View Poll Results: 'Lord of the Flies': Final Verdict

Voters
49. You may not vote on this poll
  • * Waste of time. Wouldn't recommend it.

    0 0%
  • ** Didn't like it much.

    6 12.24%
  • *** Average.

    3 6.12%
  • **** It is a good book.

    14 28.57%
  • ***** Liked it very much. Would strongly recommend it.

    26 53.06%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 91

Thread: February '05 Book: Lord of the Flies

  1. #46
    Good morning, Campers! Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    7,251
    #######possible spoiler####### (if there's still anyone who hasn't finished it)

    I wonder how Simon knew Ralph was going to get off the island, can't remember what exactly he said but he stressed that Ralph was going to be saved. Could he know he wasn't going to make it?
    I still have to finish Flies but I'm sure Simon's to be killed.
    I have a plan: attack!

  2. #47
    Super papayahed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    17,049
    The book was kind of depressing.
    Do, or do not. There is no try. - Yoda


  3. #48
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,564
    Quote Originally Posted by papayahed
    The book was kind of depressing.
    I agree of it being very depressing, papayahed. Golding certainly makes obvious the darkest side of human nature, especially so early of age, considering most characters had barely reached their teenage years. ***SPOILER*** After the arrival of the ship on the island, I think that the serious hope of being saved came true also saved the stranded young boys from the danger of their own instincts, bringing them back, in turn, to a structural-functionalist ideal of society.

  4. #49
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903

    TLOF Live Chat Summary

    I first read TLOF when I was 20 ... Now after reading it for the
    second time I realise that I did not appreciate it truly then

    How do we change through life, such that we had something when
    young, and enjoy it when older, or the converse, we love a book in our
    youth and tire of it in later years?

    Corollary: Did you ever have SUCH a wonderful experience with a
    book that you are afraid to re-read it, for fear that the second time will
    be disappointing?

    We always seek to recreate initial experiences.... but "you cant go
    home again"

    We can never experience again the thrill of first love, first
    intoxication,.... first learning experience/discovery/insight

    Age and experience brings with it so much finer focus

    Locke's notion of human nature, as capable of good and evil, and
    self-government, versus Hobbes notion that human nature is basically
    brutish...

    Why are all the characters young boys? Why no females?

    Are children cruel by nature?

    Can a person have absolutely no conscience?

    The West tends to see infancy as innocence, sinless.... (look at Limbo
    in Dante for unbaptized infants).... and the age of reason and
    understanding brings the fallen nature... and sin, culpability,
    accountability.

    Are we all selfish and pleasure seeking initially?

    I read something fascinating recently, about particles and quantum,...
    which states that each individual particle is totally free, random.... just
    like the concept of natural man for Locke and Hobbes.... BUT... then
    entire mass of all particles (the society) is bound by statistical laws...
    I thought it an interesting analogy

    The bigger a group of people is the more predictable it is

    With a bigger group it is also easier to get into 'mass psychology'?

    Like it happened on the night Simon got killed

    Even Ralph and Piggy...they longed to be the members of some group
    too

    From a group, from society.... factors absent when we are in solitude

    I think when in a group it is easier to get rid of the limitations

    Less responsibility on individual basis

    Humans long for communication

    It is a basic need

    A large city provides anonymity for us to act out... but in a small
    community, we are known, more visible, more accountable

    The violence of a mob... when most of those individuals would not be
    so aggressive if alone

    Small societies actualy tend to work better than big ones

    So, we would do things we wouldnt do normally to be a part of a
    group?

    The work of people like Rupert Sheldrake, morphic resonance... about
    that genius monkey who realized that he could WASH the sweet
    potatoes and get more food more quickly... and that potato washing
    technology quickly spread to other monkey clans

    I can believe peer pressure, but only until a certain point, but then of
    course I'm proven wrong by Hitler

    I am think of Goldhag's book "Hitlers Willing Assassins"

    I still cannot get over the fact that Ralph and Piggy took part in
    Simon's killing

    Instincts stronger than intellect

    I couldn't agree more. In a life or death situation, especially in people
    of younger ages, instincts most definitely may dominate.

    It was their instinct which took them there initially

    The herd instinct and physical needs to have meat

    Interesting.... intellect vs instincts..... the human being is the only
    creature which can elect , of free will, to abstain from mating,
    reproduction,.... to become celibate, ascetical

    I am thinking of Maslow's pyramid/hierarchy of human needs
    Humans have abstract thinking

    At the bottom, air, water... at the top.... self realization/transcendence

    First the physical needs

    when at the top of the pyramid/hierarchy, one may even reliquish
    ones life willingly

    unless physical needs are fulfilled, morals can be a luxury

    but.... towards the top of pyramid, you have your Gandhis fasting to
    the point of near death....

    I think the instinctive behavior, seen by others, it becomes easier for
    them to do it, much like Bok's idea of "spread and abuse."

    Once more people succumb to lower levels of Maslow's pyramid,
    others also.

    An author builds a world and people with unique laws, and then the
    laws play out to a logical conclusion.... Ayn Rand does the same
    thing in Atlas Shrugged.... but the question is.. how realistic the that
    fictive world, how does it compare to real world in different historical
    periods

    We have seen actual instances of "feral" children.... brought back to
    society.... who never learn speech.... who attempt to each chickens
    raw...

    I think Golding's logic seems to follow the psychological examples...

    feral children being an EXTREME real life example of the phenomenon
    which Golding describes...

    superego, ego and back to ID

    And the "spread and abuse" of the id. and the needs pyramid

    Sartre said, "Hell is other people"

    but maybe 'hell' is within us

    perhaps both heaven and hell is within

    we all have urges and such which we keep under control

    agriculture implies POSTPONEMENT of immediate gratification for the
    sake of some FUTURE benefit (such as a harvest)...
    hunter/gatherer cultures have little postponement of gratification
    (self-control)

    Milton wrote: "The mind is its own place, and in itself creates / a
    heaven of hell, a hell of heaven."

    In the Zoroastrian Avesta scriptures, in their language (circa 2000
    bc)... the word for CIVILIZATION, society.... is a word which means
    "those who tend flocks"

    England is that famous "nation of shopkeepers" and suddenly the
    boys are thrust into a hunter/foodgathering environment

    without the wisdom of how to live the hunter/gatherer way

    This makes me wonder which is more complex: "civilized"society or a
    hunter-gatherer society.

    Do you think if they were better prepared for hunting etc, the result
    would have been different?

    but.... obvioulsy.... to plant a tree which will take 50 years to mature
    and bear fruit.... is to be altruistic, to provide for the next generation...
    there is a famous passage in Talmud about planting such a tree
    imagine if hunters/gatherers had lived as the boys lived
    they wouldn't have lasted

    humans would be an exctinct species

    we are weak creatures as individuals, and our survival depends on our
    unique ability to cooperate and organize

    even the most primitive tribes have an 'order'
    they had probably "tribe laws"
    totems and taboos

    small societies actually work better than the big ones
    they tend to work

    everyone knows everyones face and so on
    so being 'primitive' does not necessarily mean being devoid of
    superego and ego

    True, the needs of a society work well with fewer individuals - a
    structural-functionlist-like society.

    there is an interesting passage in Carl Jung's autobiographical
    "Memories, Dreams Reflections" which describes the reaction of a
    tribe of south american natives to the European.... really quite
    revealing....where the native says, "what is it that you europeans
    want, always going about with your lean and hungry look.... never
    content to sit as we do and simply be" (paraphrasing from memory)

    perhaps the most savage beast of all is the civilized person placed
    suddenly in a jungle

    or, suddenly removed from the constraints of society and law
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  5. #50
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903

    TLOF Live Chat Summary - 2

    I remember two incidents here in the UK both involving children
    was it the one with the 2 ten year olds? in one, two little boys aged

    10 and 9 I think, kidnapped a 3 year old from a shopping centre, took
    him out of the city and killed him by stoning
    and another one, a little girl of 10 killed another boy by strangling
    no explanation as to why
    of course the media blamed the families

    anarchy is only fueled by the repression of an order/regime/rule,....
    natural man knows no similar urge to rebel and be free, i suspect
    actually, if i remember correctly, anarchy actually doesn't mean total
    chaos
    it means that people just don't need laws

    Hobbes wrote in page one of Leviathan "If men were angels, there
    would be no need for government"

    but... hmmm.... look at all the violence we see billed as
    entertainment..... we all know 10,001 ways to murder, torture, kill,
    mame,

    gladiators

    but look at the play of young animals
    they are not very tender either

    that reminds me
    we werent very nice to animals when we were children

    the kitten must be taught to kill prey by the mother...

    a cat raised by humans does not quite understand the proper way to
    handle a mouse

    I think we go through periods of wrecklessness in various arenas,
    sexuality, violence, overindulgence.... then, we suffer the
    consequences or see the suffering we cause,.... and finally we repent
    and reform...that is, IF we repent

    remember "Clockwork orange"?

    I have heard that cruelity to animals in childhood is a sign of trouble in
    adulthood. I'm assuming they mean intentionally cruelity that goes beyond
    normal childhood curiosity

    Gandhi said, "You may judge a culture by how they treat their
    animals"

    My one college school mate became a physician... and recently told
    me that he has never ever seen the truly sadistic and inhuman
    pathological criminal reform in any way..... but he has seen others,
    who hit rock bottom with alcoholism, or some other fault, reform and
    become model people

    what is interesting in Orange is that, the society programmed him to
    be violent in another way or gave him license

    hmm.... i am suddenly thinking about how Jung, and Joseph Campbell
    speak of primitive societies in which VIOLENCE becomes ritualized....

    I wonder if ritual is a human way to sublimate, control instinctual
    violence

    do you think that violence is need in society as an outlet?

    Today sports being our violent outlet?

    Well... look at all the violence in our entertainment.... and... also in our
    religions.... (the crucifixion for one obvious example), and i suppose
    the throwing of stones at satan during the Hajj in Mecca
    or, the cult of animal sacrifice in so many religions

    sometimes, we must FEEL something, experience something, suffer
    something,... in order to be convinced, to believe.... look at the
    Australian Aboriginal ritual of Walk-about

    or an initiation for the adolescent...like circumcision

    I read an article about humans basic two psychological needs
    love and agression

    isn't everything else just shades of those 2 anyways?

    perhaps, two sides of the same coin sex and violence

    I am thinking of the words in the old testament "I am a JEALOUS God"

    jealosy is a combination of love and hate

    The Old Testament is full of violence

    so, if the boys on the island would have been hugged do you think it
    would have been more civilized?

    but actually, remember when Ralph dreamt about his home?
    and his mother and father and comfort
    not necessarily before the island, but while on the island

    I do not understand - Ralph dreamt about home when he was on the
    island ... he must have missed it heavily

    maybe that is why Golding did not involve girls
    girls would be holding hands and hugging each other maybe

    probably, of course girls can be cruel too

    or.... sexuality might enter into it.... and most schools then were all
    boys or all girls

    so he didn't have material about girls?

    well, err... there is also some possible question about Goldings
    "orientation"

    it probably would have opened up a whole other can of worms

    a brand new look at the book

    it probably would have been very difficult to write from the point of
    view of a 12 year old girl

    it is very hard to write from the point of view of the opposite sex

    well, also, in the times that he wrote,.... it would not be politically
    correct to write about children and sexuality....

    I still would like to believe that he just took boys of that age as 'mini
    human beings' to explore his theories

    the book seems devoid of any kind of sexuality,... or does my memory
    fail me?

    Before they learnt the social codes and before the order and law
    instilled in them

    See, I contend they new the social codes perhaps not fully instilled
    but they had a grasp

    Murder is taboo, and homosexuality is taboo.... Golding
    explores the concept of murder,.... but not of homosexuality

    Roger killing the pig by stabbing its...rectum is a sexual symbol

    Golding would have to know that it would be difficult to get published
    if there was an overt sexuality....

    well, yes.... the idea of skewering an animal in that fashion,...
    so he had to write about pig sexcuality

    precisely, Golding had to be politically correct

    Yes, and for boys of 5-12 sexuality is not a great concern maybe?

    Most people lie a lot about their own childhood, and their sexual life
    as adults

    I mean, they lie by not admitting all the nasty stuff they really did... i
    dont mean they lie by bragging about exploits

    Who would like to admit having murderous thoughts about their boss
    etc?

    Perhaps it is through fiction that we vicariously live out the violence
    and sexuality of our fantasy world

    Well, sex would have made the situation more complicated
    and he had a message to give so he concentrated on that

    He touched the topic of sex in his other novels
    maybe he didn't write about it because it was suppossed to be taboo
    and not discussed which could have lead to alienation from the group
    also

    You know, I will tell you something interesting, about artistic
    distortion, to create the illusion of reality the Parthenon is built with a
    CURVE, and not straight, because IF it were geometrically straight,
    then it would appear curved to our spherical retina
    we curve something to achieve the artistic illusion of perfection.....
    in literature, we distort something, in an attempt to bring out what we
    are after

    if you had said to another boy that you loved him, you'd have been
    excommunicated at the moment

    Think of Thomas Mann "Death in Venice", they say he married from a
    sense of duty, but sometimes wept hysterically because he was living
    a lie

    you think if he were to write that book today, there would be
    sexual elements in it?

    Quite possibly, given todays greater freedom. A writer is a child of his time
    you cannot rip one out of it

    If he had grown up on some other time, he'd have been a different
    person

    If he had grown up on some other time he might not have written it

    Jack hesitates the first time he has a chance to kill a pig, but vows the
    next time he shall not hesitate.... killing is a learned behavior...

    Sexuality is also a learning process... we are shy at first.... hesitant...
    uncertain

    Perhaps killing in this book is some metaphor, euphemism for
    sexuality...

    The message of the book is deeper and more universal than
    seuxuality

    No matter how civilized people think they are, they're still animals if
    taken out of civilization?

    Civilization is only skin deep. Scratch it, you will get the raw selves again

    I'm not buying only because they were children on the island and not
    adults

    It is easier for children to give up their semi learned/half baked
    civilization?

    Remember that plane crash ? the survivors ate the dead bodies of
    fellow travellers?

    right but they didn't kill each other for food

    I am always impressed by how infants can give love to anyone,
    regardless of color, gender, physical beauty
    but an older child is more zenophobic and biggoted

    When cornered, we dont hesitate to regress to our savage self

    Maybe as kids they were able to devolve to animals?

    But infants are very selfish as well. They dont want to wait for food
    They dont care if mommy didnt sleep all night

    Well, a cat or dog does not empathize with us... but the still give a
    form of unconditional love

    Would they still if we didnt feed them?


    This raises in my mind the issue or question of whether or not it
    conceivable for there to be a totally self-less love/sacrifice which is
    not quid-pro-quo, something in exchange for something....

    I doubt if there is ANY selfless deed

    I am certain there are mothers, whose children are incapable of doing
    anything in return (for example, retarded chldren)... yet the mothers
    love and sacrifice for them

    But then the mother gains joy from seeing the child happy. you get self satisfaction



    Spark Notes says the conch shell represents law and order....
    (interestingly in India, in scriptures, virtuous heros are always
    trumpeting on conch shell)....
    Last edited by Scheherazade; 03-01-2005 at 06:55 AM.
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  6. #51
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903

    TLOF Live Chat Summary - 3

    I have a footnote in a philosophy book, "Every man is Napoleon to his
    dog. Hence the popularity of dogs"

    Plato imagines a selfless act, in the Republic, when the one who frees
    himself from the bonds of the cave and the shadows of illusion,
    returns to the cave to free the others...

    Perhaps compassion is a cultural thing, something learned, like a
    tradition...

    Although it changes from one person to the next, it is a cultural thing
    as well

    Example? is one culture more compassionate then another?

    Think of the Buddhist vow of the Bodhisattva, very similar to Plato's
    cave analogy,... a vow never to enter the liberation of Nirvana, but to
    intentionally retain some faults, to be reborn again and again into the
    world, until all suffering beings are liberated

    Well, look at Gandhi's whole thing, about sacrificing himself for the
    sake of others, and his love for the Beatititudes (sermon on Mount),
    yet he personally rejected Christianity as a religion for himself

    But to deny yourself nirvana for the sake of all the other beings
    seems a little steep.

    For Goldings scenario to reach the ultimate extreme of savagery,
    there must be ZERO compassion and concern for others, and TOTAL
    ABSOLUTE concern for the self

    During World War II, with the blitz bombings of Britain, Britain made
    plans for local underground resistance in even of invasion. Each town
    police constable was asked to provide names of candidates... each
    candidate was given a sealed envelope of instructions, to be opened
    only in event of invasion.... after the war, some people opened their
    envelope, and the first instruction was to KILL THE the constable...
    since he knew the identity of the resistance squad... so they asked
    one old man if he would have killed the constable... and he said WHY
    YES of course,.... my patriotic duty... well, we do not think of British as
    eager to do such a thing

    so we all kind of agree it is a cultural thing

    in Goldings book, we are looking at a theoretical spectrum... at one
    end, beelzebulb, satan, absolute savage depravity.... and the other
    end, culture, morality, empathy for others, altruism
    might not charity be a society forced thing? I mean... could it be that
    people could feel the need to donate from other reasons than
    compassion?

    I wonder what they were think the instant they knew they were
    rescued?

    they realised the situation they were in and became 'boys' again crying etc... relief

    can they really be boys again or are they changed in some way?
    Ralph realises that he is changed forever NOW that he has lost his
    innocence which will never to come back

    In so many words it says he is crying for his lost innocence

    In a bizarre way its a "coming of age" book

    lost innocence, lost youth, lost virginity, lost purity

    gain of maturity demands sacrifice of loss of innocence...

    we dont have to take a walk on the darkside to be mature?

    one may write about anything, but if it is not from experience it will
    probably be lousy

    where does the imagination come into play?

    Golding taught in boys schools, and lived through WWII

    Orwell didnt live in a Big Brother age

    Imagination comes into play, but in the context of what we know....
    I'm thinking all you need is to have felt the emotions your writing
    about, everything else can be faked.

    Well, perhaps he studied the development of communism... and
    totalitarian regimes...

    Hemingway went to Spain, in civil war, and wrote for whom bell tolls

    Orwell didnt live in a communist society and surely nothing like
    1984

    Fitzgerald lived the life he wrote about...

    What about Star Wars? Jules Verne

    Well,.... then perhaps.... those who write all write from a life
    experience, if only in the sense that they have lived a life which drives

    them to such a unique form of introspection

    perhaps empathy is needed in good writing, the quality to feel
    someone elses' situation

    Faulkner said, "I write about the South because it is all I know, and
    there is not time and energy to live this life, AND write, AND learn
    something other than the South

    Faulkner had to "punch" up his experiences though, well probably

    Christie is not a murderer nor King is a psycho

    Jane Austin didnt write about jungles, she wrote about sitting rooms,
    and what she knew

    Mark Twain (Samuel Clemens) was actually on a Mississippi riverboat

    Verne was not under the sea nor on the moon

    Henri Remarquez actually fought in World War I

    Herman Wouk wasn't a navey admiral during WWII

    then again, how great is Wouk, in the scheme of things...not that he is shabby, i wouldnt mind being Wouk

    and there are those who write historical novels....

    fantasy/scifi

    Ayn Rand wasn't a male archtect

    I think that Sinclair Lewis truly picked topics that he had experienced
    something about

    A young teenaged forum member sent me his novel, and I was quite
    impressed,... and he said... oh,... its not that good, its immature.... but
    I said, you are a teenager writing about what you know first hand.


    I just think that you don't need the experience to write about it.

    Perhaps it helps to make it more realistic

    It is one thing to say that it is wise to write about the culture and the
    religion and the age bracket and the society we have experienced...
    and it is quite another to assert that a male may not write about
    childbirth, or a woman who has never had a child...

    I think if one wants to write, it just makes good sense to stick to what
    you know.... your country your times your culture....

    Golding wasn't a 12 year old boy stuck on an island

    Obviously, scifi and fantasy writers are not experiencing dragons and
    martians...

    But... I am willing to bet that someone like Ursula Leguin is great
    because she explores WHAT SHE PERSONALLY knows within the
    vehicle of fantasy and sci fi

    thats what I'm saying- you don't need to personally experience
    something but have the abiltiy to empathize with that situation...

    I am not saying that one cannot write about what one has never
    experienced, what is totally alien... i am just saying that it has less
    chance of being significant

    Take a look at successful writers, whose first book comes from the
    heart... and then the make the mistake of trying for a second or third
    book, when it just isnt there...

    There are some excellent works based on experience but also some
    truly based on imagination

    Persig's Lila is probably a good example of a sequel which is a
    mistake,.... "Zen and the Art of motorcycle maintenance" was great,
    but he just didnt have a second book like that in him

    Maybe those who soley rely on experience are not able to produce
    second/thrid works

    Whereas those who use their imagination can?

    Probably Harper Lee was wise not to write another book

    Out society has an unfortunate tendency to say "what have you done
    lately" and give people a feeling of inadequacy if they do not
    constantly produce...

    They are considering Dylan Thomas for a Nobel on some of his
    amazing song lyrics from the 60's.... and they interviewed him and
    asked him if he could write the same great stuff today...
    and he said NO, flat out.... he couldnt do again what he did then
    the times are different, social relevance is different, and, Dylan is
    different...

    I could not write the same poetry now that I did as a teenager....
    as a teenager, I could not write the things I write now on religion and
    philosophy

    To really write about something well, one needs to be around the
    experience, ones own or others... but the converse, to have some
    incredible experience, does not mean that one will write about it,
    unless one has the gift and inclinatiion

    Experience is a good starting point but I personally think it is not the essential ingredient

    Imagination in my opinion precedes experience

    And imagination creates things which cannot even possibly exist... like
    the amazing poetry of Wallace Stevens...

    Wallace Stevens was not a Rimbaud and not a Baudelaire, and he had
    the wisdom to stick with his own voice....

    Imagination takes you a lot more place then experience, on some
    levels you still need experience

    For me Rimbaud was really into what he was and did, his life..... and
    Wallace Stevens stuck with what he knew.... even though it was all
    pure fantasy...

    I am trying to bend and change myself, because I have this obsession
    with heavy laden symbolism, like pynchon, and kundera,... and i am
    making a real effort to get out of my rut,.... read other things... look at
    what other people say, other tastes... I may even read Little Women

    I want to understand literature and readers in its totality, and not just
    from my own prejudices

    I have a hard time getting into symbolism and the like

    I have read Christie, cheap paperback.. even Barbara Cartland

    If everyone is reading certain things.... and some author enjoys great
    popularity, then it is good to study it and understand why
    he/she is so wildly popluar

    I did watch the movie Shawshank Redemption, which is simply
    awesome... to come up with a story like that, forget symbolism....or
    the Green Mile

    Perhaps such an author is torn between books that pay the bills, and
    the books they REALLY want to write it is conceivable
    imagine a story about an author who is torn between those two
    motivations

    I am glad that the forum is here to push me to do something that is

    I need something to force me towards variety...
    I need something to shake up my values, make me question


    I would like to thank Sitaram for providing the summary. My computer failed to save it for some reason.
    Last edited by Scheherazade; 03-01-2005 at 07:35 AM.
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  7. #52
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903
    What is your final verdict on TLOF? Please join our poll! (scroll up! )
    Last edited by Scheherazade; 03-02-2005 at 08:07 AM.
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  8. #53
    LOTF is one of those books that is now required reading (at least it was in the 1960s) as a book that will make young people better people. Books which improve or books which are very historic are required reading. My 88 year old father was required to read Red Badge of Courage (Stephen Crane) in the 1930s. I had to read it in the 1960s. My stepson had to read it in the 1990s. It is historic (Civil War) and it teaches us that war is evil. Nowadays, "Man's Search for Meaning" (Viktor Frankl) is required, as it teaches the evils of the Holocaust, and also teaches how to find inner strength in the face of difficulties and meaning in suffering. "The Jungle" (Upton Sinclair) taught the evils of and industrial society which exploits poor immigrant workers.

    LOTF definitely earns a place in the posterity of required reading. It make us ask ourselves "What would I really do if I were totally free and there were no law (the natural man)?"

  9. #54
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,564
    I had to read Golding's Lord of the Flies in high school, roughly around the same time as J.D. Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye, then we compared the two, which had relatively similar qualities. Reading it the second time seemed even more satisfying, I thought, and I would never regret it.

  10. #55
    melting
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    romania
    Posts
    40
    first of all, hello everybody... the way i came across this forum was googling for lord of the flies that i read about a week ago and that still haunts me (and being haunted by a book hasn't happened to me for quite a long time).
    i won't write whole pages about what genius interpretation i may give to the many simbols i came across. i love the fact that the strong, dark statement about the real nature of human beings, in essence dominated by basic instincts that are only kept under control by the influence of society, is conveyed with the help of what seems to be, at first sight, just another kids adventure book (my mother actually made fun of me when she heard i was reading about some boys playing on a desert island). and another thing: it's damn well written. every single phrase has a purpose, every gesture has a meaning, while descriptive passages combine "fine writing" with deeply striking images (like in the scene when simon's dead body is dragged away at sea).
    i'm just a little sorry that i saw the movie about 5 years ago before reading the book, but it almost didn't spoil the pleasure of reading it. great piece of writing that i strongly recommend.

  11. #56
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903
    Yay! I have finally found a copy of TLOF video;will be watching it tomorrow hopefully. It is a 1990 version. Hope a good one. Anyone seen it?
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  12. #57
    Pièce de Résistance Scheherazade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Tweet @ScherLitNet
    Posts
    23,903
    I have finally watched the movie:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100054/
    What a disappointment it was! The characters hardly seem right, there are unexplained changes to the text and the message is hardly clear. American children from a military school are stranded on an island with a sick and delirious Captain (adult). It takes place in present time. The children swear and use slang far too much (full of f- and sh- and whatnot).
    No KitKats for this movie at all!
    ~
    "It is not that I am mad; it is only that my head is different from yours.”
    ~


  13. #58
    melting
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    romania
    Posts
    40
    heh... didn't even know this version existed anyway, what i saw is a 1963(?) film by mel brooks. i couldn't write a proper review right now, since this happened about 5 years ago (and, by the way, i was in 6th grade), but i remember bering quite impressed at the time.

  14. #59
    Good morning, Campers! Jay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Czech Republic
    Posts
    7,251
    Mel Brooks? hehe, Scher might not like that version either, hehe. Though Mel's movies are fun
    I have a plan: attack!

  15. #60
    Well, in regards to the sexuality in the book... the only real sexual expression is sort of hidden. It lies in the murder of the sow. Reread that part... I believe it's in chapter 8. In essence, the boys rape her without actually raping her.


    And Simon is epileptic, but he isn't truly hallucinating when he has the conversation with the Lord of the Flies. What he does is projection... he gives the part of himself that is discouraging and doubtful to the pig's head and embodies the confident, strong part of himself. This part in the book is the real battle between good and evil, and the good prevails, as when Simon awakes from his ensuing seizure, he no longer hears the voice of the Lord of the Flies, implying that the good did win.
    Last edited by GangstaConnie; 05-18-2005 at 04:12 PM.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Lord of the Flies: Favorites
    By Scheherazade in forum Forum Book Club
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 05-07-2011, 08:44 AM
  2. animal farm compared to Lord of the flies
    By ☆Sonnet VCLV★ in forum Animal Farm
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-23-2006, 01:18 PM
  3. lord of the flies by william golding
    By Admin in forum Book & Author Requests
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-10-2006, 04:11 PM
  4. Albert Goldbarth: "Library" part 1
    By amuse in forum Poems, Poets, and Poetry
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2004, 07:28 PM
  5. Albert Goldbarth: "Library" part 2
    By amuse in forum Poems, Poets, and Poetry
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-05-2004, 07:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •