One Amazing Thing is a novel about a group of people who, in a life-threatening situation, tell stories to one another and behave more or less peaceably while they await rescue.
The Lord of the Flies, on the other hand, is a story about a group of people (kids) who, in a life-threatening situation, descend into savagery while they await rescue.
Which outcome do you consider more realistic? Why?
I believe that One Amazing Thing is more realistic because not everyone is going to get stuck on a island. What I think really won't happen is it being a group of kids. I think that getting stuck in an office and telling stories to pass the time is more realistic. Not everyone goes on planes and not everyone on the plane will be a kid except the pilot.
ReplyDeleteIt's true that not everyone goes on planes, but you also have to remember that not everyone goes into customs offices either.
DeleteI believe that people would most likely act the way they do in The Lord of the Flies. In One amazing Thing, the people spent enough time together to know that they were in a bad situation and went almost to the point of desperation. We do not know how the story ended. Maybe if they did not get rescued, they would have gotten desperate enough to act savage. The children in The Lord of the Flies do not act completely savage in the beginning of the book. They act a little mean, but not much more than kids are in general. I think the desperation brings out the worst in people as it also did in the road for most people.
ReplyDeleteI thinkk lord of the flies is mmore realistic because why would anyone tell stories instead of trying to survive thats dumb
ReplyDelete...I would disagree. I think people would tell stories in the room, while on the island they wouldn't be wasting their time and doing things to survive. Also you spelled think and more wrong.
DeleteThe reaction in Lord of the Flies is more realistic compared to One Amazing Thing. If people were really in a life-threatening situation, I don't think they would be in a calm enough state to be telling stories. It's more likely that they would be establishing a leader, searching for resources, and finding ways to escape.
ReplyDeleteI think both outcomes are equally as likely. The situation in One Amazing Thing resulted among adults, who were more likely than children to see the importance of remaining calm. Also it's not as if the people in One Amazing Thing were completely calm and relaxed. There was tension and there were outbreaks, making the story more believable. The outcome of savagery in The Lord of the Flies is more likely to occur among children as it did because they don't understand that remaining peaceable is very important. Their group mentality is less refined than those of adults, making it natural for them to revert back to their survival instincts. These children have also grown up during a time of intense war, making it seem normal to them to follow that example.
ReplyDeleteI think the first situation is more realistic because in the room they really can't do much or they could die or get extremely injured. Plus the chances of a random group of kids on a plane with no adults is HIGHLY unlikely, let alone them being stranded on a random island during an atomic war.
ReplyDelete"The Lord of the Flies" outcome is more likely, not to knock the overly optimistic "One Amazing Thing" outcome. If you look back in history people have turned to eating one another, The Donner Party, to stay alive. There is no way that a group of people in a life-threatening situation will resort to telling stories in order to keep the situation light-hearted. In the real world, life is harsh and realistically someone will get eaten, killed, or beat up in a life-threatening situation. I feel like the writer of "One Amazing Thing" tried to sugarcoat the harsh situation while Golding is keeping it real. You can only keep things light for so long.
ReplyDeleteI think One Amazing Thing is more realistic because all the people can do in their situation is sit in the room and wait. On an island, there is so much more that can be done. On the island they actually have a chance for survival , and in the room all they can do is sit and wait. Also in the room in One Amazing Thing, they are all adults with a story to tell. As kids, most of their stories are probably similar.
ReplyDeleteI think that the outcome in One Amazing Thing is more realistic. I think that because I think thats how I would act in a situation like that. It would be much easier to sit down and just stay calm than go start going crazy. Of course I would be a little worried but in the long run I would feel better about the situation if I was calm, and the people around me were calm.
ReplyDeleteI think that people will descend into savagery in a life-threatening situation rather than remain peaceful and tell stories to each other. A good example of this is the Donner Party. While trapped in the mountains, people resorted to savage-like cannibalism, instead of working together to get out of their situation or to at least calm down. The lack of food is definitely a motivator for behaving like a savage, because dying of hunger would be a painful tortuous. In One Amazing Thing, the group was just running out of food. Had the story went on, the group probably would have starting fighting over anything edible that they could get their hands on. Primal instincts would kick in in a life-or-death situation like these two groups were in.
ReplyDeleteOne amazing thing is more realistic, because earthquakes happen a lot throughout the world. And people can get trapped for days in that situation. You can imagine people talking about their lives when they are trapped and have nothing else to do. Lord of the Flies does not seem realistic because plane crashes are not common. And people surviving a plane crash is also not common. Also that there is no adults around either. And that all the kids don't know each other.
ReplyDeleteI consider the outcome of One Amazing Thing more realistic. One Amazing Thing is more realistic than Lord of the Flies because I don't think children have enough sense to survive in a life-threatening situation. If kids were put in a life-threatening situation the result would be panic. Also they wouldn't know how to work together every well because kids don't listen to each other very well and have tendency to talk over one another. Adults realize the situation they are in and can handle it in a rational way.
ReplyDeleteThe outcome in Lord of the Flies is more realistic than the outcome in One Amazing Thing. When people are in survival mode, they will do anything necessary to stay alive. In One Amazing Thing, the people acted extremely calm in a life threatening situation. This is unrealistic because if anyone is in a death threatening situation, they would not think about entertaining each other. They would think about trying to get out of danger.
ReplyDeleteI think the peaceful situation would be more likely to occur with the adults. Children would probably not be able to even form a properly organized group. Also i think they would be thrown more into shock and disorder than a group of savages with any chance of survival. Most of the children i have met have been barely capable of any form of action besides getting into trouble. The children would probably be dead shortly after the crash due to their lack of discipline and knowledge. Although some fighting does occur in One Amazing Thing, it is subdued by the rest of the group. The scenario in One Amazing Thing which the life threatening situation occurs and carries out is much more plausible in a real world environment.
ReplyDeleteI would consider the possibility of both plausible, but I find that One Amazing Thing is a little more realistic. I state that both are plausible because of the different mentality of the two groups, one composed of mostly adults and the other being only kids. The reason why I feel that the outcome in One Amazing Thing is more realistic is that adults tend to be more rational and would try and remain calm during a life-threatening situation, and telling stories would provide a welcome distraction.
ReplyDeleteI THINK THAT THE OUTCOME IS LARGELY EFFECTED BY THE SETTING. IN "ONE AMAZING THING" YOU REALLY CAN'T DESCEND INTO SAVAGERY. I THINK THAT IF THE KIDS WOULD HAVE BEEN PLACED INTO THE SAME SITUATION, I THINK THEY WOULD REACT IN A SIMILAR WAY.
ReplyDeleteI think that the outcome in Lord of the Flies is more realistic. I think that in a disaster situation, people naturally take on an "every man for himself" mentality. Young boys are a prime example of this behavior.
ReplyDeleteI find that Lord of the Flies is more realistic, if you consider the immaturity and general ignorance on how to handle dangerous situations that kids have. A group of young boys would be prone to power struggle, especially since there are no adults to provide guidance. Kids also tend to act more emotionally than rationally, so turning savage is almost inevitable. One Amazing Thing is possible too, but no matter what when people are put in danger, they act panicky and impatiently (at least to start) so quietly listening to stories as they're dying seems unlikely.
ReplyDelete