I read Lord of the Flies several years ago (when I was a wee lass) to explore the rational vs. irrational and civilization vs. savagery dichotomies. My memory isn't so good (comes with the being old) so here's what I remember of it:
Simon was indeed the "saintly" figure, depending on who you talk to people will say he is a Christ figure or merely representative of human goodness. If you were to examine each character closely--and your teacher will probably make you, eventually--you'll find that each one is representative of a force in society (Jack = anarchy, Piggy = intellectualism, Ralph = order). Simon is the only likable one, which is also why he dies. Golding isn't really writing the characters, he's using the island as a microcosm for the rest of the world, since WWII was taking place during that time. Simon dying basically means that even basic human goodness gets consumed and overshadowed by the piss-taking that goes on around it. In the end you'll notice that, though a passing ship comes by and saves the boys from killing each other further, who's going to stop the ship from sinking another ship in wartime?
Meh. I'm on a literature overload and an anthropology major to boot, so I'm almost incapable of reading anything superficially anymore. Lord of the Flies is definitely a critique of society and a commentary on human nature. But yes, I did like it.
Also, this topic might interest you: http://hol.org.uk/forum/index.php?showtopi...t=0&start=0