Veeky Forums's thoughts on Lord of the Flies?

Just curious to know what you guys think, that's all. I've never read the book btw.

Girls are HOT

it's fucking great

>Trying to hide the fact that he's secretly a faggot

It was a good book to read when I was 14 years old, in retrospect it was okay.

Could you explain why?

it's good, deserves its place in the starter kit
but nothing incredible

Well, I'd say I'm quite beyond the "starter kit" phase. I probably would've read it back in the 9th grade if I had moved in to my new high school sooner. Should I read it anyway?

its a pretty short and easy, so you might as well.

I liked it, but I was 12.

Short, easy and fun read. Give it a go OP, The trial scene is slick as hell. Piggy dindu nuffin.

girls

WHY ARE THERE NO WOMEN??? WILLIAM GOLDING IS A SEXIST PIG WHO WON'T REPRESENT WOMEN!!! THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!!

Its a children's book written by a bong
So naturally the kids ass-rape a pig with a spear.
Why are bongs so degenerate?
We should nuke England.

Actually, from what I heard, he was a major beta cuck. He wrote a book as a way to rant on "toxic masculinity" and believed women to be the superior sex.

I thought it was incredible when I was 13, probably the book that got me into classics. A little scared to re-read it though.

>A little scared to re-read it though
how come?

What does Veeky Forums think of the upcoming movie adaption that replaces all the boys with girls instead?

Shit. It's like an angry, reactionary grandpa's idea of what "kids these days" are like.

Guys, could you please elaborate a bit on your responses?

Sure - it's a pessimistic view of humanity, and more specifically children, where any sort of empathy or morality disappears the second things get difficult, and everyone is just a violent brute. It resonated with me as a 13-year-old boy because I was an arrogant little shitter who thought "every man for himself" was a working philosophy, but looking back it's just needlessly edgy and incoherent.

Wow, interesting. Thanks for the detailed reply.

I agree that it shows a pessimistic view of humanity, but I wouldn't link it to the idea of 'every man for himself'. Both 'tribes' are communities, even though one is more violent than the other, it's more of an attempt to explore how terrible children can be.
In a lot of ways it's a kid's Heart of Darkness; the 'civilised' public schoolboys end up abandoning their 'proper' sensibilities and reverting to more violent and base instincts because we are not as good as we think we are when we're dragged from our comforts and find that maintaining our rules is difficult compared to less 'moral' options.
(this is also why John green seems to hate it, hence why he gets posted every time this book comes up. All the stuff about women aside, he really objects to the idea that humans aren't fundamentally good.)

It also strays into examining the power of a charismatic leader with essentially a personal army to shape the mind of 'society' and make people allow atrocities they'd never normally have dreamed of accepting, but given how much it was inspired by World War 2 that isn't particularly surprising.

So basically a YA version of Heart of Darkness? No wonder it never made it to the Western Canon.

Outside of the core idea it touches on different themes than HoD but in a lot of ways yes, it's a YA Heart of Darkness. I'm always surprised when people discuss the book without looking at how much Heart of Darkness must have inspired Goulding. I have to admit, I love Heart of Darkness, and the similarities helped to enjoy Lord of the Flies when I read it for the first time as an adult.

Well, now I know what to read. Thanks.

Always glad to help out.

SIMON IS JESUS
:^)

How could someone miss the point this fucking hard?

Really good for high school aged readers.

I liked this one better.