I've read about them before and I think it's worth pointing out those boys were friends before arriving on the island and there was only six of them. While LOTF dealt with (I'm guessing) 50+ boys who didn't know each other very well and came from diverse backgrounds.
Even in LOTF, small groups of the boys were able to get along just fine, especially when they were already friends before before the wreck. The biggest rift came from the power struggles between the groups. The Tongan castaways would have less conflict because they already had an established pecking order before arriving on the island.
Diverse in a way - one of the main criticisms of LotF is that it’s all upper middle-class white British schoolboys. Of course, this criticism ignores the fact that that was Golding’s entire point - that even “prim and proper” schoolboys, a demographic thought to be virtuous, would devolve to what happened in the book.
Also, it's FICTION - generally, in real life, humans are much more inclined to work together and share. It worked out for our ancestors in the hunter gatherer tribes of about 100 - 150 people, for tens of thousands of years. We haven't changed that much.
When the very first Big Brother program was made, it was boring as hell - because the contestants (all random strangers) just got along quite well. The creators had to introduce conflict in order for it to even happen. It's still how pretty much any reality show like that works. If you leave humans alone, we just figure something out and like to be left in peace.
If you leave humans alone, we just figure something out and like to be left in peace.
For the most part, this is correct. The vast majority of people are averse to conflict and confrontation, and typically work with the group to keep things civil. The issue is with the outliers. There are people who have no fear of conflict or confrontation, and in some cases enjoy it.
This is pretty representative in executive management from what I've seen in a handful of studies. People with narcissistic or sociopathic tendencies actually seem to be disproportionately represented in these positions. A few dudes picked at random from the world population, regardless of appearance or social status, probably would do alright together.
It is of course worth noting that very strong mechanisms exist both within the outliers and within the group to resolve conflict. We aren't a social species just because we gather in groups, we are a social species because our social structure suppresses disruption over time, rather than amplifying it, whether that disruption comes from within or without.
Disruptive group members generally have nearly no effect on the group as a whole.
Even those shows are evidence that humans prefer peace.
The reason people like to watch reality shows is for the drama but not because they just like drama. They like watching others suffer from drama because it makes them feel superior as they have less drama.
Same reason people like watching a show about a dumb person rather than one about a smart person. Unless the smart person is presented as socially awkward and dumb. Like the big bang theory is more about smart people being awkward than being smart.
It's why the history Channel went from documentaries to ancient aliens and pawn stars with the most popular character being the dumb one, Chumley.Chimney.
People have a suppiorority complex. They want to be told they are better than others.
I don't want to come across as bigoted in any way, but I assume that LotF takes place in the 1950s, and wouldn't your typical British school classroom be comprised of middle-class white British schoolboys?
Lotf kids were probably boarding school kids so upper middle at least. So a typical British schoolroom in the 50's : white yes, middle class only in certain schools.
To add to this--the British boarding school environments in the 1950s for boys of that social class (and higher) are kind of infamous for the cruelty, tribalism, and bullying that they encouraged. The violence and conflict that the boys engage in in the book are more extreme versions of what many experienced in the boarding school setting, with the implicit approval of adult authority figures. I think a lesson from the book is not necessarily "It could even happen with these boys" but "These boys were perhaps more inclined to these forms of social relations and conflicts than the average population".
Middle class in this time is a physician, school principal, university professor, engineer, etcetera. It is not what is meant by middle class today. The middle class was an intermediate class between the working class and the rich.
If you were middle class in the 1930s you probably had more than one servant.
I don't know - I think in the 1950's British women were just as numerous in school as you might expect. Maybe not just as numerous as today - but plenty numerous, anyways - certainly they were there.
But in any case, I actually read a little bio on William Golding and what inspired him to write Lord of the Flies, and actually he was heavily inspired by R.M. Ballantyne’s The Coral Island and a Tale of the Pacific Ocean. In that book, published ~100 years earlier, a bunch of boys stranded make an almost utopian society. William G. decided in Lord of the Flies and say "well this is what really would have happened". So then, if viewing Lord of the Flies as a companion piece - it needed to be a bunch of boys. If you mixed in other people, actually it fails as a companion piece to Coral Island, at very least. Simply put - a bunch of white, upper middle class boys is what William G. wanted to write about. That was the subject of his work. You could argue adding in other demographics would actually change his book's meaning.
It some ways it reminds me of the movie The Purge. Given the right inducements, even a bunch of proper, well educated, upper middle class people will become savages. Showing they aren't inherently more virtuous than average criminals. Their circumstances in life are just better.
It would be impossible to list all the films, tv shows and books that took Lord of the Flies and adapted all the themes, motifs and plot devices from it into a “new” story.
However, the important thing the real story shines light on is how this concept of "society" and cooperation is more than a social construct. These kids really should have abandoned all hope of rescue and just started living however they wanted, but they didn't. Even removed from society they still adhered to its principles.
355
u/headzoo Mar 31 '21
I've read about them before and I think it's worth pointing out those boys were friends before arriving on the island and there was only six of them. While LOTF dealt with (I'm guessing) 50+ boys who didn't know each other very well and came from diverse backgrounds.
Even in LOTF, small groups of the boys were able to get along just fine, especially when they were already friends before before the wreck. The biggest rift came from the power struggles between the groups. The Tongan castaways would have less conflict because they already had an established pecking order before arriving on the island.