Scan barcode
hollypeno_pepper3's review against another edition
5.0
A classic. One a didn't realize was so decisive. I love this book, but I've also realized a lot of people hate it. To me, I love how it delves into the human condition and our barbarism. How no one is immune from mob mentality. It's pertinent in every era.
aiden79's review against another edition
dark
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.0
tay_tay's review against another edition
dark
tense
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
Content Warnings
Graphic: Animal death, Body shaming, Bullying, Child death, Death, Fatphobia, Gore, Violence, Blood, Abandonment, War, and Injury/Injury detail
apechild's review against another edition
4.0
I bought this book in 2006 thinking it is one of those books I really should read once. It has taken me a few years to get around to it, but here we are. I saw a black and white film of it donkeys years ago, and I suppose it is so well known that we all have a vague idea of what it is all about. Plane crash leaves a load of little school boys stranded on a tropical island and whilst they try to set up their civilisation, they all end up following their base instincts and go a bit feral. To the point they start killing.
My brain wonders about the small details. Where were they being evacuated from and to? Why? There is vague mention of war, A bombs... are they caught up in the paranoia of the 50s or is this a creation of all the panic of the cold War terror?
Pigs feature a lot. The outsider, the bully victim that the pack can vent its fury on, is the fat asthmatic boy Piggy (how does he manage not to lose weight just living on fruit?!). There are wild pigs on the island that macho alpha male Jack and his hunters hunt. They put the heads on sticks as tribute to the "monster" to keep it away. Simon sees the head covered in flies. It speaks to him. It is Lord of the flies. When you see them hunting, it is always sows they kill, sometimes with piglets fleeing. Is this symbolic of breaking free of mother? Part of me thought they were dumb, killing of the sows meant they'd soon exterminate their entire food source.
There is a conch shell that they use for calling meetings, which they stick to for a time like playing games. It is all over when the thing is smashed. Then they are animal, feral. And... mostly its that except for a couple of moments that feel a little uncomfortable. One where Piggy is furious with the hunter tribe, now all painted and wild and refers to them with the n-word... I suppose an opinion at the time that if you were black and living in the jungle, you must be wild! Never mind tribes and civilisations have managed to live in the jungles for thousands of years without annilating themselves. Then at the end when the navy turns up, they are a bit disappointed that as British boys they couldn't have held off the savagery a bit longer (eye roll). Rather ironic that it is only in trying to destroy everything - ie burn the island to ash - for the single minded goal of hunting down and killing Ralph, that they manage to put out a good enough smoke signal to attract the navy.
Good book, I can understand why it won the prizes etc. Not sure that I would want to read it again.
My brain wonders about the small details. Where were they being evacuated from and to? Why? There is vague mention of war, A bombs... are they caught up in the paranoia of the 50s or is this a creation of all the panic of the cold War terror?
Pigs feature a lot. The outsider, the bully victim that the pack can vent its fury on, is the fat asthmatic boy Piggy (how does he manage not to lose weight just living on fruit?!). There are wild pigs on the island that macho alpha male Jack and his hunters hunt. They put the heads on sticks as tribute to the "monster" to keep it away. Simon sees the head covered in flies. It speaks to him. It is Lord of the flies. When you see them hunting, it is always sows they kill, sometimes with piglets fleeing. Is this symbolic of breaking free of mother? Part of me thought they were dumb, killing of the sows meant they'd soon exterminate their entire food source.
There is a conch shell that they use for calling meetings, which they stick to for a time like playing games. It is all over when the thing is smashed. Then they are animal, feral. And... mostly its that except for a couple of moments that feel a little uncomfortable. One where Piggy is furious with the hunter tribe, now all painted and wild and refers to them with the n-word... I suppose an opinion at the time that if you were black and living in the jungle, you must be wild! Never mind tribes and civilisations have managed to live in the jungles for thousands of years without annilating themselves. Then at the end when the navy turns up, they are a bit disappointed that as British boys they couldn't have held off the savagery a bit longer (eye roll). Rather ironic that it is only in trying to destroy everything - ie burn the island to ash - for the single minded goal of hunting down and killing Ralph, that they manage to put out a good enough smoke signal to attract the navy.
Good book, I can understand why it won the prizes etc. Not sure that I would want to read it again.
marymeowles's review against another edition
4.0
Lord of the Flies is a solid classic I somehow missed out on in high school and I am glad I picked it up as an adult. Gave me the spooks!
babybastian's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
emotional
mysterious
reflective
sad
tense
fast-paced
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
casualcostumer's review against another edition
5.0
Reading this as a fully-formed adult now (because I think the last time I read it was in college), I appreciate this on a whole new level and see so much more symbolism and meaning. I don't think I ever realized before just how much Ralph grows.
jdauer5's review against another edition
1.0
This is type of book that teachers make kids read to make them hate reading... Also, the message of law and order isn't great... It's essentially copaganda
cayleejo's review against another edition
Oof. The writing is strong, the moral is clear, but it's heavy. It's a lot to take on, to wrap your head around. The characters are infuriating and I had to remind myself over and over again that they're just kids, but damn.
writerbeverly's review against another edition
3.0
A group of boys ends up ?shipwrecked? plane-crashed? on an empty tropical island. There are basically two groups: older boys of about 11-12, and young ones of about six. No adults. One older boy (Ralph) wants to establish rules and responsibilities; another (Piggy) is weak (fat, asthmatic, spectacled) but smart, while Jack wants to paint his face, have fun and kill things.
Does this still hold up as classic? I suppose; certainly it's become an oft-referenced cultural meme. But there are HUGE hole in this story - how did they get to this island, WHY are they on the island, and if they were plane- or shipwrecked, why isn't anyone seriously injured on landing on the island? How is it that they are so widely separated on the island and have no idea how many of them there should be, or where they are?
Why doesn't anyone GET injured (fall and break an arm, for instance) or get sick and die from an infected cut or gash? There's an almost total lack of the older boys looking after each other or the younger ones; would that truly be the case? Not that pre-teens can't be self-centered, cruel and brutal; of course they can, but they can also be surprisingly sensitive and kind.
The main characters are one-dimensional stereotypes; the littluns are props. I got the impression that this author doesn't know young boys very well, and dislikes what he does know of them, as well as having a very dim view of humanity in general. Is this truly a book that reveals the dark and flawed side of human nature? Or just a dark and flawed book that people found shocking for its time?
Does this still hold up as classic? I suppose; certainly it's become an oft-referenced cultural meme. But there are HUGE hole in this story - how did they get to this island, WHY are they on the island, and if they were plane- or shipwrecked, why isn't anyone seriously injured on landing on the island? How is it that they are so widely separated on the island and have no idea how many of them there should be, or where they are?
Why doesn't anyone GET injured (fall and break an arm, for instance) or get sick and die from an infected cut or gash? There's an almost total lack of the older boys looking after each other or the younger ones; would that truly be the case? Not that pre-teens can't be self-centered, cruel and brutal; of course they can, but they can also be surprisingly sensitive and kind.
The main characters are one-dimensional stereotypes; the littluns are props. I got the impression that this author doesn't know young boys very well, and dislikes what he does know of them, as well as having a very dim view of humanity in general. Is this truly a book that reveals the dark and flawed side of human nature? Or just a dark and flawed book that people found shocking for its time?