Lord of the Flies - William Golding

⭐ 4.5/10

(Originally written by Chaives)

First I must say I know many people read this book in high school English class. It was not part of my curriculum though so I’ve never read it before. I’ve heard there was a movie but I’ve also never watched it. Lord of the Flies appears on a list I have of “100 epic reads of a lifetime”. So I chose to listen to the audiobook the other day at work. 

And wow. Let me tell you, I kind of knew what I was expecting but still. 

The story follows a group of British boys being flown away to safety during the Great War. Their plane crashes (was shot? Mechanical failure? Unknown) down and the survivors are stranded on a deserted island with only adolescent boys, the oldest being aged 12.

Basically the novel is an illustration of a society without laws, and the devolution of humankind into savagery without civilized society.

The book itself was written well, and was definitely an interesting, albeit slightly horrific, read. But I have one major problem with it -

So the book is read by the author William Golding. He introduces the novel by telling the reader his reasoning for writing the book, and by answering a question that I assume has been asked a lot by readers, and is especially relevant in today’s social climate.

Mr. Golding answers the million dollar question - why boys on the island? Why not little girls? Or why not little boys AND little girls?

His answer is my problem with the book. And honestly I wish he hadn’t included it. Otherwise I’m sure I would have come at this novel without a feminist perspective, I wouldn’t have interrogated it at all, and would have just enjoyed this bloodbath of a ride.

First, he says it must be little boys, because little girls would not cope the same. He basically says that little girls wouldn’t fall into savagery - what? Then he goes on to say that women are far superior to men in every way - but is this his true opinion or is he just trying to placate his woman readers?

(Really to me it sounds like Golding just wanted to get his PR team off his back so he added the obligatory “feminist statement”)

Because the very next sentence he utters is, “but women are not society and therefore they do not represent society.”

 

What? 

There are two ways to read this statement. Either he is saying that women do not have a place in society outside of the home economy and therefore they do not represent society - which is a past century mindset - OR he is saying that women should not be in society and they do not represent society because they do not have the rational and sophisticated education and discipline that boys do. Which is problematic. (Also sure true due to the fact that women were treated like garbage who didn’t deserve an education for most of the earths revolutions around the sun).

Secondly, Me. Golding says he did not want to make the novel about sex, because that is what would ultimately happen if you mix little boys and little girls. Which, okay, fair point.

But what I’m trying to illustrate here is that this book is so culturally out of touch. Golding says women aren’t society. Women gained the right to vote in Britain in 1918 (two years before America). Lord of the Flies was written in 1953. His own mother was a suffragette.

For 35 years women had been representing society already.

Golding literally was just a patriarchal asshole who also didn’t want to account for the fact that little boys would also engage in sexual activity with each other at prepubescent ages so basically I just wanted to write this review to say I thought the book’s author was trash.

but the story was pretty good.