Written in the afterword:

The theme for LORD OF THE FLIES is described by Golding as follows (in the same publicity questionnaire): "The theme is an attempt to trace the defects of society back to the defects of human nature. The moral is that the shape of a society must depend on the ethical nature of the individual and not on any political system however apparently logical or respectable. The whole book is symbolic in nature except...." - and here I end the quote because it provides spoilers for the ending of the novel. (spoilers after review in spoiler tags if curious for the rest)

After I was 80% or so through with this, I started wondering about why it was such a commonly chosen book required for school reading. Did the teachers and administration mistakeningly assume it would somehow drive home the point that children need adults to remind them of right and wrong, right and fair, honest and true? I would hope that no adult would assume children would get that moral lesson from this text, when we know the truth ourselves, and it is this: that perhaps a group of adults in mixed company, who suddenly faced no law or consequence of action, would be much more terrifying on an island than a group of children.

Maybe they choose the book to show how important society and law can be to keep things in order and not let the wildness take over, although the author seems to disagree with this ideology. He says that despite a logical, respectable system, it can depend on the nature of the individual.

I suppose this book would have been downright boring had the group been comprised of likeminded pacifist individuals who wanted to do coconut shell tea parties over a fire while staying content munching on the island berries.

Instead of that pretty picture, we get a mix of boys who are savages at heart, intent on killing pigs on the island for meat....but really just because they want to kill something. At the heart of it is how one bad seed leads others to corrupt growth, tainting the entire group and turning everyone against each other.

The one lone person with sense was the most bullied, nicknamed "piggy" for his weight issue, scoffed at when his asthma acted up, and was so poorly respected they even took his glasses to make fires. It's possible the author in that day was already speaking against bullying, but it's more likely that it has always been a common issue and often the most rebelled against is the brightest of the bunch in the first place, just that groups are too dim-witted and prejudiced to listen.

It works as a dystopia - it's not in the future, but it's a twisted 'society gone wrong in unusual setting' scenario. The island certainly wasn't utopia - despite how pretty it seemed. And how small was this thing? They made it seem incredibly tiny.

As much as I enjoyed the book - and I did, it was riveting, well-written, with rounded characterization that rang true - I think it would have been interesting to add some more nature elements other than fire and poor pigs. Island snakes are creepy, they did say there were sharks in the water beyond the safe lake-thing area but never mentioned it again - as twisted as it sounds, I kind of wanted a wild bore to show at least one of the savages who was boss since they were so relentlessly after the pigs. Even if the author wrote it to focus on the nature of man overriding civilization's best intentions, it would have been even more tense to add some of that in the mix before their little group started falling apart. Even if no one was hurt, the suspense of it would have made the story more gripping than it already was.

I enjoyed how - instead of just having the sides of leadership struggling for dominance, followers unsure who to follow, and a breakdown of civilization - they also had a fear of an unknown element they called 'the beast.' It wouldn't have been realistic for them, especially as children, not to have a least one overriding fear to help shape them. I think most civilizations were originally shaped from fear as they formed themselves anyway.

Overall, whether schools want you to read it or not, it's a worthy classic. I'm curious on reading more from the author since I dug his writing style and appreciate his honest look at the subject.

Rest of quote from author on theme that reveals the ending n   The whole book is symbolic in nature except....the rescue in the end where adult life appears, dignified and capable, but in reality enmeshed in the same evil as the symbolic life of the children on the island. The officer, having interrupted a man-hunt, prepares to take the children off the island in a cruiser which will presently be hunting its enemy in the same implacable way. And who will rescue the adult and his cruiser?"n

And this was beyond creepy -

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

⭐️⭐️⭐️/5

«"Prendetelo! Ammazzatelo! Scannatelo!"»

Poche parole per descrivere quello in cui, una piccola società, fondata da bambini,  può trasformarsi.
Quando penso ad un'isola deserta, meravigliosa, abitata da bambini perduti...ecco, quello che mi viene in mente è la storia di Peter Pan. Ma su quest'isola regnano anarchia e caos, sangue e terrore.
Ma come , direte voi, se ci sono solo dei pargoli, come può essere?
E qui capiamo quanto poco di innocente abbiano dei graziosi ragazzini.
Possiamo capire come l'uomo, sopraffatto dalla paura, possa dare di matto, diventare picchiatello, tocco (per usare i termini attribuiti a Simone), aggressivo, violento,sanguinario.
Golding ci mostra come il male si celi negli adulti come nei bambini.
Ma....c'è un grande ma! Questo libro ha qualche punto che mi ha smorzato tutta la storia.
A parte il fatto che, dubito fortemente, dei ragazzini riescano a sopravvivere mezza giornata su di un'isola deserta, ma poi nessuno che piange disperato (teniamo conto che ci sono 6enni sull'isola), nessuno sta male perché ha mangiato qualcosa che non doveva (mio figlio di 14 anni non credo sappia nemmeno distinguere un mirtillo da una bacca velenosa), tutti che pensano a cacciare, mangiare, giocare.....
Se penso alla capacità di adattamento di mio figlio, beh ragazzi miei, la specie umana sarebbe fottuta! Ah, io stimo tantissimo mio figlio e credo sia più sveglio dei sui 14 anni, giusto per essere chiari.
Sicuramente l'anno di uscita di questo romanzo si portava dietro una generazione completamente diversa da quella attuale, una generazione anche abbastanza maschilista. Nemmeno una bambina nella storia, paura che non sarebbe sopravvissuta o paura ad ammettere che forse, con qualche rappresentante del genere femminile, le cose sarebbero andate diversamente?

I.
Lord of the Flies is a quintessential novel about the dark side of human nature, a parable showcasing the thin barrier between civilization and savagery. Golding deliberately used children to highlight that the allure of savagery is inherent in human nature regardless of age. This essay-review will explore several themes that emerge from Golding's masterpiece. Major spoilers follow, so if you wish to avoid them, consider returning after reading the novel.

II.
The boys on the island begin with the democratic ideals of their upbringing, but quickly descend into totalitarian chaos. Golding uses various symbols to illustrate this transformation.

The conch shell represents civilization, democracy, and order. They use it to assemble the group and organize their discussions. The conch's destruction coincides with Piggy's death, symbolizing the definitive end of order, morality, and rationality, and the triumph of savagery.

Piggy's glasses symbolize intellect and rationality. As they break, so does the boys' connection to reason, leaving only instinct and violence in their place.

Jack's war paint allows him to shed his identity and moral restraints. Behind the mask he is no longer Jack Merridew, a schoolboy shaped by civilization, but becomes an untamed savage. This suggests that civilization is a fragile construct that represses, rather than erases primal instincts. Ultimately, when survival is at stake, power shifts away from intellect and social order, leaving only primal instincts.

The beast embodies the fear of the unknown that spirals into hysteria. The boys' belief in the beast reflects how societies create enemies to justify violence. Their descent into paranoia mirrors the ideological manipulation seen in totalitarian regimes, an aspect of Ur-Fascism.

The pig's head on a stick, or the titular Lord of the Flies symbolizes the dark side of human nature. The name is a translation of Beelzebub, which is synonymous with Satan. The boys cannot escape the beast because it is within them.

The paradisical island itself resembles the Garden of Eden, yet the boys bring destruction with them. Instead of harmony, respect, and reciprocity, they act diabolically and create conflict, showing that humanity carries its own downfall wherever it goes.

Ironically, the boys were fleeing from a nuclear war, only to replicate its brutality on the island. They're rescued by naval officers, but what happened on the island is just a miniaturized version of what is already happening globally around the world.


III.
Leadership on the island quickly fractures into two opposing models: Ralph's democratic approach and Jack's totalitarian dictatorship.

Ralph is confident, assertive, and athletic, reflecting a childhood with a strong father figure. He is elected as leader, albeit in far from ideal conditions--the boys are disoriented and scared, and are swayed by charisma. He believes in order and democracy but struggles to enforce them. Ultimately, Ralph is a tragic hero because he refuses to abandon his principles even when it costs him everything. While he is power-hungry, he isn't inherently evil and he preserves his humanity and caring for the community. He could have joined Jack's tribe, but instead, he chooses exile, losing both power and a true friend--Piggy.

Jack Merridew is also assertive and authoritative, but is unsophisticated. He is a demagogue, driven by power rather than principle. Jack represents aggression, dominance, and the primal need for control. But, unlike Ralph, Jack is a provider. He brings meat and security which is more appealing than Ralph's fading authority, and the boys flock around him.

Piggy is intelligent but physically weak and socially awkward, making him an easy target. He is naive, anxious, and insecure, and doesn't even get to use his real name. Piggy's upbringing, with an overprotective mother and aunt and absent father, suggests how early experiences can shape an individual's social role. Piggy embodies reason and logic, yet his lack of charisma ensures that no one listens to him. Piggy's physical weakness and inability to assert himself contribute to his tragic death.

Simon represents innate human goodness and has a deep connection to nature, often seen as a Christ-like figure. He represents the person who causes cognitive dissonance by revealing uncomfortable truths to the public. His hallucination--the conversation with the pig's head--reveals the novel's core idea: the beast is not an external force but the evil within every human. Simon's murder symbolizes how societies silence those who challenge collective delusions.

Roger begins as a quiet boy but evolves into a sadist. He bullies the littluns, tortures Samneric, and kills Piggy with a boulder shattering the conch with it. The murder marks the complete breakdown of morality, and the destroyed conch erases the last sign of civilization. He represents the executioner in every totalitarian regime.

The decision of Samneric, the twins Sam and Eric, to abandon Ralph symbolize the loss of individual identity in the face of groupthink and societal pressure. Samneric represent the ordinary people who form the backbone of every society. The general public do not lead, nor challenge authority. They enable totalitarian dictatorship to exist. In totalitarian systems, power does not exist solely in the hands of an oppressor--it requires a majority willing to tolerate oppression in exchange for a certain compensation.

Democracy, capitalism, and other sophisticated social structures seem fragile against the pull of tribalism. In times of crisis, primal instincts take over. Jack may be a tyrant, but he is also a provider. When the brain struggles for basic survival, higher needs--reason, morality, order--fade into the background. People gravitate toward strong, charismatic leaders like Ralph and Jack, regardless of their flaws. Physically weaker but intelligent, book smart figures like Piggy are dismissed--not because they lack value, but because they don't inspire faith in survival.

The novel ends ambiguously, with the boys' rescue occurring against the backdrop of a global conflict. Ralph preserving his principles is a glimmer of hope about the world because even in the face of immense danger, the good may prevail. Thus, Ralph's survival and Piggy's death suggest that principled persons are more important in preserving the moral order than knowledgeable ones. While factual knowledge can eventually be rediscovered, moral principles are essential for guiding its application and preventing its destructive use.

IV.
In 1965, six Tongan boys stole a boat to escape their strict boarding school. A storm wrecked it, leaving them stranded on an uninhabited island for 15 months. They survived through cooperation, utilizing their practical skills to build shelters, find food, and maintain a sense of community until their rescue. Their story contrasts sharply with the events in Lord of the Flies, showcasing cooperation instead of violent descent.

However, key differences exist. The Tongan boys had pre-existing relationship and trusted each other. They faced no internal threats--no Jack-like figure, they had survival skills, and knowledge how to mend injuries. Unlike the boys from Lord of the Flies, the Tongan boys were all physically strong and providers.

While the Tongan boys' experience highlights the positive potential of human nature, it doesn't necessarily invalidate Golding's exploration of its dark aspects. It simply highlights the importance of context. Lord of the Flies explores what happens when destabilizing factors are present, and a group of strangers, thrust into a survival situation, must create a society from scratch. The contrasting narratives of the Tongan boys and the boys in Lord of the Flies highlight different aspects of human nature. History shows both the horrors of human nature (countless wars and genocides) and humanity's capacity for solidarity (international response to natural disasters like the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami).

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...

Era da anni che volevo leggere questo classico moderno e finalmente col nuovo anno ci sono riuscito.

La trama è la seguente: un gruppo di studenti inglesi sta volando in aereo quando avviene un incidente e naufragano in un'isola deserta, dove muoiono gli adulti. Col tempo i bambini creano una sorta di società in cui ognuno ha il suo compito: chi va a cacciare i maiali, chi costruisce le capanne per ripararsi dalle piogge, chi prova a dettare delle leggi da rispettare ma la cosa più importante è quella di mantenere acceso il fuoco di modo che se dovesse passare una nave essi possano essere recuperati e salvati. Ma col tempo vedremo che i ragazzi diventeranno sempre più selvaggi fino a tristi epiloghi.

L'autore William Golding, Premio Nobel per la letteratura nel 1983, ha creato, con questa opera, una sorta di esperimento sociale, una sorta di Grande Fratello coi bambini: cosa potrebbe succedere se dei bambini ben educati improvvisamente si ritrovano da soli, senza adulti e quindi senza regole, in un'isola deserta e devono provvedere ai loro bisogni primari? E Golding sembra risponderci così: andrà male, molto male, perché in questi bambini si risveglieranno i loro istinti animaleschi e diventeranno dei selvaggi. Quindi egli ci dice che il male è congenito nell'uomo. I bambini, quindi, hanno dentro di loro il germe della violenza che, in condizioni estreme come il vivere in un'isola deserta, si espande in tutta la sua bruttezza. Ed è quando ci viene descritta la testa del maiale ricoperta di mosche scoperta da Simone che l'autore ci descrive bene quel che intende dirci:

"Che idea pensare che la Bestia fosse qualcosa che si potesse cacciare e uccidere!" disse la testa di maiale. Per un po' la foresta e tutti gli altri posti che si potevano appena vedere risuonarono della parodia di una risata. "Lo sapevi no? ... che io sono una parte di te? Vieni vicino, vicino, vicino. Che io sono la ragione per cui non c'è niente da fare? Per cui le cose vanno come vanno?" La risata echeggiò di nuovo. "Ti metto in guardia. Sto per perdere la pazienza. Non vedi? Non c'è posto, per te. Capito? Su quest'isola ci divertiremo. Capito? Su quest'isola ci divertiremo. Dunque non provarci nemmeno, mio povero ragazzo traviato, altrimenti... " Simone si accorse che stava guardando dentro una gran bocca. Dentro c'era buio, un buio, che dilagava. "Altrimenti..." disse il Signore delle Mosche "ti faremo fuori. Capisci?"

A parlare è lo spirito del maiale, ovvero la violenza dei bambini che si era scatenata, uccidendo la povera scrofa incinta. E l'autore ci dice che la violenza chiama violenza, in un circolo vizioso che porterà solo morte e orrore. Il bene è solo un'utopia, la vera radice dell'uomo è la sopravvivenza che porta alla violenza e all'assassinio. Inutilmente Ralph prova a farsi rispettare, eletto all'unanimità "capo" della tribù dei bambini superstiti all'incidente e ben presto sostituito da Jack che incarna l'istinto di sopravvivenza più crudo e sanguinario. Sembra di rileggere ad un certo punto la storia di Caino e Abele, e sappiamo che non finirà bene. Golding ci dice e ce lo sottolinea spesso durante la lettura soprattutto nella seconda parte del romanzo, che ognuno di noi ha dentro un male "naturale", istintuale, e che può uscire fuori improvvisamente in determinate condizioni: fame, noia, odio, gelosia. La cosa terribile e bella allo stesso tempo è che ognuno dei protagonisti incarna un aspetto del nostro carattere: Ralph il raziocinio, Piggy la prudenza e la paura, Jack la cattiveria e l'istinto di sopravvivenza.

Non taccerei l'autore di pessimismo, come ho letto nella maggior parte delle recensioni, ma di realismo: nella realtà ognuno di noi se si dovesse trovare in quelle condizioni dei bambini non penso proprio che vivrebbe in pace e in armonia, o almeno lo farebbe i primi giorni, e poi...
Temo che molti di noi abbiamo paura del proprio lato oscuro, anzi, temono di ammettere che lo hanno dentro, ma vogliono nasconderlo. Golding lo scoperchia e ci mostra quanto sia putrido e orripilante. Basti pensare che l'umanità potrebbe facilmente tornare allo stato primitivo e regrediremmo sicuramente al nostro stato bestiale.

(I read THE LORD OF THE FLIES... en español!)

I watched the films when I was seven & had an existential drought thereafter, a hole in my soul--I thought that all the acts committed by the kids in a deserted island were so atrocious that there was NO God.

And the book. The book is a masterpiece undoubtedly, and probably one of the most horrifying allegories ever conceived. The greenness of the children, the naivete which is soon corrupted, almost as naturally as the green plants grow there, is the anchor that dares the reader to tread like the young explorers--cautiously & superaware of surroundings. "The Lord of the Flies" is the deus ex machina... the representation of something holy (or, in this case unholy), a dead parachuter, a cadaver brought back to earth to horrify the kids, but the monster is inside them.

My favorite detail is the horrific image of the little boy with the birthmark on his face (Hawthornian Goth here) who appears only at the beginning and disappears thereafter. Where did he go? Where does society arrive at when everything is dismantled and savages and anarchy rule?

I should've read this in high school.

Perhaps one of the only people in the world who never read this book in high school, I thought that it was high time that I tested the waters. William Golding has created quite the novel, using young adolescents to develop key societal themes while being isolated from the world. After their plane crashes on a deserted island, the surviving young boys gather to determine how they will survive. Using a conch shell as both a gathering tool and one that denotes speaking power, the boys elect Ralph as their leader. From there, it is a delegation of duties to ensure everything is done, something Ralph discovers is not as easy as he would like. His greatest rival for leadership, Jack, begins to instil distrust and rallies those around him not to fall into line with Ralph. As time progresses, cracks occur in the unified group and they splinter off, with Jack taking some of the older boys into his own ‘savage’ camp. The two groups are forced to devise new ways to procure the needed skills for survival. Ralph agrees to attend a feast held by the saved group, only to discover that they are ruthless and end up killing one of the boys. As outside assistance remains bleak, tough choices will have to be made and the lives of all the boys lay in the ever-shifting balance of power. A clever novel that touches on many important issues and has stood the test of time. Not sure I would call it stellar, but surely worth my time and effort.

I never do well when a book is called a ‘classic’, feeling the pressure is always too high that I should like it. I rarely turn to the classics, finding my enjoyment of reading halted when I am supposed to find themes and symbolism. Then again, I love to learn when I read, something Golding does somewhat subtlety with this piece as he speaks about the roles and differences that adolescent boys have within society. The story is both well-paced and overly detailed in places, as Golding seeks to lay the groundwork for a great deal in short order. Some say the downed airplane was part of a nuclear situation that saw the world on the cusp of World War Three, while others surmised it was just a freak accident that left all the adults dead. By thrusting the boys into the role of leaders, Golding posits that their leadership and follower roles would become more apparent over time, though there is a fine line between leading and dictating. As can be seen throughout the piece, the give and take between Ralph and those under him comes to fruition, causing strife and anxiety, which Jack uses to his advantage. The need to survive also pushes the boys to take drastic measures, something they might not normally do, as has been seen in other books and stories of groups stranded and away from help. The use of longer chapters seems needed for Golding to lay some necessary groundwork on different topics. Rather than a constantly evolving flow to the narrative, he chose to tackle these major issues in a single chapter, forcing the reader to push on to understand the concepts being discussed. I suppose it works, but not the approach I might have taken. There were times I also felt the dialogue was slightly jilted, though I am not sure if that is due to the time it was written or a stylistic choice by Golding. I know the way in which young boys speak has devolved of late, but I kept asking myself if I could properly picture boys bantering and ordering one another around in this way. Golding speaks in the introduction about how boys were the only option, that girls could not have played a role in this piece. While I can see what he means, to a degree, wearing my 2020 glasses and not those from 1954, I think much has changed and would love someone to take a stab at the story from the girl-centric approach. I’m sure it would be a refreshing look at this tale that everyone seems to know.

Kudos, Mr. Golding, for a decent read that kept me thinking throughout.

I never do this, but I recently read a novel that takes some influences from Golding’s piece. Do check it out once it is published: The Benevolent Lords of Sometimes Island

Love/hate the review? An ever-growing collection of others appears at:
http://pecheyponderings.wordpress.com/

A Book for All Seasons, a different sort of Book Challenge: https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/...

William Golding's classic Lord of the Flies is a terrifying dystopian novel about the savagery at the heart of the human experience and as such deserves comparison to Conrad's Heart of Darkness. However, rather than using a voyage motif as Conrad did, Golding uses a deserted Pacific island as a Petri dish where an unspecified number of British schoolkids are mysteriously stranded during WWII. The third-person narrator mostly follows the protagonist Ralph as he navigates the limits of his own sanity in being the most consistent and vocal advocate for keeping a smoke signal alive in order to signal their location to any passing ship for rescue and in assuming and fighting for leadership of the band of kids. He meets a rotund, spectacled boy who makes the mistake of revealing his fear of being called Piggy and who naturally is given this name in the story. Piggy finds a conch shell which becomes the pivotal object in the story as it is used to call meetings and designate the recognized speaker. At the first such meeting, Ralph is elected Chief against his primary antagonist, Jack. These three figures are at the heart of the story as it plays out and as the situation devolves into chaos slowly but surely.

The writing is very beautiful as Golding describes life on the island such as it is and the kids' early, fading fascination for it: "[Henry] squatted on his hams at the water's edge, bowed, with a shock of hair falling over his forehead and past his eyes, and the afternoon sun emptied down invisible arrows." (p. 61) In this scene, Henry is observed by the unstable Roger who is struggling against his social conditioning: "Roger gathered a handful of stones and began to throw them. Yet there was a space round Henry, perhaps six yards in diameter, into which he dare not throw. Here, invisible yet strong, was the taboo of the old life. (p. 62) Jack appears on the scene: "Jack was standing under a tree about ten yards away. When Roger opened his eyes and saw him, a darker shadow crept beneath the swarthiness of his skin; but Jack noticed nothing. He was eager, impatient, beckoning, so that Roger went to him. (p. 62)

There is a fracture in the group between those around Ralph who represent order and the grasping of hope for rescue, and the growing group around Jack, the hunters, that sought out and embraced chaos. Ralph struggles with this division and sees the forces inevitably turning against him - the forces of Jack's hunters but also the surrounding water: "Wave after wave, Ralph followed the rise and fall until something of the remoteness of the sea numbed his brain. Then gradually the almost infinite size of this water foced itself on his attention. This was the divider, the barrier." (p. 110)

The title of the book comes from the head of a wild pig that is killed resulting in the irreversible swing in power on the island from Ralph to Jack. The head is impaled on a stick and decomposes causing several - but especially the influencable Simon - to slowly lose their grip. "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 by his runnels of sweat and drank. They tickled under his nostrils and played leapfrog 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. In Simon's right temple, a pulse began to beat on the brain." (p. 138). This moment is truly the centerpiece of the book.

From here, civilization takes a dive and the boys descend into savagery and murder. The situation results in a hunt for Ralph who is saved only by the deus ex machine of a British cruiser which sees the feeble smoke on the horizon from a massive, accidental fire: "His voice rose under the black smoke before the burning wreckage of the island; and infected by that emotion, the other little boys began to shake and sob too. And in the middle of them, with filthy body, matted hair, and unwiped nose, Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man's heart..." (p. 202)

Lord of the Flies is a masterpiece of dystopian fiction that leaves images of hellish savagery on the reader's mind long after the cover is closed. It has been an inspiration for countless movies and I daresay even more contemporary phenomena such as Lost or Survivor. A truly important and essential read. Would that the world had more Ralphs and less Jacks.

“

This is a second read of this book. My first was at university as part of my course and maybe it was the impact of my outstanding tutor but I relished the book. Many years later my reaction was not the same. The author clearly had a very bleak view of mankind which in the light of recent events is probably justified but I found myself recoiling from it. I'll admit to boredom in places. It was interesting to read other people's opinions in the Readathon and thanks to Lisa for that.

n  n    Book Reviewn  n
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.

n  n    About Men  n
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.