliking a book so much which was surprising as I was a voracious reader. I just remember having absolutely nothing in common with the characters - a group of English upper / middle class school boys whereas I was a Scottish working class girl. I just could not relate to the story at all and just wished they would all kill each other as soon a I absolutely hated this book. That's my over-riding memory of it I'm afraid. I had to read it in secondary school when I was about 12 and I never remember disliking a book so much which was surprising as I was a voracious reader. I just remember having absolutely nothing in common with the characters - a group of English upper / middle class school boys whereas I was a Scottish working class girl. I just could not relate to the story at all and just wished they would all kill each other as soon as possible so the book would finish. The fact that we had to read the book in class at the pace of some of the slower readers (agonisingly painfully slow readers) and then discuss it afterwards, which was like trying to get blood out of a stone, probably didn't help. Never, ever again.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Natalie Vellacott

    This book shocked me. Not so much because of the content, I will come onto that, but because my gentle, kind, mother recommended it to me. My mum who mutes the TV when a swear word is coming up and who can't stand any type of violence recommended a book that involves children killing each other. Perhaps in her case familiarity has rendered the content less offensive--she studied it in high school and it had her childish scrawls all the way through, also entertaining! That said, there was a lot t This book shocked me. Not so much because of the content, I will come onto that, but because my gentle, kind, mother recommended it to me. My mum who mutes the TV when a swear word is coming up and who can't stand any type of violence recommended a book that involves children killing each other. Perhaps in her case familiarity has rendered the content less offensive--she studied it in high school and it had her childish scrawls all the way through, also entertaining! That said, there was a lot to this book. I can see why it has become a classic. I guess, I was just taken aback having started the story and expecting it to continue in a Peter Pan type "lost boys" style...when it took a violent turn in a "no going back" direction. A group of boys are abandoned on an uninhabited island. Ralph takes the lead and formulates a rescue plan. But it isn't long before the group are embroiled in internal conflict as they battle for supremacy and status. What is really needed is for them to band together and for everyone to do their part to keep the group alive and alert any ships that happen to be passing. But they cannot even get that right--those meant to be tending the fire are off hunting pigs when the first vessel draws near. The divisions widen over time as some of the children begin to adopt savage-like behaviour resulting in tragedy. It is not a Christian book but there are a great number of spiritual analogies and lessons worthy of comment. The book reminds us that children do not learn sin from their parents. They are born sinful and if not disciplined, given appropriate boundaries and taught right from wrong, they will choose sin as it is predetermined due to the fall--"born in sin and shapen in iniquity." The book also reminds us that man is not basically good or innocent but the opposite. There is also a lesson about the pack mentality. How much easier is it to fall into sin or temptation in a group than it is alone? When young people goad, dare and egg each other on they can be capable of great evil--peer pressure is a powerful force. We see it in the media when a group loses control and in a violent frenzy attacks a person in the street. But we will not ultimately stand before God in a group but by ourselves to account for our behaviour. It is why the Bible warns us about the company we keep and who we choose to be our friends. I was also reminded of the damage that can be done to children who spend too much time playing video computer games. They become lost in their own worlds of darkness where theft, violence and killing are normalised and those who murder are heroes not criminals. Lord of the Flies made me realise how easy it was for these children to begin playing a very dangerous game with life and death when they became immersed in their own world and had lost touch with reality. Maybe it will make some parents think about what their children are filling their minds with alone in their bedrooms. We shouldn't be surprised when the same children translate their video game world into a murderous rampage on our streets. That is what they have been taught to do! The last chapter of the book was for me the most impactive as the sequence of events was unexpected. The narrative is chilling in places but definitely held my interest and I wanted to know what happened to the children in the end. There are a few swear words in the book but nothing major. There is no sexual content. There is some graphic violence and animal slaughter. This book is not really suitable for younger children but may hold lessons for older teens. I would recommend the book for Christians for the spiritual lessons that can be learned but it is not particularly uplifting!

  24. 5 out of 5

    Joshua Nomen-Mutatio

    BOYS WILL BE BOYS THERE'S A PIG'S HEAD.

  25. 5 out of 5

    Fernando

    Civilización y barbarie. ¿Civilización o barbarie? ¿Cuán profunda es el alma humana? ¿Somos todos tan malos? ¿Somos buenos y en algún momento la vida hace aflorar lo más perverso que está oculto en nuestros corazones? ¿Nacemos con una maldad adormecida y latente o las circunstancias de la vida nos transforman e inclinan hacia el mal? Este libro me ha hecho plantear estas preguntas. Me ha hecho pensar. En otras reseñas, he comentado cuáles fueron los libros que más me han gustado y en este caso d Civilización y barbarie. ¿Civilización o barbarie? ¿Cuán profunda es el alma humana? ¿Somos todos tan malos? ¿Somos buenos y en algún momento la vida hace aflorar lo más perverso que está oculto en nuestros corazones? ¿Nacemos con una maldad adormecida y latente o las circunstancias de la vida nos transforman e inclinan hacia el mal? Este libro me ha hecho plantear estas preguntas. Me ha hecho pensar. En otras reseñas, he comentado cuáles fueron los libros que más me han gustado y en este caso debo decir que en lo que va del año, "El Señor de las Moscas" es el libro que más me ha impactado (esa es la palabra). Parece mentira que los personajes principales son tan sólo niños de entre 6 y 12 años. Hasta parece inverosímil, pero lo inverosímil es algo que en la literatura se sale de su propio cauce, aunque la realidad aporta cuestiones similares. Ya desde el principio, el autor nos mete de lleno en la trama argumental de la historia. William Golding no pierde tiempo en explicar la caída del avión, ni como se salvan los niños y perecen todos los adultos sino que directamente nos muestra a unos niños tratando de sobrevivir en una isla desierta de la forma más visceral, tomando decisiones propias de los adultos y haciéndose hombres de golpe. Naturalmente y como en todo tipo de situaciones, aparecen los líderes. Aquellas personas hechas para hacerse cargo de la situación pero con formas totalmente antagónicas para pensar y actuar en los momentos más difíciles. De esta manera conoceremos a los tres personajes principales del libro: Ralph, Jack y Piggy. Encontramos en Ralph una característica que sobresale claramente y que es la del sentido común. Toda decisión que pasa por sus manos es analizada fríamente para buscar un bien que sea el mejor para todos. La idea de hacer una fogata y mantener el humo constante en el aire con la esperanza de que los vea un barco es simple en sí, pero es a la vez difícil de sostener en el tiempo. Contará con él con Piggy. Ese muchacho gordito de amplias gafas cuyo principal emblema es la sensatez. De esta manera sus personalidades ofician de equilibrio ante los sucesos que vendrán y estarán los mellizos San y Eric, caracterizados por la fidelidad que le profesan a Ralph incluso hasta el final. En la contraparte de esta historia nos encontraremos con Jack, un muchacho impulsivo y agresivo, de esos que acostumbran a hacerse los guapos en el barrio. Tiene un instinto casi salvaje. Para él, lo único que interesa es cazar, matar, subsistir a base de lanzazos contra cuanto jabalí se le cruce. Asar la carne y comerla de a dentelladas. Hasta eso llega su forma de vivir y eso es lo que exige de sus súbditos (hay un punto que los otros muchachitos adquieren ese mote). Lo secundarán con un fanatismo ciego Roger, un chico violento (tal vez más que Jack) y Maurice, una especie de lugarteniente efectivo a la hora de los castigos. En el libro, Golding utiliza ciertos elementos como simbolismos para tratar de mantener algo de ecuanimidad en una atmósfera tan desbalanceada como la de esta isla desierta. La caracola es el elemento para expresarse y a su vez para escuchar al que tiene algo que decir y se transformará en un objeto del deseo. Todos querrán tener el control de este artefacto cuya función principal es la comunicación, pero pierde el sentido para el que se lo intentó utilizar en un principio. Otros elementos tiene otro objetivo como la fiera, del que yo intuyo representa el miedo que todos llevamos dentro. Todo aquello a lo que tememos y no podemos controlar. Al principio atemoriza a los peques de 6 años y posteriormente, este miedo los alcanzará a todos. Las posiciones de Ralph y Jack son completamente antagónicas, enfrentadas, irreversibles y… peligrosas. Tarde o temprano la situación se irá desvirtuando. Todo se reduce a cazar o salvarse y el clima se pondrá denso, pesado y sangriento. Varias veces, se repite la frase ¡Mata al jabalí! ¡Córtale el cuello! ¡Derrama su sangre!, algo que considero totalmente de espanto... El último de los elementos que regulan la vida de estos niños es El Señor de las Moscas, simbolizada por esa cabeza de jabalí clavada en una estaca. Este nombre es uno de los tantos que se utilizan para denominar al Diablo. Es la encarnación del mal, una especie de tótem infernal que infectará la mente de los niños más oscuros y ya no habrá vuelta atrás. Cuando estaba llegando a la última parte del libro y ante las escenas finales que enfrentan a ambos bandos de niños volví a reflexionar que eran seres humanos como yo, como el autor o como tú lector que también, si leíste el libro puede que te hayas preguntado algo que yo sí me pregunté: ¿Somos tan malos?

  26. 5 out of 5

    James

    Book Review 3 out of 5 stars to Lord of the Flies, a coming-of-age novel written in 1954 by William Golding, who was a Nobel Prize winner. Most people have either read this book during middle/high school (in America or Great Britain), or have heard of it because of its supposed cannibalism story line. But wait... it wasn't cannibalism -- huge exaggeration to set straight, right from the beginning. But let's back up... At a time of war, a group of pre-teen boys are in a plane that crashed onto Book Review 3 out of 5 stars to Lord of the Flies, a coming-of-age novel written in 1954 by William Golding, who was a Nobel Prize winner. Most people have either read this book during middle/high school (in America or Great Britain), or have heard of it because of its supposed cannibalism story line. But wait... it wasn't cannibalism -- huge exaggeration to set straight, right from the beginning. But let's back up... At a time of war, a group of pre-teen boys are in a plane that crashed onto an isolated and jungle-like island. They are forced to grow up quickly when they have no food, water or shelter easily at their disposal, e.g. in the kitchen cabinet. It's a story about how to take care of yourself in the jungle when you have nothing but raw supplies. The novel is full of themes from loss of innocence to the differences between savagery and civilization. It asks the question what type of a person are you -- a leader or a follower? The story charts the actions of the boys as they grow up, hunt for food, build shelter and learn how to work together. They divide into opposing teams, trying to see how is the best leader. They learn to help each other and watch others die. I read the book once and tried a second several years ago, but what I realized is that the world today is a very different place. While I appreciate the themes and characters being brought to life in this novel, it didn't have as strong an impact on me as it has for others. I think it may be the kind of novel that is best read when you are a teenager, as it helps with understanding things are the same today as they were 75 years ago, in terms of growing up and learning how to work together. When you've got a classic like this one paired up against something like The Hunger Games, it's a tough choice. They deal with the same sort of context in terms of "survival of the fittest," but one is a dangerous game and another is an accident. I like them both, but I'd choose The Hunger Games, even tho it's less well-written. "Teen/Childhood" angst, lessons to be learned, education versus playtime, all great concepts both books addressed, but the difference is when a book almost goes out of the way to try to teach me something versus it naturally happening. I still believe it's a good book, and it should be read, but if it were written today, I don't think it would be as popular. About Me For those new to me or my reviews... here's the scoop: I read A LOT. I write A LOT. And now I blog A LOT. First the book review goes on Goodreads, and then I send it on over to my WordPress blog at https://thisismytruthnow.com, where you'll also find TV & Film reviews, the revealing and introspective 365 Daily Challenge and lots of blogging about places I've visited all over the world. And you can find all my social media profiles to get the details on the who/what/when/where and my pictures. Leave a comment and let me know what you think. Vote in the poll and ratings. Thanks for stopping by.

  27. 5 out of 5

    Mario

    Maybe there is a beast… maybe it's only us. This book doesn't fall under horror category, right? Then why did it scare living crap out of me? Lord of the Flies is a story about a group of boys who get marooned on one island after their plane crashed. Now, from the first page of this book, I had this uneasy feeling for some reason. And the more I read, the more that feeling grew. I've already heard that this book was not an easy book to read and that there were some pretty disturbing scenes. But st Maybe there is a beast… maybe it's only us. This book doesn't fall under horror category, right? Then why did it scare living crap out of me? Lord of the Flies is a story about a group of boys who get marooned on one island after their plane crashed. Now, from the first page of this book, I had this uneasy feeling for some reason. And the more I read, the more that feeling grew. I've already heard that this book was not an easy book to read and that there were some pretty disturbing scenes. But still, I did not expect this. And what scared me the most was just how realistic (at least in my opinion) this book was. And how these children are not any different than adults. I'm positive that we would get similar outcome if a group of adults got marooned on an island. And that is why (unlike The Maze Runner) this book got it right. And I'll definitely re-read this book in the future many times, because I fell that this is one of those books that just needs a re-read to be completely understood.

  28. 5 out of 5

    Evgeny

    A group read with a bunch of Pantaloonless Buddies. A group of young boys are dumped on a small island in the middle of Atlantic. The reason for this is very sketchy and the tale starts right after this event. For a while it was all fun and games until it was not: primitive instincts took over and for kids it became kill-or-be-killed survival. This book was hailed by some critics as the best novels written in English. This is also an undisputed classic and a required reading in high school. It d A group read with a bunch of Pantaloonless Buddies. A group of young boys are dumped on a small island in the middle of Atlantic. The reason for this is very sketchy and the tale starts right after this event. For a while it was all fun and games until it was not: primitive instincts took over and for kids it became kill-or-be-killed survival. This book was hailed by some critics as the best novels written in English. This is also an undisputed classic and a required reading in high school. It did not quite work for me. Considering its average rating of 3.62 it did not work for some other people - even discounting the poor souls that were force fed with the classic in aforementioned high school. Let me make one thing crystal clear before I proceed: I fully acknowledge its classic status and fully understand its significance and influence. It is just me I will explain what exactly did not work. I did not like the presentation. William Golding was a playwright among other things and I always had a feeling of watching a play instead of reading. Sometimes it was not clear who speaks a particular line of dialog and sometimes the switching of scenes were jumbled - for the lack of a better word. The difference between a play and a book is that in the former you only show while in the latter you have to sometimes tell. This "tell" part was missing. As any classic book this one delivered a message as well as was an allegory of the human society. It quite succeeded at this, but it sacrificed everything else along the way. It could tell a tale of an adventure as well, but there was not much of it. The whole island experience as not realistic. You have a bunch of people stranded on an island with a bad diet and nobody ever gets sick. I am not buying it. What about good old sunburns? They did not bother to cover themselves and never get any, why? The only distinguishable feature between the vast majority of the characters was their names; I had trouble remembering who was who, and I stopped caring after a while. Nothing much happened for about two thirds of the book and when the events finally began unfolding, there was not enough length left for them thus an abrupt resolution suddenly appeared at the end. One is not supposed to give low ratings to classics, but my conscience would not allow me go higher than 3 stars and this would be my final rating. Once again I would like to stress that I understood the importance of the message.

  29. 4 out of 5

    Jason Koivu

    I've got the conch now, so listen up! In Lord of the Flies Golding deconstructed civilization, wiping it out and showing us our world in chaos. It's not pretty. Man without governance is apt to slide into savagery. At first the castaway children on this deserted isle set up rules and leadership, but law and order is overwhelmed when the majority discover there is no immediate consequence if they give in to their wants and desires. In the place of civility, a brutal world is born in which might is I've got the conch now, so listen up! In Lord of the Flies Golding deconstructed civilization, wiping it out and showing us our world in chaos. It's not pretty. Man without governance is apt to slide into savagery. At first the castaway children on this deserted isle set up rules and leadership, but law and order is overwhelmed when the majority discover there is no immediate consequence if they give in to their wants and desires. In the place of civility, a brutal world is born in which might is right, the weak are stamped out, and the female voice all but silenced (Piggy's frequent references to his auntie). Golding pounded away at that theme, so much so as to rankle some readers who criticize the book's heavy-handed use of cardboard cut-out stereotypes to force the author's point across. I don't deny it, but in this instance I'm okay with it because I found the outcome, depressing and disheartening as it is, satisfying as a statement and, the whole, enjoyable as a fully contained tale. Surely the characters could've been invested with deeper background, which would have added greatly to the story in detail as well as pages. Both are unessential, for the intended purpose is served...Golding held the conch and Lord of the Flies is what he had to say.

  30. 4 out of 5

    Manju

    yup, i have now ticked box where it says this book is one of the must read classics and i think that's the highlight of my reading experience that i have with this story. there are many things that are hard to believe about this story, like why only teenagers got stranded on the island? other than few no one said anything about going home? violence among these kids is not such a big thing as this is a common occurrence nowadays. this book depicts how easily humans could turn violent, and their de yup, i have now ticked box where it says this book is one of the must read classics and i think that's the highlight of my reading experience that i have with this story. there are many things that are hard to believe about this story, like why only teenagers got stranded on the island? other than few no one said anything about going home? violence among these kids is not such a big thing as this is a common occurrence nowadays. this book depicts how easily humans could turn violent, and their desire to rule fellow humans but i was also expecting another trait of human nature to come out and that was being stand united against oppression. Sadly, that did not happen. definitely a disturbing read but not an outstanding story in today's world.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In order to read or download eBook, you need to create FREE account.
eBook available in PDF, ePub, MOBI and Kindle versions



Loading...