Lord of the Flies?

Is it a good book?
How old were you when you read it?
Is it suitable for an 11 child?
Do you want your grandchildren to read it?


Just curious as usual.

It's a brilliat book, Alice.

Shelagh wrote:

It's a brilliat book, Alice.

Thank you Shelagh --the other questions, please.

I read it in college; I saw the movie; I was haunted by it for many years. I don't remember it in detail; but it had such a strong impact on me then that I chose not to read it again.

As to age appropriate; it depends on the maturity of the child. Children today are much more sophisticated than when I was young.

I read it in sixth grade, which would make me about that age. It was perfectly appropriate, and the subject of weeks of great discussion in English class. Is it even required reading anymore? Seems like a lot of the classics have been ditched in favor of "multicultural" books that have nothing to recommend them other than an agenda to push.

I have taught it. It was required reading for 10th grade honors classes for years.

It's a bit gruesome in places for an 11 year old, though. Better for early high school, I would think.

Ann

It is not a happy book.

However, today's children are exposed to television and video games that are pretty awful.

What some sixth graders have to say about it:

http://www.nisk.k12.ny.us/larow/novels96/lord_of_the.html

I remembered it as a sixth grade-level book. Ann, I am surprised it was tenth grade honors reading at your school. But since you've described your school as inner-city, maybe I shouldn't be.

I read it in college - at Michigan State Honors College - for a special group of particularly bright students in a small college atmosphere. Literature may be age relevant; however, good literature is also age neutral in terms of appeal. A child's book should also offer appeal to adults.

The reading level (language) limits some books to a more language sophisticated audience; however, many great pieces of literature use no words past what would be considered middle elementary level.

Last I knew, the great newspapers (now disappearing fast) have language that is about mid elementary level.

It's been a very long time since I needed a dictionary to fully grasp the meaning of any particular word in anything I have read.

My understanding is that newspapers are written at an 8th/9th grade level, the "Enquirer" types at a sixth grade level, and the WSJ at a 12th grade level.

I disagree that a child's book should hold interest for the average adult. But I also wouldn't call LOTF a child's book or even YA. That said, it still seems most appropriate for a rigorous sixth grade class. My kids were/are reading much different books in their high school honors classes.

Of course, maybe an older group finds different layers to talk about.

Thank you all for your opinions. They are greatly appreciated.

LC wrote:

I remembered it as a sixth grade-level book. Ann, I am surprised it was tenth grade honors reading at your school. But since you've described your school as inner-city, maybe I shouldn't be.

Actually, it was also used at the same level in the school my kids attended, which was, and still is, ranked one of the highest in the state, and the "inner city" school where I taught was an experimental program which developed a curriculum designed to make those kids competitive with kids from the higher income schools.

The difference would probably have more to do with the time element. I'm talking the 1980's. Maybe today's 6th graders could grasp the deeper levels and themes, but I'm not convinced they would. The responses from the sixth graders in Shelagh's post didn't indicate a lot of depth.

The reading level is not all that high, but the underlying themes and symbols might be.



Ann

When you think of it, it is kind of ironic: Are children of that age going to be able to understand a book that deals with the concept that such children have not developed enough to be able to govern themselves?

http://www.cliffsnotes.com/WileyCDA/LitNote/Lord-of-the-Flies.id-64.html

Quote :

Lord of the Flies explores the dark side of humanity, the savagery that underlies even the most civilized human beings. Golding intended this novel as a tragic parody of children's adventure tales, illustrating humankind's intrinsic evil nature. He presents the reader with a chronology of events leading a group of young boys from hope to disaster as they attempt to survive their uncivilized, unsupervised, isolated environment until rescued.

Quote :

The difference would probably have more to do
with the time element. I'm talking the 1980's. Maybe today's 6th
graders could grasp the deeper levels and themes, but I'm not convinced
they would. The responses from the sixth graders in Shelagh's post
didn't indicate a lot of depth.

That's an interesting comment. Are you saying sixth graders (maybe students in general) were better critical thinkers 30+ years ago? I wouldn't be surprised, but I wonder why. 30 years of dumbing down of the school curricula?

LC wrote:

Quote :

The difference would probably have more to do
with the time element. I'm talking the 1980's. Maybe today's 6th
graders could grasp the deeper levels and themes, but I'm not convinced
they would. The responses from the sixth graders in Shelagh's post
didn't indicate a lot of depth.

That's an interesting comment. Are you saying sixth graders (maybe students in general) were better critical thinkers 30+ years ago? I wouldn't be surprised, but I wonder why. 30 years of dumbing down of the school curricula?

I'm just saying that the curriculum was different. I don't personally think that sixth graders have reached the level of cognitive or moral development to grasp the significance of the novel, and I'm not speaking of the level of language or word recognition skills, but of the level of moral and cognitive development. Maybe I'm thinking of Piaget and Kohlberg, and that the median group of these kids is just barely entering the stage of formal operations. Many of them are simply not there yet. I'm assuming that the reason for placing it so early is that the characters are about the same age as the students, and that it is being read simply as an adventure story. That's why the book was taught at a early high school level rather than beginning middle school. It was written for people who were at a higher level of moral and cognitive development.

There is so much more to the book than an adventure story, and there are other better books for the younger students.

Is the curriculum being dumbed down? It would seem so, but the point here is that the curriculum designers are not getting it. Just because this book is about children does not mean it is a children's book.

Attempting to teach it to 6th graders is not about dumbing down, it's either about holding too high an expectation, or its about not recognizing the book's true comprehension level.

Ann

I have to agree with Ann about the comprehension level of Lord Of The Flies, but I see not one thing wrong with a 6th grade person reading it and getting what they get out of it.



I believe that Huckelberry Finn is the same kind of book. Lots of stuff that floats on by the child mind, but understood on a different level by adults. The same with To Kill A Mockingbird.



I could list a lot.



When I was in sixth grade, not much was available to read. Definitely not any book like Lord Of The Flies.



I wish I had had the opportunity to read books like that.



I may have not understood all the author intended, but a good story is enough to encourage a child to read. That is what is important.



I am thinking of Richard Adams and the story of the bear cult.



Small windows enlighten the mind, no matter if the mind is old or young. Let in the light. It is important.



Love,

Betty

Betty,

Nothing you read could have affected you adversely.

Sorry, but you had a bad to the bone, miserable childhood. Your folks belonged in jaii.

Love,



Alice

Betty, it's perfectly OK to read books like Huccleberry Finn and Lord of the Flies in 6th grade. they are both vivid, well told stories that can be read on several different levels, again and again.

But they are both also dense and multi-level works that can be studied as literature, challenging for readers and students at higher levels.

I remember hearing Lynn, Susan, and David joking about the sophomore honors curriculum for English being designed to prove that "man is essentially evil." and agreeing with them, about the curriculum, anyway. At least the 10th graders could make conscious decisions as to whether or not they agreed. I'm not sure the 6th graders would have that level of discernment.

I remember one of my favorite students, during his Jr. year, having a real problem because he didn't agree with the philosophy of Emily Dickenson, at least as it appeared in her poems. His frustration was voiced when he said, "But, Ms. J, she's in the textbook."

It came as a great shock to him that he wasn't supposed to believe that everything he read in the classroom wasn't absolute gospel, and he was sixteen, at the time. He had lived a very protected life.

The light is always important, Betty. Some grasp it more quickly than others. You were a child of that light. It helped you to survive.

Ann