What do you think?
Rate this book
Lord of the Flies: Acting Edition
This special Acting Edition of William Golding's "Lord of the Flies", published by Faber and Faber, contains the full play-text as well as an introduction by Nigel Williams notes on staging, a full properties list and lighting and sound cues.
130 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1996
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
October 2, 2021
reading this before I do the show. why is this so dark oh my god
April 19, 2025
the blooding scene is forever ingrained in my head, A A A A A A A A-
I love the way it expands upon the characters, especially Rodger and Maurice, Maurice is so funny. The whole thing makes me go
"A A A A A A A A" - Denver, Money Heist
also, Simon's interaction with The Lord of the Flies was MUCH BETTER than in the book (sorry William Golding), same with Piggy's death, alot better.
overall 100000/10 and merridew is so good AJAJAJA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA MERRIDEW SUPREMACY
I love the way it expands upon the characters, especially Rodger and Maurice, Maurice is so funny. The whole thing makes me go
"A A A A A A A A" - Denver, Money Heist
also, Simon's interaction with The Lord of the Flies was MUCH BETTER than in the book (sorry William Golding), same with Piggy's death, alot better.
overall 100000/10 and merridew is so good AJAJAJA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA AaAaAaAaA MERRIDEW SUPREMACY
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 25, 2025
Très très perturbant. Je ne me souviens pas vraiment du roman, mais cette adaptation théâtrale accentue les tensions et met profondément mal à l'aise.
August 29, 2025
Playing simon. Hype as fuck
April 8, 2023
Cool à jouer
October 25, 2021
Lord of the Flies is one of my favorite books of all time. I still avoid reading it too often cause I'm always deeply shocked and moved at the end of the story, even though I already know what happens.
This Acting Edition lacks some of the symbolism and heavyness of the whole story (especially the slightly slower descent into savagery and Simon's important role) due to its nature as a play, but I still felt bad at the end - as it honestly should be. This edition reminded me why I love this story (although I hate it at the same time, for making me feel so much) and why it will always be relevant. I'd still recommend reading the whole thing to fully understand the importance of this tale.
This Acting Edition lacks some of the symbolism and heavyness of the whole story (especially the slightly slower descent into savagery and Simon's important role) due to its nature as a play, but I still felt bad at the end - as it honestly should be. This edition reminded me why I love this story (although I hate it at the same time, for making me feel so much) and why it will always be relevant. I'd still recommend reading the whole thing to fully understand the importance of this tale.
January 5, 2017
"There's just me and you in the whole world and I'm coming to get you..."
July 20, 2026
This is a great adaptation of a great book. In terms of page-to-stage adaptations, this is about as good as it gets.
Note: I read this because my school is putting on this show, so I wasn’t reading for enjoyment but to prepare for the audition. I don’t normally write big reviews, so I’m sorry if this is a bit clunky.
NON SPOILERS:
I absolutely love how Williams makes the boys talk. They use fragmented, archaic language that only grows stranger as the show progresses. I think this was a great way to establish the eerie tone of the play; it felt like I was reading a normality from a culture I was unfamiliar with, and I found it very effective.
The play is a lot more focused on the rivalry between Ralph and Jack than the descent of the group as a whole. In general, the side characters are sidelined a lot, and they feel a lot more like agents to add to the chaos and savagery than thought-out and fully realized characters. Especially Bill and Maurice felt very shallow. On that note, the absence of littluns onstage (besides Percival) makes lots of sense considering casting restrictions (and I greatly prefer how this script does it over having very young people act in a play this violent), but it does significantly lower the stakes of the play.
Of course, the play is condensing a 300ish page book into a three act, 2ish hour play, and some things were lost in that adaptation. Because of the choice to have each act be a single scene instead of including time skips/scene changes within an act, some things didn’t logically make sense (all of the smoke from a fire that burns down a significant part of the island is gone three minutes later, stuff like that), and the group’s descent into savagery was a lot less nuanced.
I don’t think the play (or the book, for that matter) is a story about human nature. I think it is a commentary on how British boarding schools are built to teach young boys to be imperialists, and that their institutional rewarding of bullying and hazing, compounded with the emotional suppression and detachment from families that boys face in boarding schools, lead their students to vie for power over others, become apathetic, and avoid accountability. I think the play excels in this aspect, and I liked the way school dynamics were brought up.
From an acting standpoint, I’m split on the stage directions and dialogue tags. Sometimes, especially in the beginning of act 2, the stage descriptions became quite abstract, and it was difficult to imagine what was meant to be happing onstage. With that said, there are some amazing insights that are in the stage descriptions, and the writing style really worked for me when it didn’t get in the way of clarity with how the show was intended to be performed.
SPOILERS (the play has the same plot events as the book):
I think that Piggy’s death is SO much stronger in the play than the book. I really like how they did it. Instead of Roger throwing a boulder at Piggy, Piggy (who is blind because his glasses have been stolen) takes Roger’s hand, believing him to be Ralph. Roger then leads him to the edge of the mountaintop, and once Piggy realizes who is actually leading him Roger pushes him off. I feel like making his death a lot more deliberate and slow rids the audience of any illusion that this was impulsive or accidental, and forces them to reckon with the brutality of the act. It also reminds the audience of Piggy’s innocence, which makes the ending make more sense. I found it very powerful.
I’m a big fan of Simon’s Lord of the Flies monologue. I think that, in general, Simon feels a lot more human here than he did in the book, and I really liked it.
I’m going to be so vulnerable and honest right now and say that I have absolutely no idea what the heck the parachutist is a symbol for. Lots of crazy stuff happens with the parachutist during Simon’s death and eventually the parachutist literally transforms into the naval officer. Is he a symbol for the adult world and shows that the supposed “civilized” society is just as savage as the boys? Is he meant to show that the boys’ behavior is a direct result of the examples they’ve been shown from a war-torn and imperialist nation? I don’t know, but I just don’t think that either of those good enough points to justify making someone lie in dead person makeup for hours before magically transforming into the naval officer onstage somehow idk.
All in all, t’was great, and I’m excited for my school to do it this year woot woot! If you’ve actually read this far, it’s probably because you’re auditioning for/part of a production of this show as well, and I wish you the best of luck! Break legs!
Note: I read this because my school is putting on this show, so I wasn’t reading for enjoyment but to prepare for the audition. I don’t normally write big reviews, so I’m sorry if this is a bit clunky.
NON SPOILERS:
I absolutely love how Williams makes the boys talk. They use fragmented, archaic language that only grows stranger as the show progresses. I think this was a great way to establish the eerie tone of the play; it felt like I was reading a normality from a culture I was unfamiliar with, and I found it very effective.
The play is a lot more focused on the rivalry between Ralph and Jack than the descent of the group as a whole. In general, the side characters are sidelined a lot, and they feel a lot more like agents to add to the chaos and savagery than thought-out and fully realized characters. Especially Bill and Maurice felt very shallow. On that note, the absence of littluns onstage (besides Percival) makes lots of sense considering casting restrictions (and I greatly prefer how this script does it over having very young people act in a play this violent), but it does significantly lower the stakes of the play.
Of course, the play is condensing a 300ish page book into a three act, 2ish hour play, and some things were lost in that adaptation. Because of the choice to have each act be a single scene instead of including time skips/scene changes within an act, some things didn’t logically make sense (all of the smoke from a fire that burns down a significant part of the island is gone three minutes later, stuff like that), and the group’s descent into savagery was a lot less nuanced.
I don’t think the play (or the book, for that matter) is a story about human nature. I think it is a commentary on how British boarding schools are built to teach young boys to be imperialists, and that their institutional rewarding of bullying and hazing, compounded with the emotional suppression and detachment from families that boys face in boarding schools, lead their students to vie for power over others, become apathetic, and avoid accountability. I think the play excels in this aspect, and I liked the way school dynamics were brought up.
From an acting standpoint, I’m split on the stage directions and dialogue tags. Sometimes, especially in the beginning of act 2, the stage descriptions became quite abstract, and it was difficult to imagine what was meant to be happing onstage. With that said, there are some amazing insights that are in the stage descriptions, and the writing style really worked for me when it didn’t get in the way of clarity with how the show was intended to be performed.
SPOILERS (the play has the same plot events as the book):
I think that Piggy’s death is SO much stronger in the play than the book. I really like how they did it. Instead of Roger throwing a boulder at Piggy, Piggy (who is blind because his glasses have been stolen) takes Roger’s hand, believing him to be Ralph. Roger then leads him to the edge of the mountaintop, and once Piggy realizes who is actually leading him Roger pushes him off. I feel like making his death a lot more deliberate and slow rids the audience of any illusion that this was impulsive or accidental, and forces them to reckon with the brutality of the act. It also reminds the audience of Piggy’s innocence, which makes the ending make more sense. I found it very powerful.
I’m a big fan of Simon’s Lord of the Flies monologue. I think that, in general, Simon feels a lot more human here than he did in the book, and I really liked it.
I’m going to be so vulnerable and honest right now and say that I have absolutely no idea what the heck the parachutist is a symbol for. Lots of crazy stuff happens with the parachutist during Simon’s death and eventually the parachutist literally transforms into the naval officer. Is he a symbol for the adult world and shows that the supposed “civilized” society is just as savage as the boys? Is he meant to show that the boys’ behavior is a direct result of the examples they’ve been shown from a war-torn and imperialist nation? I don’t know, but I just don’t think that either of those good enough points to justify making someone lie in dead person makeup for hours before magically transforming into the naval officer onstage somehow idk.
All in all, t’was great, and I’m excited for my school to do it this year woot woot! If you’ve actually read this far, it’s probably because you’re auditioning for/part of a production of this show as well, and I wish you the best of luck! Break legs!
February 3, 2020
This book was about children who have survived from a plane crash and have come together to form a tribe. near the end of this book you can tell the difference of leadership from Jack and Ralph, you can learn how to survive on an island from this book.
August 31, 2020
The acting edition is a really good book compared to the other Lord Of The Flies and it is a lot easier to read.
October 23, 2020
This book is an okay read. I'm sure that the original version (not acting) would be much better. Not much to say, not good, not bad.
Read
January 10, 2022had to read it for my theater group and idk why but i feel like this is not a great adaptation so if you see me reading the novel soon(ish) that's why
March 20, 2025
everything you kill makes you strong
January 17, 2026
Solid stage adaptation of the classic that makes it more approachable.
October 30, 2014
It was my first time reading anything "Lord of the Flies" so I still think I could read the book, but it was a good introduction I think.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews