Talk:Lord of the Flies

Major POV issue

This article presents many very particular interpretations of the text as content of the novel. Much of the book is ambiguous or open to varying interpretations and deliberately so. Like many wikipedia articles I have seen, this one does not recount a summary of the plot which limits itself to the text itself but interprets several passages, asserting authorial intent in various places which are wholly the province of the reader. This really ought to be changed and almost totally rewritten. It is like a high school paper on the book. --CRATYLUS22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.113.221.111 (talk) 14:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

confusing sentence

Right at the beginning of the section "Allegorical relationships" we read: "The relationships displayed in the novel have not yet been fully examined." What on earth does this mean? Examined by whom? I'm pretty sure this novel has been thoroughly examined, more so than most. Could we just nix the first two sentences of that section? 69.129.196.12 (talk) 14:08, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't agree more. The novel is one of the most studied novels ever, so that sentences does really not fit there, especially not without a note or explanation of some kind. It seems very unprofessional, take it away!--195.84.42.1 (talk) 09:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

about certain details

first-as mentioned bellow, there were 3 deaths. although that first kid is rather unmemorable

second-I have a problem with the being evacuated from Britain theory. The book mentions on more than one occasion that they are in the Pacific ocean so i find it more likely that they were going to/coming from a British territory (probably Australia). Also who says they were being evacuated, I don't see why these boys would be important enough to be evacuated and all the other citizens left behind. I was always under the impression that they were en-route to somewhere else when the war broke out.

third-there are missed allegorical importance's? for example the fire is used on more than one occasion and is very important to the book. The Beast is another recurring item that for me represented the unknown and the fear thereof.

fourth-Does Jacks rise to power qualify as a coup? A military coup?

fifth-I got the impression that by themselves the boys formed a primitive religion with a mythology (the beast), idols (the conch), "deliverance" (being rescued) and rituals (the assemblies, keeping the fire, offerings, kill the beast chant). Am I the only one to think this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.111.252.145 (talk) 17:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

There were three deaths

Well Ralph tells the officer that there were two dead bodies. THe mullberry marked boy was probably burned to ashes otherwise the boys might've found him dead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.177.208.27 (talk) 05:11, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Is there any source of information about the boy? From the very beginning I was curious what would happen with him. And I didn't get any answer. Could anybody reveal some truth or is it planned by the author not to reveal his fate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.40.99.104 (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Is it also worth noting that the video for Turin Brakes' Dark On Fire is clearly based on Lord Of The Flies? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxLXnccO5fQ&hl=un RangerFish (talk) 13:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Coral Island

I have always regarded Piggy as being Peterkin Gay's incarnation in Lord of the Flies. Unless an authoritative reference can be found, may I suggest the line "Golding used two of the names in his book, and replaced Peterkin with Simon" is amended. --Zipperdeedoodah (talk) 20:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

The age of kids

It is unclear from the article what age group do kids belong to. As far as I remember there were several groups: younger kids, older kids (members or orchestra?) and other kids. So can somebody add the approximate age of each category or/and the age for each main character? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilya-42 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the book divided the children into the older ones, the younguns, and the chorus (Jack's group). Midorihana みどりはな 23:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The younguns are ages 4-6, the older boys although it never actually says the age are in my opinion 11-13 and the Orchestra members are again about 13 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.32.64 (talk) 16:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I have the book right here :P :

The littluns (they're referred to that way) are aged 6+. I don't think it gives any maximum age. The biguns, primarily Ralph and Jack, along with Roger and a few others, are aged probably somewhere around 10-12/13. The "in between" are comprised of Simon, probably the twins, and some of the hunters. They're somewhere in between. I don' think Jack's choir (it's a choir, not an orchestra) has its own separate group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fin Archangel (talk • contribs) 02:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

piggy

Piggy was killed by the boulder thrown by Roger causing Piggy to die, the boulder fell from fourty feet high. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.60.243.100 (talk) 22:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC) Piggy's name was also given by his fat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.179.88 (talk) 05:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Small grammatical error

Under "plot," fourth paragraph. The sentence reads

While on his way there, he find the pig's head on a stick Jack put there earlier, and begins to hallucinate.

I believe it should read

While on his way there, he finds the pig's head on a stick Jack put there earlier, and begins to hallucinate.

Also, the sentence describing a dead parachuter is brought in rather abruptly - in fact, no mention of a parachuter was made before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chansebout (talk • contribs) 01:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Simon watched Jack plant the pig's head there. He was hiding in the bushes. And the novel says Simon's had seizures in the past, so the hallucination was probably brought on by the seizure. 142.26.133.248 (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Toward the end of "Background": "...from from...". What are "iron primitive instincts"? Is it going to be "civilisation" or "civilization"? Pipersdad (talk) 03:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

"From from" & "iron primitive instincts" fixed. DropShadow (talk) 20:58, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

As for -ise vs. -ize, we normally don't have a preference (except for US topics), but in this case I guess it would make sense to use whatever spelling is used in the original text of the book itself. I don't have it here, though. —JAO • T • C 09:12, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

The word "metaphor" in the third paragraph is spelled wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.85.176.229 (talk) 05:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. (I wonder if this article really needs semi-protection.) —JAO • T • C 09:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

In-depth Analysis

This page lacks an in-depth analysis of the characters, as well as a summary and discussion of the themes in the book, in the way other notable books have. Since this is quite a popular as well as a "deep" book, perhaps such a section is worth considering.

Some ideas: What was Golding's main point in the book? What would be a logical expelenation to this book and why did he write it, for what reason? Simon: Probably the most mysterious character in the book. He is similar to Jesus in some ways; for example, he is caring, generous, helpful, and he is the pure goodness in the book. Piggy: What role did he play in the story? Why was he the only kid that his hair did not grow? Jack: Why is it that he antagonizes Ralph? Ralph: His leadership qualities and faults. etc, etc, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fin Archangel (talk • contribs) 02:30, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Should there not be a reference to the nature of the ship? From what I understand, a major feature of the allegory was the fact that the naval officer was appalled at their barbarism, but the book closes on his warship in order to highlight 'civilised' hypocrisy - the children had just been prey to no more original sin and propensity to violence than the civilised world, with its nuclear weapons and warships, had already, and that we in the civilised world are no better. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.116.223 (talk) 10:31, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

the conch

The significance of the conch being shattered during Piggy's death isn't clear here. I think the first paragraph of the plot section should say something about the fact that, in meetings, only the person holding the conch can speak. 128.232.250.213 (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Piggy symbolized reason and intellect. The conch representing order. It was no coincidence that the two of them died together for without reason you have no order and vise versa. It shows the completion of the destruction of civilization.

the island

The island is seen as an allegory of the Garden of Eden. The island is perfect but is soon corrupted by the boys. The choir are first described as a kind of 'creature'. They march in straught lines, giving the impression of a snake, like in the Garden of Eden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seamy94 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Allegory?

This article says that Lord of the Flies is an allegory, but the article about allegories says that "fictions that are not allegories may help define the genre by contrast," and lists Lord of the Flies as one of those fictions. Personally, I don't think that Lord of the Flies is an allegory - I've heard that it's an allegory to WWII, but I can see almost no evidence to support that. Of course, my knowledge about literature is limited - any comments would be much appreciated. i would like to edit the allegory section of the main page but unfoartunately i cant even though im a registered user. if someone would please copy and paste the following to the main page."There have been many allegorys spotted in this novel but the most talked about is the resemblece of Simon and Jesus Christ.When simon is haalucinating he sees satan as does Jesus in the dessert.People have also seen simileraties between simons murder and Jesus's death on the cross.Also Jack and Ralph's realationship has been compared to segments in the bible."

NotKasparov (talk) 00:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Are you aware that Golding specifically said that the novel wasn't allegorical? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.59.153 (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Well then... state your source! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Volke Locke (talk • contribs) 17:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Allegory

Generally, the conch is seen as a symbol of authority; thus when it is destroyed, so is rational authority. Ralph is often considered symbolic of rational man and Jack instinctive man. Simon is seen as a messianic figure (note his religiously-based name).

The scene of the hallucination with the pig's head is very significant for the theme of the book. The pig's head is called "The Lord of the Flies". This is a reference to Beelzebub--the name literally means "lord of the flies", and thus the Lord of the Flies in this novel could symbolically be taken as the devil. The Lord of the Flies tells Simon that he (the devil) is inside all of them, and that he's the reason that "it's no go--why things are what they are". Thus the theme is that corruption in human society comes from the corruption of individuals. Simon, attempting to reveal this truth to the now hyper-superstitious society on the island, is executed, like a prophetic or Christ figure. Thus the allegory could be that the island starts out as a pristine Eden, and then corrupted humanity appears and attempts to build a society. But due to their internal corruption, the society also becomes corrupted, and they end up destroying themselves. Thus there are parallels to the World Wars and nuclear warfare, but the main allegory is more religious or intended to simply be applied to society as a whole. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.232.232.132 (talk) 01:45, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Jack= Hitler. choir= nazis. they didn't need meat= they didn't need to kill the jews. Piggy and that crowd= the jews. ralph= FAIR HAIRED boy....see any connections??? Hitler liked blonde and blue eyed people. there are SO many quotes to prove it. like "under the threat of the sky" = nuclear war threat during the cold war. it's also got some parallels to the bible. and by the way allegory means it's related to real LIFE. so like not just WWII but the BIGGER picture- the world, human nature. just think about it.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.238.185 (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Plane crash site is the "scar"

Plane does get mentioned in the book but is mentioned just as the "scar" throughout the rest of the book.

 Question: what exactly do you want fixed? LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 22:28, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

plane crash

It says that a plane has crash landed but is never seen again. however i am reading this right now and its an old school copy, in the back it breaks it down a bit and it says "there has been an atomic explosion and the children have been evacutated in an aircraft with a detachable passeger tube. flying over the tropical seas (having travelled via gibraltar & addis ababa) the aircraft has been attacked and has realesed the tube, which has crash landed in the jungle of the island. the aircraft has flown off in flames and the remains of the tube have been swept out to sea in a storm." this certainly explained a lot to me and makes perfect sense when rereading the first chapter Elleyh (talk) 10:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

What version of Lord of the flies to you have?! Sp!der (talk) 00:19, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

He is quite right in this, I read a school copy and though it did not explain this our teacher gave us the background information which goes hand in hand with what Elleyh says —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarkinor (talk • contribs) 01:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

lord of the flies

WHAT IS LORD OF THE FLIES BASED ON? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.43.103.227 (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Lord of the Flies has WWII themes and parallels. It's in response to/ inspired by Coral Island, a book written earlier about boys on an island. Since it's allegorical, Golding's writing is in generalities and themes about human nature and life. Like how the glasses represent human innovation and technology that can be used in both a good and a bad way. For example when Jack starts the fire to like kill Ralph, as opposed to Ralph who uses it for good to light a fire to signal for help. Technology that Golding was talking about was the nuclear warheads (since the Cold War was going on). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.238.185 (talk) 06:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if the pig head on a stick is an allusion to Bois Caïman. That would add some quite reactionary subtext to the novel.--87.162.45.214 (talk) 06:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The title Lord of the Flies is the literal translation for the Biblical name "Beelzebub", one of the Devil's companions. That may give a clue as to the meaning that Golding intended. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.68.219 (talk) 09:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Golding and Goethe

In recent German editions of the book several lines from J.W. von Goethe (Faust I), reciting the "Herr der Fliegen, ..." is found. I assume this is a marketing gag, as everything concerning Goethe, Schiller or Luther (Martin, not Lex), "adds value" to literature in Germany. Could someone please look at a recent English LotF-edition to verify, whether there is (or is not) a citation from Faust? My English edition from 1969 (Faber) does not have one. I need this for an argument in the German WP (Discussin "Herr der Fliegen"). Thanx a lot --Grey Geezer 11:25, 23 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grey Geezer (talk • contribs)

stalinian?!

No such word. Substitute either Stalin's or Stalinist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.171.108.159 (talk) 07:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. DropShadow (talk) 20:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Additional referencing bands

The German band Rage and Swedish band Therion both have songs titled "Lord of the Flies" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.247.155.234 (talk) 13:30, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The band Gatsby's American Dream has a song entitled "Fable," which is about the novel. Flamingotrigger (talk) 06:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

ending

• The captain at the end WAS aware that they weren't playing a game, as the novel says he could tell Ralph was serious about the murders. Therefore, i suggest the 2nd sentence in that paragraph to be taken out.

• No, the Captain asks whether two were "killed". Ralph simply assents. This is deliberately vague. Recommend that the paragraph stands as-is. U664003803 (talk) 17:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't the Captain just ask if anyone was killed, himself thinking that some people may have been killed from the crash or by an aminal or something of the sort? And then by the way Ralph says that there have been two, it appears the officer can tell that they were no accident deaths. thats just a thought

There is also an episode of The Simpsons which can be linked with this novel. The kids from Springfield Elementary were going on a school trip when the bus crashes into the ocean. They all get marooned on an island and, just like The Lord of the Flies, they attempt to create a society. Bart Simpson can be seen as Ralph, Milhouse Van Houten with Piggy, Nelson Muntz with Jack and Lisa Simpson with Simon. Could some please add this to the main article.S4R9AM (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

About the Simpsons ep; I don't see why. Simpsons was influenced by LotF of course, but it's pretty irrelevant to LotF itself. 86.149.59.218 (talk) 10:59, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The pig killing

In the article it says that the first time Jack and his hunters kill a pig was after they left Ralph's tribe, this is incorrect. They killed the first pig after they abandoned the fire to go hunting, this is also when they first put on the clay face paint, they did not do this when the two groups split. This should be changed to avoid confusion among readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarkinor (talk • contribs) 01:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this should be changed to avoid confusion. The pig killing/hunting is in the last part of Chapter 1. According to the novel itself, they are just only hunting the pig for food. The pig actually escaped and the hunting wasn't successful. Greatgabriel (talk) 10:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

References to Other Works

Golding goes so far as to name-check The Coral Island in the final passage; the Naval Captain mentions it in: "I know. Jolly good show. Like The Coral Island." Please consider including this explicit in-narrative citation in the article.this is all wrong golding is indeed 90 years old and cannot type well U664003803 (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

unprotected

Okay, let's see how this page goes unprotected for a while. Be wonderful if some schoolkids expanded some out-of-universe critique section. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Citation

First citation now goes to a blank page for the ALA, might want to remove or fix it. 173.30.250.62 (talk) 06:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Piggy

Added a section on Piggy to the other characters. As he is as much a pivotal character as any of the others listed, and the symbolism surrounding him is obvious, it seems a glaring ommission not to include him. PatrickLMT (talk) 23:23, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

"background" section?

Are sparknotes really a valid source for the opinions expressed in the allegory discussion? Shouldn't such interpretation and opinion cite a peer review publication or authority? --68.35.3.66 (talk) 11:55, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

SUCKS TO YOUR ASS-MAR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.145.142 (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Plot tag

Cleaned up plot, as tagged since June, and removed tag. --125.236.223.156 (talk) 03:56, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Your removal was excessive and I've restored the text. I also was restoring British English which you seem to have misunderstood. Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:01, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry mate. I misunderstood your edit summary and thought you were adding Yank text instead. There was a plot tag on the article, the reason for the chop. Cutting it down to the barest synopsis is appropriate per WP:PLOTSUM ('There is no set length for a plot summary though many editors generally recommend 300 to 500 words for a typical novel, movie or similar work. Well-written plot summaries describe the major events in the work but do not describe individual scenes or paraphrase dialog.'). My changes put the word count at 344, rather than as it was at 1,563 before my edit. --125.236.223.156 (talk) 00:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

This is not a typical novel ;) The summary and allegory sections are well supported by refs; present and the many more available. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not interested enough to argue, but that's an illogical defence for not following the guidelines. --125.236.223.156 (talk) 14:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

(How is it illogical? I took Advanced Formal logic as a core class. I know logic well.)

I've replaced the tag that was there before I tried to improve the article based on that tag. I'm not interested enough to continue trying to fix it. Let someone else get brain damage beating against the brick wall. --125.236.223.156 (talk) 03:15, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

plot summary

The plot summary is not very chronological. The general ideas are but the specific sequence of events isnt. 142.167.12.7 (talk) 13:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

NOT WORLD WAR II

This book doesn't take place during World War II because a reference is made in the beginning of the book about telivision. Telivision wasn't around prior to World War II. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.186.37 (talk) 23:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

That is not true contray to popular belief only a few people had personal televisions. But they book could just have some parallels to WW2.Most likly set in The Cold War. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.29.77.231 (talk) 15:24, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

The novel took place BEFORE World War II. I have to edit this article. Greatgabriel (talk) 10:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I have seen references that refer to it as Cold War era. 86.149.59.218 (talk) 11:01, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Ralph refers to 'The reds' - the Russian communist block, the book was also published in 1954, this in my opinion makes it unlikely that it was set before world war two. I do however have an alternative theory; that the second world war has continued for some vast length of time (up and including 1954), and that Britain is still at war, this then envelops the book into a greater level of darkness and acceptance, it wold mean that for the 12 (ish) year old Jack his whole life would have been nothing but war, not only that but also some three years before his birth... this bushes an air of revenge from Jack which could be expressed in his actions later on in the book... this is obviously only my opinion and so shouldn't be taken as gospel :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.13.150.73 (talk) 17:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

The novel is taken place in the fictional WW3,as Golding talks about nobody being left and "mankinds essentail illness" - war and corruption to hurt. Blazemon (talk) 17:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Britain had a public television service in 1936 before the war - see Alexandra Palace. It closed down in 1939 with the outbreak of World War II and re-opened in 1945-46. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.112.68.219 (talk) 20:58, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Needs section on Piggy's Glasses

Piggy's glasses represent law and reason. When his glasses are broken, destruction comes to the island. It has to be noted in allegorical references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.141.186.37 (talk) 01:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

OMG, we have GOT to add this. lotf, though...not really my style of reading, though. it's too graphic for my taste, u know? Celestialwarden11 (talk) 19:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

http://www.sparknotes.com/lit/flies/section1.rhtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.8.140.194 (talk) 16:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC) Am I only person who's noticed that as Piggy has myopia he would be short sighted and so his glasses would be refracting lenses. AFAIK Refracting lenses simply don't work for starting fires using the sun, that needs focusing lenses and so glasses would have to be for long sighted people. As the glasses are such a central plot device, I wonder if this may be why so many publishers refused the book initially. Not sure if Golding made an accidental mistake with this, or it is deliberate. If it is a deliberate mistake, was he suggesting something "more" about law and reason? perhaps "technowaffle" being a kind of belief too? For me it ends up spoiling the book as it's so well written and everything else seems very plausible. 82.47.136.229 (talk) 11:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Influence of the Film on book sales

I bring this up because I recently saw the 1963 film and it had a decidedly independent feel to it, which made me wonder if the film was originally made low key from a low key book and consequently sparked new interest, leading to the book's bestseller status in the 60s, or if the book's sudden bestseller status in the late 50s or very early 60s led to the making of the film. The problem I see is that there's no citation for the references to the book's success. I'm not bringing this up to sharp-shoot, but rather because I am genuinely interested in how the book became so popular. Are there references that could be cited as to the life cycle of this book, or at least, could that portion be clarified in the article? - Diesel Phantom (talk) 02:28, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

---

The book takes place during WW3, not WW2!

The plane is lost after NUCLEAR bombing of the departure airport.

And in the text we read:

Ralph dredged in his fading knowledge of the world.

    "We might get taken prisoner by the Reds."

Britain was not in war with REDS in WW2. But presumably in WW3.

In original of Golding there was a detailed description of atomic war. But it was removed by publishers. (See also a German version of Wiki)

Edit request from Abein, 26 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} change "within the mountains" to "on the mountain"

Abein (talk) 11:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

 Done SpigotMap 12:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Ulluxo, 29 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Under the subtitle of "The Beast", please change "beaten to death" to "stabbed to death"

Ulluxo (talk) 11:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

 Not done: Welcome and thanks. According to the plot overview (reference 5), they "kill him with their bare hands and teeth." That supports "beaten" better than "stabbed." Do you have a conflicting source? Celestra (talk) 16:09, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Naval Officer

His arrival was said to be a Deus ex machina.

However since the attempt to gain rescue was in fact a major part of the plot, the fact that it happened (all-be-it at a rather convenient time for Ralph) does not relegate it to the "contrivance" of Deus ex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Soutter (talk • contribs) 06:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Pig - Devil motifs

In ancient Egyptian religion the devil Set(h) sometime takes the form of a pig. On the other hand in ancient Canaanite religion pigs were sacred to Baal. 26 August 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.20.43 (talk) 20:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Also, the ancient Egyptians did not eat pork and tended to equate Baal with Set(h). 5 September 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.14.53.43 (talk) 13:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

theme

The theme of the book attemps to show that the defects of society today are in direct corrollation of the defects of human nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godzilla21 (talk • contribs) 18:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Age

Sorry I am new to this so I do not understand responses to the talk page, but the ages of the older kids are around 12 years old. I put emphisis on 'around' because they all are not 12. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Godzilla21 (talk • contribs) 12:03, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Conch Shell/Boar's head

It seems to me that the conch shell and the boar's head are complete opposites, and maybe this should be mentioned in the description of the two? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.114.78 (talk) 01:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

References in the form "text[12]."

Especially in "Allegorical relationships" the references are between the end of a sentence and the full stop. I think "text.[12]" is more common. Maybe change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geschichte09 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

That is in line with the Manual of Style, see WP:REFPUNC, so you can go ahead and change it. Keith D (talk) 20:22, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Swallows and Amazons?

I don't really see how this link is relevant, and to claim it is a "similar novel but with a different perspective" seems a bit of a stretch. --Mattpartridge24 (talk) 23:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Problems?

There is a section titles problemS which is about the single problem that the glasses weren't quite the right kind to be physically accurate. A tiny, insignificant scientific inconsistency mentioned in a throwaway lines about him being nearsighted deserves a section? I'd recommend finding some REAL problems or just removing that section.

--99.6.157.136 (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I agree, as it is unsourced. I will try removing the section again. -- Dianna (talk) 02:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)