《Lord of the Flies》经典读后感10篇
《Lord of the Flies》是一本由William Golding著作，Perigee出版的Mass Market Paperback图书，本书定价：USD 9.99，页数：208，文章吧小编精心整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(一)：又是一部反乌托邦
《三体》作者刘慈欣说：“当我们尽情畅想宇宙的种种可能性时，关于人类自身，我们却依然所知甚少。”关于人性与社会总是人们常争论的话题。还记得高一历史课上老师在讲到荀子的性本恶观点时，问道：有谁支持性本善？我果断举起了手，不料老师点我起来问道：为什么呢？我却哑口无言，抛出了弟子规：人之初，性本善嘛！老师无语，然后叙述了她儿子从小的占有欲等等，并做出了分析，说着孩子从小就是自私的、好胜的、顽皮的。
老师没有说服我，我向来都认为孩子们是美好纯真的，在长大的过程中才会渐渐失去幼儿时的无知与单纯；这本书也没有说服我，或许说服了我而我却不愿意承认，相信世界总是美好的会自在很多，不是吗？所以许多人看完《蝇王》后得出的“性本恶”悲观结论在我心目中是不成立的，而我所收获到的是：人类是野蛮的。或许会问：野蛮与恶又有何之分？或许我会答：野蛮是自然的，是属于生物的，而恶是一个与善相对的观念，归属于人的特质。
未翻开书前，曾幻想《蝇王》一定是本精彩的科幻小说，封面上有只很大的苍蝇，肯定是一个大Boss，而封面中央站着的那个男孩一定就是玩家了；甚至在对书一无所知前开始摆布它的剧情——人类苍蝇大战，最后人类成功打败了蝇王后，才发现：“人类不能欺负同一片区域内的其它生物”之类的。只是当时还未注意到封面上还有飘渺扭曲的浅绿和深绿色、一副破碎的眼镜、和男孩空洞可怕的眼神。果真还是自己太肤浅。
书本的场景代入感很强，神态、动作、对话、场景的细微描写很生动具体地勾勒了一幅幅画面，让人浮想联翩，一个海岛，一座山，一片孩子们开会的空地，一个岩石的城堡……人物刻画地也自然和细致，不同的鲜明个性跃然纸上；有时候多希望自己能成为岛上的孩子之一，能参与整个活动，并大声告诉他们：“你们不能这样！”；多想和西蒙做朋友，他身上散发的光芒深深吸引着我，也很想为皮基打抱不平，轻轻地抚摸他的头；想给拉尔夫一个拥抱，因为他承担了太多。一直觉得小说总会有个圆满的大结局的，或许像《美女与野兽》那样——善良本性却笨拙的野兽与美丽的女孩幸福地在一起；孩子们能意识到火种的重要性，最终团结一致被大人拯救，于是满怀期待文明是怎样战胜了野蛮，可在读到西蒙死去时，心里很压抑与难受，让我竟讨厌起书的作者来，一定要置这样一个无辜的孩子于死地吗？
书中的故事虽然发生在未来，但是一切都显得过于真实，这样的荒岛无论是在现在还是将来都将是人类的墓地。如果不是因为我是一位有小十来岁弟弟的大姐姐，我想自己是不会相信的。默默可以关注一个孩子的心理是怎样渐渐变化与成长:他有大部分孩子都有的缺点：自我意识重，不容易控制自己的情绪，喜欢跟风与歧视不一样的人，不爱看书，懒惰；也有大部分孩子都有的优点：自在，单纯，美好。意识经验告诉我：人是智慧的、文明的。可是书里的孩子们却在我的心里诅咒着：你是野蛮的、是无知的。许多人都会把《蝇王》和“性本恶”联系在一起，可是思考：为什么孩子会这样？因为孩子的本性是恶，孩子不够成熟？试想如果是一群大人在岛上呢？情况不会比书中描述得好到哪里去吧？孩子的行为只是大人的映射，而大人们的野蛮、残忍与自私才是幕后凶手。
这样一个荒岛让我想起了在读者上看到的一篇文章，是一个真实的故事。二战期间，一位日本女孩比嘉和子和她的丈夫是唯二在安娜塔汉岛上的幸存者，但是不久后，又有三十二名落难的士兵来到岛上。最后——为了争夺唯一的女孩，男人们自相残杀，到被外界发现时只剩下十九人，就这样，整个岛变得扭曲不堪，故事还被拍成了电影《这就是安纳塔汉岛的真相》。
很少有人将《蝇王》和反乌托邦文学作品联系在一起，但是个人认为《蝇王》是我看过最压抑的一部反乌托邦的文学。同样设定在未来，比起《1984》《美丽新世界》，《蝇王》太真实了，它没有任何的高科技手段来控制人们的思想，一切都发生在自然的庇护下，没有老大哥，没有监听器，每个人看起来都很平等，不用愁吃住。岛上是一个还不错的新世界，是一个由孩子们统治的自由乐园。比起思想被禁锢的大人，《蝇王》的主角是孩子，每个孩子有自己的优缺点与独特的个性。但是戈尔丁就像送来了一个美好童话的开端，却残酷地撕裂撕毁其美好的外表，揭露的“腐烂”的本质。孩子通常是人们希望的载体，可在这本书中，孩子们变得和大人一样，戈尔丁好像一直在说：没救了！都没救了！
在书后E. L. Epstein写的笔记中，他提到戈尔丁自己形容蝇王的主题时说，“文章的主旨，是试图通过社会的缺陷，追溯回人性本身的缺陷。寓意就是，社会的形态，实际上取决于个人的道德，而不是政治体制，无论这个体制看起来有多么合理并值得尊敬。”
人类所久久期盼的乌托邦社会不会到来，或许文明的最终归宿便是野蛮。野蛮人，吃人呢，就像鲁迅写的“我翻开历史一查，这历史没有年代，歪歪斜斜的每叶上都写着‘仁义道德’几个字。我横竖睡不着，仔细看了半夜，才从字缝里看出字来，满本都写着两个字是‘吃人’!”整本书就是戈尔丁对现实与人类道德大大的讽刺：借用人们对童话的美好幻想与对孩子所抱有的期待，重重打击现实中，表面上正常的秩序下，看似合理且尊敬的体制下，其实危机四伏。丧失理智的人类在自然中也不过是一头野蛮的野兽。长久以来人们梦想的乌托邦又一次在文字中幻灭了。
戈尔丁深刻地描写了书中许多很有象征意义的东西，不同的孩子象征着不同类型的人，海螺、蝇王、面具等等。但是个人最注意到的是书中的绿，一种充斥在整本书的颜色。那是森林的颜色，也是野兽的颜色。绿将整本书渲染地更压抑了，一种无以名状让人窒息的淡绿色气体就萦绕在空气中，让人窒息。绿虽曾经是自然的美好颜色，却在野蛮中变得扭曲。
依然坚信——孩子们是美好的，干净的——只是人是野蛮的罢了。谁是孩子呢？谁又不是孩子呢？耳边，仿佛又听到鲁迅的呐喊：“救救孩子！”
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(二)：An in-depth look at our innate angel and demon...
Well written, and superbly elaborated, the book groped along our souls and searched for the innate 'Ralph' and 'Jack' thereof.
I shuddered at the tragic language with which the author depicted the killing. And I felt bitter about the antagonism，as reflected in the book, between life and death, good and evil，order and violence, and between rescue and the compulsion to kill...
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(三)：Civilization vs. savages
“Kill the pig. Cut her throat. Spill her blood” (Chapter 4), an astounding sentence spoke out of a group of English boy. The world may have a stereotype attitude of children’s nature reckoned to be benevolent, naive, and chaste. None of the grownups ever cogitated the concealed instincts under their exterior that had been well camouflaged. All children have an instinct of savagery in their innermost heart that are waiting to be release someday in their life. So, are human savages since being born？ “The Lord of Flies” by William Golding will be the book I am going to referring to in this essay. It is about the process of a group of civilized English schoolboys degenerated to savages. They were trapped on a deserted island with out adult after their plane crushes. They tried to govern themselves establish laws in order to maintain civility. Unfortunately they failed and end up in internecine conflict. I believe the savagery facet of human would only present base on the social influences and environmental impact. The English schoolboys in “ The Lord Of Flies” would be a typical example of environment impact, which lead them to the point of savagery. Jack is one of the main characters in the book. The fact of the inhospitable condition of the island he’s character changed from afraid of killing animals to cure and brutal through the book. It proved human could degenerate base on the environmental impact.
The English schoolboys degenerated from civilized to savages through many stages. The boys are extremely civilized at the beginning of the story. They try to keep the way of life they use to have in the civilized society. Their parents teach them how to behave in specific manner, dealing problems in specific way. Therefore the reaction they presented on the island would obviously related to the education they had received. “They knew very well why he hadn’t: because of the enormity of the knife descending and cutting into living flesh; because of the unbearable blood.” (Chapter 1) Jack fears killing the pig in chapter one, a fear he overcomes as he sheds civilization and adopts the way of savage. But the instinct of civilization in the boys did not last long, they gradually became more and more savagery as time passed.
The simplest solution to differentiate savagery and civilization would be by the appearance of looks and behavior. In civilized society people will dress and behave dependents on the different type of occasions. But usually in public we will always behave in our best manner and dress suitably. Compare with the beginning of the story, Jack were much more wild on his behavior and became more savage like on his appearance. “He began to dance and his laughter became a bloodthirsty snarling”(Chapter 4). This quote proved Jack’s action had become less and less civilized. “I painted my face”(Chapter 4). Now, Jack’s appearance had completely turned up side down due to he needs to hid in the bushes and hunt pig in order to obtain the basic needs of food. In comparison of the appearance Jack presented now with the beginning, he wore the uniform and marching in a queue, he had gone way wilder than that time. These frantic behaviors has pushed the boys a step closer to the savages.
Day after day, the boys became less and less civilized. There aren’t any adult on the deserted island, they boys were in the condition of helplessness. Children without adult are just like the society with out laws. The outward appearance of the boys became unacceptable as the novel progressed, “…hair much too long, tangled here and there, knotted round a deal leaf or twig; clothing, worn away, stiff his own with sweat, put on, not for decorum or comfort but out of custom; the skin of the body scurfy with brine…” The appearance is a reflection of the boys’ inward state towards savages. Accordingly the boys successfully become savages.
The instinct of savagery is in all every human beings, some are just haven’t been activated. As you can see, the savage side of human would not be activated without a reason. The boys in “Lord Of Files” became savages due to the environmental impact they were facing on the deserted island. They had a time when they were in the civilized society, their parents teach them how to behave in certain manner. But as the living environment changed their appearance and attitude towards things also changed. They gave up the way they use to dress and behave civilized society. The condition on the island was absolutely lawless, they does anything they want without considering morality. Their characters change as the story progressed, from innocence to evil. In our society we each one of us is unique, yourself shouldn’t be lost under anything condition, be yourself.
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(四)：去個體化
#書# 《社會心理學》《Lord of the Flies》9/10
蒼蠅王是至今讓我看到名字都會不由心寒的小說：在各種各樣的「惡」中，這種純真極惡是最摧毀人心的。一群本來好好的孩子，在臉上畫了幾道花紋後完成了「善」到「惡」的轉換。從社會心理學分析，這幾道花紋是「去個體化」，之後的野獸化殺戮行為是群體的行為，和「我」無關。
一群蒙面的學生在虛擬懲罰實驗中會比掛名字牌的對照組使用兩倍以上的電擊懲罰，文質彬彬的人開車卻搶道罵人按喇叭，都是因為別人看不到，失去了後天養成的社會約束力。遊行示威亂砸亂搶，也是去個體化的惡果：群體是和「我」沒有關係的。
人和獸，其實沒有我們想像的區別那麼大⋯⋯
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(五)：The magical realism
The writing style of Lord of the Flies is rich and dark, which I mean indirect and implicit, unlike Camus, Golding has his own change of points of views or perspective shifting.We can find a variety of implicit allegories,illustrations,plot and utterances.
Well, Maybe they are right —— Most good stories start with a fundamental list of ingredients: the initial situation, conflict, complication, climax, suspense, denouement, and conclusion. Great writers sometimes shake up the recipe and add some spice.
All in all, worth reading :)
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(六)：现实只有更残酷
This book is about revelation of the dark side of the human nature, about how reason succumbs to savageness and how a civilised society dismantles into pieces of brutality. The chiefdom consisting school boys in the novel is an allegory of human society in general. But the difference between the novel and the real life is that, in the former, the salvation lies in the rescue by an adult marine officer whereas in the adults' world, people can only count on themselves, if rescue exists at all.
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(七)：We're but Jacks, and occasionally Rogers!
“A stick sharpened at both ends!”这是一句让我久久不能释怀的句子，Roger的心底里对暴力，血腥，权力的渴望早己经把原来就不是很浓的理智冲成白开水，在我看来，即使Jack也料想不到出现了比自己作风更硬朗的选手，喜惧参半！
说到stick，让我不禁思考这个苍蝇之王究竟应该是谁，是猪头咧笑所投射的海岛上那股将人推向原始的神秘之力；还是始昨甬者Roger内心的罪恶情愫，毕竟字面上来说是他用了一根a stick sharpened at both ends 将猪头插到地上，引来了密密麻麻的蝇群；还是说通过Simon的角度来看，是一种对黑暗和未知的恐惧的vast darkness；甚至是说苍蝇之王就是象征着人类道德良知的沦陷与人性之本恶。
每每看完书后，就会努力想去从书中汲取一些人生道理，可这次我次我汲取完后便不寒而栗。我们看书时一定会是在唾弃杰克和罗杰的，但仔细一想，他们所向往的打猎生活是一种对拉尔夫现定体制的挣扎，拉尔夫就像是大人一样，常说，这是为你们好，你们若想怎样，就必须怎样...而杰克要自由，要潇洒，不要这样或那样的框定和限制。我们这一代人不正是这样的吗！说的不正是我们吗!大人总说你要成才，要出人头地，就必须读书，社会说你要杰出就必须懂事守规矩，国家说你要默默无闻，无私奉献才是好榜样！但我们就是想不按部就班，就是要冲破限制，触碰发律底线！因为身为jack的我们己经受够了拉尔夫那一套怎样就必须的无聊框定！小时候和小伙伴们在玩具店配合偷取玩具小车的刺激现在还散发着清香，我想Jack也是一样的，主宰其它生物的快感一定更是美味不己，让人爱不释手。Rogers就像是大人世界的罪犯，也是最接近野蛮人的一个了，他的道德防线也是最弱的，一旦鲜血沾手，便没有了鲜血来自兽或是人的概念！对他而言，拉尔夫的头和猪头是一样的，都可以挂起来祭祀岛怪。
最后海军的出现阻止了这场猎杀，但谁又来阻止军舰起航后对其它船队的猎杀呢！
《Lord of the Flies》读后感(八)：一篇制度输给人性的寓言
与其说是一部小说，更像是一篇寓言。文章对于人物背景以及事件背景一笔带过，孩子们在太平洋一座不知名的小岛上遇到的居然不是生存危机，而是体制危机，可以说是作者特意架设了一个平台来对人性进行拷问和试验。
Ralph是小说前半部分的群体领导人，是在公平的民主选举中产生的领袖，在一群孩子中他年纪偏大，阅历广，信念坚定，但毕竟是一个12岁的孩子，在认识到流落荒岛的事实时仍然非常开心的认为获得了一段“自由的时间”，虽然个人能力较强，但并没有成功的组织协调群体，导致后期所召开的民主会议完全一团糟。
iggy是有哮喘症的肥胖男孩，聪明有理智，正是他敦促Ralph召集孩子们燃起火堆等待救援。Piggy敏感且自尊心强，虽然有正确的理念，但鉴于外貌性格等多方面因素并不被重视，这也直接导致了Piggy与Jack的决裂以及事实上Piggy并不完全被群体接纳的悲剧。
Jack是小说后半部分的群体领导人，可以肯定Jack与Ralph在相遇初期是相互欣赏的，高能力以及高阅历使得他们成为无话不谈的好朋友，但理念的差异最终导致了两人分道扬镳。Jack在后期的恶不可否认，实际上Jack并不想照顾年龄较小的小孩子们，这也正说明了他的制度是精英主义及党同伐异的，而对Ralph执着的追杀一方面出于私仇另一方面则是对于执政权力的把控欲望了。
多数评论倾向于将Ralph和Jack分别作为脆弱民主及邪恶专政的代表，我认为不是这样的。
Ralph所建立的体制有其先天的缺陷，“民主”仅仅是体现在选举权及发言权，而对于公投通过的“法律”并没有一定的监督，更别说是相应的奖惩措施，这直接导致大部分人在不想干活时就可以偷懒晒太阳，事实上这是一种在生产力极不发达的情况下建立起来的脆弱共产制度，这种体制对于选择干活的人是一种负影响，内部矛盾的逐渐积累必定导致该体制的最终崩溃。
而Jack本身就拥有足够的领导经验以及领导欲望，所建立的专政体制也与合唱团时一脉相承，但我并不认为Jack团体在后期的壮大是专政的胜利，事实上我相信生存条件的改善在这里起了非常大的作用，一边是享受打猎的乐趣以及珍贵的猪肉，一边是熬夜看守火堆期待飘渺的救援，孩子们的选择也不言自明了。
书中反复出现而事实上并不存在的野兽不过是分裂的诱因，即使没有失事的伞兵也会有其他的幻觉导致事件的失控。
对于最终讽刺的获救实在是……太呵呵了，如果任由事件继续发展，我认为Jack集团内部几位集权者之间会出现不可调和的矛盾，目前仍微弱但不可忽视的反对派将被迫分裂出去，而环境恶化导致的生存条件严苛必定会酝酿出一场更加恶劣的人性大戏。