I read Bregman's book and can recommend it. The boys in question collaborated, grew crops and fished. Whenever they had a fight amongst them they'd retreat to cool down. One of them broke his leg and the others cared for him.
Honestly, I think six is likely the right number for this to work. I don't recall how many boys were in Lord of the Flies, but you get to 10-15 and you're absolutely going to start forming factions. And a hierarchy. And with more opinions you get more disagreements, and you're right back to Lord of the Flies.
I liked that book. It was eye-opening. And kinda made me appreciate the relative orderliness we have in a society run by adults. As much as kids would love to run wild & free with no supervision, but I was fortunate to be a child of the 1970's & 80s so I enjoyed the perfect balance of wild freedom with parental care at the end of every day.
Edit: I am not saying it’s not a good book. I enjoyed reading it myself. I just don’t like the picture it paints of society and the conclusions people draw from it.
When lunchtime approached at her usual morning time, Becca waited and waited, still and silent, till the sun set on the calm and foamy sea. She sat waiting in the golden hour sun, stomach churning, wondering why.
I both dislike the book and dislike this comic for missing the actual point of the book, which is not in fact, haha, this is what would actually happen and it's just a group of random kids. It was specifically portraying british aristocratic children to criticize the colonizer mindset while discussing larger issues of human nature and civility and structure vs chaos.
I haven't read the book but how did it criticize the colonizer mindset? A cursory look makes it seem like a justification of paternalistic authority, so propaganda for kids to blindly listen to their parents haha.
If anything wouldn't this be justification for colonization, as colonized nations were often infantalized/dehumanized?
It was specifically a contrast on the colonizer mindset that was common both in culture and literature at the time. Showing a bunch of useless british aristocrats coming to "savage lands" and rather than taming the land they were shown that without their wealth and power and being taken care of by competent natives and labourers they became the savages they claimed to be inherently divinely better than.
I hated it because it was totally unbelievable, just a paternalistic rationalization for authority
I was confronted with the knowledge that the adults around me all thought the only thing keeping me from murdering someone was layers of rules and supervision. Like we're all just rabid animals barely held back by a watchful eye
Even then, I knew myself better than that. I knew people better than that
But that's how our society treats people. Like monsters that must be managed
Fair, my analysis of it was that it was more metaphorical. That you could abstract it easily to global society at large.
The rejection of intellectualism through breaking glasses. The war caused over superstition. The one disabled kid being murdered first could be read as a criticism of extreme right wing ideology.
The Forrest burning is very reminiscent of American napalm bombing. Hell the meetings could be compared to the UN if you squint
I can see that angle, but that's not how it was presented to me... And based on memes like this, it's not how it was presented to most students. Teachers legitimately taught this as if it were a justification for giving us so little autonomy
Analyzing it now outside of that, I see a through line with what you're saying. I think to really understand the intention behind it, this all points back to one thing...
“I have always understood the Nazis,” Golding confessed, “because I am of that sort by nature.”
To drive your point home, most of what you listed are on the fascism checklist. This is something Golding thought of often, because he had that level of darkness within him
And as a depressed schoolteacher, he did what many small minded people do - he projected himself onto others instead of understanding that people come with all sorts of drives and natures
"Shucks to your Ass-mar" Said Ralph, as his face grew white, his eyes lost focus, and a telltale buzzing began emanating from somewhere deep inside of him. His mouth drooped low and spread wide forming a horrifying O at least two feet in diameter. The buzzing became louder and more frantic, as thousands of flies began to spill from his mouth, hurtling towards the small, fat boy in front of him who even now was attempting, futilely, to run from the buzzing, angry, hungry swarm of flies.
"He truly is" said one of the other boys, glad not to be the object of Ralph's ire for once "the lord of the flies"
LOL oops sorry. What are the odds this thread is being visited by someone reading Lord of the Flies for the first time in their life? 😆 But you were warned. That's the purpose of spoiler tags. To protect any virgin eyes out there.
As a European, the book wasn't in any of my curriculums. But I'm working my way through the classics. And as the other commenter said, your spoiler tag isn't collapsible. No worries though, my fault for reading this thread.
48 Comments
skittle07crusher@sh.itjust.works · 91 pts · 299d
Obligatory https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months
stiephelando@discuss.tchncs.de · 24 pts · 299d
I read Bregman's book and can recommend it. The boys in question collaborated, grew crops and fished. Whenever they had a fight amongst them they'd retreat to cool down. One of them broke his leg and the others cared for him.
Thebular@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 299d
Hey, thanks man, that was an interesting read, perfect for insomniacs trying to fall asleep.
laranis@lemmy.zip · 11 pts · 298d
Honestly, I think six is likely the right number for this to work. I don't recall how many boys were in Lord of the Flies, but you get to 10-15 and you're absolutely going to start forming factions. And a hierarchy. And with more opinions you get more disagreements, and you're right back to Lord of the Flies.
skisnow@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 298d
Yeah, fragmenting into groups was an important part of the book.
Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 288d
that's a confident assertion with 0 evidence
Armand1@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 299d
Anyone know what the movie mentioned in the article is called? Could be a fun niche watch.
sockenklaus@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 299d
The movie mentioned turned out to be a 10 minutes long documentary:
https://youtu.be/qHO_RlJxnVI
iamdisappoint@reddthat.com · 61 pts · 299d
I hated that damn book, but this (complete with conch) is hilarious.
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 299d
I liked that book. It was eye-opening. And kinda made me appreciate the relative orderliness we have in a society run by adults. As much as kids would love to run wild & free with no supervision, but I was fortunate to be a child of the 1970's & 80s so I enjoyed the perfect balance of wild freedom with parental care at the end of every day.
Bababasti@feddit.org · 37 pts · 299d
If it’s really that eye-opening is debatable I would say. As another user has posted it already, this is a more realistic scenario: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months
Edit: I am not saying it’s not a good book. I enjoyed reading it myself. I just don’t like the picture it paints of society and the conclusions people draw from it.
MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 299d
Well imagine if one of the kids was young Donald Trump. Pretty sure it would be different.
Crashumbc@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 299d
Not really, he would disappear early on.
RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz · 0 pts · 299d
The idea of you debating their subjetive experience sounds funny
Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de · 5 pts · 299d
Lord of the flies is not based on a true story
RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 299d
Wat. I'm talking about them saying it was eye opening lol
Jessica@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 299d
Oh I see. You replied to the wrong person
RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 298d
Whelks_chance@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 299d
Reading it in the early 00s it made me wish I lived somewhere far more interesting with far more wild classmates.
All the rules and restrictions were so internalised, I think if we were abandoned on an island half of them would just sit still and starve.
I can't imagine any of them being interesting enough to try to start their own religious cult or anything.
PieMePlenty@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 299d
kerrigan778@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 298d
I both dislike the book and dislike this comic for missing the actual point of the book, which is not in fact, haha, this is what would actually happen and it's just a group of random kids. It was specifically portraying british aristocratic children to criticize the colonizer mindset while discussing larger issues of human nature and civility and structure vs chaos.
shawn1122@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 298d
I haven't read the book but how did it criticize the colonizer mindset? A cursory look makes it seem like a justification of paternalistic authority, so propaganda for kids to blindly listen to their parents haha.
If anything wouldn't this be justification for colonization, as colonized nations were often infantalized/dehumanized?
kerrigan778@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 6 pts · 298d
It was specifically a contrast on the colonizer mindset that was common both in culture and literature at the time. Showing a bunch of useless british aristocrats coming to "savage lands" and rather than taming the land they were shown that without their wealth and power and being taken care of by competent natives and labourers they became the savages they claimed to be inherently divinely better than.
AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 pts · 299d
Can I ask why? It was actually one of my favorites in school, so just curious for a differing opinion.
theneverfox@pawb.social · 16 pts · 299d
I hated it because it was totally unbelievable, just a paternalistic rationalization for authority
I was confronted with the knowledge that the adults around me all thought the only thing keeping me from murdering someone was layers of rules and supervision. Like we're all just rabid animals barely held back by a watchful eye
Even then, I knew myself better than that. I knew people better than that
But that's how our society treats people. Like monsters that must be managed
AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 298d
Hmm, interesting. To be fair, I haven't read it since HS and that was...decades ago. Based on what you said I might reread and reassess.
Deathray5@lemmynsfw.com · 2 pts · 299d
Fair, my analysis of it was that it was more metaphorical. That you could abstract it easily to global society at large.
The rejection of intellectualism through breaking glasses. The war caused over superstition. The one disabled kid being murdered first could be read as a criticism of extreme right wing ideology.
The Forrest burning is very reminiscent of American napalm bombing. Hell the meetings could be compared to the UN if you squint
theneverfox@pawb.social · 3 pts · 298d
I can see that angle, but that's not how it was presented to me... And based on memes like this, it's not how it was presented to most students. Teachers legitimately taught this as if it were a justification for giving us so little autonomy
Analyzing it now outside of that, I see a through line with what you're saying. I think to really understand the intention behind it, this all points back to one thing...
To drive your point home, most of what you listed are on the fascism checklist. This is something Golding thought of often, because he had that level of darkness within him
And as a depressed schoolteacher, he did what many small minded people do - he projected himself onto others instead of understanding that people come with all sorts of drives and natures
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 299d
Humans aren’t monsters until they reach a critical mass. Then they’re just awful.
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 299d
Maybe it was presented to him as required school reading so that's why he hated it 😜
Kolanaki@pawb.social · 43 pts · 299d
The name of that book is kinda stupid, IMO.
None of those kids even have the ability to command flies.
bampop@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 299d
I was expecting one of the boys to get complete mastery of the word "the", then get the power of flight so he could leave the island. So disappointed.
krooklochurm@lemmy.ca · 13 pts · 299d
"Shucks to your Ass-mar" Said Ralph, as his face grew white, his eyes lost focus, and a telltale buzzing began emanating from somewhere deep inside of him. His mouth drooped low and spread wide forming a horrifying O at least two feet in diameter. The buzzing became louder and more frantic, as thousands of flies began to spill from his mouth, hurtling towards the small, fat boy in front of him who even now was attempting, futilely, to run from the buzzing, angry, hungry swarm of flies.
"He truly is" said one of the other boys, glad not to be the object of Ralph's ire for once "the lord of the flies"
morphballganon@mtgzone.com · 2 pts · 299d
I don't remember it very well but I thought the title was a reference to something hypothetical one of the kids thought of
Like they saw something they didn't fully understand and extrapolated that the thing they were seeing was the lord of the flies
bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 298d
Baal-zebub: Baal is "lord" or "master", zebub means "fly".
itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml · 19 pts · 299d
Watch out for that boulder, Piggy
einlander@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 299d
Sucks to your assmar
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 299d
Spoiler alert: >!Piggy died.!<
QuinnyCoded@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 299d
the spoiler didn't work for me, but I've already read it
kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 299d
I'm reading the book at the moment and shouldn't even be in this thread but this was a spoiler for me!
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 298d
LOL oops sorry. What are the odds this thread is being visited by someone reading Lord of the Flies for the first time in their life? 😆 But you were warned. That's the purpose of spoiler tags. To protect any virgin eyes out there.
kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 298d
As a European, the book wasn't in any of my curriculums. But I'm working my way through the classics. And as the other commenter said, your spoiler tag isn't collapsible. No worries though, my fault for reading this thread.
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 297d
The spoiler tag isn't collapsible? That's weird, it's not working for anybody? This is what it looks like on my end:
kernelle@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 296d
I'm using Voyager:
And on Firefox/lemmy.world:
I'm not sure what interface you're using, but I haven't seen Markdown spoilers done like that.
::: spoiler Tap for spoiler
hidden content
:::
Which looks like:
::: spoiler Tap for spoiler hidden content :::
LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 296d
Oh you're using Voyager. I'm using Sync. Perhaps different interfaces don't communicate the same with each other.
But your spoiler example works for me on my end. So maybe I should switch to Voyager.
davetortoise@reddthat.com · 5 pts · 299d
Uhm guys we should have a meeting ☝️🤓
dechnically@sh.itjust.works · 3 pts · 299d
this is how my world history teacher introduced us to locke and hobbes
Zozano@aussie.zone · 2 pts · 298d
Still better than the class about John Wayne Gacy, featuring Pogo the Clown.
Teppichbrand@feddit.org · 1 pts · 298d