Category: book Nook
Do u like it, guys?
I liked it.
I found it rather disturbing. I think it had some things to tell us, but the overall theme was a discouraging one. Personally, I think that we can all overcome becoming a savage if we try hard enough.
I think William Golding is spot on in Lord of the Flies. He reminds us of the trend toward evil that we all exhibit and that we are all capable of murder given the right circumstances.
It was rather disturbing. I wish they would've listened to Piggy.
LOL, Jack was the best!!! But yeh, piggy was cute.
It was a great book. A very realistic view of how society works and how underdogs are made and treated. If it was discusting it was because it was very realistic. A miniature society where the topdog rules and the underdog just tries to survive. Star
Yes, lord of the flies is great. I like it.
Hi.
I read that book a long time ago, but it stayed with me. I cried twice in that book: once when Simon was killed and once when Ralph cried in relief. I think I read it at the right time, because I was in high school and was learning to accept the fact that I will always be different from my mates because of my blindness and that this difference is not necessarily a bad thing. I felt very much like piggy.
I agree with the person who said they should have listened to pIggy. But, a book is a book ... hehehe, I was sad when Piggy had to die.
UM it was okay we read it for some class Idon't remember but Piggy Died something with a rock I think. Damn what a way to go>
It is really sad. I was hoping that this book would have a happy-ending but, bla, it didn't. I was crying, as usual on sad endings. Typical for me.
it was cool when they killed piggy
drifting off topic slightly for a moment. I remember watching this documentary about this group of young men and women..who had volunteered to spend 6 weeks on a deserted tropical island ..the girls got down to the practical stuff like..finding food water ect..within 3 weeks the lads had begun acting like savages destroying the enviroment, acting like petulant children, and generally failing to cope in such a harsh test of their maturity..it was fascinating watching the dynamics of the sexes ..I wonder how LOTF would have ended if the castaways had been female...
Beelzebub the Inevitable?
The lord of the flies is a story about a group of boys stranded on an island and how they manage themselves before returning to England. It can be taken as just another adventure story with children replacing the usual devinere cast of assorted pirates, sailors, and heroes; written to entertain readers with its courageous, survivor, against the odds inspiration. That is the obvious external perspective, but not the only one to be brought into consideration. The author also implied a symbolism relating the management of the island to the management of humans as a whole; what draws them astray from achieving the supreme ideals of justice and peace; and how the possibly inherent traits of iniquitous avarice, malice, and dividing discrimination manifest themselves as one with the notion of evil, the lord of the flies.
At the beginning of this novel, Ralph was chief and he ruled with leniency and permission. His control was overtaken by Jack who commanded his population more efficiently and with little regard for human freedom and minimal warranted decency. The island lacked utopian qualities because of the wants of the individual inhabitants. The yonger children wanted to play and bathe. The older children wanted adventure and accomplishments, the thrill of the hunt; and Jack wanted power, alpha-male supremacy. The need for assumed superficial order was not enforced, and thus was unnecessary. Efficient unification was not a priority for the masses, and instant gratification was sought by all. Children want to be happy and not be required to do extra work when they can be having fun. So life was good for everybody because the only worries were projected on the aftermath of island life, so not on day to day survival and arduous threats. But Jack wasn't satisfied with submitting to Ralph and wanted control.
The debasement of organized utopian society by ostensible selfish want is the apple spoiling the bunch. If a better society is what is wanted, then this hypothetical evil needs to be thoroughly examined in order to eliminate it. The first question is asked to discover where its source lies; whether environmentally conditioned or inherent in humans as part of an evolutionary self-defense mechanism used to further the genus as a whole, to survive. Did Jack learn his conjectural strive for dominancy through his military school background and his situational upbringing or is this an example of a fundamental element of man, impossible or harmful to eradicate? In other words - is Man inherently evil, distorted by nature; or can he be taught to think in relation to what consequences his actions bring upon his fellow man? Is a beautiful society what we want or do we want to be happy as a first priority and the end justifying the means? Is it acceptable to sacrifice the lives of others in order to please ourselves? And is life itself not able to reach the expectations of ethic code of humans? If people think themselves to be above animals and their ways, and wish to strive for a social completion in terms of a society in which all its members feel themselves to be free and independent; it would not be possible to complete this task if it's unfeasible to suppress the sadist desire for supremacy over anthrocentric morality. If this high goal is what is sought after, What prevents us from achieving it? Is it evil? Perhaps cowardice? An absence of action, palpably. If it's evil, where did it originate from? A gift from the heavens? Is "the lord of the flies" excuses solely used to prevent helpful action from taking place, or are we really obligated to self-destruction, misery and inequality?
From William Golding's stand point, man is a creation intended as a practical joke. A creature whose sole interest is to harm himself by attempting to help himself. An animal with good intentions but detrimental actions. The order imposed leading man is: What do we want? - Happiness by an incessant, banal, implausible, perfection, Completion by a solemn inner-peace individually, or a Prospect utopian and accepted as impossible future. (or something unthought of)
On a lighter note, we can say that if we choose to ignore the implications of our actions; no harm will be done unto us. And if bliss is what we so strive to meet, it is recommended that we follow the advice given to us by our many forefathers and ignore all that has been said in this brief text. After all, ignorance is bliss, or is it?