• laranis@lemmy.zip
      8·
      7 hours ago

      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.

    • stiephelando@discuss.tchncs.de
      12·
      10 hours ago

      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.

    • Armand1@lemmy.world
      2·
      11 hours ago

      Anyone know what the movie mentioned in the article is called? Could be a fun niche watch.

    • Thebular@lemmy.world
      15·
      19 hours ago

      Hey, thanks man, that was an interesting read, perfect for insomniacs trying to fall asleep.

    • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
      11·
      17 hours ago

      “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”

    • morphballganonEnglish
      1·
      10 hours ago

      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

    • bampop@lemmy.world
      14·
      19 hours ago

      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.

    • kerrigan778@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      2·
      7 hours ago

      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
        1·
        5 hours ago

        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.zoneEnglish
          1·
          15 minutes ago

          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.

    • LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world
      203·
      1 day ago

      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.

      • theneverfox@pawb.socialEnglish
        14·
        12 hours ago

        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

        • Deathray5@lemmynsfw.com
          1·
          9 hours ago

          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.socialEnglish
            1·
            6 hours ago

            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