Customer Reviews
Contender for 'Worst Book Ever' - By: J. Ashworth, 18 Sep 2008 
Let me just say one thing; I am an avid reader. I love books. Whenever I begin reading, I cannot stop halfway through, even if it is an absolutely awful book. However, this book went beyond awful. It was so far past awful it made me want to throw up (and I wish I were exaggerating). Not just because the book is basically a doctoral thesis on human psychology wrappedin a plot stolen from 'The Coral Island', but mainly because it makes no sense.
Let's start at the beginning: The arrival. The pilot manages to safely land the plane on the one islandin the middle of nowhere, while the cockpit is on fire. Having done this, the several tonne plane then washes out to sea, after all the boys have left, without a scratch on them. Not even a bruise, after an emergency crash-landing through a forest. This is stupid.
Also, why is this deserted island of such importance that there are enemy planes patrolling? It cannot be between them & the enemy's target, or the plane would be goingin exactly the wrong direction. This is also stupid.
Next, these boys, rather than being even slightly upset, & without the faintest trace of post-traumatic shock, begin to get naked & swim. Because once you are stranded on an Island with no hope of rescue, swimming is the first priority. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
The conch. Hands up everyone who remembers the conch. Not A conch, THE conch. This is highly unlikely. Where you find one, you find many. And yet, miraculously, they find a single conch, completely undamaged. And immediately Ralph knows how to 'play' it. Suspiciously stupid.
Skipping forward a bit: The pigs. Not suspicious having pigs, is it? Yes. Yes it is. How are there just pigs on this island? If you have pigs, you have other animals. There are no other animals. Then how did the pigs come to be there? Quite stupid. Taking it as read that they did miraculously appear, why do they act as they do? We know from experience (See Dodos) that an animal without predators loses its fight or flight instincts. The population should A) have been booming, & B) be so tame that the conch would draw them all to find out what the fuss was about.
Then there is the Beast: Lt's talk about the pilot. He (while dead, mind you) floats down directly on to this one island,in the middle of the ocean, & lands on the island. Once more this shows that there are ennemy planes over head, & this island must be of some importance, which would suggest the rapid discovery of the children, with their fires etc. Anyway, this pilot floats down, & gets lodged, inextricably, so that it cannot move. Until the plot requires it. Upon the death of Simon, the ropes all free themselves at once, & the pilot glides away. And this isn't the last appearance of our good friend unlikely coincidence.
No. To finish, I shall turn to the end (of the book; we already know we're coming to the end of the review. How? I just said so.). At the very end, the schoolboys, who are now all insanein the fastest downfall since... actually, the fastest downfall full stop(.) They are attacking Ralph, who miraculously retains his moral compass, & set fire to the island. At this precise moment, a naval ship appears, & a boat dispatched to investigate, justin time to save Ralph. Absolute tripe. The boys all then immediately regain their minds, & all is well.
I think my point is clear, that this book was not thought through, & was merely a vessel for Golding's feelings. The amount of symbolismin the book is beyond belief, to the point where it becomes unreadable (well, more so), & the plot feels contrived. After having done this book for GCSE (and somehow scraped an A, despite the ludicrously ambiguous questions), I felt like throwing the book through the window of the exam hall. I am now physically unable to read the book, without suffering from a headache, & I urge you not to even attempt to read this, & I pity all of you who are forced to do it for GCSE.
(As a post-script, I feel I should point out that this 'book' was lambasted when it came out, as it should have been, & it was only the Americans who decided it was worth the read (it wasn't), so we can all blame them for inflicting this on us)
Loved it - By: H. Butler, 05 Sep 2008 
I was fortunate enough to not have to read this novel at school. It meant I could read it at my own pace & not have to write 10,000 words on the symbolism of blah, blah, blah. Lord of the Flies has become one of those tales that is a stereotype of itself. But I still enjoyed reading it. I think this book holds up well & it has stood the test of time. But as we move deeper into the Blu-ray generation, however, time can only tell?
It's a slow book that doesn't really go anywhere - By: OK, 01 Sep 2008 
For years this has been on my list of books to read, when I bought it I got ten other books as well. I started reading three or four to begin with. This was the first one I left reading. When I got some of the other books read I went back to it, still no, I picked up a different book. After another while I went back to it but started a few chapters into it. This time I finished it.
The plot I felt didn't go far. The psychological aspect only got interesting towards the end of the book & could've continued into the boys during the aftermath of what had happened. That is what I would be more interested in.
I know that that wasn't really his message but I just think it would have made for a better book.
A good education - By: Milly Ward, 20 Jul 2008 I found the 14 year olds perspective really interesting. I read this book for G.C.S.E. & loved it! admittedly I had read it several years before & found it O.K. Looking back I think I missed some of the finer points & the more gory bits put me off (I was about 10 & more interestedin ponies at the time).
It is true to say that often studying a book can ruin it, destroying the magic of the story. butin my case study enriched the experience & helped me to understand some of the finer points. at the time I loved the way that understanding added new depths to the text.
I have just read it again & I still love it. one of the greatest things about LOTF is its ability to appeal to both a young & mature audience, & I was delighted to find that, like teaching, age also offers new angles of approach & fresh perspectives.
Having sung its praises I do feel that William Golding had an axe to grind when he was writing LOTF & there is an ever-present religious undertone that can get a bit monotonus. I think for this reason the book is better suited to younger readers & will be especially appreciated by those with a bit of nouse, who are able to see but not be draggedin by some of the books (arguably) outdated moral ideals that seem a little un-realistic. Similarly some of the more obvious analytical gems, such as the island as a microcosm of the world & the boys as representations of humanity get a bit dull & repetitive, but a bit of reading around will see you well rewarded.
For me LOTF remains a good story & an excellent introduction to textual analysis that is very rewarding no matter when you read it.
Another classic that lives up to its billing - By: Ian Shine, 14 Jul 2008 I always find it a little daunting finally getting round to reading a book that you've previously read & heard so much about. Obviously 'Lord of the Flies' has had a lot said about it, & I cannot but agree with most of it. It's psychologically on the button, delving into & really immersing youin the minds of a group of stranded young boys, & its political allegories are just as striking as Orwell's.
As such, there's not really much to add that hasn't already been said. It's a simple read, but it strikes deep. Golding says as little as possible with his words, but the thoughts he provokes are important ones, & ones that still sound true with us today,in this era of political bandstanding.
