Lord of the Flies

Lord of the Flies:
Lord, referencing power and authority.
Flies, referencing something that is rotting. It doesn't get much clearer than that.

In this disturbing look at human nature, a bunch of boys between the ages of 6 and 12 (notice that this is before the age of teenage testosterone rages) crash land on an island. The wreckage left "a scar" on the island (symbolism!!). Ralph and Piggy find a conch (more symbolism!!) and call the others to a meeting. Some of them show up wearing all black (symb.... ok, you get it). One kid wants to be made supreme ruler because he can sing a C#, and another one just wants someone to be named chief so that they can organize and get some stuff done (also notice the difference here in supreme ruler vs a leader of peers). The kids vote for the leader of peers and C# boy will never be happy with that.

The conflicts thereafter show the differences in priorities as extensions of each character's personality. Is it more important to make and maintain a signal fire so that they can be rescued? Is it more important to build shelters? Is it more important to maintain a sense of civilization and rules? Or is it more important to go on pig-slaughtering sprees? In a nutshell, will creating win out over destroying if the boys are left to themselves? And if they get rescued, aren't they simply being taken to a grownup world in the middle of their own war that is as bad as the one that will inevitably happen on the island?

Before long, they are all long-haired, dirty, mostly naked, covered in warpaint, participating in ritualistic dances and animal sacrifices, and beginning to target each other. So, there ya go.

Lord of the Flies not only does an excellent job of exploring human nature, but also making us ask questions about the value of civilization, rules, and identity as well as what effects fear and power have on that system. 5 stars from me, and 2 big thumbs down to leaving any more than 2 children to themselves for more than 5 minutes. They will burn down your island.

Arriva Thomas al tavolo. Schiaffa un fantastico foglio a A4 che titola “Stato di Natura”, sotto una spiegazione breve e concisa. Poi arriva Golding, gli ciula l’a4 e comincia a scriverci la sua storiella. Guarda caso calza tutto a pennello. Hobbes non s’incazza perché alla fine fila quasi tutto liscio secondo ciò che lui andava teorizzando. Vogliam metter poi il leggero contrasto, generato dall’inevitabile candore che la figura dell’infante si porta appresso, con la spietatezza di certe vicissitudini? E i bambini di 6 anni, fastidiosi e assolutamente “in mezzo ai coglioni”?
Il coinvolgimento, il gioco di ruolo, il desiderio e il senso d’appartenenza. Credo che nulla sia esagerato, neanche nei momenti più crudi.
Quasi riuscivo a cucirmi tutto su vecchi ricordi, come credo che ognuno di noi, dopo tanti anni, possa sentirsi in colpa per Piggy.
In qualche modo, se potesse, tornerebbe indietro di una manciata di anni per dargli un forte abbraccio e ascoltarlo un pochino di più.

“Maybe there is a beast... maybe it’s only us.”

Story ⭐️⭐️⭐️
This story shows how people, even the most innocent ones - children - change when there are no rules and no structure.
How they point of view changes, their feelings toward other humans beings or living things in general.
I think the concept and the story itself was really really good, but while reading it, it felt really slowly. The last 10 % were the most shocking and made the story so good.

Writing style ⭐️⭐️⭐️
The writing seemed a little bit plain, but it was still enjoyable.

Lord of the Flies isn't your average book. The setting is predictable for a story - boys stranded on an Island. It's a recipe for a good old fashion adventure novel, right? Except, it's not. It's different. But in a good way? yes and no.

Set in an unspecified period of war, a plane crashes, leaving a group of schoolboys stranded. Shocking, but not that unbearable. After all, the young boys dreams have come true: who wouldn't want a whole island to play on all day without any nagging from the Adults? The unlikely protagonists are Ralph, and his buddy, Piggy. Without any adults, the boys realise that a leader must be elected in order to make sure that everyone has fun and doesn't act unkindly. Ralph ends up being voted in as leader of the pack, he has skills and popularity with the rest of the boys. Ralph befriends a choirboy called Jack, who turns out to be the antagonist in this story. But as time passes a sort of cabin fever kicks in, resulting in a more sinister and unsettling set of actions.

Is this a book about protagonists and/or antagonists? it's really hard to truly define who they are as a group, for you see, Lord of the Flies isn't just a book about boys becoming independent and mentally toughened up. It holds a deeper, more subtle meaning, making the reader question what it really means to be immoral, and the true meaning of evil. It is a book with more depth that it first appears, and it constantly brings up some interesting points. The biggest problem I found was reading it as an older adult, I just never felt the trills and spills, that say, an eleven year old boy would, thus found it hard to really connect with the kids in the same way as a kid reading this would. It is definitely more suited for those still in education, and would make a great read for a boy scout camping out in the wilderness. Should have read it 30 years ago, for better appreciation. Solid storytelling though.

Fenomenalna.

“Maybe,” he said hesitantly, “maybe there is a beast…. What I mean is … maybe it’s only us.”
…
“What are we? Humans? Or animals? Or savages?”
…
Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart.

The setup of Lord of the Flies is as simple as it is iconic. A plane full of boys aged six to twelve crashes on a deserted island. Free from adult supervision, the boys try to set up their own society. But it turns out that “the darkness of man’s heart” is stronger than our better angels, and the boys slowly descend into a murderous mob.

Lord of the Flies is an allegory, with each character essentially an archetype: Ralph the optimistic leader, Piggy the voice of reason, Simon the believer, Jack the power-hungry rival to Ralph, and Roger the truly malevolent. And, of course, there are symbols everywhere: the conch shell, Piggy’s glasses, the signal fire, the beast, and, ultimately, Simon’s vision of the Lord of the Flies.

Lord of the Flies was written in the aftermath of World War II, and it carries that same pessimism about humanity that is common to many great novels of that era. The novel works precisely because of that pessimism, because it feels realistic. A group of boys left unsupervised wouldn’t live like Robinson Crusoe. They likely would devolve from order to chaos, from civilization to savagery, from innocence to a face-painted group who torture, hunt, and kill each other. It’s dark and dystopian, yet it reflects and explains so much about the world we live in. Recommended.

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 -

”They accepted the pleasures of morning, the bright sun, the whelming sea and sweet air, as a time when play was good and life so full that hope was not necessary and therefore forgotten.”

So this was a book many people had to read when they went to school and in some way this already says a lot about “Lord of the Flies”. Like so many of the books that are required to be read during people’s educational careers this one wasn’t only full of serious topics but also dealt with ethical values.

I mean we have boys between the ages of 6 and 12 who are stranded on an island after they had a plane crash. There is no adult who would force them to stay in line; there is no authority that would tell them what's right or wrong. They are left to their own devices and even though they were doing as good as you would expect schoolboys to do, they still were fairly decent at the beginning of the book.

“I agree with Ralph. We’ve got to have rules and obey them. After all, we’re not savages. We’re English; and the English are the best at everything. So we’ve got to do the right things.”

Oh, how often I thought back to this quote when I read on with horror, every new chapter revealing another aspect of the dark abyss of human kind. The morale dilemma of Ralph and Piggy was so intense that I couldn’t help but feel with them whenever something bad and terrible happened. They were the only ones that tried to get order into the chaos but on an island without any rules only the strongest remain.

”I got you meat!”
Numberless and inexpressible frustrations combined to make his rage elemental and awe-inspiring. “I painted my face – I stole up. Now you eat – all of you – and I –“

The fight of savageness vs. civilisation was so tangible it hurt and I constantly found myself sitting at the edge of my seat hoping against all hope, that civilisation would actually win. It doesn’t take a genius to know that it didn’t. Why hold on to moral standards? Why listen to reason if you can have a kingdom of your own? Why should you accept someone else’s opinion if you’re stronger and can force them to obey your own rules? You know it better than the others, right?!

”If I blow the conch and they don’t come back; then we’ve had it. We shan’t keep the fire going. We’ll be like animals. We’ll never be rescued.”

I know I’m being provocative here but it is how it is. The strongest will always try to rule the weak. It’s been done for centuries and I doubt that it will ever stop. It’s as much a part of human nature as breathing and let’s face the bitter truth: There’s darkness in all of us. We can only decide if we fight it or let it in. ;-)

”Look, Ralph. We got to forget this. We can’t do no good thinking about it, see?”
“I’m frightened. Of us. I want to go home. O god I want to go home.”

”The thing is – fear can’t hurt you any more than a dream. There aren’t any beasts to be afraid of on this island.”

If you ask me there certainly was a monster on the island or should I rather say that there were monsters? n  Plural.n It weren’t monsters that had been there all along though. No, it were the monsters that had fallen from the sky, claiming the island as their own, doing as they pleased because they could do so without anyone to stop them. The monsters on the island came from the outside and despite their claims to want to get off of the island they all knew that they actually wanted to stay.

”I’m scared of him,” said Piggy, “and that’s why I know him. If you’re scared of someone you hate him but you can’t stop thinking about him. You kid yourself he’s all right really, an’ then when you see him again; it’s like asthma an’ you can’t breathe.”

So in the end things took their natural course and got worse and worse. The descent into savageness was inexorable and the book ended on a heavy note. I can only speak for myself but the ending was brilliant. Brilliant and shocking and so very, very realistic that it caused me to ache even more. Those stupid boys... those stupid, stupid little boys. *shakes head*

Anyway, if you want to read a really good book which will haunt you days after you finished it, this should be your choice. *lol* After all I finished “Lord of the Flies” almost a week ago and I’m still thinking about it. ;-)

Happy Reading! I hope you’ll enjoy it as well!

Those are two quotes that were perfect and moved me so damn much when I read the book. Because they would spoil too much and would give away some crucial parts of the plot I didn’t write them down in the actual review though.
Anyway if you read the book already you might as well enjoy them now:

”Piggy.”
“Uh?”
“That was Simon.”
“You said that before.”
“Piggy.”
“Uh?”
“That was murder.”

”And in the middle of them, Ralph wept for the end of innocence, the darkness of man’s heart, and the fall through the air of the true, wise friend called Piggy.”