2022/08/17

Lord of the Flies - Wikipedia

Lord of the Flies - Wikipedia

Lord of the Flies

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Lord of the Flies
LordOfTheFliesBookCover.jpg
The original UK Lord of the Flies book cover
AuthorWilliam Golding
Cover artistAnthony Gross[1]
CountryUnited Kingdom
GenreAllegorical novel
PublisherFaber and Faber
Publication date
17 September 1954
Pages224[2]
ISBN0-571-05686-5 (first edition, paperback)
OCLC47677622

Lord of the Flies is a 1954 novel by the Nobel Prize-winning British author William Golding. The plot concerns a group of British boys who are stranded on an uninhabited island and their disastrous attempts to govern themselves. Themes include the tension between groupthink and individuality, between rational and emotional reactions, and between morality and immorality.

The novel, which was Golding's debut, was generally well received. It was named in the Modern Library 100 Best Novels, reaching number 41 on the editor's list, and 25 on the reader's list. In 2003, it was listed at number 70 on the BBC's The Big Read poll, and in 2005 Time magazine named it as one of the 100 best English-language novels published between 1923 and 2005, and included it in its list of the 100 Best Young-Adult Books of All Time. Popular reading in schools, especially in the English-speaking world, Lord of the Flies was ranked third in the nation's favourite books from school in a 2016 UK poll.

Background

Published in 1954, Lord of the Flies was Golding's first novel. The idea came about after Golding read what he deemed to be an unrealistic depiction of stranded children in youth novels like The Coral Island: a Tale of the Pacific Ocean (1857) by R. M. Ballantyne, which includes themes of the civilising effect of Christianity and the importance of hierarchy and leadership. Golding asked his wife, Ann, if it would "be a good idea if I wrote a book about children on an island, children who behave in the way children really would behave?"[3] As a result, the novel contains various references to The Coral Island, such as the rescuing naval officer's description of the boys' initial attempts at civilised cooperation as "a jolly good show, like the Coral Island".[4] Golding's three central characters (Ralph, Piggy, and Jack) have also been interpreted as caricatures of Ballantyne's Coral Island protagonists.[5]

The manuscript was rejected by many publishers before finally being accepted by London-based Faber & Faber; an initial rejection by the professional reader, Miss Perkins, at Faber labelled the book an "Absurd and uninteresting fantasy about the explosion of an atomic bomb on the colonies and a group of children who land in the jungle near New Guinea. Rubbish and dull. Pointless".[6] However, Charles Monteith decided to take on the manuscript[7] and worked with Golding to complete several fairly major edits, including the removal of the entire first section of the novel, which had previously described an evacuation from nuclear war.[6] As well as this, the character of Simon was heavily redacted by Monteith, including the removal of his interaction with a mysterious lone figure who is never identified but implied to be God.[8] Monteith himself was concerned about these changes, completing "tentative emendations", and warning against "turning Simon into a prig".[6] Ultimately, Golding made all of Monteith's recommended edits and wrote back in his final letter to his editor that "I've lost any kind of objectivity I ever had over this novel and can hardly bear to look at it."[9] These manuscripts and typescripts are now available from the Special Collections Archives at the University of Exeter library for further study and research.[10] The collection includes the original 1952 "Manuscript Notebook" (originally a Bishop Wordsworth's School notebook) containing copious edits and strikethroughs.

With the changes made by Monteith and despite the initial slow rate of sale (about three thousand copies of the first print sold slowly), the book soon went on to become a best-seller, with more than ten million copies sold as of 2015.[7] It has been adapted to film twice in English, in 1963 by Peter Brook and 1990 by Harry Hook, and once in Filipino by Lupita A. Concio (1975).

The book begins with the boys' arrival on the island after their plane has been shot down during what seems to be part of a nuclear World War III.[11] Some of the marooned characters are ordinary students, while others arrive as a musical choir under an established leader. With the exception of Sam, Eric, and the choirboys, they appear never to have encountered each other before. The book portrays their descent into savagery; left to themselves on a paradisiacal island, far from modern civilization, the well-educated boys regress to a primitive state.

Plot

In the midst of a wartime evacuation, a British aeroplane crashes on or near an isolated island in a remote region of the Pacific Ocean. The only survivors are boys in their middle childhood or preadolescence. Two boys named Ralph and Piggy find a conch, which Ralph uses as a horn to convene the survivors to one area. Ralph immediately commands authority over the other boys using the conch, and is elected their "chief". He establishes three primary policies: to have fun, to survive, and to constantly maintain a smoke signal that could alert passing ships of their presence. Ralph and two other boys named Jack and Simon use Piggy's glasses to create the signal fire.

The semblance of order quickly deteriorates as the majority of the boys turn idle and develop paranoia towards an imaginary monster they call the "beast", which they all slowly begin to believe exists on the island. Ralph fails to convince the boys that no beast exists, while Jack gains popularity by declaring that he will personally hunt and kill the beast. At one point, Jack summons many of the boys to hunt down a wild pig, drawing away those assigned to maintain the signal fire. The extinguished smoke signal fails to attract a ship passing by the island. Ralph angrily confronts Jack about his failure to maintain the signal, but he is rebuffed by the other boys. A disillusioned Ralph considers relinquishing his position as leader, but is persuaded not to do so by Piggy.

One night, an aerial battle occurs near the island while the boys sleep, during which a fighter pilot ejects from his plane and dies in the descent. His body drifts down to the island in his parachute and get tangled in a tree. Twin boys Sam and Eric see the corpse of the fighter pilot and mistake it for the beast. When Ralph, Jack, and another boy named Roger investigate the corpse, they flee, incorrectly believing the beast is real. Jack calls an assembly and tries to turn the others against Ralph, but initially receives no support. Jack storms off alone to form his own tribe, with the other boys gradually joining him.

Simon often ventures out into the island's forest to be alone. One day while he is there, Jack and his followers erect an offering to the beast nearby: a pig's head, mounted on a sharpened stick and swarming with scavenging flies. Simon conducts an imaginary dialogue with the head, which he dubs the "Lord of the Flies". The head tells Simon that there is no beast on the island, and predicts that the other boys will turn on him. That night, Ralph and Piggy visit Jack's tribe, discovering that they have begun painting their faces and engaging in primitive ritual dances. Simon discovers that the "beast" is the dead parachutist, and rushes down to tell Jack's tribe. The frenzied boys mistake Simon for the beast, attack him, and beat him to death. Ralph and Piggy participate in the melee, and become deeply disturbed by Jack's violence.

Jack and his rebel band decide to steal Piggy’s glasses, the only means the boys have of starting a fire. They raid Ralph's camp, confiscate the glasses, and return to their abode on an outcropping called Castle Rock. Deserted by most of his supporters, Ralph journeys to Castle Rock with Piggy, Sam, and Eric in order to confront Jack and retrieve the glasses. The boys reject Ralph, with Roger killing Piggy and shattering the conch. Ralph manages to escape, but Sam and Eric are tortured by Roger until they agree to join Jack's tribe.

Ralph secretly confronts Sam and Eric, who warn him that Jack plans to hunt him like a pig and behead him. The following morning, Jack's tribe sets fire to the forest, with Ralph narrowly escaping his hunters. Following a long chase, most of the island is consumed in flames. With the hunters closely behind him, Ralph trips and falls in front of a British naval officer whose party has landed to investigate the fire. Ralph bursts into tears over the deaths of Simon and Piggy. Jack and the other boys, filthy and unkempt, also revert to their true ages and erupt into sobs. The officer expresses his disappointment at seeing British boys exhibiting such feral, warlike behaviour.

Themes

At an allegorical level, the central theme is the conflicting human impulses toward civilisation and social organisation—living by rules, peacefully and in harmony—and toward the will to power. Themes include the tension between groupthink and individuality, between rational and emotional reactions, and between morality and immorality. How these play out and how different people feel their influence form a major subtext of Lord of the Flies, with the central themes addressed in an essay by American literary critic Harold Bloom.[12] The name "Lord of the Flies" is a literal translation of Beelzebub, from 2 Kings 1:2–3, 6, 16.

Reception

The book, originally entitled Strangers from Within, was initially rejected by an in-house reader, Miss Perkins, at London based publishers Faber and Faber as "Rubbish & dull. Pointless".[7] The title was considered "too abstract and too explicit". Following a further review, the book was eventually published as Lord of the Flies.[13][14]

A turning point occurred when E. M. Forster chose Lord of the Flies as his "outstanding novel of the year."[7] Other reviews described it as "not only a first-rate adventure but a parable of our times".[7] In February 1960, Floyd C. Gale of Galaxy Science Fiction rated Lord of the Flies five stars out of five, stating that "Golding paints a truly terrifying picture of the decay of a minuscule society ... Well on its way to becoming a modern classic".[15]

"Lord of the Flies presents a view of humanity unimaginable before the horrors of Nazi Europe, and then plunges into speculations about mankind in the state of nature. Bleak and specific, but universal, fusing rage and grief, Lord of the Flies is both a novel of the 1950s, and for all time."

Robert McCrumThe Guardian.[7]

In his book Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and WrongMarc D. Hauser says the following about Golding's Lord of the Flies: "This riveting fiction, standard reading in most intro courses to English literature, should be standard reading in biology, economics, psychology, and philosophy."[16]

Its stances on the already controversial subjects of human nature and individual welfare versus the common good earned it position 68 on the American Library Association's list of the 100 most frequently challenged books of 1990–1999.[17] The book has been criticized as "cynical" and portraying humanity exclusively as "selfish creatures". It has been linked with "Tragedy of the commons" by Garrett Hardin and books by Ayn Rand, and countered by "Management of the Commons" by Elinor Ostrom. Parallels have been drawn between the "Lord of the Flies" and an actual incident from 1965 when a group of schoolboys who sailed a fishing boat from Tonga were hit by a storm and marooned on the uninhabited island of ʻAta, considered dead by their relatives in Nuku‘alofa. The group not only managed to survive for over 15 months but "had set up a small commune with food garden, hollowed-out tree trunks to store rainwater, a gymnasium with curious weights, a badminton court, chicken pens and a permanent fire, all from handiwork, an old knife blade and much determination". As a result, when ship captain Peter Warner found them, they were in good health and spirits. Dutch historian Rutger Bregman, writing about this situation said that Golding's portrayal was unrealistic.[18]

  • It was awarded a place on both lists of Modern Library 100 Best Novels, reaching number 41 on the editor's list, and 25 on the reader's list.[19]
  • In 2003, the novel was listed at number 70 on the BBC's survey The Big Read.[20]
  • In 2005, the novel was chosen by Time magazine as one of the 100 best English-language novels from 1923 to 2005.[21] Time also included the novel in its list of the 100 Best Young-Adult Books of All Time.[22]

Popular in schools, especially in the English-speaking world, a 2016 UK poll saw Lord of the Flies ranked third in the nation's favourite books from school, behind George Orwell’s Animal Farm and Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations.[23]

On 5 November 2019, BBC News listed Lord of the Flies on its list of the 100 most inspiring novels.[24]

In other media

Film

There have been three film adaptations based on the book:

A fourth adaptation, to feature an all-female cast, was announced by Warner Bros. in August 2017,[25][26] but was subsequently abandoned. In July 2019, director Luca Guadagnino was said to be in negotiations for a conventionally cast version.[27][28] Ladyworld, an all-female adaptation, was released in 2018.

Stage

Nigel Williams adapted the text for the stage. It was debuted by the Royal Shakespeare Company in July 1996. The Pilot Theatre Company has toured it extensively in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.

In October 2014 it was announced that the 2011 production[29][failed verification] of Lord of the Flies would return to conclude the 2015 season at the Regent's Park Open Air Theatre ahead of a major UK tour. The production was to be directed by the Artistic Director Timothy Sheader who won the 2014 Whatsonstage.com Awards Best Play Revival for To Kill a Mockingbird.

Kansas-based Orange Mouse Theatricals and Mathew Klickstein produced a topical, gender-bending adaptation called Ladies of the Fly that was co-written by a group of young girls (ages 8–16) based on both the original text and their own lives.[30] The production was performed by the girls themselves as an immersive live-action show in August 2018.

Radio

In June 2013, BBC Radio 4 Extra broadcast a dramatisation by Judith Adams in four 30-minute episodes directed by Sasha Yevtushenko.[31] The cast included Ruth Wilson as "The Narrator", Finn Bennett as "Ralph", Richard Linnel as "Jack", Caspar Hilton-Hilley as "Piggy" and Jack Caine as "Simon".

  1. Fire on the Mountain
  2. Painted Faces
  3. Beast from the Air
  4. Gift for Darkness

Influence

Many writers have borrowed plot elements from Lord of the Flies. By the early 1960s, it was required reading in many schools and colleges.[32]

Literature

Author Stephen King uses the name Castle Rock, from the mountain fort in Lord of the Flies, as a fictional town that has appeared in a number of his novels.[33] The book itself appears prominently in his novels Hearts in Atlantis (1999), Misery (1987), and Cujo (1981).[34]

King wrote an introduction for a new edition of Lord of the Flies (2011) to mark the centenary of William Golding's birth in 1911.[35]

King's fictional town of Castle Rock inspired the name of Rob Reiner's production company, Castle Rock Entertainment, which produced the film Lord of the Flies (1990).[35]

Music

Iron Maiden wrote a song inspired by the book, included in their 1995 album The X Factor.[36]

The Filipino indie pop/alternative rock outfit The Camerawalls include a song entitled "Lord of the Flies" on their 2008 album Pocket Guide to the Otherworld.[37]

Editions

  • Golding, William (1958) [1954]. Lord of the Flies (Print ed.). Boston: Faber & Faber.

See also

References

  1. ^ "Bound books – a set on Flickr". 22 November 2007. Archived from the original on 25 October 2014. Retrieved 10 September 2012.
  2. ^ Amazon, "Lord of the Flies: Amazon.ca" Archived 20 May 2021 at the Wayback MachineAmazon
  3. ^ Presley, Nicola. "Lord of the Flies and The Coral Island." William Golding Official Site, 30th Jun 2017, https://william-golding.co.uk/lord-flies-coral-island Archived 23 January 2021 at the Wayback Machine. Accessed 9th Feb 2021.
  4. ^ Reiff, Raychel Haugrud (2010), William Golding: Lord of the Flies, Marshall Cavendish, p. 93, ISBN 978-0-7614-4700-9
  5. ^ Singh, Minnie (1997), "The Government of Boys: Golding's Lord of the Flies and Ballantyne's Coral Island", Children's Literature25: 205–213, doi:10.1353/chl.0.0478
  6. Jump up to:a b c Monteith, Charles. "Strangers from Within." William Golding: The Man and His Books, edited by John Carey, Farrar Straus & Giroux, 1987.
  7. Jump up to:a b c d e f "The 100 best novels: No 74 – Lord of the Flies by William Golding (1954)"The GuardianArchived from the original on 12 June 2020. Retrieved 25 June 2020.
  8. ^ Kendall, Tim. Email, University of Exeter, received 5th Feb 2021.
  9. ^ Williams, Phoebe (6 June 2019). "New BBC programme sheds light on the story behind the publication of Lord of the Flies"Faber & Faber Official SiteArchived from the original on 1 May 2021. Retrieved 14 February 2021.
  10. ^ "EUL MS 429 - William Golding, Literary Archive"Archives Catalogue. University of Exeter. Retrieved 6 October 2021The collection represents the literary papers of William Golding and consists of notebooks, manuscript and typescript drafts of Golding's novels up to 1989.
  11. ^ Weiskel, Portia Williams, ed. (2010). "Peter Edgerly Firchow Examines the Implausible Beginning and Ending of Lord of the Flies"William Golding's Lord of the Flies. Bloom's Guides. Infobase. ISBN 9781438135397Archived from the original on 11 June 2020. Retrieved 14 August 2017.
  12. ^ Bloom, Harold. "Major themes in Lord of the Flies" (PDF)Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 December 2019. Retrieved 11 December 2019.
  13. ^ Symons, Julian (26 September 1986). "Golding's way"The GuardianISSN 0261-3077Archived from the original on 6 October 2019. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  14. ^ Faber, Toby (28 April 2019). "Lord of the Flies? 'Rubbish'. Animal Farm? Too risky – Faber's secrets revealed"The ObserverISSN 0029-7712Archived from the original on 28 April 2019. Retrieved 28 April 2019.
  15. ^ Gale, Floyd C. (February 1960). "Galaxy's 5 Star Shelf"Galaxy Science Fiction. pp. 164–168.
  16. ^ Marc D. Hauser (2006). Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. page 252.
  17. ^ "100 most frequently challenged books: 1990–1999"American Library Association. 2009. Archived from the original on 15 May 2010. Retrieved 16 August 2009.
  18. ^ Bregman, Rutger (9 May 2020). "The real Lord of the Flies: what happened when six boys were shipwrecked for 15 months"The GuardianISSN 0261-3077Archived from the original on 9 May 2020. Retrieved 9 May 2020.
  19. ^ Kyrie O'Connor (1 February 2011). "Top 100 Novels: Let the Fighting Begin". Houston Chronicle. Archived from the original on 30 July 2012. Retrieved 12 December 2019.
  20. ^ "The Big Read – Top 100 Books"BBC. April 2003. Archived from the original on 28 October 2012. Retrieved 18 October 2012.
  21. ^ Grossman, Lev; Lacayo, Richard (6 October 2005). "ALL-TIME 100 Novels. Lord of the Flies (1955), by William Golding"TimeISSN 0040-781XArchived from the original on 10 December 2012. Retrieved 10 December 2012.
  22. ^ "100 Best Young-Adult Books"TimeArchived from the original on 22 January 2020. Retrieved 11 December 2019.
  23. ^ "George Orwell's Animal Farm tops list of the nation's favourite books from school"The IndependentArchived from the original on 11 December 2019. Retrieved 11 December 2019.
  24. ^ "100 'most inspiring' novels revealed by BBC Arts"BBC News. 5 November 2019. Archived from the original on 3 November 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2019The reveal kickstarts the BBC's year-long celebration of literature.
  25. ^ Fleming, Mike, Jr (30 August 2017). "Scott McGehee & David Siegel Plan Female-Centric 'Lord of the Flies' At Warner Bros"DeadlineArchived from the original on 6 March 2018. Retrieved 11 April 2018.
  26. ^ France, Lisa Respers (1 September 2017). "'Lord of the Flies' all-girl remake sparks backlash". Entertainment. CNNArchived from the original on 7 November 2017. Retrieved 11 April 2018.
  27. ^ Kroll, Justin (29 July 2019). "Luca Guadagnino in Talks to Direct 'Lord of the Flies' Adaptation (EXCLUSIVE)"VarietyArchived from the original on 30 July 2019. Retrieved 15 May 2020.
  28. ^ Lattanzio, Ryan (25 April 2020). "Luca Guadagnino Taps 'A Monster Calls' Author to Write 'Lord of the Flies' Adaptation"IndieWireArchived from the original on 24 September 2020. Retrieved 15 May 2020.
  29. ^ "Lord of the Flies, Open Air Theatre, Regent's Park, review"The TelegraphArchived from the original on 30 May 2011. Retrieved 26 May 2011.
  30. ^ "Orange Mouse Theatricals to stage re-imagined 'Lord of the Flies' with an all-female twist"LJWorld.com.
  31. ^ "William Golding – Lord of the Flies"BBC Radio 4Archived from the original on 20 June 2013.
  32. ^ Ojalvo, Holly Epstein; Doyne, Shannon (5 August 2010). "Teaching 'The Lord of the Flies' With The New York Times"The New York TimesArchived from the original on 8 January 2018. Retrieved 6 May 2018.
  33. ^ Beahm, George (1992). The Stephen King story (Revised ed.). Kansas City: Andrews and McMeel. p. 120ISBN 0-8362-8004-0Castle Rock, which King in turn had got from Golding's Lord of the Flies.
  34. ^ Liukkonen, Petri. "Stephen King"Books and Writers (kirjasto.sci.fi). Finland: Kuusankoski Public Library. Archived from the original on 23 March 2007.
  35. Jump up to:a b King, Stephen (2011). "Introduction by Stephen King". Faber and Faber. Archived from the original on 24 July 2012. Retrieved 12 October 2011.
  36. ^ "CALA (-) LAND"ilcala.blogspot.comArchived from the original on 13 October 2016. Retrieved 6 May 2018.
  37. ^ "Indie band The Camerawalls releases debut album"Archived from the original on 10 June 2020. Retrieved 10 May 2020.

External links

===

Lord of the Flies (1963 film)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Lord of the Flies
Lordofthefliesposters.jpg
Theatrical release poster
Directed byPeter Brook
Written byPeter Brook
Based onLord of the Flies
by William Golding
Produced byLewis M. Allen
Starring
CinematographyTom Hollyman
Edited by
Music byRaymond Leppard
Production
companies
  • Lord of the Flies Company
  • Allen-Hodgdon Productions
  • Two Arts
Distributed byBritish Lion Film Corporation
Release dates
  • 12 May 1963 (Cannes)
  • 23 July 1964 (United Kingdom)
Running time
92 minutes
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
Budget$250,000 (£80,000)[1]

Lord of the Flies is a 1963 British drama film based on William Golding's 1954 novel of the same name about 30 schoolboys who are marooned on an island where the behaviour of the majority degenerates into savagery. It was written and directed by Peter Brook and produced by Lewis M. Allen. The film was in production for much of 1961, though the film did not premiere until 1963, and was not released in the United Kingdom until 1964. Golding himself supported the film. When Kenneth Tynan was a script editor for Ealing Studios he commissioned a script of Lord of the Flies from Nigel Kneale, but Ealing Studios closed in 1959 before it could be produced.

The novel was adapted into a movie for a second time in 1990; the 1963 film is generally considered more faithful to the novel than the 1990 adaptation.

Plot[edit]

A group of schoolboys is evacuated from England following the outbreak of an unidentified war. Their aircraft is shot down by briefly-glimpsed fighter planes and ditches near a remote island.

The main character, Ralph, is seen walking through a tropical forest. He meets a chubby, bespectacled, intelligent boy who reveals his school nickname was Piggy, but asks that Ralph not repeat that. The two go to the beach where they find a conch shell, which Ralph blows to rally the other survivors. As they emerge from the jungle, it becomes clear that no adults have escaped the crash. Singing is then heard and a small column of school choir boys, wearing dark cloaks and hats and led by a boy named Jack Merridew, walk towards Ralph and Piggy.

The boys decide to appoint a chief. The vote goes to Ralph, not Jack. Initially, Ralph is able to steer the boys (all of whom are aged between about six and fourteen) towards a reasonably civilised and co-operative society. The choir boys make wooden spears, creating the appearance that they are warriors within the group. Crucially, Jack has a knife. Ralph, Jack, and a choir boy named Simon go off to explore, and find out they are indeed on a deserted island. The boys have another assembly where Ralph tells the boys to make a fire.

The boys build shelters and start a signal fire using Piggy's spectacles. With no rescue in sight, the increasingly authoritarian and violence-prone Jack starts hunting and eventually finds a pig. Meanwhile, the fire, for which he and his "hunters" are responsible, goes out, losing the boys' chance of being spotted from a passing aeroplane. Piggy chastises Jack, and Jack strikes him in retaliation, knocking his glasses off, and breaking one lens. Ralph is furious with Jack. Soon some of the boys begin to talk of a beast that comes from the water. The next day, twins Sam and Eric see something land on the mountain, and they tell the boys it's another beast. All the boys except Piggy and the littluns go searching for it. Ralph, Jack, and another boy named Roger continue on to the top of the mountain and see something move. The boys all run away. The next day, Jack, obsessed with this imagined threat, leaves the group to start a new tribe, one without rules, where the boys play and hunt all day. Soon, more follow until only a few, including Piggy, are left with Ralph.

Events reach a crisis when Simon finds a sow's head impaled on a stick, left by Jack as an offering to the beast. He becomes hypnotized by the head, which has flies swarming all around it. Simon then climbs the mountain and sees that what the other boys thought was a beast is actually the dead body of a parachutist. Simon runs to Jack's camp in an attempt to tell them the truth, but the frenzied boys in the darkness mistake him for the beast, and beat him to death. Piggy defends the group's actions with a series of rationalisations and denials. The hunters raid the old group's camp and steal Piggy's glasses. Ralph goes to talk to the new group using the still-present power of the conch to get their attention. However, when Piggy takes the conch, they are not silent (as their rules require) but instead jeer. Roger pushes a boulder off a cliff which falls on Piggy, killing him and crushing the conch. Piggy's body falls into the ocean and gets washed away.

Ralph hides in the jungle. Jack and his hunters set fires to smoke him out, and Ralph staggers across the smoke-covered island. Stumbling onto the beach, Ralph falls at the feet of a naval officer who stares in shock at the painted and spear-carrying savages that the boys have become, before turning to his accompanying landing party. One of the youngest boys tries to tell the officer his name, but cannot remember it. The last scene shows Ralph sobbing as flames spread across the island.

Cast[edit]

  • James Aubrey as Ralph
  • Tom Chapin as Jack
  • Hugh Edwards as Piggy
  • Roger Elwin as Roger
  • Tom Gaman as Simon
  • David Surtees as Sam
  • Simon Surtees as Eric
  • Nicholas Hammond as Robert
  • Roger Allan as Piers
  • Kent Fletcher as Percival
  • Richard Horne as Lance
  • Timothy Horne as Leslie
  • Andrew Horne as Matthew
  • Peter Davy as Peter
  • David Brunjes as Donald
  • Christopher Harris as Bill
  • Alan Heaps as Neville
  • Jonathan Heaps as Howard
  • Burnes Hollyman as Douglas
  • Peter Ksiezopolski as Francis
  • Anthony Mcall-Judson as Maurice
  • Malcolm Rodker as Harold
  • David St. Clair as George
  • Rene Sanfiorenzo Jr. as Charles
  • Jeremy Scuse as Rowland
  • John Stableford as Digby
  • Nicholas Valkenburg as Rupert
  • Patrick Valkenburg as Robin
  • Edward Valencia as Frederick
  • David Walsh as Percy
  • John Walsh as Michael
  • Jeremy Willis as Henry
  • Erik Jordan as Head Clapper Boy

Theme[edit]

As with Golding's book, the pessimistic theme of the film is that fear, hate and violence are inherent in the human condition – even when innocent children are placed in seemingly idyllic isolation. The realisation of this is seen as being the cause of Ralph's distress in the closing shots.[2]

Charles Silver, curator in the Department of Film at MoMA, wrote that the film is "about anarchy and how that thin veneer we wear of what we refer to as 'civilization' is threatened by the attractive clarion call of bestiality and its accompanying hatred".[3]

Production[edit]

Filming[edit]

The parents of the boys chosen as actors were reported to have been provided copies of the novel, from which a commentary had been physically removed; those pages included describing the culmination of the hunt of a wild sow as an "Oedipal wedding night". Brook noted that "time was short; we were lent the children by unexpectedly eager parents just for the duration of the summer holidays".[4]

The film was shot entirely in Puerto Rico at AguadillaEl Yunque and on the island of Vieques.[5] The boys in the cast were all non-professional, had mostly not read the book, and actual scripting was minimal; scenes were filmed by explaining them to the boys, who then acted them out, with some of the dialogue improvised.[3][6] Life magazine journalist Robert Wallace visited them there and observed one of them amusing himself by feeding live lizards into the blades of a rotating fan. Wallace commented: "One could almost hear William Golding, 4,000 miles away in England, chuckling into his beard."[6]

The 60 hours of film from the 1961 shoot was edited down to 4 hours, according to editor Gerald Feil. This was further edited to a 100-minute feature that was shown at the 1963 Cannes Film Festival (9 to 22 May), but the cuts necessitated that new audio transitions and some dialog changes be dubbed into the film more than a year after shooting. The voice of James Aubrey, who played Ralph, had dropped three octaves and was electronically manipulated to better approximate his earlier voice, but it is still significantly different. Tom Chapin, who played Jack, had lost his English accent and another boy's voice was used to dub his parts. The U.S. distributor insisted the film be further edited to 90 minutes, so one fire scene and scenes developing the character of Ralph were cut.

In 1996, Peter Brook organised a reunion for the cast members for a documentary film titled Time Flies. Brook was "curious to know what the years had done to his cast, and what effect the isolated months of filming had had on their lives".[7] Although none seemed damaged by their time working on the film, Simon Surtees, one of a pair of twin brothers who played Sam and Eric, "put his finger unerringly on the ethical dilemma. The problem is that most of us are not trained artists, so I now believe Peter runs the risk of abandoning us to our fate, just as he did in 1961, when he plucked us from our schools and our homes, put us on the island, then cast us back to live our lives as if nothing would ever change."[7]

Tom Gaman, who played Simon in Brook's film, remembered that "although I didn't think much about it at the time, in hindsight my death scene scares me. It was night, the spears – those wooden stakes – were quite real. We were excited, brandishing flaming sticks around a bonfire on the beach in a real storm. I really did emerge from the bushes into the centre of a raging crowd, screamed in terror, was stabbed by boys with sharpened sticks, and staggered to the water."[8]

Song[edit]

The song, heard throughout the film, of the boys singing is Kyrie Eleison which, translated from Greek, means "Lord, have mercy". It is an expression used in a prayer of the Christian liturgy.

Reception[edit]

Critical response[edit]

Rotten Tomatoes reported that 91% of critics have given the film a positive review based on 22 reviews, with an average rating of 8.19/10.[9] On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 67 out of 100 based on 9 critic reviews, indicating "generally favorable reviews".[10]

PopMatters journalist J.C. Maçek III wrote "The true surprise in Lord of the Flies is how little these child actors actually feel like 'child actors'. With few exceptions, the acting rarely seems to be forced or flat. This practiced, well-honed craft aids Brook's vision of a fly on the wall approach that pulls the viewer into each scene."[11]

Bosley Crowther wrote in The New York Times that "the picture made from it by the writer-director Peter Brook is a curiously flat and fragmentary visualization of the original. It is loosely and jerkily constructed, in its first and middle phases, at least, and it has a strangely perfunctory, almost listless flow of narrative in most of its scenes".[12]

Accolades[edit]

Peter Brook was nominated for the Golden Palm at the 1963 Cannes Film Festival.[13]

The film was named one of the Top Ten Films of the year in 1963 by the National Board of Review.[14]

Home media[edit]

The Criterion Collection released it on DVD and Blu-ray Disc in America and Canada. In 2000 Janus Films also released the DVD in the UK.

See also[edit]

  • Survival film, about the film genre, with a list of related films

References[edit]

  1. ^ De la Mare, Richard; Hatton, Maurice (29 November 1962). "Peter Brook film director". The Guardian. p. 6.
  2. ^ Robert Wallace, Life Magazine 25 October 1963
  3. Jump up to:a b Silver, Charles (12 November 2013). "Peter Brook's Lord of the Flies"MoMA. Retrieved 6 June 2016.
  4. ^ Brook, Peter (1998). Threads of time : a memoir (Paperback. ed.). London: Methuen Drama. p. 129. ISBN 0413733009.
  5. ^ Carrasquilo, José (2016). "When Lord of the Flies Came to Vieques"Vieques Insider. Retrieved 21 April 2019.
  6. Jump up to:a b Michael, Brooke. "Lord of the Flies (1963)"www.screenonline.org.uk. Retrieved 20 July 2015.
  7. Jump up to:a b Hollindale, Peter. "A History of Savages"www.tes.co.uk. Archived from the original on 12 March 2016. Retrieved 20 July 2015.
  8. ^ Gaman, Tom. "Flies"www.forestdata.com. Archived from the original on 4 March 2016. Retrieved 20 July 2015.
  9. ^ "Lord of the Flies (1963)"Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved 10 March 2020.
  10. ^ "Lord of the Flies (1963) Reviews"Metacritic. Retrieved 10 March 2020.
  11. ^ Maçek III, J.C. (6 September 2013). "Have Mercy: 'Lord of the Flies'"PopMatters.
  12. ^ Crowther, Bosley. "Lord of the Flies (1963) Screen: Agitating Fable of Wild Boys:Savagery Is Depicted in 'Lord of the Flies'"www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 20 July 2015.
  13. ^ "Festival de Cannes: Lord of the Flies"festival-cannes.com. Retrieved 27 February 2009.
  14. ^ "1963 Award Winners"Nationalboardofreview.org. Retrieved 20 July 2015.

External links[edit]

2022/08/16

No Excuses: Existentialism And The Meaning Of Life by Robert C. Solomon | Goodreads


No Excuses: Existentialism And The Meaning Of Life by Robert C. Solomon | Goodreads

Want to Read
Buy on Kobo


Rate this book

No Excuses: Existentialism And The Meaning Of Life


Robert C. Solomon

4.09
789 ratings84 reviews



PhilosophyNonfictionAudiobookHistoryPsychologyReligion20th CenturyUnfinished
...more



12 pages, Audio CD

First published January 1, 1995

Robert C. Solomon78 books146 followers

Follow



Robert C. Solomon (September 14, 1942 – January 2, 2007) was a professor of continental philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin.

Early life

Solomon was born in Detroit, Michigan. His father was a lawyer, and his mother an artist. After earning a B.A. (1963) at the University of Pennsylvania, he moved to the University of Michigan to study medicine, switching to philosophy for an M.A. (1965) and Ph.D. (1967).

He held several teaching positions at such schools as Princeton University, the University of California, Los Angeles, and the University of Pittsburgh. From 1972 until his death, except for two years at the University of California at Riverside in the mid-1980s, he taught at University of Texas at Austin, serving as Quincy Lee Centennial Professor of Philosophy and Business. He was a member of the University of Texas Academy of Distinguished Teachers. Solomon was also a member of the inaugural class of Academic Advisors at the Business Roundtable Institute for Corporate Ethics.

His interests were in 19th-century German philosophy--especially Hegel and Nietzsche--and 20th-century Continental philosophy--especially Sartre and phenomenology, as well as ethics and the philosophy of emotions. Solomon published more than 40 books on philosophy, and was also a published songwriter. He made a cameo appearance in Richard Linklater's film Waking Life (2001), where he discussed the continuing relevance of existentialism in a postmodern world. He developed a cognitivist theory of the emotions, according to which emotions, like beliefs, were susceptible to rational appraisal and revision. Solomon was particularly interested in the idea of "love," arguing against the notion that romantic love is an inherent state of being, and maintaining, instead, that it is instead a construct of Western culture, popularized and propagated in such a way that it has achieved the status of a universal in the eyes of many. Love for Solomon is not a universal, static quality, but an emotion, subject to the same vicissitudes as other emotions like anger or sadness.

Solomon received numerous teaching awards at the University of Texas at Austin, and was a frequent lecturer in the highly regarded Plan II Honors Program. Solomon was known for his lectures on Nietzsche and other Existentialist philosophers. Solomon described in one lecture a very personal experience he had while a medical student at the University of Michigan. He recounted how he stumbled as if by chance into a crowded lecture hall. He was rather unhappy in his medical studies at the time, and was perhaps seeking something different that day. He got precisely that. The professor, Frithjof Bergmann, was lecturing that day on something that Solomon had not yet been acquainted with. The professor spoke of how Nietzsche's idea asks the fundamental question: "If given the opportunity to live your life over and over again ad infinitum, forced to go through all of the pain and the grief of existence, would you be overcome with despair? Or would you fall to your knees in gratitude?"

Solomon died on January 2, 2007 at Zurich airport. His wife, philosopher Kathleen Higgins, with whom he co-authored several of his books, is Professor of Philosophy at University of Texas at Austin.
More



Readers also enjoyedItems 1 to 4 of 19



Will to Power: The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche
Kathleen Marie Higgins
4.03
611


The Great Ideas of Philosophy
Daniel N. Robinson
4.05
814


The Meaning of Life - Perspectives from the World's Great Intellectual Traditions
Jay L. Garfield
4.4
363


The History of Ancient Egypt
Bob Brier
4.51
1,548

See all

Ratings & Reviews

My Review

Sejin
3 reviews

Want to Read.


Rate this bookWrite a Review

Friends & Following
No one you know has read this book. Recommend it to a friend!

Community Reviews

4.09
789 ratings84 reviews
5 stars

303 (38%)
4 stars

295 (37%)
3 stars

155 (19%)
2 stars

29 (3%)
1 star

7 (<1%)
Search review text

Filters

Displaying 1 - 10 of 84 reviews


Ivy-Mabel Fling
371 reviews32 followers

Follow
November 25, 2018
Another excellent course but a lot of it is quite philosophical. I found parts of it difficult to get my head round (but when I have listened to ten more professors on the same subjects, I will no doubt understand better!)

22 likes
1 comment
Like
Comment



SJ Loria
434 reviews71 followers

Follow
March 26, 2014
Existentialism

A fantastic lecture series, where the professor explains existentialism with passion and vigor. One of the best lecture series I’ve ever listened to. Period.

Basic points of Existentialism
1. Embrace personal responsibility – Sounds so simple when explained, but here’s the idea. You make choices. You are responsible for these choices. It’s a virtue ethics approach, as opposed to rule systems, motivation theories, or consequential ethics. What matters is the action. You chose it, you are responsible for it.
2. Live life passionately – Existentialists held very little faith in the possibility of an afterlife. Therefore if this is your one shot at life, make the most of it. There is the metaphor Kierkegaard makes of riding a wild horse vs. passively falling asleep in a wagon being pulled by a horse. Existentialists believe you should hop on the horse and ride. It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning. Passionate commitment, say yes to life, commit to it with passion. It’s invigorating.
3. No belief in the afterlife – Neitche hated what he called the “otherworldly.” Existentialists thought that actions should be weighed and justified according to this world, and without relying on any others. This has to do with debating people who are religious, and in historical context this line of reasoning makes a lot more sense.

Other fun facts, I don’t think Camus’ The Stranger is enjoyable without understanding Existentialism. Nietzsche also isn’t as terrible of an atheist as his reputation would have you believe. I thought the lecture on Hesse’s Siddhartha wasn’t quite as strong as it could have been. I think the Kierkegaard section is the strongest, excellent lecture series overall.

Quotes
It is through passionate commitment that we give our lives meaning
People clamor for freedom of speech, to make up for the freedom of thought which they lack.


12 likes
Like
Comment



Gary Beauregard Bottomley
903 reviews501 followers

Follow
July 25, 2015
I don't like existentialism philosophy, but I liked this lecture series. It allowed me to understand other philosophers through the lens of Existentialism, and I got to understand Kant, Schopenhauer, and learn learn more about Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Heidegger. I liked the hour and a half he devoted to Heidegger so much, I ended up buying "Being and Time" from Amazon.

I would strongly recommend watching the BBC production of the play "Huis Clos" ("In Camera", or also called "No Exit") freely available on YouTube before or after listening to this lecture. I did and am glad for the understanding it brought. The heart of this lecture series is really Jean-Paul Sartre and a lot of what he thinks is within this highly watchable and freely available play.

Even if you think Existentialism is passe (a word the lecturer uses), and you don't particularly like Existentialism this lecture has more than enough to keep you entertained. As with almost all of these Great Course series, I don't know of anything else where I get as much value for my one credit, and because of this series I'm violating one of my rules and plan on reading a difficult book because this series has piqued my interest that much in Heidegger.

8 likes
Like
Comment



Todd
96 reviews59 followers

Follow
April 8, 2021
In these lectures, Robert Solomon provides a very nice exegesis of several main existentialist authors. The lectures start with Camus, as the most popular and easiest to understand author in the tradition; Solomon then backtracks to take on in order Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Sartre. In a sense, it pairs very well with Irrational Man: A Study in Existential Philosophy by William Barrett. This survey is meatier than many in that it engages with the philosophies of several major existentialist authors, where many books deal more with the lives of the authors. It's well done and Solomon shows his command and ease discussing the ideas and doctrines of often difficult philosophers. The biggest weakness is probably Solomon's emphasis on personal responsibility at the expense of the society and structures serving as the environment for the individual and freedom in the grand sense. You would want to have some prior familiarity with existentialism and be ready to think philosophically, after all this is a philosophy survey.
philosophy
8 likes
Like
Comment



Andy
1,226 reviews420 followers

Follow
August 30, 2015
This was a bizarre presentation of the material. It's not that what the professor talked about was wrong or uninteresting, but in opposition to the title, it seemed he was making a lot of excuses to dwell in trivia and avoid talking about the meaning of life.

He goes out of his way to cover writers tangentially related to Existentialism (Kafka, Dostoevsky, etc.), and he tends to focus more on literary angles of novels, and on philosophical jargon than on real-world implications.

For example, for Camus, he talks about symbolism and writing technique in The Stranger and The Fall, etc. , but he doesn't really get into The Rebel and the meat of Camus's copious non-fiction that deals with how to live in a world full of evil. The lecture series wasn't boring, but I think unfortunately that in the end it confuses more than clarifies.



5 likes
Like
Comment



Dorum
227 reviews

Follow
May 17, 2020
This is a series of lectures by TTC. I watched the video lectures and review them here.

After watching all of them, I realized that I have already read What Nietzsche Really Said by the same author. That book is in my opinion one of the best introductions to Nietzsche. It allows one to avoid many of the pitfalls that one can encounter with that philosopher.

As expected, this lecture series is itself very good. The presenter is explaining in a very clear and concise language, some very intricate ideas of this current.

The authors discussed are (in the order of apparition): Camus, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Sartre. The lectures are 30 minutes each, and each provides an introduction to some of the key concepts. As such, it should be a really easy introduction, but by no means an extensive or comprehensive introduction.

The depth and quality of the lecture varies. Camus for instance, is pretty deeply presented. There are a lot of insights to be gleamed from his presentation of 3 of his works (The Stranger, The Plague and The Fall). However, his only philosophical work, The Myth of Sisyphus gets only a very weak presentation. Only generalities are explained.

Kierkegaard is also quite poorly explained. What disturbs me is that while Camus is presented work by work, Kierkegaard is somehow amalgamated, and very imprecise.

Nietzsche is again less properly explained, but the main themes of his philosophy are present. I have no doubt that professor Solomon IS able to explain all of them in much more detail, but I don't quite get why he didn't do a work by work analysis as in the case of Camus. It might be because the "theme by theme" analysis is not so easy for Camus as it is for the others.

Dostoyevski gets only cursory treatment. The only novels discussed are "Notes from The Underground", "The Idiot" & "The Brothers Karamazov". The interpretation given to the events is somewhat rushed. Why he excluded "Crime And Punishment" will be forever a mystery to this reviewer.

However, considering that Dostoyevski, Kafka and Hesse are all treated in the same lecture, I guess we can give him a break. What I really cannot understand is how comes he describes the end of "The Grand Inquisitor" completely wrong. Jesus walks away at the end!! He says that Jesus actually gets crucified a second hand, which doesn't happen!

Heidegger and Sartre are quite well explained. Especially Heidegger who is notoriously difficult, is nevertheless distilled in a way that is accessible to the non-professional.

For this reason, I need to say that the content is more often good, rather than bad. It is a bit on the commercial side of things but it is the better part of that side.

Also, I really like his voice. It is so relaxing, and soothing.

4 likes
Like
Comment



Hmd Book
34 reviews16 followers

Follow
April 15, 2016
رابرت سالومون با صدای عمیق و شمرده به واکاوی افکار و کتاب‌های چهره‌های برجسته اگزیستانسیالیسم می‌پردازد. درس با «بیگانه» آلبر کامو آغاز می‌شود هر چند او پیشگام اگزیستانسیالیسم نبود؛ اما بیگانه او مردی را توصیف می‌کند که در مراسم تدفین مادرش نمی‌تواند اشک بریزد. علاوه بر بیگانه که به تفصیل در دو درس ۳۰ دقیقه‌ای برای روشن کردن موضوع درس بحث می‌شود، اثر دیگر کامو، در مورد «افسانه سیزیف» صحبت می‌شود که قهرمان آن تا ابد محکوم است تا سنگی را از تپه‌ای بالا برد، آن را رها کند و دوباره سنگ را بالا برد و رها کند-تا ابد. سیزیف نماد انسان محکوم به زندگی بیهوده است. «طاعون» و «سقوط» در درس دیگر بحث می‌شود، به ویژه که «طاعون» نماد انسانی است که با همه تلاش خود قادر به درمان طاعون زندگی نیست.
پس از این آغاز طوفانی از کامو، سولومون به سراغ پدر اگزیستانسیالیسم می‌رود: سورن کیرکگارد. دغدغه و بینش او (بر خلاف آیندگان از جمله کامو و سارتر) مسیحیت بود- به عبارت دقیق تر چطور می‌توان مسیحی «شد».
با توجه به اینکه (تا جایی که اطلاع دارم) تنها ترس و لرز او در مورد تعلیق اخلاق در بازه‌ای که ابراهیم فرزندش را به کشتارگاه می‌برد در ایران چاپ شده است، سه درس‌ موجود در این مجموعه و صحبت در مورد کتاب‌های کیرکگارد برای آشنایی بیشتر با او و این که چرا بنیان‌گذار اگزیسنانسیالیسم است بسیار روشنگر است.
نیهیلیسم نیچه که بر خلاف کیرکگارد پاسخی متفاوت و ضد دینی به مساله زندگی است در چهار درس بعدی مورد بررسی قرار می‌گیرد- این که «خدا مرده است» در اندیشه نیچه و در آن کانتکست زمانی از روشنگری و اعتقادات مردم به چه معناست‌. پیش از آنکه در ادامه هایدگر و سارتر به عنوان مشهورترین چهره‌های اگزیستانسیالیسم بحث شوند، یک درس سی دقیقه‌ای به داستایوسکی و رمان‌هایش به اختصار می‌پردازد و این که چگونه تِم برادران کارامازوف از زبان ایوانِ روشنفکر و در انتهای داستان در بستر بیماری این است که «اگر خدا نباشد همه چیز مجاز می‌شود.»- رویکردی متفاوت به نیهیلیسم مورد توجه نیچه.
بحث اصیل (آوتنتیش) بودن در تفکر فلسفی پیچیده هایدگر، علاوه بر مفاهیم دیگر او همچون داس مان، زورگه و ... بسیار مختصر و مفید بحث می‌شود.
بحث انتهایی مربوط به سارتر و مسئولیت پذیری در کانتکست زمانی جنگ جهانی دوم است. اندیشه و کتاب‌های سارتر در شش درس سی دقیقه‌ای به زیبایی بحث می‌شود که شاید برای تفسیر کتاب‌های او که بعضا به فارسی هم موجودند مفیدند، از جمله رمان «تهوع» او که داستان مردی است که وقتی سنگریزه ها را (دن��ا) را لمس می‌کند، احساس تهوع می‌کند.
اگر سارتر و کامو با داستان‌های متفاوت و سیاه خود برای ما آشنا باشند، این مجموعه نشان می‌دهد آبشخور فکری این دو چگونه در کیرکگارد و هایدگر ریشه دارد. به ویژه که سارتر رسما اعلام کرده بود که تحت تاثیر هستی‌شناسی هایدگر کتاب «بودن و هیچی» Being and nothingness را نوشته است.
More video-lectures
3 likes
Like
Comment



Amirography
198 reviews122 followers

Follow
October 11, 2016
A great book. One of the most fluent reads. I loved it. Yet I didn't love Existentialism. It raises some great questions and ideas, yet it is a bit bitter and I cannot find any good reason for that.
The good thing about it was that I understood that I have to read more of Nietzsche works, and don't waste much time on Sartra any more.
philosophy
3 likes
Like
Comment



Joseph L.
228 reviews1 follower

Follow
January 18, 2021
Watch a detailed review along with my favorite ideas and takeaways at:
https://youtu.be/Q7b7k_ey_yg

2 likes
Like
Comment



Olga
383 reviews61 followers

Follow
September 28, 2020
Приятный курс лекций, чтобы освежить в памяти философские идеи. В начале лектор подаёт прям очень разжёванно и гладко всё, начиная с «Постороннего» Камю — собственно за использование худлита как опорного материала уже как минимум одна звезда.
А вот когда начинается часть о феноменологии Гуссерля и Хайдеггера - *эмодзи с криком Ван Гога, три раза*
Собственно их приткнули в серединку, видимо это хардкорная часть для тру philosophy lovers.

Кончается всё довольно гладко Сартром, на мой взгляд опять же достаточно доступно и удобоваримо, как и в начале с Камю.
Важная пометка —Сартра, Камю (выборочно), Ницше, Кьеркегора и опять же выборочно Хайдеггера я читала очень, очень давно. В университетском курсе были все, кроме Ницше (загадочно, почему?). Впрочем, кто же не читал Ницше.
Поэтому думаю если найти подборку ключевых отрывков из работ авторов, и перечитать их по ходу прослушивания, понимать курс станет значительно проще.

Собственно, автором так и задумано — к аудио идет 100-страничный буклет с кратким содержанием теории, рекомендованным чтением и вопросами полегче и посложней. В идеале перед каждой лекцией нужно читать указанную главу в источнике, но я в общем считаю себя молодцом уже хотя бы за прослушивание аудио)

Примеры вопросов попроще в конце лекции о «Мифе о Сизифе» и абсурдизме:
- What is “the absurd”? Camus gives us several possible ways of living
in the face of “the absurd.” What are they? Do you think that they are
equally meritorious? What is “philosophical suicide”?

И посложней:
- Camus, who considered himself a political moderate and a humanist,
states that “to abolish conscious revolt is to elude the problem.”
Elsewhere, he emphasizes the need for “metaphysical revolt.” Who or
what is Camus, an avowed atheist, revolting against?
- Would “the absurd” simply disappear in the face of irrefutable evidence
that God exists?

Ну и как уже можно догадаться, о смысле жизни лектор не даст однозначного ответа, несмотря на завлекающий заголовок (а как хотелось бы...).
В общем и целом, однозначно рекомендую, профессор Соломон — человек явно увлечённый темой, и слушать его приятно. Хотя мне и приходилось некоторые лекции по паре раз прогонять для полного понимания.
favorites non-fiction philosophy religion

Overall    5 out of 5 stars
Performance    5 out of 5 stars
Story    5 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Mitchell
Mitchell
20-02-2017
Outstanding
Great introduction to existentialism and a good summary and interpretation of key texts. Solomon covers different concepts within existentialism including freedom and responsibility, and continually points out its relevance to one's everyday experience. It is a broad survey of ways about how to think about ourselves and our place in the world which, if you found this as Intersting as I did, will have you thinking for hours after listening. I thoroughly enjoyed this, particularly the coverage of Camus, Dostoevsky and Nietzsche. It has inspired me to read some of the key texts discussed. The presentation is clear and very followable despite the complexity of some of the ideas, some lectures will require a bit more concentration than others. If you are interested in philosophy at all, having some sort of life-crisis or want to have some good discussion material for debating friends on the big questions, I would really recommend this course.
Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
8 people found this helpful

Overall    4 out of 5 stars
Performance    3 out of 5 stars
Story    5 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Billy Bathgate
Billy Bathgate
24-08-2020
A good intro to Existentialism
I approached this course as an atheist, with a spotty/amateur understanding of existentialism.

It definitely gave me a clearer picture, and did, IMHO, the best job one could reasonably expect of a course that covers so much material - from Keirkegaard to Sartre. I feel that I have a cleared understanding of the basic tenets of existentialism.

One reservation I do have is that the lecturer has what seems to be a christian bias, which shows through subtly. I understand that it is hard to lecture in philosophy without having your own personal favorites - philosophy ain't an exact science. Certainly, also, the bias here pales in comparison to a certain Lobster dominance hierarchy theorist.

Atheist, or theist, this is a 'survey course' that will, I believe, will answer some questions you might have had, but give rise to even more questions - which is exactly what philosophy is supposed to do.

Recording was clear throughout.

Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
Overall    5 out of 5 stars
Performance    5 out of 5 stars
Story    5 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Stephen van Schalkwyk
Stephen van Schalkwyk
01-04-2019
Great overview
For an amateur, ‘No Excuses’ has been an excellent resource to understand the key ideas Existentialism contributes to thinking.

Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
Overall    5 out of 5 stars
Performance    5 out of 5 stars
Story    5 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Roddi
Roddi
02-11-2018
interesting
well presented and very interesting talks on this subject. what else do you need. brilliant!

Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
Overall    5 out of 5 stars
Performance    5 out of 5 stars
Story    5 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Amazon Customer
Amazon Customer
03-09-2018
Essential
This is a great series of lectures by a professor who knows his subject well.

Essentials are well explained and the men who made them are put into context.

Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
Overall    1 out of 5 stars
Performance    2 out of 5 stars
Profile Image for Sam
Sam
05-11-2018
Existentialism.
The reading was fine, and I don't know if this is apoor rating of the lectures or of existentialism itself, but it just seemed to be a mix of trite observations masquerading as profundity.
Gave up around lecture eleven.

Was this review helpful for you?

Helpful
  Report this
2 people found this helpful





Amazon: Love, Service, Devotion, and the Ultimate Surrender: Ram Dass on the Bhagavad Gita (Audible Audio Edition): Ram Dass, Ram Dass, Sounds True: Books

Amazon.com: Love, Service, Devotion, and the Ultimate Surrender: Ram Dass on the Bhagavad Gita (Audible Audio Edition): Ram Dass, Ram Dass, Sounds True: Books





Audible sample

Love, Service, Devotion, and the Ultimate Surrender: Ram Dass on the Bhagavad Gita Audible Audiobook – Original recording
Ram Dass (Narrator, Author), Sounds True (Publisher)
4.5 out of 5 stars 7 ratings
===============


Audiobook
$0.00Free with your Audible trial
Audio CD
$77.65
10 Used from $23.585 New from $55.66

The Bhagavad Gita is a gem so precious in India's spiritual treasury that many regard it not as a volume of sacred verse, but as a living manifestation of the Divine. In the summer of 1974, inside a balmy Boulder, Colorado, warehouse that served as a main hall of a fledgling Naropa Institute, some say a minor miracle occured: The reawakening of the Gita's living presence, as it unfolded in a series of wisdom teachings led by Ram Dass. With Love, Service, Devotion, and the Ultimate Surrender, you are invited to experience these legendary gatherings.
=====

12 hours and 3 minutes
Author

Ram Dass

Product details

Listening Length 12 hours and 3 minutes
Author Ram Dass
Narrator Ram Dass
Audible.com Release Date August 23, 2011
Publisher Sounds True
Program Type Audiobook
Version Original recording
Language English
ASIN B005IT1IUE
Best Sellers Rank #28,490 in Audible Books & Originals (See Top 100 in Audible Books & Originals)
#19 in Hinduism (Audible Books & Originals)
#21 in Bhagavad Gita (Books)
#340 in Other Eastern Religions & Sacred Texts (Books)






Customer reviews
4.5 out of 5 stars
Top reviews from the United States


Rd. Northern California

5.0 out of 5 stars Highly recommended for the spiritual pathReviewed in the United States on January 16, 2019
Verified Purchase
Again Ram Dass delivers. I have traveled the spiritual path for many years and there is a great quantity of material on the subject but Ram Dass gives a clear and insightful message for the western yogi.

One person found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

Robert Perry

3.0 out of 5 stars Where's the chanting?Reviewed in the United States on September 26, 2016
Verified Purchase
I own the original cassette tape version, and was very disappointed to discover that so much of the footage - both from Ram Dass's lectures and from the kirtans, the latter of which were the heart of the recording - had been cut out. It has been over-edited.

6 people found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

Dian

5.0 out of 5 stars Great wisdomReviewed in the United States on August 16, 2014
Verified Purchase
So much wonderful wisdom, I keep listening to it over and over!

One person found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

Reader

3.0 out of 5 stars More like Ramdass's adventures in spiritual seekingReviewed in the United States on September 14, 2013

Ramdass is a great and very engaging speaker/teacher. You can listen to him regardless what is the topic he talks of, or how controversial it may be. In that way this is a great and very engaging talk, recorded in the 70s at Naropa. The point is just that it is not a whole lot about the Gita. He refers to the Gita now and then, but it is largely about his own adventures in spirituality - which of course includes considerable adventures with psychedelic drugs and a lot of stories about his guru Neem Karoli Baba. It is interesting, and there are things you can learn from him that you probably would not learn from anyone else. Such as the conflict between ahimsa and eating meat. And of the serious differences between Buddhist and hindu traditions. Along with it you will hear a lot of stuff which is to me a little disgusting, such as how many acid trips he took and why he thinks such dangerous experiments are 'sometimes ok'. All said and done, worth hearing if you are up for it. And definitely not the Bhagavad Gita.

9 people found this helpful

HelpfulReport abuse

ronnie white

5.0 out of 5 stars awesomeReviewed in the United States on January 15, 2020

Like all of Ram Dass's books Awesome!!


HelpfulReport abuse

See all reviews


Top reviews from other countries

william
5.0 out of 5 stars Ram Dass on the Bhagavad Gita (audio CD)Reviewed in Canada on February 11, 2013
Verified Purchase

Ram Dass puts spirituality into easily understandable terms, speaking from personal experience with anecdotes and stories to amplify his message. His approach is practical and down to earth, given from a Western point of view. This is important, since much of Eastern Philosophy comes to us from an Eastern culture, making it that much harder for a Westerner to grasp. His message is from the heart. Ram Dass is a brilliant speaker, enjoyable to listen to. This CD is based on the Bhagavad Gita, so may require a basic review of the Gita’s story line for some. Well worth the cover price.
Report abuse


Ratings & Reviews for
Love, Service, Devotion, and the Ultimate Surrender: Ram Dass on The Bhagavad Gita
Ram Dass
4.60
167 ratings13 reviews
5 stars
114 (68%)
4 stars
42 (25%)
3 stars
8 (4%)
2 stars
3 (1%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Search review text

Search review text

Filters
13 results
Profile Image for Nate.
Nate
117 reviews
531 followers

Follow
December 18, 2018
Charlie Chaplin once said, "what do you want a meaning for? Life is a desire, not a meaning."

On Quantum mechanics, Robert Oppenheimer wrote, "If we ask, for instance, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether the electron's position changes with time, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether the electron is at rest, we must say 'no'; if we ask whether it is in motion, we must say 'no.'"

Psychology demonstrates how motivation effects perception. Karma tasks us with working within the desire system, faced with being unattached to the ego as a doer. To do work in the world in an impersonal way, and not to feel threatened by fear or driven by shifting meanings of desires (called passionate desire).

Jana Yoga is the practice of discriminating real from unreal. Service, giving and love can only be performed via desire. Pure desires bring us closer to God, passionate desires/fears attach us to ego. This discrimination directs the electrons of our being.

On detachment, outing attachment: karma is dharma; in other words, what we must work out in this life, is precisely the obstacles and experiences we face. If the inner ego (I/me/mine desires/fears) win (external win/lose, don't matter), that obstacle/experience is faced all over again in this life or the next. The inner ego is extricated only when we remain detached from the obstacle/experience/dharma. This is how we work out our karma. We remain a non-judgmental witness to all happenings.

Divinity is indivisible: Faith, no fear; fear, no faith (can't have both: only to the One, or to the many). Faith is being grace. Being a non-judgmental witness is loving union against and amongst the human condition. Finding unity in diversity. What we think is wrong, what we know is Real. Aldous Huxley grasped at absolute, unchanging Truths via perennial philosophy - "I Am" and "God is" - all else is transitory.

Giving it up to get it: paradoxically, when a method works, we must give it up to move on to the next stage. We don't pray because repentance is liberating; we don't meditate because the still mind is bliss -- these are methods to unite with the Lord of Love ("not my, but Thy will, O Lord") O father, O son <-- holy trinity: it's all the same: no matter which way you go --> pleasure, pain; loss, gain; fame, shame: it's all the same: atop a bridge above water in flow is how and where we can watch our ego-selves go. If you don't have a sense of humor, it's just not funny.

Matthew 16:24-27: "If anyone wishes to come after Me," says Christ, "let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. For he who would save his life, will lose it; but he who loses his life for My sake, will find it. For what does it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, but suffer the loss of his own soul? ... For he who would save his life, will lose it. But he who loses his life for My sake, will find it."

The spirit is between and beyond moral law and social responsibility. The awakening struggle is comfortably and confidently facing conflicts with social/cultural norms, and transcending both via higher consciousness. The difficulty manifests from the model of oneself by means of standing outside of oneself. Cultural/social training via institutional education is about getting data/action-points from the outside-in rather than the inside-out. Culture and ego work full-time to preserve themselves.

Going against what we previously believed to be right — leads to deeper harmony, negative issues are easy, going against positive issues are the paradoxes. go perpetually keeps us caught in who we thought we were. Anywhere we cling is going to cost. Doesn’t have to be given up all at once, but all attachment will eventually have to go. The discipline to not be caught in any patterns whatsoever, is the discipline to stand nowhere. Over time, meditation will lead to freedom from one’s own thoughts. Active memory is only but a small part of our entire internal consciousness. Get out of the active and into the inactive: slower is clearer.

Ways of dharma: do what we are most inclined to do (follow where God leads); go to where we feel most draw to (not attaching degrees of importance); live out the nature of our being; take everything God gives evenly (that is, by not comparing to anything else). See the relations between forces of nature and action; by listening deeply, we can begin to realize what part of God we are (what role we play in the whole dance-drama of life); there’s no better or worse, only different.

On the theme of karma yoga Gandhi think: (1) result to follow; (2) means thereto; (3) capacity for it - equips one to work without desire for the result (wholly engrossed in task) = how to renounce fruits of one’s action. On working within the desire system: being attached to the doer, but aware of systematic functionality (doing work in an impersonal way) Jana Yoga: discriminating real from unreal. Working with intellectual faculties (levels of the mind) - going inward rather than outward, understanding via internally, not externally. This is a sensing of understanding from inside, which cannot be performed via intellect. Theravada Buddhism: purification, concentration, correct understanding.

What desire do you use to give up all desires? The desire of sacrifice to return to one’s roots The end of all sacrifice is that of spiritual wisdom: learn it all, then give it all up. Practice offering all thoughts into a mantra. Truth is the hardest austerity to maintain. Let manifestations manifest as they are supposed to. Acts don’t change, but meanings and persons doing acts do change. Developing the witness: quiet and observe the mind; doesn’t matter what’s being done, the state of mind and being (attitude) matters.

More 

1 like

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Krista Lindgren.
Krista Lindgren
28 reviews
1 follower

Follow
May 2, 2022
Quality stuff, meaningful lectures. For some reason they would cut Ram Dass off mid-story and move on to something else, which I wasn't a fan of. I also didn't agree with his take on Ahimsa.

1 like

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Sara Alarcon.
Sara Alarcon
21 reviews
3 followers

Follow
June 14, 2018
I cannot get enough of Ram Dass!!!!!!

1 like

Like

Comment

Profile Image for J. Maximilian Jarrett II.
J. Maximilian Jarrett II
127 reviews

Follow
April 8, 2018
Ram Dass by name, Ram Dass by nature. As insightful, compassionate, educative and inspiring as ever. Excellent. Highly recommended. I would give this an 11 out of 10 “ This is Spinal Tap” style if I could ;)

Like

Comment

Christer Edwards
5 reviews
1 follower

Follow
September 26, 2019
I've enjoyed everything I've heard by Ram Dass.

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Julie.
Julie
62 reviews
3 followers

Follow
October 3, 2019
My favorite Ram Dass
favorites
 
spiritual-inner-work
 
yoga-ayurveda

Like

Comment

Dean Somers
9 reviews

Follow
July 4, 2022
Lovely teacher, especially on audio! He really knows how to take the pressure off while advocating a spiritual life.

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Craig Bergland.
Craig Bergland
323 reviews
8 followers

Follow
August 22, 2014
This is only peripherally about the Bhagavad Gita, which is why I gave it two stars. It contains many of Ram Dass' standard stories, which are very enjoyable, but except for the first session or two virtually ignores the Gita in favor of his stories. For that reason, I found it disappointing on many levels.
eastern-spirituality
 
hinduism
 
mysticism

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Kathleen .
Kathleen
216 reviews
2 followers

Follow
March 20, 2013
At first I felt like Ram Dass was straying pretty far from the Gita. Then I realized that he was merely taking it off of the page and out into life. Isn't that what we all would like to do?

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Devashish Sharma.
Devashish Sharma
26 reviews

Follow
April 5, 2020
Beautiful book. An absolutely must read for a spiritual seeker.
(However not for someone who wants to read verse by verse Bhagwat Gita)
It covers spirituality in general.
Again mesmerising book.

Like

Comment

Profile Image for Gaylon.
Gaylon
23 reviews
3 followers

Follow
February 6, 2013
Ram Dass presents the principles of the Gita in an approachable and pragmatic way.

Like

Comment

Profile Image for John Arnette.
John Arnette
84 reviews
1 follower

Follow
August 30, 2014
Not enough actual info on the Gita.

Like

Comment

Nichol P
30 reviews

Follow
September 25, 2017
Amazing.

Like

Comment

2022/08/15

박홍규 - 한·일 역사갈등, 책임론적 화해 넘어 포용론적 화해로

(18) Facebook

한·일 역사갈등, 책임론적 화해 넘어 포용론적 화해로
중앙일보
입력 2022.04.05 00:31

최악의 한·일관계 풀어야 할 새 정부
박홍규 고려대 정치외교학과 교수
===

실타래처럼 엉킨 한·일 역사 문제를 해결하고 파국 일보 직전에 도달했던 한·일 관계의 개선을 모색할 시점이다. 20대 대통령으로 당선된 윤석열 당선인은 기시다 후미오 총리와 전화 통화를 하고 한·일 관계 개선을 위해 서로 협력하기로 뜻을 모았다. 미래를 향해 희망적인 덕담을 나눈 두 사람이지만 문제는 엉킨 실타래를 어디서부터 어떻게 풀 것인가이다.

기시다 총리는 한국 대법원의 강제 징용  판결로 악화한 한·일 관계를 개선하기 위해서는 한국 측이 선제적인 해법을 제시하라는 일본 정부의 기존 입장을 견지하고 있다. 그렇다면 모처럼 뜻을 모은 양국 간 협력이 실행으로 옮겨지기 위해서 문재인 정부와는 다른 접근이 필요하다.

가해자 사죄와 피해자 용서라는 책임론적 화해는 수명 다해
세계 10대 강국 한국, 가해자 입장도 듣는 포용적 태도 필요
한국이 징용문제 해법 먼저 내놓고 ‘반일·혐한’ 악순환 끊어야
초당적 협의체 한일의원연맹이 문희상 법안 수정·통과시키길
나는 윤석열 정부가 한국의 높아진 국격에 걸맞은 선제적 해법을 과감하게 제시하여 꽉 막힌 물꼬를 트고, 한·일 역사 문제 해결 과정에서 한국이 주도권을 확보하기를 기대한다. ‘포용론적 화해’는 그 해법의 철학적 토대가 될 것이다.

지금까지 한·일 과거사를 둘러싼 화해의 모색은 ‘책임론적 화해’에 근거하여 이루어져 왔다. 가해자의 사죄와 피해자의 용서를 핵심 내용으로 하는 책임론적 화해는 2차 대전 이후 유럽 국가 간의 화해를 위한 이론으로서 결정적 역할을 했다. 유럽에서는 이 방식을 통해 실제적 효과를 가져왔고, 유럽연합(EU)의 탄생과 더불어 이제는 유럽에서 과거사 문제로 인한 심각한 갈등은 찾아보기 어렵게 되었다.

책임론적 화해론, 서구 기독교와 관련

한반도평화워치
한반도평화워치

한편 1991년 위안부 피해자 김학순 할머니의 증언을 계기로 동아시아 지역에서도 역사 문제가 현안으로 부상했다. 유럽에 비해 역사 화해가 상당히 지체된 시점이었던 만큼 이 문제를 설명하고 해결하는 데 책임론적 화해론이 사용되었다. ‘일본의 사죄와 한국의 용서’를 통한 화해의 모색이 활발히 진행되어, 1993년 고노 담화, 95년 무라야마 담화를 거쳐 마침내 98년 김대중-오부치 파트너십 선언으로 이어졌다.

그러나 김대중 대통령의 낙관적 전망은 교과서 왜곡, 영토 문제, 야스쿠니 신사 참배, 위안부 문제 등의 장애물에 부딪혔고 이후 역사 화해가 진전되기는커녕 오히려 퇴행과 역행을 거듭하면서 마침내 2018년 10월 강제 징용 대법원 판결을 계기로 한·일 관계는 최악의 상황에 빠져버렸다. 이제 책임론적 화해론은 그 기능과 수명을 다한 듯하다.

원래 책임론적 화해론은 서구의 기독교 문화를 배경으로 하는 종교적 화해와 밀접한 관련이 있다. 신과 인간 사이의 관계에 기반을 둔 기독교적 화해는 자신의 죄에 대한 죄인의 깨달음, 죄의 고백과 회개, 용서받기, 그리고 죄인의 시정 노력의 순서로 이루어진다. 유럽의 국가 간 화해는 이러한 개인 차원에서의 화해 순서를 국가 간에 적용하여 가해국 독일이 피해국에 대해 사죄와 보상을 함으로써 화해가 이루어졌다.

유럽과는 달리 에도 시대로부터 메이지, 그리고 제국주의 시대를 거쳐 현재에 이르는 일본의 문화적 기반은 기독교적 세계관이나 가치관과는 거리가 한참 멀다. 그들에게 책임론적 화해론에 근거한 ‘진정한’ 사죄를 요구한다고 해도 납득할 만한 응답을 기대하기 어려웠다. 비록 책임론적 화해론이 도덕적 측면에서 정당성을 가질지라도 현실의 정치 영역에서 실질적 효과를 가져오지 못한다면 새로운 화해론을 모색할 필요가 있다. 나는 한·일 관계의 개선과 역사 화해를 위한 철학적 토대로서 기존의 책임론적 화해론과는 근본적으로 다른 포용론적 화해론을 제시한다.

국격에 걸맞은 사고·행위 요청돼

오늘날 대한민국은 경제·군사력에서 세계 10대 선진 강국의 대열에 올라섰다. 문화의 힘은 그보다 훨씬 눈부시게 분출하고 있다. 한국의 국격은 청구권협정이 체결되었던 1965년이나, 파트너십 선언을 단행했던 98년과는 현격히 다르다. 이제 우리는 스스로에 대해 긍지를 가지고 국제사회에서 높아진 국격에 걸맞은 사고와 행위를 해야 한다. 피해자의 입장에서 가해자의 무한 책임(피해자가 원하는 만큼의 책임)을 집요하게 추궁하기보다는, 가해자의 입장·견해·주장을 듣고 이해하며 그들의 상처와 아픔조차도 함께 치유해가는 포용적 관점으로 사고를 전환할 필요가 있다. 이것은 결코 가해자가 사죄하지 않으니 무조건 용서하자는 논리가 아니다. 포용은 사죄와 용서의 프레임에서 벗어난 화해의 방식이다.

책임을 추궁하는 주체에서 상대를 포용하는 주체로 자기의 정체성을 전환하기 위해서는 무엇보다 지금까지의 자신의 모습에 대한 진지한 성찰이 요구된다. 달리 표현하자면 책임론적 화해론에 근거하여 일본을 상대해왔던 우리의 모습을 객관적으로 바라볼 필요가 있다. 이를 위해 책임론적 화해의 논리 구조를 좀 더 자세히 들여다보자.

가해자와 피해자 개념은 매우 모호하다. 피해자 개념에는 피해 당사자, 피해자 지원단체, 피해 국민, 피해국 등 결을 달리하는 여러 층위가 있다. 게다가 피해 시점과 화해의 시점이 상당히 멀어져 피해의 상속이란 문제가 추가되면 더욱 복잡해진다. 한·일 역사 문제의 본질을 정확히 포착하기 위해 피해자 대신에 여러 층위를 포괄하는 의미로서 ‘피해자 쪽’이라는 개념을 사용하여 논리 구조를 정리해 보자.

토착왜구론 등 파생적 분노 도움 안돼

과거 어느 시점에서 ‘가해 당사자’의 부정의한 행위로 인해 ‘피해 당사자’의 분노가 발생했다. 이 문제를 해결하기 위해 ‘가해자 쪽’이 사죄와 보상을 하고 ‘피해 당사자’가 용서함으로써 분노를 소멸시키고 정의를 회복한다. 이후 ‘피해자 쪽’과 ‘가해자 쪽’은 함께 과거를 기억하고 추모하며 미래를 향한 교육에 매진한다.

90년대 이후 진행된 화해의 과정에서 가해자 쪽의 노력을 통해 ‘피해 당사자의 분노’(본원적 분노)는 해소될 기회가 있었고, 해소된 부분도 있다. 그러나 피해 당사자에 대한 화해의 과정이 진행되면서 오히려 ‘피해자 쪽의 분노’(파생적 분노)가 커지는 역설적 현상이 발생했다. 가해자 쪽의 노력이 미진하다는 생각과 그 노력의 진정성에 대한 불신이 가해자 쪽의 책임을 더욱 추궁하게 되고(반일), 이러한 피해자 쪽의 동향이 가해자 쪽의 반발을 불러와(혐한), 이는 또다시 피해자 쪽의 분노를 증폭시키는 현상을 낳게 되었다. 이렇듯 분노를 증폭시키는 반일과 혐한의 악순환이 거듭되는 과정에서 파생적 분노가 본원적 분노를 압도하는 상황이 되어버렸다.

파생적 분노를 증폭시키는 데는 민족주의, 국민 정서, 친일파 몰이(토착왜구론) 등 다양한 요인이 작용했다. 파생적 분노를 정치적 동원의 수단으로 활용하는 저급한 정치, 책임 추궁을 통해 사적 이익을 추구하는 교조적 집단, 파생적 분노를 조장하는 무책임한 언론, 친일파 몰이에 휩싸이기를 꺼리는 방관적 지식인이 빚어내는 오해와 편견, 무지와 억지, 비겁과 침묵을 자양분으로 하여 파생적 분노는 눈덩이처럼 커져 버렸다.

나는 현시점의 역사 문제는 본원의 문제가 아닌 파생의 문제라고 본다. 본원의 문제에 대해서는 한·일 간에 이미 많은 부분을 해결했고, 앞으로 남은 문제를 해결해야 한다는 데 이견이 없다. 오히려 파생의 문제가 본원 문제의 해결을 저해하고 있고 그에 따르는 손실은 너무 크고 아프다.

일방적 책임 추궁에서 벗어나야

파생적 문제의 책임을 오로지 가해자 측에 전가할 수 있겠는가? 피해 당사자에 대한 사죄와 보상으로 피해자 측의 파생적 분노를 해소할 수 있겠는가? 나는 파생적 분노는 책임론적 화해로는 해소할 수 없다고 본다. 이것이 분명하다면 역사 화해의 철학적 토대를 포용론적 화해로 전환하자. 그리고 일방적 책임 추궁에서 벗어나 높아진 국격에 걸맞게 상대를 포용하는 주체로 자기의 정체성을 정립하자. 포용론적 화해라는 새로운 철학으로 무장하고 파생적 분노를 일시적으로 유보하자. 그리고 한국이 해법을 제시하라는 일본의 입장을 이해하고, 그들의 요청을 수용하여 징용자 문제에 대한 선제적 해법을 제시하자. 2019년 12월 문희상 국회의장을 대표로 하여 14명의 여야 의원이 공동발의했다가 회기 종료로 자동 폐지된 ‘문희상 법안’을 다시 추진하는 것은 좋은 방안이 될 것이다.

5월 10일 탄생하는 윤석열 정부 앞에는 국내외 난제가 산적해 있다. 험로를 개척하며 미래로 전진하기 위해 모든 사람이 요구하는 바가 통합과 협치다. 그러나 절반으로 갈라진 국민의 마음과 현격히 비대칭적인 여소야대 상황에서 통합과 협치가 실현될지 많은 국민이 불안감과 의구심을 갖고 지켜보고 있다.

현역 국회의원 154명이 소속된 한일의원연맹은 초당적 협의체인 만큼 진영 논리와 정당의 이해관계를 떠나 국익을 위한 판단과 행동을 할 수 있다. 다수의 여야 의원이 뜻을 모아 문희상 법안을 수정하여 통과시키길 기대한다. 윤석열 정부의 통합과 협치를 가늠하는 시금석이 될 것이다.

박홍규 고려대 정치외교학과 교수


===
Jong Cheol Lee

  · 
단톡방에 아래와 같은 글이 올라 왔길래 몇 자 비판을 해보았습니다.  

"올려 주신 글 잘 읽어 보았습니다. 한일 관계가 지금처럼 악화되면 결국 한일 정부나 국민 모두에게 좋지 않겠지요. 그런 의미에서 지금까지 이루어졌던 '책임론적 화해'를 넘어서 '포용론적 화해'라는 새로운 철학(?)까지 끌어들이는 것은 발상의 전환이라는 면에서도 바람직하다고 봅니다. 그런데 이 글에서 짚어야 할 몇 가지 문제가 있다고 봅니다. 
먼저 일본의 국력을 너무 과소 평가하고 반대로 한국의 그것은 과대 평가하는 것 같습니다. 한일 간의 국력 차는 아직도 상존하고, 그런 면에서 한국이 일본을 포용할 만큼의 수준은 못 된다고 생각합니다. 일본은 여전히 한국을 한 수 아래로 보고 있다는 현실을 엄연히 알아야 합니다. 사인들 간에도 아래 사람이 포용한다고 하면 우스개로 보이는 경우가 많습니다. 
다음으로 한일 간의 관계 악화의 책임을 한국의 과도한 책임 추궁으로 모는 인상을 많이 주는데, 사실 한일 관계는 한국 쪽 보다는 일본의 국내 정치 상황과 더 밀접한 관계가 있습니다. 오히려 한국 쪽은 거의 수세적 반응의 수준을 넘지 못하는 측면이 있습니다. 일본의 혐한은 일본 사회의 고령화와 일본 정치의 극우화와 연관이 큽니다. 일본의 극우 정치는 젊은 세대 보다는 과거의 망령과 박탈감에 사로 잡혀 분노의 대상을 찾는 고령화 세대에 더 초점을 맞추고 있습니다. 아베 부류의 극우주의자들은 자신들의 정치적 영향력을 유지하기 위해 오히려 이 세력을 자극한 면이 큽니다. 과거 한일 관계가 좋았고, 일본 내부에서 과거사 반성 분위기가 형성된 때는 대부분 극우 세력의 영향이 현저하게 약할 때였습니다. 이 점을 고려하지 않고 마치 한국의 좌파 정부가 한일 관계를 악화시켰다는 인상을 준다면 문제의 본말을 제대로 파악하지 못한 것으로 생각됩니다. 
마지막으로 역사적으로 볼 때 일본의 극우주의자들은 늘 대륙 진출의 기회를 호시탐탐 노려 왔습니다. 때문에 일본이 극우주의의 망령을 제어하지 못한다면 앞으로도 과거 일본의 제국주의를 반복할 가능성이 없지 않습니다. 사실 일본 내부에서 조차 아베의 극우 정치가 일본 정치와 경제를 이류 국가로 만들어 버렸다는 진단이 많이 나오고 있습니다. 그런 면에서 일본의 정치가 바뀌어야 한다는 것은 일본 자신을 위해서도 필요합니다. 일본의 젊은 세대들 사이에는 한국 못지 않게 자신들의 정치를 암울하게 생각하고 좌절하면서 일본을 탈출하자는 분위기가 큽니다. 
이런 몇 가지 선결 문제를 고려하지 않은 상태에서 '포용론적 화해'라는 모호한 개념을 들먹이는 것은 일종의 교언영색이자 곡학아세에 가깝습니다. 무엇보다 정치학 교수라는 자의 글이 이 정도 수준뿐이 되지 않는다는 것이 안타깝습니다."
=====
[박홍규의 한반도평화워치] 한·일 역사갈등, 책임론적 화해 넘어 포용론적 화해로
JOONGANG.CO.KR
[박홍규의 한반도평화워치] 한·일 역사갈등, 책임론적 화해 넘어 포용론적 화해로
나는 한·일 관계의 개선과 역사 화해를 위한 철학적 토대로서 기존의 책임론적 화해론과는 근본적으로 다른 포용론적 화해론을 제시한다. 파생적 분노를 정치적 동원의 수단으로 활용하는 저급한 정치, 책임 추궁을 통해 사적 ...
=====
26 comments
이시종
저도 이 글을 읽고 이 분이 과거사 문제에 대해 제대로 알고 쓰는 것인가 하는 생각을 했습니다.
교언영색과 지록위마가 정답입니다.
Reply18 w
허서
조중동의 대일관이 이러하니 조선제국귀족들의 망령은 아직도 실재합니다
Reply18 w
석락희
공감합니다
공유하겠습니다.
Reply18 w
고동식
말은 그럴듯하게 하는 양반인데 피해자가
포괄적으로 양복하라는 이야기같은데
도대체 누가 가해자고 피해자인지 모르겠습니다… See more
Reply18 w
김수정
미친 인간이네요ㆍ
일본에 포용 ?
절대 일본과 우리는 포용론적이란 단어는 적절 치 않지요~
과거나 현제에도 우리가 피해자이고
반성과 화해 ㆍ포용론 은 피해자가 결정 합니다
Reply18 wEdited
Jong Cheol Lee
김수정 그런 단순한 진실을 외면한 처사지요.
Reply18 w
김양희
옳소!!!
Reply18 w


한병식
저 교수님의 화려한 미사여구, 포용론적 화해와 책임론적 화해, 본원적 분노와 파생적 분노 등의 복잡한 논리는 결국 이솝 우화에 나오는 배고픈 여우가 자기로서는 따먹을 수 없이 높은 곳에 매달려 있는 잘 익은 포도를 보고서 ‘먹을 수 없는 덜 익은 신포도일 것’이라며 자기합리화하고 스스로 위안삼는 ‘신 포도의 우화’에서와 같이 한국이 일본에 대해서 자기합리화 체념, 정신승리하라는 주장이네요.
아마도 의도를 가진 자의 청탁에 의해서 쓴 글일텐데 전형적인 곡학아세 내용이라고 생각합니다.
Reply18 wEdited
Jong Cheol Lee
한병식 아침에 글을 쓰면서 이 '곡학아세'라는 말이 생각나지 않아서 애먹었는데 한 선생님이 잘 지적해주셨네요.
Reply18 w
김양희
극히 정답입니다.
Reply18 w


김양희
화려하게 미사여구로 만들어 합리화하는 전형적인 매국자들에 수법이다!
깨어있는 집단지성민들은 바른견해로 후손들 위하여 행동해야 할것이다!!!
Reply18 w
Jong Cheol Lee
김양희 미사여구로 분장 질 했지만 속은 뻔하지요.
Reply18 w


이주한
박홍규 주장은 완벽한 이완용 표절입니다.
Reply18 w
Jong Cheol Lee
이주한 그렇게 볼 수도 있네요.
Reply18 w


Lee Jang Hee
요즘 이 문제에서 돌아가는 분위기가 좀 이상한데요, 한일관계의 악화 원인을 우리에게서 찾고 개선의 방법을 우리에게서 찾는 것이 최근 한일 전문가란 사람들의 견해 같습니다.
일본은 그러면 극우적 입장을 견지하며 그냥 하던 그대로 하면 된다는 것인지 한심합니다.
Reply18 w
Jong Cheol Lee
Lee Jang Hee 그렇지요. 적반하장도 유분수지요. 아주 그럴듯한 논리로 주장되고 있네요.
Reply18 w