Friday, September 19, 2008

Lord of the Flies 9-12

LOF Closed Cage Match: MACBETH V. JACK/RALPH

Macbeth declares an impassioned phrase when he feels that he is caught in all the turmoil he has created. He says, "It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood... (Act 3). What did Macbeth mean? How does this ring true for Macbeth? How does this also connect to the situtation Jack and Ralph find themselves in Lord of the Flies.
Also, include any final impressions of LOF. What did you think? How did the annotating go for you? Did you feel as though there was a change in your learning/ understanding of the text? Are you seeing big connections to Macbeth?

53 comments:

johnc2012 said...

Hmm... A cage match?

I think that Macbet means in his statement that because they (Who are "they" by the way)are asking for blood from somone who has come into much of his power by blood. Two Thirds of Macbeth's titles have been accheived through death (with the exception of the Thane of Glamis). This connects to L.O.F becasue, simillarly to Macbeth, Jack has built himself up on the fear of others and the deaths of pigs and simon. I will talk later on annotating

John

robertc2012 said...

I think the Lord of the Flies is a most depressing book. What's the moral? "Share and be friends"?? "Don't get crushed by a boulder falling from a hundred feet up"??? I think it's just a book about how humans aren't perfect. That's the big theme: we mess up. A lot.

katiez2012 said...

I thought of that quote pretty much the same way as John. People didn't usually come into power because they deserved it or would be the best for it, but because someone else was killed so they could have the spot. Macbeth relates to this because he wanted to kill king Duncan so that HE could have power. This realates to LOF because they were always trying to steal the power for eachother and Jack had himself come up with the power that he did by death and blood. Pigs seemed to symbolize alot in that book. I frankly thought that this book was boring. I didn't really enjoy it at all and it was just a drag to have to force myself to read. Just not my kind of story. Annoting just made it worse because I couldn't concentrate on reading when i had to stop and write about something else that related to it. I had so much trouble focusing on this. I didn't have a ton of connections with either of these stories, but I did enjoy Macbeth alot more than LOF. Sorry =/

bridgetL said...

I think that when Macbeth says, "It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood...” he means that “it” being the person who committed the murder will have blood. That blood being the murder itself. But then, there will be revenge against the murder also. This rings true for Macbeth because he fears that his murders and sins will catch up to him at some point and he will have to pay the price for his actions. This connects to Jack in Lord of the Flies because he has murdered people and therefore had his blood. But somebody will have revenge against him at some point. That revenge may not be the loss of his own life, but possibly when he returns to civilization his own guilt. Also, when people in the outside world find out what he did, he will be alienated and shunned from normalcy and acceptance for the rest of his life. I did not like the book. First of all, I found it very hard to understand. I would read each chapter, and then often have to re-read it or look it up on line to clarify what I thought happened. I also thought too much of the book was simply a boring struggle for power. The annotating was okay, but very difficult because I struggled to understand the book so much. I do, however, feel that towards the end of the book things were making more sense to me and I was able to make more connections to Macbeth. While I really did not enjoy the book, I do recognize it’s immense use of symbolism and irony.

justinp2012 said...

When Macbeth said, "It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood...” he meant ('it' being the the murder) that he has spilt blood in the murder of Duncan. He is now afraid that the blood he has shed would now come back to get revenge on him, thus, "blood will have blood." This relates to LOF because Jack has been gaining respect through the blood of pigs that he has killed and through fear and the death of Simon. Although Ralph was discomforted by all the death and blood, like Macbeth at first, Jack gained confidence in the same way Ralph lost it, just like Macbeth after it. This shows the ambivalence of Macbeth and his actions.
I thought LOF was a great book. Although thoroughly depressing, it had so much meaning and symbolism in every page. The annotating was very hard, however. It was confusing, and however many times I read it, I just could not find anything significant to write, even though I knew there was something. As I read more, the more I understood and learned from it. It has so many philosophical conflicts and questions that rose up from it that I just had to think deeper into the book, therefore learning a ton more. Nearer to the end, I found myself seeing more and more connections to Macbeth, although I still don't think I saw that many.

johnc2012 said...

Ok, I am back

Overall, although L.O.F is not my favorite book, I enjoyed it bcause it made me think. I also though it was interesting to watch the plans the boys made sldie and be torn apart by fear.

I also agree with Robert on how the moral to this story should be "We mess up. A lot." But In addition, I think it shows us we can't let fear ruin our lives (However litterally that may be!). I think that had there been no fear or had there been adults to keep order, that the society established by Ralph and all of the others could have survived.

As for annotating, I had taken notes before but not in the book. I like in the book annotating better though because it is much easier to find other notes a because they are all in one place.

Thanks

John

robertc2012 said...

I agree with the people that said that LOF is a depressing book, but I do not see why Macbeth is favored above it. I think they are both pretty dark stories that revolve around murder and evil. Why is this the only type of book we've read so far in Language Arts? Sure, they might have symbolism and morals in them, but I bet you could find that in almost any other book. It would be nice to read a pleasant story for a change, where people aren't dying and killing each other. Pleasant stories have morals and symbolism in them too. I mean, even some Dr. Suess books has enough symbolism to be writing essays on.
Does anyone else agree with me?

Megg2012 said...

Robert, I definitely agree with you. Both books are very depressing. As a girl, I do not like to read about murder of innocent people.
Anyways, I think that "It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood," refers to murder, and how it will have blood, but even the blood will have blood, meaning that there will be a lot of blood. So much blood, that, it is hard for Macbeth to wash it away. I think that the blood is not only literal, but figurative, meaning guilt. This relates to LOF, because the guilt of killing Simon will stay with him forever, it is too much to forget about, and "wash away."
Overall, LOF was the strangest book ever. Although I did not particularly enjoy it, it helped me with connections to Macbeth, which led me to understanding Macbeth. I think Goulding produced a book that will trigger the thoughts of many. I think that annotating the book helped me get my thoughts into words. Although it took a lot of extra time, it helped me understand it better, and it prevented me from taking time to re-read a chapter. It also was easy to flip to a page, and see the questions I asked, that I could ask the class.
I am seeing big connections to Macbeth. A couple of the main one's I see are dramatic irony, murder, guilt, chaos and society, and how evil emerges in characters. When do you guys think the evil started in LOF? I thought it was when the first fire broke out in the forest, but I want other opinions!
Thanks,
MEg

brookem2012 said...

I agree with Bridget about how Macbeth felt about the blood. But I also think that it relates to Jack because he first killed a pig, and then he killed a boy, and now I think that he’s little bit power hungry and is using the other boy’s fear against them. They could all think that if the mess up and do something that Jack does not like, he could kill them.
The book in general…it’s weird. I had to concentrate very hard to keep up with what was going on. I also thought that I got distracted very easily while reading this book, and I think that that shows in my annotations. About the annotations, I think they were hard. But I also think that they could be useful in the future if I’m reading another book and I make a connection to LOTF and then I could pull out my copy, find where I annotated that part, and make the connection stronger. What I mean is that I can see how annotating can be helpful, but I also think that it was a little bit of a hassle to do while reading.

samis2012 said...

On the interpretation of the quote, I agree 100% with katiez2012 and johnc2012 that many people today get into positions of high rank and power not because they worked honestly and hard for it; they cheated and killed their way up there. This relates to Macbeth because he killed King Duncan so that he could become king. This relates to Jack and Lord of the Flies by way that he killed and beat and cheated his into power. My initial thoughts about LOF were wow, what a book. Not in the sense that wow that was the best book I’ve ever read, it was just wow, that was a very interesting book. I agree with brigitl that it was a hard book to understand, and you did have to reread chapters, and sometimes I still wouldn’t understand it after that. Annotating was a little hard for me in the beginning because I had never done anything like that before but it became easier. I mostly wrote comments and questions, I'm one who doesn’t really make connections when reading I'm more of a questioner.

kailynw2012 said...

To me this statement is referring to something like karma. Like, if you cause pain, then you will suffer to. At least so far the book is playing out like that to. However, in Lord of the Flies I am not so sure if karma plays as much of a role as power. (which also relates to Macbeth) Lord of the Flies, impacted me on a large level. It really disturbed me. On annotating, I definitely think its a little weird, I feel almost as if I am trespassing. And it definitely makes reading choppy too. But that said I am not totally against it.

kailynw2012 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ericak2012 said...

Lord of the Flies is definitely not an easy book to read. It has moments of pure irony and depression. Macbeth also may mean that you can't do something immoral without getting your hands dirty, for every good thing that may come out of the bad thing, you still won't be able to wash your hands of it.

Maxe2012 said...

I think that when Macbeth says this it could mean that "It" is the killing of Duncan which will obviously be bloody. Also, I think that since in Macbeth blood also means death, that the first blood in his statement could mean death. Which would make it death would have blood. I think that Lord of the Flies was really depressing. I didn't really enjoy reading it but it was okay. The annotating went alright. It was a little confusing at first but I think I have the hang of it. I didn't really think there was too much of a change in my understanding of the text. I think I thought about it more and it helped me remember a lot about the parts that had an emotional impact on me but other than that my understanding wasn't altered too much. I am seeing some major connections to Macbeth but I am not very good at text to text connections so it is sometimes hard to find them.

Brianc2012 said...

I think when Macbeth says "it will have blood they say." it means that "they" will talk about blood from Macbeth killing Duncan because blood gave him that power to kill. This relates to Jack because he uses The deaths of boars to show that he is a leader and that the other boys should fear him. LOF is definitely a hard book to read all the way through. I liked the way the book was written but it is kind of a depressing book. Annotating the book was hard during the first few chapters but it got easier as I made more sense of who the characters really are. I couldn't find many connections to Macbeth but i think I learned a lot from the text and it was easier to make connections.

TristanL said...

I think that Macbeth meant when he said "Blood will have blood" that he himself, with royal blood, was going to see a lot of death. I also believe (in response to johnc) that "they" might possibly be the witches. I'm just guessing though. This "rings true" for Macbeth because he is of royal blood, and he has just killed Duncan. This connects to Lord of the Flies because both Ralph and Jack see a lot of blood; Jack is usually the murderer, Ralph the witness to the murder.

My final impressions of Lord of the Flies are distributed. It isn't a book I really enjoyed a lot. It didn't seem very original. I mean, there have been so many movies and books based off of people being trapped on islands and their issues with each other. I don't like how the author turned a small British boy into a rampaging murderer, either. That is very unlikely to happen in real life. But, I can connect Jack in this book to the character Buck from the novel, "The Call of the Wild", by Jack London. In LoF, Jack becomes similar to a mosnter, living off his instincts, driving people into doing what he wants. In "The Call of the Wild", Buck is a happy house dog. But, he is taken to Alaska as a sled dog, and in the end, he himself turns into a monster. His drive to survive led him to be a monster, just like Jack.

Also, I've always been fond of reading. I don't think that reading this book has had an effect one bit, besides the fact that there is one more book on my list of "Books Not To Read Again". I'm not trying to not do any work or try to get out of things, but it just didn't really click for me.

And finally, I am seeing small, not big, connections to Macbeth. In both, there is a lot of death and sadness, and a will to be stronger and better. I don't really think there are any real big connections to Macbeth, because I do not think that William Golding based his book off of Macbeth. If that were so, then I'd have something much more to say.

Reading this book was a pretty good learning experience though. I've learned about themes like unity, betrayal, and fear. A lot of fear. Once more, it isn't a book I'd like to read again, but it was nice to have the chance to read it in the first place.

chelseac2012 said...

“It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood…” I see that as payback in a way. Karma, too. He has committed a murder, and the “blood will have blood…” The death of Duncan will come back to haunt him in one way or another, killing him. Macbeth may not be actually killed but his life may go down the drain and his future dead.
I think the story of Macbeth and LoF connect because of the craving for power. Macbeth wants power, as does Jack. Lady Macbeth and Macbeth want murder, Jack will do anything to be chief. Macbeth regrets things he does, Ralph thinks more than Jack about things that could happen. Ralph finds that he’s losing his friends, a downfall. Macbeth may be put into the same situation, losing things he cares about.
LoF is not the worst book I have ever read, but I still don’t like it very much. Everyone has been saying how depressing both stories are. And, personally, I don’t mind stories including murder and death. I think it makes books more interesting to have more of an edge to them. LoF doesn’t interest me much because it’s just a bunch of boys on an island who really have no idea what they’re doing. I liked it a little better towards the end of the book when more started to happen. I don’t like annotating in general, so that was kind of annoying to have to do.
When I stop reading and really think, there are many connections with Macbeth. Crave for power, the innocent lives lost… There’s a deeper meaning than just skimming the top.

jonathanp2012 said...

Macbeth meant when he said, "It will be blood they say. Blood will have blood..." that to be the king or to have power someone with the same blood has to be powerful, then you will have the chance of being powerful but only if you kill your own family(blood) that has that power. It is true for Macbeth because he has just killed the king so now he is king and gained a lot of power. This connects to the situation that Jack and Ralph have in Lord of the Flies because they too fight for power and when time goes by, Jack is willing to spill blood for being the leader and having all the power on the island. I think that Lord of the Flies was about real life situations in the world today and how people want power and glory so bad they will even kill someone for it which also relates to Macbeth in the killing of the king. The annotating of the novel helped me understand the novel a little better.

AllisonM2012 said...

I feel that LOF was a very violent book. I can definitely see how this instance could occur on an island or with the rest of the world. Macbeth connects with LOF for the reason that characters must deal with the problems that they have created. For Macbeth, Macbeth must deal with when he murdered Duncan and the course of events that will follow when he is King. In LOF there is no way that both boys, Ralph and Jack, could lead at which the way that they wanted to. The only way that they could settle their want for power was to destroy the other person. This relates to quote from Macbeth for the reason that spilling of blood is the only way that Jack and Ralph will resolve their conflict.

I felt that the annotating went okay for me. it was very difficult for me to find items in the text to comment about. At the end of the book I felt that I was making many more connections and more interactive with the book. I felt that I wasn't really making connections with other books but more with items inside the text or thing that were mentioned earlier.

annas2012 said...

“It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood…” Macbeth meant that ‘it’ (the murder) will spill blood/guilt. Blood will have blood means that there will be more murders, if someone can kill once they can kill again. Power does blind the greedy, so when there is a chance to become powerful, nothing will stop them. This rings true for Macbeth because he just killed Duncan for power, but Macduff is still in the way to be crowned king. In LOF Jack killed Simon, and at the end of the book he killed Piggy too. Piggy and Simon were both rebels, they were smarter than the rest of the boys and they knew better than to follow Jack. Jack also tried to kill Ralph but luckily a rescue ship stopped the savages from killing him.
LOF seemed like de-ja-vu; I have definitely heard the story before. I thought the book was a good way to show how society can fall apart and how the civilized can become savage. The annotating went well for me; I had a lot more comments at the beginning of the book than at the end. I am seeing big connections to Macbeth and to the real world. The whole idea of corruption and evil doings was portrayed differently but it was still the same idea.

annas2012 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
carolynf2012 said...

I think that Macbeth meant that if you say there will be something violent, there will. This is true for Macbeth because Lady Macbeth has put the thought of murder into Macbeth's head and Macbeth carried it out. This connects to Jack and Ralph because there was the murmuring of how violence would happen and how the boys would become savage and then there was.
As for my final thoughts of LOF I personally thought it was too violent. The plot line didn't appeal to me and I probably never would have read this book was I given the choice. The annotating was, at times, difficult. I do feel as if I made more connections to the world and other texts but I think I've pretty much always done that and this time I was just writing it down. I also am see HUGE connections to Macbeth in many of the themes of the book. Such as "Appearance v. Reality" and "The Darkness of Man's Heart," which I found to be two major themes.

katieh2012 said...

I think that the quote "It will have blood they say" doesn't necessarily refer to murder and the spilling of blood. I think that, even though these things are present in Macbeth, it refers more to the rise to power and the betrayal and cruel acts that occur along the way. For Macbeth, this did entail a murder and spilt blood as well as breaking trusts (with the King and his men) and going against his own will (and giving into Lady Macbeth's wishes). Similarly, Jack rose to power in LOF in a cruel way. When he first broke away from teh tribe, he just stormed off. he later used bribery (meat) and insults (directed at Ralph) to get others to follow him. The blood in this case really came after his rise to power with the murder of Simon and the sow.

Lord of the Flies is definately not my type of book. It is symbolic and everything, but it just seems boring and rather cruel to me. It is kind of a slow read already, and I think that annotating it didn't help at all. I feel like I lost concentration alot because I would get focused on making notes and then have to pick up again.

The biggest connection I see to Macbeth is simply the quest for power by lesser parties.

PeterH2012 said...

As soon as blood is spilled, it will demand more. Macbeth didn't show this as much, he was really struggling throughout the story with the blood on his hands. Lady Macbeth however wanted more, she was fine with killing anyone who got in her way, and would've done it again if she had the chance. she uses fear to control her husband, and can now hold the blood over him next time she wants something.

Jack can't stop killing. He hunts to feed himself and others, but he would do it even if he didn't have to. He also uses fear to get what he wants, he can use people by exploiting their fears.

I was very surprised by the war that happened at the very end. I really want to know why they wanted to kill him! he didn't do anything but try to get them rescued. It was very ironic that they ended up taking his advice without knowing it! If the war wouldn't have happened, they probably wouldn't have been rescued!

The annotating was actually difficult, it definitely stretched me. I feel like i did learn many things i wouldn't have learned if i just read it, so i would say it was a good assignment. It also made me realize that there are very similar motifs. Appearance Vs. Reality. When the captain landed on the beach, he was condescendingly asking if they had a war, and if anyone had died. They answered that they really were, and they had two dead. They didn't look like they were really trying to kill each other, but they were capable of doing so.

austin d 2012 said...

Lof.Macbeth. Comparisons might possibly be to the fact that John is more like Macbeth in characteristics. My final thoughts on Macbeth are so that I never really enjoyed the books themes and morals which I felt at points were non-exisatant.

treyjb2012 said...

I think he meant it to be the murder of the King. They say that there will be revenge for the murder of such a good man. Macbeth notices the irony in this. They want blood for blood. They wanted the murderer killed for the murder. They want two deaths instead of one. He is also pointing out that basically any time blood is drawn the result is more blood being spilled. They want to kill Macbeth for killing the king. I think one way to look at this in relation to LOTF is that instead of getting back for murder of an individual they are getting back for the murder of an opportunity. When the ship comes by the island and Jack kills that opportunity Ralph gets mad. This could be compared to drawing blood. Blood begets blood as Macbeth said. Because of this Jack gets his revenge on Ralph by slowly converting or killing every member of him group. So when Ralph hurt his feelings and drew figurative blood it begot real blood (piggy's death).

My final impressions of LOTF was overall it was a very well written book. At the end it was disturbing and a bit lame. The bolder killing Piggy was not a good way to kill a character off. As I said in class my annotating was better toward the beginning. I do see the big connection between the two stories. Now I finely understand why we were reading them at the same time.

bradyp2012 said...

What Macbeth means by “blood will have blood” is that friends and family will be killing each other in the mass chaos that he has created by killing the king. This relates to Jack and Ralph because Jack just wants to hunt and Ralph wants to be rescued. When Jack has enough of not being in charge he storms off and starts his own tribe he starts to rise in power and his influence over the children grows. Then he creates mass chaos by killing Simon. Once Simon is killed the war is started and the children who all new each other and were from the same town started to kill. Roger killed Piggy and then when they were hunting down Ralph, Ralph killed a few people. The chaos spilled a lot of blood that should not have been spilled. My final thoughts of the book were that the book was terrible. The kids spend the whole time being afraid of something that didn’t exist. The book could of more description because I had a hard time picturing where they were and what they were doing.

leahf2012 said...

“It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood” Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo and it causes him to go insane at dinner. I think that this is significant in that Macbeth’s conscience is clouding over the murders of Banquo and Duncan. I think it means the lives he discarded of will come back to bother him and seek revenge, “Blood will have blood”. I think this definitely connects to Ralph and Jack in LOF. The blood they shed from other people will definitely come back to seek revenge, whether it be in wrecking their consciences or literally, but I don’t believe in ghosts. The guilt they should feel is almost unbearable for one person to handle.

To be honest, no offense Ms. Smith, but I strongly disliked LOF. I abhor annotating just because I personally don’t get anything out of it and it takes an incredible amount of time for me. I didn’t see any connections between Macbeth and LOF beside the fact that people die in both. First off, I hated Jack and Ralph from the very beginning. They just weren’t good people, so I don’t see how they could be a tragic hero of no one liked them in the first place. I got the sense that Jack and Ralph were corrupted even before they arrived on the island. Macbeth was a respectable man and I liked him until he murdered Duncan.

I think that I would have enjoyed the book more if it weren’t for the typical stranded island story. Maybe if the characters were girls, too. Girls have a lot more struggles than boys have and it’s not typical for girls to kill each other. I think that of the book were more recent too, I would have liked it. The time period in which Golding wrote this shapes the components of the boy’s characters. I can connect more to modern characters and their struggles because I see myself in their position, but in LOF, I couldn’t empathize with the characters because they were so different.

bens2012 said...

I believe that Macbeth means he his strong and powerful because of blood and killing/ slaughtering. This easily relates to Lord of the Flies because killing is very predominant in the book. I thought that L.O.F. was a very subpar book, it was hard to understand even with the annotating (in fact maybe even harder to understand because of the annotating due to the fact that I was constantly lookin for comments and questions to which I could annotate.)

stephaniel2012 said...

Well, you know, since it is Shakespeare, we can never know quite what it means, but I think that it means that the guilty with the blood on their hands will fall. He fears for what he has done, knowing that there's no way he can escape it. He knows that he's going to be taking the fall for it. Yeah. Well, I think Ralph was struggling with Jack's like... way too over the top 'let's go kill something' nature. Ralph wanted to wipe it clean from his hands, like Macbeth, but knows that if he didn't do anything it was only going to get worse, you know?

Lord of the flies... well... hmm. I thought it was an... okay book. I thought it was very creepy, and the sentence phrasing was a little awkward to read. I did not like it when she just had chunks of sentences, and all of the boys were cutting each other off. Even if it was supposed to give the impression that that was how it really was, I just thought it was really jumbled and annoying. That might just be me though.... Annotating was easy for me. Sticky notes are my friends, but I went to town with it. It's hard not to get angry and express it at some points, as I did, obviously. There was a bit of a change in my understanding once I stopped to read/reread lines, and really take them in. I'm seeing sort of vague connections to Macbeth right now, and that might be because I need to reread the past act of Macbeth again... but still.

I just think it's cool, but my word verification is 'globe'. He he....

AustinW2012 said...

I think that Macbeth is saying that everyone will know there will be death but even more so than an average situation like that (if that can be called normal at all). I think it's true for Macbeth because in the situation he's in there's bound to be a lot of death. I think it connects to lord of the flies because even though they are different situations. In Lord of the Flies they are fighting for their own survival and power. In Macbeth for power and maybe survival if you are Duncan. I feel that towards the end of the book is easier to understand then the beginning because it has more action and less of describing the setting. I do see connections to Macbeth here and there but I will have to work on that more.

ashleys2012 said...

When Macbeth boldly states “It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood…” he is stating that bleeding is contagious. This relates to what Peter said: “As soon as blood is spilled, it will demand more.” This rings true for Macbeth because once you start bleeding it will take a while for it to stop. The pain and the mess will not go away suddenly, just as the consequences he faces with killing King Duncan will not suddenly go away. This connects to the situation Jack and Ralph find themselves in Lord of the Flies because they will not all of a sudden be rescued, everything will not all of a sudden be OK. It will take time for them to get themselves out of the mess they are in and clean up the blood left behind.

I will confess that it did take me a while to be drawn into Lord of the Flies. However, my attention was defiantly caught by chapter six when they start talking about the beast. From then on, I kept asking myself “what or who really is the beast?” By the end of the novel I concluded that both The Lord of the Flies and the beast were created by all the boys on the island and the real beast is them. I connected the Lord of the Flies/beast to the boys on the island in chapter 8 when Jack and the hunters kill the innocent pig. By killing the innocent pig they have killed their innocence. Therefore they are all the Lord of the Flies and beast.

I loved annotating because it helped me to go back and look at my notes from previous chapters and make connections with Macbeth through my annotations. The main connection between Macbeth and Lord of the Flies was the theme of appearance vs. reality. In Macbeth the theme of appearance vs. reality comes into play with Lady Macbeth. She and Macbeth trick people on who really killed King Duncan. They do so using appearance vs. reality. In the novel, Lord of the Flies, stereotypes are casted amongst all of the boys. One example is Piggy who is labeled practically as useless although he is extremely thoughtful and comes up with great ideas. Piggy is a brilliant thinker. They label Piggy as useless because of his appearance and don’t give a second thought to what reality makes him. Appearance vs. reality is very similar to stereotyping and that is the major connection I observe between Macbeth and Lord of the Flies.

carolineb2012 said...

Firstly I’d like to say that a closed cage match is a good way to describe both Macbeth’s inner battle and Jack and Ralph’s outer battle. They are both contained. My interpretation of when Macbeth says “It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood...” is that blood will appear to those who want it, even if unintentionally. If you are asking for blood, even without realizing it, you are going to get blood. Macbeth asks for blood. Boy does he get blood. Jack asks for blood. He gets blood also. This also relates to the situation between Jack and Ralph because they both unwillingly ask for blood. Jack asks for blood by separating himself from Ralph. Ralph asks fro blood by forcing Jack to feel inferior, and like he has to leave. My final impression of LOF was that it was one of those books that didn’t make sense until the very end. It made you have to read it very carefully to understand what was going on, which was good for me because I tend to read through books very fast and this made me slow down and think about it. I also didn’t like it very much. I can see how it was symbolic and deep, but really it was just a weird book. I guess it just wasn’t my type of book. I did however, like the ending, where Ralph wept for the end of innocence. There are however, definitely some big connections to Macbeth. I think that as we go on and read more of Macbeth I’m going to have a lot of text to text connections between them.

kaelib2012 said...

Macbeth is saying that because he created a problem and the blood he created when he killed Duncan, that that blood will eventually lead to more spilling of blood and more problems to occur. This connects to Ralph and Jack because when they fought in the beginning, it maybe wasn't such a big deal, but the fighting got worse as the book went on, splitting the group into two.

I really did not enjoy reading LOF. I had a hard time paying attention, I would lose interest, and forget what I was reading. Annotating was hard in some parts and easier in other parts. It wsa difficult to annotate when the author described the scenery again for the hundredth time. There are only so many comments and questions you can make. It did help my understanding a little bit, because I would ask questions and then I would be thinking about the answers to the questions for the next little bit, and sometimes I would find the answer, which definitely helped me understand the book. There are definitely connections to Macbeth, like the confusion that leads to turmoil. In both books, everyone starts out with good intentions, but when chaos and confusion begins to set in, no one knows for sure what is right and what is wrong, splitting the group in half and leading to the group's downfall. It is definitely a good lesson to learn.

Zivenc2012 said...

He meant that because people have been killed more people will be killed as revenge. Macbeth killed Duncan and Macduff killed Duncan’s servants because Lady Macbeth framed them. In LoF Simon is killed in mob frenzy because he is framed to look like the Beast. I liked LoF and I thought it was a very thought provoking book. I haven’t even started annotating. When I read the forward I didn’t understand what the author was saying but now it makes sense. Yes I am seeing connections to Macbeth.

hannahg2012 said...

I agree with Johnc2012, Macbeth didn't come into power because he deserved it; (with the exception of the Thane of Glamis) he came into power because he murdered others in his way. He fears that for killing people, he in return will be murdered. This connects to the situation with Jack and Ralph because Jack seems to believe by hunting and killing the others, he will gain power. Overall, I didn't really enjoy Lord of the Flies. It was a very depressing book. I didn't relate with the characters at all. Annotating was simple for me. It helped me understand the plot better and make connections to Macbeth. In Macbeth, a major theme is challenging the system. I felt that Ralph challenged the system when he challenged Jack. Also, both Macbeth and Jack are thirsty for power. Both are willing to kill others to come out on top. But overall, Lord of the Flies is definitely not my favorite book.

NickM2012 said...

I think that he says "blood" will have blood because blood can also be your relatves, and Duncan is his cousin. And Macbeth has recieved his power by spilling blood, which relates to Jack in LOF becuase he has gained power in the same way, but less blood. I loved LOF! It is an awesome book. I did not expect the ending though, and that was a good thing becuase I imagined them killing each other. Annotation is difficult for me because a lot of stuff goes on in my head and it's hard to put it on paper. There are big connections to Macbeth, mainly fear, that can easily be seen. This is a great book!

KyleL2012 said...

I think that Macbeth meant that violence makes violence. one rebellion provokes another. blood will draw blood. this becomes true because he kills the king, but that might bring rebellion to him against others that want to be king. this goes with LOF because the fear of others and the death builds the rank of the character, which have been roled by Jack and Macbeth. I think LOF was............different than other books that i have read. i can't say it was the best but i can say it was a good book. the annotating was more annoying than helpful imo so i just didn't like it. i felt thoughthat there was a difference in the interpretting of the book, but not for better. and also i can't say im connecting with macbeth, but it's interesting to read.

jays2012 said...

I agree with John for this one. Macbeth means in this quote that with blood comes power kinda. Macbeth gets his titles from blood. No matter what it has come to him from blood. Not only blood in killing but through the blood system of royality. Also LOF was kinda hard to follow, i felt i didnt have enough time to read it as well as i wanted to with so many things going around. Macbeth and LOF do have similiar tragic flaws that i am noticing

brianf2012 said...

When Macbeth says "It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood... (Act 3). He means that because he took blood the way to get back to power is to take blood. This is true for Macbeth because the way he was noticed at first was through taking blood and he also can now be king from taking blood. Jack and Ralph also could use this quote because Jack has become the most powerful through taking blood and no one in this village has ever become powerful without blood. I did not like the ending of LOF, it kind of seemed like the ending of a scary dream. I made more connections from Macbeth to LOF than I would usually with just one book by itself.

SydneyR2012 said...

Wow. That is an awful lot to take in the last few chapters of the book. Two people die, (notice they are the two people Ralph found strength from, and also the two people besides Jack that had SOME civilization left in them) and nearly all the symbolic items are destroyed. The conch, which symbolized leadership, is destroyed along with Piggy’s death, Piggy’s glasses, which symbolized strength or survival because they were the source for fire, are put into the wrong hands as well. All of the boys turn into savages. Jack is like Macbeth in the way that he strips Ralph of his authority and screws everything up by putting priorities out of order.
Also, did anyone find it ironic that the very fire that was supposed to kill Ralph ended up saving him? The whole time he tried to keep a controlled signal fire going in hope of attracting rescue, and that never worked. And then the one time Jack actually pays attention to making a fire, and tries to kill Ralph with it, it ends up saving them. Jack’s need for power was his tragic flaw, and it brought all of the boys, except Ralph, down with him.

SydneyR2012 said...

Also, relating to the Macbeth quote, I agree that when he says "blood will have blood" he is talking about how whoever created the blood, or violence/conflict, will have more conflict that comes off the initial crime or sin they committed. That seems to be the way everything works. Like in LOF, when Jack starts a fight with Ralph, it causes Piggy's death, which then causes more chaos and also, the conch is lost.

leslieh2012 said...

Blood is like Macbeth's evil side. Maybe his sin too. His inner demon will be fed with blood, here being murder, deciet etc. That madness will feed off of more madness. It is all basically an exclation of evil to feed Macbeth's dark side. Jack has an evil side too. When he puts on the mask, the evil side takes over. He can do things he would normally never do. His evil side requires blood and more evil.

Annotating was horrid!!!!!!!!!!
"horror, horror, horror!!!"
When i read, my brain shuts down and i am totally inveloped in the story. Nothing can pull me out, and i get deeper into it because of that. Annotating, i can't do that. I have to stay shallow so i can pull myself out and make a logical comment on the scene, and then continue. I read, and then form an opinion on it, not the other way around.

Laurao said...

I think that Macbeth means that blood of the King of Scotland will have the blood of Macbeth, maybe foreshadowing what is to come. So Macbeth killed the King of Scotland, but the blood of the king could have revenge on Macbeth, making more blood (gruesome!). This connects to Ralph, because Ralph first had the blood of a pig and then the blood of a boy (Simon). I haven’t finished annotating yet, but I have gone through the book. It took me a while to pick up the book, I would get frustrated with the plot line and how stupid these boys are, then put it down for a while, forcing myself to pick it back up. One of the biggest threads between the two books was overall greed, Lady Macbeth and Ralph should definitely get together and take over the world some day, they would be good at it (just kidding). Annotating is still hard for me. Thinking and reading combined is very hard to learn to multitask. So I am going over it again, I’ll see how that goes.

Laura

connorm said...

I think that Macbeth means that blood is part of everything. The need of blood also connects to LOF. Jack begins killing and can't stop. He starts with the pig and then just escalates to murder. Macbeth gets a taste of power and sees chances to gain more and he takes them whether it means murder or not. It also happens with Jack. He uses fear and weapons to gain power over the people in their community to rule the island even though its not best for the people altogether. Another connection i was curios about is if there is a connection between Piggy and the pigs. I was thinking that the pigs feed the people and Piggy feeds the people with ideas to survive. Also, Jack hates both Piggy and the pigs so they attract the same feelings from Jack. In Macbeth the same thing occurs with Lady Macbeth and the witches. He likes and admires them both despite both of their clear intentions of evil and their greed of power. I thought that there a many connections between Macbeth and LOF. I thought that LOF was basically well telling us that leaders should be the smart people that can lead but can also make decisions that will help the group not lose their minds. I liked the book and thought it had very many valuable lessons for teenagers.

Connor

lsadler2012 said...

When Macbeth exclaims this phrase, it can be interptreted differently. In my opinion, I think it means that the "they" in this context might be the judgmentors or the people who observe from the outside. Blood will have blood could mean that once a person murders and causes death and blood, the unevitable consequence is that they too have shed blood in a sort of recompence to the blood they have draw. It's as if Macbeth knows his ultimate destruction and understands the unavoidable judgment that he must face. Karma? I'm not sure if I see the direct connection between this and Lord of the Flies. Maybe Jack's violent and bloody actions will only bring more blood and death. Maybe shedding blood only ends in death for the victim and the criminal and this is the unesacple road that all of these characters must find themselves heading on, and the end of the road isn't so pretty. To bring things back to soley Lord of the Flies, I enjoyed it tremendously. I thought it was a dark and enlightening book that exposed the corruption in humans that lurks around deep in the souls of people. I think all it needed to come out was the extreme elments the boys were faced in. I'm not saying the book was all dark and depressing, I think that it had a hopeful ending but Golding did'nt expand on it. This makes me question why Golding would choose not to be so direct with how the boys are rescued, if they are at all. Does he want the reader to reach past jsut the obvious happy tale ending? In terms of the annotating, it was just alright. I thought always focusing on annotating pulled me away from the story and all I could focus on was trying to find all the possible connections I could come up with, which isn't exactly bad. I definately see the major connections between Macbeth and LOF. They have the same themes of man vs. corruption and strong mentaly vs. physical strength.

alisonr2012 said...

I think “blood will have blood” means that conflict will cause more conflict. This relates to Lord of the Flies because Jack and Ralph get into a fight which causes Piggy’s death. Lord of the Flies was different. It wasn’t the best book I have read but it wasn’t the worst either. My annotating was better in the beginning and I am finding it difficult to annotate now that I am towards the end of the book. I am finding connections between Macbeth and Lord of the Flies.

sammiet2012 said...

Macbeth fears that Banquo's murder will be revenged by his own murder. This connects to the situation with Jack and Ralph in LOF because Jack thinks that because Piggy was killed Ralph will come back to kill him, so he ordered everyone to try to go out and kill Ralph.

I would have to say the annotating went well. I found it hard though to annotate and read at the same time because after I would right something down I would have to get back into the flow of the book. I didn't feel as if there was a change in my learning compared to if I had just read the book because I do all of this annotating in my head and for me to remember what goes on in a chapter all I have to do is read the first few sentences of that chapter.

The main connection that I saw between these two books was the act of betrayal, and appetence vs. reality.

kinseym2012 said...

What Macbeth means by “It will have blood they say. Blood will have blood…” is that, like Chelsea said, its karma. He’s thinking that what he’s done will haunt him. “Blood will have blood” refers to something coming back, maybe a ghost? Macbeth has always been haunted by the supernatural. The witches found him and messed with his mind, telling him prophecies that made him power hungry to fulfill them. Then he was hallucinating a dagger, and now he might see ghosts? Macbeth is just a magnet for supernatural. Macbeth is also power hungry, like Jack. That’s the big connection between LOF and Macbeth. Is that people are craving power. Jack and Macbeth are very much alike. They both are scheming to take out the man in charge (Duncan and Ralph) because they want to be in charge. The main difference is that Macbeth has killed the king and Jack hasn’t killed Ralph.
I thought Lord of the Flies was very depressing and savage. I had a hard time reading Lord of the Flies so I did not annotate it the first time through. I’m currently in the process of rereading it and making new connections and annotating it this time now that I’ve read it through. So thank you Mrs. Smith for the extra time to annotate!

alexandriab2012 said...

I agree with Chelseac I think that karma is going to get Macbeth in the end. Karma usually has a way of coming back and biting you, sometimes when you don’t except it. I also think that karma is going to be Macbeth’s down fall. Macbeth is a good person, he just has been manipulated by his not so nice wife. The guilt of killing Duncan is already starting to affect and he’s starting to go insane.
My thought on the Lord of Flies was shock and it wasn’t good shock either. I’m not that the book was horrible, I’m just saying that it was a pretty deep book. I like other had to reread thing in the book to understand thing like when Simon was though to be the beast, when the Lord of Flies shows up and how men with the parachutes keep ending up on the island died. The connections were fairly easy for me because I’ve done connection before in other English classes. I enjoyed writing in the book, as a kid I was thought never to write in a book or you’d get in major trouble, so writing in the book was very amusing to me. I understand that more human have bad qualities than not, but why can’t we read nice book with nicer characters sure no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes but do we have to read books were everyone uses each other for the bigger better deal. Although when you think about it life in general is kind of like Macbeth and LOF because just look at politicians and how cut throat they are. So, I guess I see why were reading this book so, then we can read a classic and see the downfall of other characters so, then we has humans can try to avoid those mistakes.

kristenm2012 said...

I agree with kinseym when she says Macbeth is always tied to the supernatural. Weather it is in the way that he believes the witches and goes so far to make their prophecy come true. I see a big relation between Jack and Macbeth because of how much Jack wants to be a leader, not to mention that his time on the island had made him very close to insane. After finishing LoF, I really didn’t like it. It was really hard to read week after week about something I really didn’t care for. As for annotating, I think I might be the worst annotator in the world! As the book went on I think that I started to understand it a little more, but nothing substantial.

BernardoT2012 said...

First, can anyone show me where the quote from Macbeth is? I couldn't find it anywhere.

I think LOF is a book about how humans will do whatever they have to do to get their way. When push comes to shove humans will go by instinct and do what it takes to survive, or thrive. For instance, Jack wasn't interested in peace, he stole Piggy's glasses because he wanted dominance and control over everyone else. The book really follows a philosopher I learned about in the 8th grade, but his name escapes me. This philosopher believed that all humans were evil beasts that were always self-centered and cruel.

There wasn't much change in my thinking from the beggining of the book to the end and annotating didn't help. I already knew that people would follow their subconscious desires with devotion when they had nothing else. I even notice people acting in their own interests in civilization. When people make descisions, there's always the hidden reason for doing so.
For instance, doing charity work gets you a reputation for college, cleaning your room keeps you from getting grounded or losing privileges, and running errands earns you favor or money depending on the person.

Macbeth wants to be king and decides to kill the king based on his desire. This fits perfectly with LOF. Macbeth becomes a cruel human being while trying to achieve power and live a better life. Jack killed Piggy (indirectly) because he wanted to control the fire on the island. It all fits the same motif that humans are cruel if that's what it takes to get what they want.

austin d 2012 said...

In grading Lof what are you supposed to have for a legend? How do you grade one?