Most food writers out there would likely find a more appropriate post title for their first entry in 2023 (something with resolutions perhaps, or jubilations upon entering an incremented calendar year), however this isn’t the food writing of most food writers.
As ever, a thoroughly enjoyable post. As a granola munching vegan, I particularly appreciate your thoughtful comments on the animal-industrial complex. I do, however, have to question your literary criticism.
Golding was writing in the immediate aftermath of WWII. He was scarred by his own experiences in the navy and horrified by the easy barbarism of supposedly 'civilised' nations. You say that Lord of the Flies is a cautionary tale about what might happen if children are left unchecked by the guiding hand of adults and their social values. But the novel ends with the surviving children being chastised by a naval captain for their savagery, before he looks out to stare at his own warship on the horizon. Surely Golding is actually saying the opposite of what you claim: that the ancient cord of 'civilisation' is little more than lipstick on a pig?
Thank you for this acute analysis, I'd expect no more from a PHD mofo as yourself.
Though I would note, I was careful (perhaps not careful enough) to avoid stating this to be Golding's message, only instead this is the message that we are taught and most often remember the tale for.
As you suggest, I think Golding's message actually far more aligns with what the rest of the post puts forward.
Also an applause for the fitting ending of your comment, civilisation surely is little more than lipstick on a pig. Wish I'd thought of that myself, may have to edit this post to rewrite it in and make it seem I had.
As ever, a thoroughly enjoyable post. As a granola munching vegan, I particularly appreciate your thoughtful comments on the animal-industrial complex. I do, however, have to question your literary criticism.
Golding was writing in the immediate aftermath of WWII. He was scarred by his own experiences in the navy and horrified by the easy barbarism of supposedly 'civilised' nations. You say that Lord of the Flies is a cautionary tale about what might happen if children are left unchecked by the guiding hand of adults and their social values. But the novel ends with the surviving children being chastised by a naval captain for their savagery, before he looks out to stare at his own warship on the horizon. Surely Golding is actually saying the opposite of what you claim: that the ancient cord of 'civilisation' is little more than lipstick on a pig?
Thank you for this acute analysis, I'd expect no more from a PHD mofo as yourself.
Though I would note, I was careful (perhaps not careful enough) to avoid stating this to be Golding's message, only instead this is the message that we are taught and most often remember the tale for.
As you suggest, I think Golding's message actually far more aligns with what the rest of the post puts forward.
Also an applause for the fitting ending of your comment, civilisation surely is little more than lipstick on a pig. Wish I'd thought of that myself, may have to edit this post to rewrite it in and make it seem I had.