lotf

[hXc]

Lord Of The Flies
William Golding
First published in the 1940's or 1950's (I forget)

We are studying this book in English class at the moment. I am sure many of you have studied this same book as school students or whatever. I'm wondering what the general feelings about the book are.

I know it won the nobel prize for literature and all that but...
The allegory in the book is used too much for today's times. The metaphors are over used for today's times. Everything said in the book, means something different than what is on the surface. The language used in it is out of date for New Zealand and a lot of the English speaking countries of the world.

I personally, think it is a good book and a good storyline and has good messages, but should 5th formers really be studying something so dated as an NCEA credit gaining thing. I don't think we should.

I have a friend in my class who told his folks we are reading this, and his dad said, "Oh that! I studied that in high school! What next, Animal Farm?!" Well the funny thing is, the other 5th form class my teacher teaches, is studying Animal Farm.

Yes, both very good books and all, but they really are getting on. Wouldn't something written by Terry Pratchett, Stephen King, J.R.R Tolkien or the man who wrote The Da Vinci Code be better. After all, the teachers are all telling us to keep up with the times. I don't see why any of the bove author's books, and many more, can't be studied instead of the books which are nearly, if not 50 years old.

Thanks you for reading all the words...

[James Deuce]

When the literature was written has little bearing on whether or not it should be studied. You are nothing without your history. You are, at best, misguided to ignore it.

Yes it can be distilled into, "We are all two meals away from barbarism", but the process documented in LOTF is is fascinating. The language isn't anything other than correct though the colloquialisms are a bit jarring.

Remember to study how the book is constructed too. Don't just focus on the content.

J.R.R. Tolkien is older than the other books you quote, and the author himself was "older" when he wrote the Middle Earth books, though they are the culmination of a life dedicated to linguistics and philosophy. The thought processes behind LOTR predate anything that people alive would recognise as a "modern" attitude.

Stephen King can't write. He is a stolid workman, plodding through a series of formulae. He very seldom explores anything new. Dan Brown can't write either, and I would suggest that the NCEA student who wallows through The Da Vinci Code would have to be a P or crack addict to stay awake.

Animal Farm is one of THE most important works of the 20th Century. It is thoroughly subversive, more so today when there are MORE Government controls in place than when it was written. Social fabric was determined by class when Animal Farm was written. Class is a state of mind, a series of subsets of a philosophy that again is foreign to our culture but intrinsic in its creation.

Terry Pratchett parodies modern "British" culture. Without an understanding of the nuances of that culture today, you can miss stuff, but how does it help you understand your own? Satire relies on the reader having an intrinsic understanding of the subject being satirised. I love Pratchett, but I know a lot of people who don't get it. They aren't stupid, large chunks of his books seem like a very weak parody of Fantasy literature, rather than social commentary, because their experience of their own culture and society is very different to the intended reader.

[yungatart]

(quavery voice) It was good enough for my generation. By god, it is good enough for yours.

[Motu]

Lord of the Flies - 5th form in 1969....yeah,but we didn't ''do'' it man,to actualy pay attention in class was kinda stepping over the edge.

[Karma]

the other 5th form class my teacher teaches, is studying Animal Farm.

I thought that was still illegal over here?

A couple of guys at my school got busted just for watching Traci Lords...

[Hitcher]

Lord of the Flies is a book that can be read on several levels. First is the basic storyline, which is frankly, a bit overdone. Although when it was first written the accepted style of writing for a novel was probably more in line with Golding's effort than what we're used to today.

Secondly, the book is an interesting study in characterisation and the relationships between the characters. A sort of a Tom Brown's School Days meets Survivor.

But, thirdly, the real guts of this book is the stories it tells through symbolism: good versus evil; civilisation versus barbarism; the need to "belong"; a belief that all will come good; and lastly, the "human dilemma", being aware of and understanding the difference between right and wrong.

Is "goodness" really a veneer on human society?

This is a very complex book. Enjoy it. And draw your own conclusions.

[James Deuce]

Oh yeah, you can tell when a book was published, and by whom, by looking in the front of the book. It will also tell you which reprint you are reading, and what country it was published in.

[Fluffy Cat]

So you say this book has a message?, what is that message....
Animal Farm again whats the point?, you should be able to rip through one of these in a day or two and then within seconds give any person some of the message/s from these very good stories or are they more?. Ever looked around?, do you see the patterns, history repeats, its the nature of the beast. As for Terry P, what do you think he read?.
Then you can get on with a few other good reads, but and this is a big but, they do not come around that often so turn on, tune in and .........
Youth don't talk to me about youth, been there done that got the t-shirt etc etc etc........

[sunhuntin]

we did that as well...i didnt think much of it either. but then i also read the hobbit and couldnt get my head around it! 4th form we did the outsiders, which i loved, but started losing interest in 5th form...barely passed school c english and failed art [the only 2 exams i took]

from what i remember, anything we studied in english was done to death....we watched saving private ryan so many times i remember most of the characters!

[Hitcher]

Many novels are appropriate for a certain place in time. Animal Farm is one such.

It was written in the 1940s when the focus of many in the western world was on a crisis more pressing than totalitarianism. While it is easy to draw parallels with Stalin's Russia, parallels can also be drawn with the "politically correct" society we live in today. "Totalitarianism" doesn't mean "communism", although that would have been a compelling edge for this novel when first written. But it's still a great read today.

Allegory is a particularly powerful form of communicating -- one that our early illiterate ancestors put to good use around campfires. A story well told is a powerful thing. Understand allegory and you unlock many of the world's great texts. Including the Bible. And Terry Pratchett. And Douglas Adams.

Animal Farm is a magnificent work. It also makes good use of other literary techniques, such as irony -- wasted on your average American. Once you've read Animal Farm, you should read 1984 (also by George Orwell). I read this in 1975, when it was still "prophetic". I must re-read both of these books.

[Wasp]

your lucky, for 6th form i had to study an auto biography by a black women who since being raped thought everone was out to get her. :whocares: (i dont think i read past page 2 or 3 and back in those days i loved books...)

www.amazon.com is your friend - got an awesome comment (longer than all the others saying its a good book) written by a 17 year old stating every single point about why that book sucked. and it wasnt just bullshit too, it was better written even than the "official" reviews.

[James Deuce]

Ahhh the opinion of a 17 year old. It's amazing how semen can infiltrate the brain like that.

[Hitcher]

i had to study an auto biography by a black women who since being raped thought everone was out to get her
I'm guessing here... The Colour Purple, perhaps?

[Motu]

Perhaps Piers Anthony would be a more suitable author for the younger mind (although he's far older than me) He was the first SciFi author I read,with the original long edition of Macroscope.Then he branched of into several trilogies and I gave up on him when he started the Xanth fantasy series...kinda Terry Pratchet,but earlier.But he still puts out the odd stand alone novel.Lots and lots of stuff is written into his books,many themes,he gets into maths theories and all sorts of crap.He's always been my favorite author....and I still go back to Sos the Rope,Var the Stick,and Neq the sword,simple,short but powerful stories.

[riffer]

Yes, I can remember reading LOTF and Animal Farm when I was 15 and 16.

Thought much the same about it as you Zach.

Strange though how I understand the books a lot better now I've lived a bit of life.

The trouble I found was in relating my own life experiences to what was happening in the books, so like you I struggled to relate, or find relevance.

Go back and read the books in ten years time and see how much differently you find them.

[Ixion]

50 years! what's 50 years!

Go, thou and read the Vision of Piers Plowman. I was at your age.That's 800 odd years.

We also had to read LOTF. I wrote an essay contrasting LOTF and Othello. I still think it was damn good.

50 years indeed. Haruummph.

(BTW , as someone said, Tolkien is much older. And if you don't know Shakespeare and Milton half the fun of Pterry goes right over your head)

[James Deuce]

(BTW , as someone said, Tolkien is much older. And if you don't know Shakespeare and Milton half the fun of Pterry goes right over your head)

To say nothing of Bunyan and Chaucer

[ZeroIndex]

I studied (well, not really :D) LOTF at school, grade10.. not sure of the NZ equivalent, SA school system went up to grade12, which would be the final year.. can anyone work that out?

..and about Animal Farm.. I got the DVD :)

[hXc]

(BTW , as someone said, Tolkien is much older. And if you don't know Shakespeare and Milton half the fun of Pterry goes right over your head)
Tolkien may be older, but the language used is a lot easier to unerstand in the society we have become.

And believe me, I do know and like Shakespeare. It is a very different thing for a lot of other people my age, to study it though. I have read Shakespeare's poems and plays etc, but I can understand that a lot of people wouldn't be able to get past the first sentence and still know what he was saying.

That does not mean they are stupid, or un-educated. It just means, and goes to show, that the language used is out of date, isn't used in most countries, and hasn't been for a long time.

[hXc]

Yes, I can remember reading LOTF and Animal Farm when I was 15 and 16.

Thought much the same about it as you Zach.

Strange though how I understand the books a lot better now I've lived a bit of life.

The trouble I found was in relating my own life experiences to what was happening in the books, so like you I struggled to relate, or find relevance.

Go back and read the books in ten years time and see how much differently you find them.
I personally, understand the book a lot better than most in my class. I can see it has it's place and I can understand why we, and the generations before us have studied it. But really, the language used in it is near extinct in today's society.

I apparently, need help with the book because "I miss the obvious messages that Golding is trying to portray." I don't miss them, I just choose to read through them, because I would rather find the very hidden messages that he portrays. I get the feeling my teacher doesn't like me because I'm racist, I argue with almost anything that somebody says that I don't like, I'm un-PC and I speak of things that she does not know about.

She had never heard of John Wayne Gacy, she didn't know what Charles Manson and his followers actually did, she does not understand anarchy the way it is supposed to be and finally, she told me that my speech -about political correctness and how it has gone too far-, was politically incorrect so I told her that she obviously didn't understand what my speech was about.

[MSTRS]

....she told me that my speech -about political correctness and how it has gone too far-, was politically incorrect so I told her that she obviously didn't understand what my speech was about.
Oh how the parents laughed when told of THAT!!

[Macktheknife]

Perhaps Piers Anthony would be a more suitable author for the younger mind ....and I still go back to Sos the Rope,Var the Stick,and Neq the sword,simple,short but powerful stories.
I remember those books well, one of my favourite series when I was a lad. Well written and probably still relevant in todays world, although I expect many younger people would need to be given some instruction on what to look for in terms of deeper meaning. Perhaps that is the real issue inherent in the threads question?
Anyway, read them, think about them, then discover for yourself the real meaning behind the words. After all that was the point of setting them as a task.

[Ixion]

,,
That does not mean they are stupid, or un-educated. It just means, and goes to show, that the language used is out of date, isn't used in most countries, and hasn't been for a long time.

Wherefore sayest thou so ? Think'st not that a sweet tongue should well befit a gentle wight in these latter days?

[MSTRS]

Wherefore sayest thou so ? Think'st not that a sweet tongue should well befit a gentle wight in these latter days?
Oooohhh - we luv it wen u tork dirty.....
:innocent:

[Macktheknife]

...and finally, she told me that my speech -about political correctness and how it has gone too far-, was politically incorrect .
I am still laughing about this one! ROFLMAO
I would suggest you need to be very flexible in your communication styles with this teacher. Good luck

[James Deuce]

I personally, understand the book a lot better than most in my class. I can see it has it's place and I can understand why we, and the generations before us have studied it. But really, the language used in it is near extinct in today's society.


You're REALLY missing the point mate. Think about what you just wrote.

Think about it properly. You're not making a valid point, you're parroting an oft repeated whinge that teenage students have made for centuries.

I believe you're better than that. Prove it - go on, I dare you. :)

[hXc]

I believe you're better than that. Prove it - go on, I dare you. :)
Nah. Too bloody lazy:nya:

[Ixion]

To say nothing of Bunyan and Chaucer

Verily. Methinks the shade of John Bunyan maphap dost stand at pterry's shoulder levelling an accusing finger at the Vaguely Reverend Oats

[The Beast]

I'm doing Lord of the Flies at the moment too, I thought it was a pretty good book, but yeah, very dated.

As for Animal Farm, shit, did that in 4th form mate.

I've heard good things about George Orwells other books...1984 I think it's called?

[crashe]

Yikes Its looks like I missed out on so much.. (Thank goodness) when I was asked oops left school at the end of the third form...:whistle:


Hxc - Good on you for reading the books that you like to read, whether it be Shakespeare or what ever other writer you like to read.
You are entitled to your own opinion in what you want to say in your essays etc at school.


My daughter read books at 10 that she had to re-read at high school.
She told the teacher she had read them already and voiced her opinion on them as well.... The teacher demanded that she re-read them and demanded that she write what was expected everyone to write.
Yep my brat aint a conformist either. She refused and her marks suffered because of it. Which is a shame as each child/teenager should be marked on their own merits not what the teacher knows.
She loved Steven King, Hitchcock, Any books on serial kellers, Charles Manson etc etc.
For one assignment she went to the Hillsborough Cementary and wrote about those that have died and those that are famous in there and what happened to them. That too was against what the teacher wanted.
Even her Music that she took at school that she had to write had a morbid tune to it as well. But that teacher allowed her to express herself and graded her accordingly and she was given great marks for music.


So I guess it depends on the teacher involved as to whether they allow the kids to develop and let them flow their own thoughts etc without the teacher holding them back etc.

So Hxc you go for it mate... I reckon you have your parents backing all the way behind you.

[BuFfY]

So do you have to write an essay on it?? Or is it just for classroom study?

[Storm]

Nah. Too bloody lazy:nya:

Again, something students and young people have said (in varying styles and languages) for centuries.

Well done, and dont give in. Make a stand against PC bollocks, and stupid teachers - and of course the misuse of the word "ass" (This message proudly presented by the BDOTGNZA)

[hXc]

So do you have to write an essay on it?? Or is it just for classroom study?
Yeah I'm writing an essay on it. The question is, "When we read, we have different understandings ona topic. What do you understand differently after reading this text?" My brainstorm so far is:

Anarchy seemed like a good idea when it was first thought out. It made perfect sense, everybody for themselves. Of course in reality, it never worked. Without rules to follow, or rebel against, people literally went crazy.
Knowledge does not always beat application
If society was left to it's own devices, it would eventually fail miserably
If each country in the world communicated with only themselces, the world would be a very different place, and it would also never work.These of course, are all on one major theme in the book, The Lord Of The Flies. This theme is inate human evil.

[BuFfY]

Yeh cause you need to make sure you incorp. all the other elements of the book. The more you analyse the better your mark it... but the more orignal the better it is once again!!

I wish I had studied it so that I could help you out more... I am kinda good at essays so if you want to flick a model essay through to me I will do the old teachery thing and proof read it

[James Deuce]

Yeah I'm writing an essay on it. The question is, "When we read, we have different understandings ona topic. What do you understand differently after reading this text?" My brainstorm so far is:

Anarchy seemed like a good idea when it was first thought out. It made perfect sense, everybody for themselves. Of course in reality, it never worked. Without rules to follow, or rebel against, people literally went crazy.
Knowledge does not always beat application
If society was left to it's own devices, it would eventually fail miserably
If each country in the world communicated with only themselces, the world would be a very different place, and it would also never work.These of course, are all on one major theme in the book, The Lord Of The Flies. This theme is inate human evil.

Anarchy is the absence of government, not the descent into chaos depicted in LOTF. Anarchists of the 1920s gave Anarchy a bad name by behaving like Nihilists. Anarchy acknowledges the worth of society, while nihilism wants to deny the reality of existence. Think of Anarchy as the ACT party, and Nihilism as the Greens.

Also the sample group of characters in LOTF isn't representative of "society", in either the time it was set or the present today.

[Hitcher]

That does not mean they are stupid, or un-educated. It just means, and goes to show, that the language used is out of date, isn't used in most countries, and hasn't been for a long time.
Try reading it out loud, it sometimes helps. And marvel at the way Shakespeare incorporates poetry and prose. Quatrains, couplets, partial sonnet forms. I thought you were a musician? Read Shakespeare with a musician's eyes. And soul. Unless, of course, you're a rap artist...

[hXc]

Try reading it out loud, it sometimes helps. And marvel at the way Shakespeare incorporates poetry and prose. Quatrains, couplets, partial sonnet forms. I thought you were a musician? Read Shakespeare with a musician's eyes. And soul. Unless, of course, you're a rap artist...
I wasn't saying anything against Shakespeare. I love his work, maybe because I am a musician. But Shakespeare was a great writer. I met him once...In a past life. I was a donkey

[Hitcher]

Think of Anarchy as the ACT party, and Nihilism as the Greens.
Bwahahahahahahahaha! (Dries eyes. Straightens toupee.) Thank you Sir. I needed that.

[El Dopa]

the man who wrote The Da Vinci Code be better.

Dan Brown.

And No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No.

[El Dopa]

The trouble I found was in relating my own life experiences to what was happening in the books, so like you I struggled to relate, or find relevance.

HXC, if you're having trouble relating to the book, have a look at the next time a group of boys in school gangs up on an individual. Check out the way they're behaving and then re-read any of the bits of the book that include 'piggy'.

[hXc]

Dan Brown.

And No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No.
It seems I am getting a whole lot of bad comments about The Da Vinci Code. Yes, the ideas that are in the book are obviously completely un-true, but it's a different take on things. I believe it's a well written book, with some interesting points in it. Is it because it's too different and completely different to what we know as 'right'?

[hXc]

HXC, if you're having trouble relating to the book, have a look at the next time a group of boys in school gangs up on an individual. Check out the way they're behaving and then re-read any of the bits of the book that include 'piggy'.
I never said I was having trouble relating to the book. But I don't like it none the less.

[El Dopa]

It seems I am getting a whole lot of bad comments about The Da Vinci Code. Yes, the ideas that are in the book are obviously completely un-true, but it's a different take on things. I believe it's a well written book, with some interesting points in it. Is it because it's too different and completely different to what we know as 'right'?

Well, I've read the book, and its certainly a page-turner. Its a useful book to have if you're on a long-haul flight and you haven't read it already. BUT, having read it once, I wouldn't pick it up again. It just isn't that interesting. Once you know the story, there's nothing to make you go back to it.

The reasons i'd go back to a book are:

1) because the ideas expressed in it were complex and expressed well, and I want to revisit them and think about them/engage with them again (e.g. Animal Farm, 1984, Brave New World).

2) the way the author has crafted the language is fantastic, and just reading the words and the way sentences are put together makes me go 'wow' (e.g love in the time of cholera)

Anything by Dan Brown (for me) would fail badly on both those counts. That's why I don't think it deserves to be taught in schools. Time is short, and there's a lot of better books that could be taught.

[riffer]

HXC, if you're having trouble relating to the book, have a look at the next time a group of boys in school gangs up on an individual. Check out the way they're behaving and then re-read any of the bits of the book that include 'piggy'.

Or even listen to The Beatles White Album.