Am I the only person who thinks that Lord of the Flies is very badly written?

[Scythe]

I think that Lord of the Flies is an epic story that deserves to be told and retold, but I think that William Golding can't write to save his life. The book is confusing about what is going on, and leaves me wondering what just happened. His descriptions frequently leave me wondering what he is talking about.

You can make whatever argument you want about the art of writing, and how it's supposed to be that way, but if at the end of the day I'm having to get someone to explain whats going on to me, than the author didn't do his job very well.

Am I the only one who thinks this, because I believe that most people out there just go along when everyone else says how great it is when they're really thinking the same thing I am.

[Veva]

:sick:No you are definitely not the only one who thinks so... I believe there are many of us... honestly I believe that he tries to make it mysterious but fails myserably. It is not refined, it is jaded... not mysterious, but impenetrable in the worst meaning of the word...

[PeterL]

Most people think that Lord of the Flies was poorly written. I doubt that the author was clear , in his own mind, as to what he wanted to write.

[WICKES]

I have never read it, but I'm sure I once heard that Golding was severely dyslexic! So maybe that explains it...

[JBI]

I'm surprised people even talk about it - I'm ready for the book to die out, I don't know about anyone else.

[Niamh]

As long as schools continue to teach it, it will remain in the spotlight. Its a good story though.

[Bitterfly]

It's an enjoyable book - for children! Who needs it to be well written?

[JBI]

They teach it in high schools here.

[Niamh]

They teach it to Ordinary level and foundation level junior cert students in Ireland.

[PoeticPassions]

It's definitely a good story... has some common and important symbolism (his allegorical allusions to the degradation of humanity/civilization, a denunciation of war, the idea of democracy versus dictatorship, alienation, conformity, etc. but I really do not get it why he received the Nobel Prize... it still baffles me. There are Lit Netters that write better than Golding... perhaps we should all get a Nobel Prize as well!? :D

[Chava]

Maybe we will? :)

[1n50mn14]

Good story, poor writing, agreed with you.
There were times that I had to re-read a passage five or six times before it was made clear to me the intent of the author. Writing in a complex style is all well and good, but Golding is just... confusing and backward.

[ntropyincarnate]

It's been so long, I don't really remember. I didn't notice it being poorly written at the time, but maybe that's because it had me so busy turning pages. But as far as being confusing and impenetrable, it didn't seem that way to me at all.

As a side note, when reading for school, never read a book that you're supposed to read over three weeks in one day. It makes for great confusion when the teacher hands out questions later and you have to re-read the whole thing. :D

[semi-fly]

Well if you take into consideration the age you're introduced to Lord of the Flies most wouldn't think of it as a badly written book. Only after you've been exposed to different forms of literature or explore different writers as you age would one think of it as bad.

As a child when you were first introduced to the book did you think it was bad or did you enjoy it for its simple escapism effect?

That being said with the current discussion going on about Faulkner and his style of writing would you say that his writing (pick any book) is considered poorly written or would you something else?

[Tallgren]

Seems to me that if the novel is only to be read by teenagers or even children, much of the message/themes/symbolism would probably be missed.

I read it this autumn when a classmate had done a C level thesis on it and I honestly had some problems, like others say I simply couldn't follow what was going on. There are many interesting things in there, but much of it is buried beneath the inaccessible writing.

[windowfriend]

Nope. :)

I think he tried to make it very theme-driven and focused on communicating an "issue" rather than writing top-notch art.

[Mag Master 21]

I couldn't even finish it.

[oopsycandy]

I've read it a few times and never had a problem :)

I shall be reading The Inheritors soon as well, do you think that all of his stuff is badly written or is it specifically Lord of the flies?

[NikolaiI]

Hm. Interestingly, in the book Hearts in Atlantis, the character Ted Brautigan gives this book to Bobby. He had explained that some books are good stories but bad writing, while some are good writing but bad stories. He gave Lord of the Flies as an example of both good writing and a good story.

[WICKES]

. but I really do not get it why he received the Nobel Prize... it still baffles me. There are Lit Netters that write better than Golding... perhaps we should all get a Nobel Prize as well!? :D

No one takes the nobel prize seriously- it is dictated by political correctness. Doris Lessing only won it because she was an opponent of colonialism and European racism in Africa. Even here in Britain no-one took her winning it seriously. Nelson Mandela could write a ****ty western and he'd probably be awarded the nobel lit. prize

[Emil Miller]

No one takes the nobel prize seriously- it is dictated by political correctness. Doris Lessing only won it because she was an opponent of colonialism and European racism in Africa. Even here in Britain no-one took her winning it seriously. Nelson Mandela could write a ****ty western and he'd probably be awarded the nobel lit. prize

But unfortunately, there were probably many people who did take it seriously; especially among Guardian readers and programmers at the BBC - or is that a tautology ? As for Nelson Mandela, you may be putting ideas into the Swedish Academy's heads: expect to see the said s****ty western up for consideration at the next Nobel prize competition.

[wessexgirl]

I think that's a little unfair on Lessing WICKES and Brian. I admit I have not read her, but she is critically well received, and the fact that she writes against colonialism and racism is surely a sign of our more enlightened times. Just because her subject matter is such, doesn't detract from her as a writer. After all, Kipling won it many years ago, a great writer, but a proponent of Empire, which is now unfavourable, but when he was writing was not. As for "less talented" writers winning it, well Hemingway got it too! Awards are never going to satisfy everyone. I think your pops at the BBC and "political correctness" say more about you than the judges of the prize, who, with respect, must have had a reason, other than "political correctness" in choosing their winners.

[Emil Miller]

I think that's a little unfair on Lessing WICKES and Brian. I admit I have not read her, but she is critically well received, and the fact that she writes against colonialism and racism is surely a sign of our more enlightened times. Just because her subject matter is such, doesn't detract from her as a writer. After all, Kipling won it many years ago, a great writer, but a proponent of Empire, which is now unfavourable, but when he was writing was not. As for "less talented" writers winning it, well Hemingway got it too! Awards are never going to satisfy everyone. I think your pops at the BBC and "political correctness" say more about you than the judges of the prize, who, with respect, must have had a reason, other than "political correctness" in choosing their winners.

The fact that she is critcally well received will probably say more about the critics than Lessing. As an outspoken adversary of colonialism, she is firmly in line with the Swedish Academy's liberal viewpoint and, therefore, Wickes's mention of political correctness cannot be ruled out. I am currently reading Evelyn Waugh's Black Mischief, perhaps the funniest book ever to be written about an "independent" African state. And although I haven't read Lessing, I would bet that it is a lot closer to the truth than anything that she has written. There is an old proverb that sums up post colonial Africa but I can't remember what it is; I believe it has something to do with a silk purse and a pig's ear.

[wessexgirl]

The fact that she is critcally well received will probably say more about the critics than Lessing. As an outspoken adversary of colonialism, she is firmly in line with the Swedish Academy's liberal viewpoint and, therefore, Wickes's mention of political correctness cannot be ruled out. I am currently reading Evelyn Waugh's Black Mischief, perhaps the funniest book ever to be written about an "independent" African state. And although I haven't read Lessing, I would bet that it is a lot closer to the truth than anything that she has written. There is an old proverb that sums up post colonial Africa but I can't remember what it is; I believe it has something to do with a silk purse and a pig's ear.

I do get exasperated with continual jibes at so-called "political correctness". To me it just means treating people with respect, as equals, and not trying to belittle them. That's it. What's wrong with that? All I seem to hear, often whipped up by the likes of The Daily (Hate) Mail, is a constant wailing of "it's political correctness gone mad....." when referring to absolutely anything where the knife can be well and truly twisted to have a go at the government/politicians/teachers/immigrants/refugees/foreigners/academics/intellectuals etc. etc. and anyone slightly left of Attila the Hun.

Brian, your last sentence speaks volumes about you too. Are you suggesting that nothing about post-colonial Africa can ever be any good? The analogy you quote is rather offensive, to say the least. The suggestion is that Africa needs to be ruled by an Empire, it can't function on its own. While I admit that there are problems in many areas, do you not think that is a consequence of being "ruled" (exploited) for years? Does that mean for anything worthwhile to spring from there, we have to turn the clock back and re-colonise?

There are many writers from the continent who are critically acclaimed, along with Lessing: Chinua Achebe, Nadine Gordiner, J.M.Coetzee, to name just a few prize-winners. Are you suggesting that their work is sub-standard too?

Lessing lived there for years. She knows the reality of the situation. Much as I enjoy Waugh, I don't think you can honestly say that a satire he wrote years ago, can be the truth of the situation today. You admit you have not read her either. So the judges are considered "liberals". So what? Does that mean that we disregard them completely? I suspect the judges who awarded the prize to Kipling would have been considered perfectly correct in their judgement of his worthiness to get the prize by you, without the charges of "bigots" and "racists" being hurled at them, undermining his achievement.

[Emil Miller]

keep epoundin
I do get exasperated with continual jibes at so-called "political correctness". To me it just means treating people with respect, as equals, and not trying to belittle them. That's it. What's wrong with that? All I seem to hear, often whipped up by the likes of The Daily (Hate) Mail, is a constant wailing of "it's political correctness gone mad....." when referring to absolutely anything where the knife can be well and truly twisted to have a go at the government/politicians/teachers/immigrants/refugees/foreigners/academics/intellectuals etc. etc. and anyone slightly left of Attila the Hun.

Brian, your last sentence speaks volumes about you too. Are you suggesting that nothing about post-colonial Africa can ever be any good? The analogy you quote is rather offensive, to say the least. The suggestion is that Africa needs to be ruled by an Empire, it can't function on its own. While I admit that there are problems in many areas, do you not think that is a consequence of being "ruled" (exploited) for years? Does that mean for anything worthwhile to spring from there, we have to turn the clock back and re-colonise?

There are many writers from the continent who are critically acclaimed, along with Lessing: Chinua Achebe, Nadine Gordiner, J.M.Coetzee, to name just a few prize-winners. Are you suggesting that their work is sub-standard too?

Lessing lived there for years. She knows the reality of the situation. Much as I enjoy Waugh, I don't think you can honestly say that a satire he wrote years ago, can be the truth of the situation today. You admit you have not read her either. So the judges are considered "liberals". So what? Does that mean that we disregard them completely? I suspect the judges who awarded the prize to Kipling would have been considered perfectly correct in their judgement of his worthiness to get the prize by you, without the charges of "bigots" and "racists" being hurled at them, undermining his achievement.

Well Wessex, if you get exasperated at continual jibes at political correctness, perhaps its exponents should not keep expounding it. I think it's the epitome of arrogance to think that the 'I know what's best for the world' should be accepted without question. All the evidence of post-colonial Africa shows that millions of people have died in tribal conflict and its associated evils of disease and starvation since the colonial powers left them to their own devices in the name of a spurious equality.
As much as I dislike the American vernacular, I would suggest that you " Get real."

[wessexgirl]

Well Wessex, if you get exasperated at continual jibes at political correctness, perhaps its exponents should not keep expounding it. I think it's the epitome of arrogance to think that the 'I know what's best for the world' should be accepted without question. All the evidence of post-colonial Africa shows that millions of people have died in tribal conflict and its associated evils of disease and starvation since the colonial powers left them to their own devices in the name of a spurious equality.
As much as I dislike the American vernacular, I would suggest that you " Get real."

That's just my point Brian, it's the anti pc brigade which keeps on whipping up ridiculous stories, not those of us who just see it as basically a respect and tolerance for others. I don't go around "expounding it", as you say, but just live my daily life in a way which I hope does not disrespect and abuse others, and I would wish the same of them.

As for the comment about the epitome of arrogance, surely that comes from exponents of colonialism, who thought it was right to go charging around the world gobbling up territories and exploiting other people. I think they can safely be said to be the ones who put out a spurrious, "I know what's best for the world" agenda whilst selfishly taking away others rights to live how they wished.

As for your suggestion that I "get real", I am perfectly compos mentis with the world, thank you, although in Daily Mail speak I would undoubtedly be considered a looney, bleeding-heart, liberal, pinko, for believing in equality, which, in their terms would mean I am off in cloud cuckoo land. Are you suggesting that Africa should be re-colonised because they can't look after themselves? Your sub-text suggests you believe that since the Empire was dismantled, just look at the mess they've made without us to "look after them". Who's arrogant now?

[Emil Miller]

That's just my point Brian, it's the anti pc brigade which keeps on whipping up ridiculous stories, not those of us who just see it as basically a respect and tolerance for others. I don't go around "expounding it", as you say, but just live my daily life in a way which I hope does not disrespect and abuse others, and I would wish the same of them.

As for the comment about the epitome of arrogance, surely that comes from exponents of colonialism, who thought it was right to go charging around the world gobbling up territories and exploiting other people. I think they can safely be said to be the ones who put out a spurrious, "I know what's best for the world" agenda whilst selfishly taking away others rights to live how they wished.

As for your suggestion that I "get real", I am perfectly compos mentis with the world, thank you, although in Daily Mail speak I would undoubtedly be considered a looney, bleeding-heart, liberal, pinko, for believing in equality, which, in their terms would mean I am off in cloud cuckoo land. Are you suggesting that Africa should be re-colonised because they can't look after themselves? Your sub-text suggests you believe that since the Empire was dismantled, just look at the mess they've made without us to "look after them". Who's arrogant now?

I began to think that we had moved too far from the thread topic until I realised that my posts contain the very essence of Lord of the Flies.
i.e. Once the trappings of civilisation are removed, man reverts to his primitive state. All the evidence of present day sub-saharan Africa points in that direction. They were definitely better off under colonial rule.

[WICKES]

I began to think that we had moved too far from the thread topic until I realised that my posts contain the very essence of Lord of the Flies.
i.e. Once the trappings of civilisation are removed, man reverts to his primitive state. All the evidence of present day sub-saharan Africa points in that direction. They were definitely better off under colonial rule.

It is a simple historical fact that Africa was at a lower level of civilisation than Asia when it was colonised and that is one of the reasons it has done so poorly since the end of Imperial rule, while India has maintained the democratic system put in place by the British and gone from strength to strength. This is not acceptable to many self hating liberals though and so they still blame colonialism (SIXTY YEARS after it ended). Btw I don't believe in colonialism but I'm sick of being made to feel guilty about something that ended long before I was even born.

As for political correctness, I agree with discouraging people calling homosexuals 'faggots' or black people 'niggers', what I hate about it is the way it is used to stifle any debate on multiculturalism and immigration.

[Eugenie]

I really hated that story, I know it is important in terms of what it is teaching, very important. But the whole thing was so dismally written, poorly crafted. I don't know. It makes me tired even thinking of it.

[Eiseabhal]

It is a very poetic text. It is very clever in that it tries to get into the mind of someone, Ralph, who is not articulate but although it is on the surface about children it is not written for children. Schools probably read it with minds that are too young for it.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I think it's beautifully written, plus it's a great story. I give it a 10/10. I've never really understood why it's considered children's literature. Because it's about children? It's dark, violent, and all aroun depressing--a great portrayal of human nature. Don't really get all the hate (except for JBI--if it isn't esoteric ancient Chinese poetry, he will likely hate it). I love this passage, one of the most famous in the book:


Simon looked up, feeling the weight of his wet hair, and gazed up at the sky. Up there, for once, were clouds, great bulging towers that sprouted away over the island, grey and cream and copper-coloured. The clouds were sitting on the land; they squeezed, produced moment by moment, this close, tormenting heat. Even the butterflies deserted the open space where the obscene thing grinned and dripped. Simon lowered his head, carefully keeping his eyes shut, then sheltered them with his hand. There were no shadows under the trees but everywhere a pearly stillness, so that what was real seemed illusive and without definition. The pile of guts was a black blob of flies that buzzed like a saw. After a while these flies found Simon. Gorged, they alighted the runnels of sweat and drank. They tickled under his nostrils and played leap-frog on his thighs. They were black and iridescent green and without number; and in front of Simon, the Lord of the Flies hung on his stick and grinned. At last Simon gave up and looked back, saw the white teeth and dim eyes, the blood - and his gaze was held by that ancient, inescapable recognition.

[PeterL]

No, I also believe that it was "very badly written." I thought that when i had to read it in high school, and my opinion has not changed. I have been told that it was the theme that was important, but the theme is too oversimplified to be effective.

[Eiseabhal]

I like the irony at the end. We are an instinctively violent species even when in neat officer's uniform. I like the description of the silent aerial battle and the sign from the adult world - the dead pilot. It is a beautifully written book. The descriptions of the sea rising and falling are very good. They help to convey a feeling of isolation and menace. The environment has a cold hostility to match the sense of civilised codes breaking down despite the efforts to maintain them. Golding had been at sea and you can tell.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

No, I also believe that it was "very badly written." I thought that when i had to read it in high school, and my opinion has not changed. I have been told that it was the theme that was important, but the theme is too oversimplified to be effective.

Maybe you could actually explain why, Peter. Oh, wait, Peter had me on his ignore list. Could someone ask him to explain himself?

Someone earlier said its inaccessible (this member is long gone, it looks like). Others said its too complex or "backwards." What? It doesn't get much more straightforward. If someone gets confused by the prose in TLotF, you may have a reading comprehension problem.

[Jackson Richardson]

I heard about the book at school as a shocking suggestion that schoolboys at independent schools could be a bit nasty. Since I knew from personal experience there was no depth of cruelty that they were not capable of, I was not interested in reading what I knew all too well.

So I read it a few years back, just to lay the ghost of my schooldays. Personally I prefer an epigrammatic, balanced prose style, Gibbon, Waugh, Saki. I’m not a great love of lyrical writing for its own sake.

Golding isn’t epigrammatic and balanced. But it is a very distinctive prose style. I find it takes concentration. It works in its context. I can see what it’s doing. It adds to the effect of the whole imaginative world in a way a simplified paraphrase wouldn’t. I can’t see what is meant by it being “badly written”.

And no way is it a children’s book. It’s not Swallows and Amazons, for Pete’s sake.

[cacian]

I think it is very cleverly written and has an underneath layer of truth behind the story itself.
I think the story is choking but what underneath it even more. You need a second pair of eyes to read past the story and see through a different image through the language.
When I looked at it recently I discovered a different image to the book I was pleasantly unreassuringly surprised.
It made sense then. It ties in with a group of boys in the wild tearing each other apart.
The story is one thing what is underneath it is another.
That is how I feel about the book.

[Alexander III]

The prose is pretty dreadful. The rest is quite good and interesting.

[qimissung]

I haven't read it in years, so I can't comment on the quality of the writing. I did find it absorbing and horrifying when I read it as a young adult. I don't think it's classified as "children's literature," but it is often read in high school here in the United States, and possibly in middle school, also, I don't know. So maybe that's why people say it's children's literature.

[ennison]

Golding was a writer who tied style and meaning very closely together in all his books. LOF is very well crafted. Pincher Martin is one of the most extraordinary short texts I've ever read. Queasily fascinating and memorable . He was one of the most successful writers to write some of his novels as illustrations of ideas. Lots of writers who try that realise that they are producing dross and have to redraft and let the story "take over" or end up producing didactic trivia. Golding seemed able to meld the two together. I've heard Allan Massie decrying attempts to do that kind of thing (His own novels illustrate ideas very well) as putting the cart before the horse. I think most readers want a story, characters, entertainment. Writers of novels who fail at that don't get too many readers.

[Eiseabhal]

I would like those who think it is badly written to give an analysis of a piece. I suspect they can't. They just don't like it. That's ok. Taste isn't rational and none the worse for that. It is unfortunately used in schools and often read with children as young as fourteen or fifteen but it is not a suitable book for immature minds who not grasping its stylistic cleverness concentrate on its dark violence and take a dislike to it. After all teenagers don't like to be told, no matter in what way, that they are a bunch of savages. Only it is not just about boy savages. They are on the island because their countries are run by sophisticated adult savages.

[Ser Nevarc]

I remember enjoying the novel. I don't remember thinking it was poorly written.

Maybe because I read it when I was 16?