While Lord of the Flies is filled with allegories, the book itself is not one giant allegory. While it is possible that the author, William Golding slaved over every word, sentence, and paragraph for a hidden meaning, this is implausible and unrealistic. Perhaps the growth of the boy’s hair was not a creative symbol of their barbaric behavior but rather an indication of how long they had been at the island. Maybe, the conch was a means of communication; a way to gather the boys, and a way to create order at meetings, rather than an elaborate metaphor for democracy. Perhaps Golding held no profound knowledge of the world, and he really was “Trying to show what would happen to a group of young boys on a real Coral Island” (Golding Audio). While there are many symbols in Lord of the Flies, the boys are not as symbolic as some people believe.

The boys in Golding’s Lord of the Flies are at first glance regular schoolboys, though, by now, they have been analyzed into elaborate symbols of society and human nature. Golding was a teacher at Bishop Wordsworth's School for Boys. He himself “was a young boy, brother, father, son, and grandfather.” (Golding Audio) “He understood boys, their thoughts, feelings and actions. “His observations of them were not passive or casual either… He used to dig out of their little heads their inmost thoughts. He used to take boys on weekend (and longer) sails on a whaling boat that belonged to Bishop Wordsworth's School for Boys. He let them make up their own crew structure while he taught them sailing technique and refereed. He slept among them and shared their food. He also would take groups of boys to an old castle near Salisbury, give them non-lethal weapons, divide them into attackers and defenders and watch the action unfold while he, again, refereed. So, he didn't dream these boys up; he knew their motivations and emotions in depth.” (Daeron, member of cre8thoughts.com). Since he had such a plethora of knowledge of young British boys, he had no need for women, or members of other nationalities.

Each character posses a unique personality that is either attracted to or posed against another character based on their personality and habits alone. “Ralph being a kind, democratic character, and Piggy his less popular, but intelligent back-up.” (Wikipedia) This simple summary is more realistic than most that are preached today. Being around boys for his entire life, Golding knew boys who were kind, democratic and reasonable, and boys who were intelligent and less popular. There is no evidence in the story that suggests that Ralph himself represents democracy, nor evidence that Piggy represents intelligence. Jack on the other hand had a more commanding power over the other boys. He felt a need to be above everyone else. This nature was first seen when he says ““I ought to be chief," with simple arrogance, "because I'm chapter chorister and head boy. I can sing C sharp.”” (LOTF Chapter 1). His personality creates drama in regards to his relationships with the other boys, yet there is no evidence to suggest that he, himself represented communism, savagery, or totalitarianism as suggested by modern day critics. Simon appears to be the opposite of Jack. He is more religious and tranquil in nature, and he shows a calm and clearheaded approach to their difficulties. He often visits "Just a place I know. A place in the jungle." (LOTF Chapter 5) to relax and think. While he has a religious disposition, there is no evidence that suggests that he personally represents religion and faith. These boys are not symbols, and their deaths and corruption do not need to represent the downfall of society. They are merely young British boys trying to survive on a deserted island.

While there are allegories and symbols within Lord of the Flies, not everything was intended a symbol. The boys in this novel are no more than young boys, and their actions no more symbolic than what would really happen on a Coral Island. When readers look so far into books that they criticize them for minuscule imperfections rather than praise them for powerful messages and original captivating ideas, they have lost the true meaning of literature. William Golding’s Lord of the Flies is a powerful and provocative piece of modern literature, without being over analyzed to find a hidden meaning behind every word, sentence and meaning. Readers should step back and enjoy the novel for what it is – a novel- rather than an elaborate work designed to portray the downfall of society as it has become today.