Skip to main content

Symbolic summary of Lord of the Flies.

My kid wrote this for English class. I thought it was pretty darn funny.


Locke Pascal
13/5/2014
Period 2

In The Lord of the Flies, by William Golding, a group of Metaphors in the guise of English schoolboys are shot out of the sky after their transport plane is mistaken for a military craft. This caused the young Metaphors to be stranded on a Metaphoric Island after their probably metaphoric plane crashes and leaves a definite Metaphor of a Scar in the jungle.

Basically, The Lord of the Flies is one massive analogy: which provides plenty of symbolism to look at.
The first piece of symbolism to appear is the Scar left by the plane. Symbolising the surprisingly arrogant notion that human presence is inherently destructive. The Metaphors’ accidental arrival brings a massive mar on the island before the Metaphors could even gather and start any of their business.
Another more acknowledged piece of symbolism to show up at the same time as the Scar is the Island itself, acting like the local Garden of Eden. As it’s a “pure” place untouched by evil. But as said, the Scar undoes that purity.

The next piece of symbolism to appear is the Conch. Symbolising society and order, with the Conch being used to gather and organise the Metaphors. Its fragility could represent the the also actually, awfully, arrogant accusation that society as a concept is easily destroyed by something similar to either simply being dropped, or having a massive boulder run it over due to negligence. Throughout the story the importance and authority of the Conch wavers and becomes essentially ignored by the larger body of Metaphors, sans Piggy, the walking Intellectualism Metaphor.

Last, but really not least at all, the most consistent piece of Symbolism in the story are the tiny, talking, walking Metaphors themselves. With the most prominent of them being Ralph, Jack, Piggy, and Simon. Symbolising Responsibility, Power, Intellectualism, and Philosophy respectively. With Power basically dumping loads of sweaty old gym socks on the rest of them for no reason better than just the fact Power doesn’t play nice with anyone. Power’s refusal to play nice eventually results in Intellectualism and Philosophy drowning in the sweaty old gym socks because Power just could not take being told to calm his butt down. Responsibility almost swallows a load of socks, but the whole thing get’s set on fire because Power was stupid.

In conclusion, as stated before: The whole thing’s an analogy. Several layers of symbolism put together like a slightly foul and arrogant ice-cream cake. Probably with “Huminz sux” written sloppily on the top.



Comments

chickelit said…
This could work as a shorter "Cliff's Notes" version.
1:36 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Some times some people.

 
Post a Comment
Read more

It's Not Projection

Take the case of "fascism". When you can see clear as day that the person who is accusing you of fascism is a fascist, they aren't projecting. They're talking about something ELSE. Basically, in the case of fascism, the basic set of fascist government controls are the default assumption of reality for a whole lot of people. The government is supposed to control every part of your life. The government is supposed to make you moral and good and reflect "justice". The government is supposed to do this by picking winners from the good people and losers from the bad people. The government is supposed to control the way people do business, how businesses (and farmers) function and what they produce. And people should be made to cooperate with this control because they are part of society and society is dependent on everyone being in compliance. This is simply the Truth. It's how the world works and how the world is supposed to work. The Socialist Nationalism, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Tyranny.gov vs Tyranny.com

Compulsion is Compulsion, no matter who does it.  This is Brilliant Theft is Theft, no matter who does it. Freedom of Association has no room in it for *private* action   that takes that away Freedom of Association. If I have a business and have voluntary associations such that I choose to serve some people and to not serve others, that might make me a jerk and it might lose me business, it might make me smart and it might gain me business, but it's got to be my choice.  If I would normally serve the current disliked minority in my shop except for the fact that if I'm SEEN to serve them by the wrong people I'll have a private campaign against me as those people do everything possible to ruin me by preventing me from doing business physically or by attacking my customers or suppliers, then I am NOT free to make those choices. Does it really make a difference to losing my CHOICE to voluntarily associate if there's a law that says I may not serve "those people" o...
Post a Comment
Read more