"(Bradbury) says the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." This quotation comes from a profile of Ray Bradbury shortly before his death. He was frustrated with what he called persistent "misinterpretations" of his most famous novel as a book about censorship rather than . Your task for this post is first to find, explain and analyze a quote from the novel that demonstrates the theme Bradbury calls our attention to above. Then, connect the quote to an example in the present which you think confirms or disproves Bradbury's fears. Yes, this means having and stating an opinion, so don't be afraid to suggest Bradbury was totally or partially wrong if that's what you think. Just support your viewpoint with another quotation, which can come from the novel, from the article about Bradbury, or from a news source that provides you with an example. You can also use a quotation from an analysis of the novel, but you cannot simply agree with the analysis without questioning or developing it. When you complete your paragraph-length post, click "comments" and submit it with your FULL NAME. If you have questions, I highly recommend attending this week's workshops. We will discuss the book as well as writing techniques, and on Friday we will have a writing session where you can complete the blog assignment with the help of experienced upperclassmen. If you cannot attend the workshops, you can email [email protected] as long as you put Fahrenheit 451 somewhere in the subject line and have something specific to ask (i.e., not, "what should I write about?," but, "How can I develop this idea/quotation/sentence?" Grading Factors: -Strength of Format -Properly Integration of Quotations -Originality of Analysis Note: See the previous post for expanded discussion of these factors.
120 Comments
Kara Forest
7/20/2015 06:21:19 am
Kara Goldsmith Forest
Reply
Emily Clarke
7/31/2015 02:03:09 pm
Ray Bradbury's novel, Fahrenheit 451 clearly represents how the growth of technology can overpower civilization and humanity. We are introduced to the setting in the beginning of the book where reading and even being a pedestrian is outlawed. Guy Montag, the protagonist, is a fireman who's job is to burn books. Throughout the novel, he starts to question his duties. He is constantly bickering with his wife, Mildred, who is way too caught up with TV. He starts to read books and Mildred becomes very agitated and sees no point if all books do is get you in trouble. "Mildred's mouth twitched. "See what you're doing? You'll ruin us! Who's more important, me or that bible?" She was beginning to shriek now, sitting there like a wax doll melting in it's own heat." (Bradbury 76) As technology expands and advances, people start to forget about books and education.
Reply
Alex Terody
7/23/2015 10:28:59 am
Ray Bradbury’s quotation meant that the antagonist isn’t the state or the government. It is the people who are the real antagonists. I would have to agree with him. Even if the government is really bad, if people don’t rebel nothing will change. The main character is Guy Montag. He lived in a government where books were banned. Firemen were in charge of burning the books. He was a fireman. On his way home from work one day he met a teenager named Clarisse. She talked about her love for nature and her other ideas. Their talk changed Montag. He wanted to change the society after this happened and Captain Beatty noticed that. Bradbury shows that people are the antagonists by Captain Beatty’s quote, "The important thing for you to remember, Montag, is we're the Happiness Boys... you and I and the others. We stand against the small tide of those who want to make everyone unhappy with conflicting theory and thought. We have our fingers in the dike. Hold steady. Don't let the torrent of melancholy and drear philosophy drown our world."(Bradbury pg 62) This is showing that the firemen are trying to stop the rebels. Even the few people that are trying to help are getting stopped. By the end of the story he meets some intellectuals when he was on the run. An intellectual named Granger said, “The difference between the man who just cuts lawns and a real gardener is in the touching, he said. The lawn-cutter might just as well not have been there at all; the gardener will be there a lifetime.”(Bradbury pg 157) This means that there are only a few people that are rebels working hard for a better world. The other people are just there not doing anything to make a difference. They just exist, waiting for help, so they might as well not be there at all. An example of people making things worse is ISIS. They are a terrorist group. The world is fighting ISIS to stop their destruction. They are like the firemen from the book. They are both ruthless and only care about what their job is. If anyone gets in their way you are killed. This confirms Bradbury’s fears. As you can see from the writing the antagonist is actually the people. They are getting in the way of a better world. Only a few people work to make it better and the few that do work get stopped by the firemen. So, as you can see Bradbury’s fear is right.
Reply
Megan Dingelstedt
7/24/2015 07:03:40 am
Ray Bradbury’s famous novel Fahrenheit 451, clearly demonstrates that the effects of technology, specifically television, on people, are often negative. Throughout the novel, much futuristic technology is used. Almost every home is equipped with at least one television and through those screens, violent and degrading images enter the minds’ of humans. Bradbury verifies that absurd and gratuitous events are televised, when a reporter is shown on television screens and states, “Tonight, this network is proud to have the opportunity to follow the Hound by camera and helicopter as it starts on its way to the target,” (Bradbury 133). At the point in the novel when this statement was made, Montag, Bradbury’s protagonist, was running from the people planning to kill him and his “wrong” intentions. The event in itself, is terrible, but the fact that it was being recorded and broadcasted on every television turned on made it worse. People’s enjoyment of disturbing shows, such as the news in Fahrenheit 451, indicates that technology is often used in a negative and dulling way, which is the point Bradbury makes in his novel. In present time, there are many graphic and tedious programs that are unnecessary and often inappropriate for viewers to watch. These shows contain no education, no positive influences, and overall no benefit. Humans receive entertainment from technology by watching television programs like these, which dominate most channels. The enjoyment people receive definitely confirms the fear that Bradbury had about TV’s effects on people, while writing his famous novel. TIME’s writer, Keith Wagstaff wrote an article about Bradbury and his works about the future, in which he seems to agree with the author when he writes, “In Fahrenheit 451, he gives a prescient description of a flat, wall-mounted television that broadcasts sensational programming meant to dull viewers’ intellects. In 2009, MTV premiered Jersey Shore, a vindication of Bradbury’s views if I’ve ever seen one” (Wagstaff). This journalist confirms Bradbury’s fear of television’s dulling effects on people, as well, by giving an example of one of the many deficient programs on television. Technology can be beneficial, but when used in the way that Bradbury demonstrates in Fahrenheit 451, and the way that most television programs presently are, it can negatively affect people, and ultimately confirms Bradbury’s fears of television having unfavorable and dulling effects on everyone.
Reply
Luke Pearlberg
7/24/2015 10:49:45 am
Ray Bradbury is saying how it is not the government that caused this iron-rule to take place, it is the people who allowed this to happen and questioned nothing of it. Fahrenheit 451 explores a dystopian world where books have been banned across America, due to their "conflicting nonsense". Television, and it's evolution into "families"as they are called, has sucked people in and prevented them from thinking for themselves. This is demonstrated through Mille's obsession with the parlor "families". Bradbury demonstrates this obsession several times throughout the novel, "Montag reached inside the parlor wall and pulled the main switch. The images drained away, as if the water had been let from a gigantic crystal bowl of hysterical fish. The three women turned slowly and looked with unconcealed irritation and then dislike at Montag."(Bradbury 94). This demonstrates how people have allowed to become part of a virtual world, rather than interact in an intellectual world. This goes along with why the books were banned, as people want nothing but being happy. The books were seen as nothing but complication and confusion, and so the government(wanting to keep the peace)employed fireman to destroy any books that are found. I believe this is what Bradbury meant when he said the people where the culprit in Fahrenheit 451. Books, I believe, would have remained part of the culture had the people not become obsessed with ease, immediacy, and being fed information, rather than finding it and educating yourself. My opinion, Bradbury is absolutely right. The age of technology is sending humanity down a path that could potentially end in the scenario presented in this novel. Specifically, the age of social media, has changed the way that people interact with each other. People are far less personal than how they were only 10 years ago, due to the rise of social media and texting. Many kids and teenagers today regard reading as “boring”, and are far more entertained by what this tech age has to offer. Bradbury, in this novel, wanted to show the people how that, by continuing down this path, they would lead to their own destruction. In the novel, Millie and Captain Beatty are both killed as a result of the world they created. Clarisse was killed for being different from it. A world where education itself is frowned upon leaves all who inhabit it broken.
Reply
Jay Izzo
7/25/2015 12:57:50 pm
Ray Bradbury's quote in context to his novel, Fahrenheit 451 discusses the very interesting idea: it is not always the government's fault for oppressing the people; it is the people's fault for ignoring the oppression by submerging themselves inside certain things in everyday things like technology, this is an idea I fully agree with. In the climax of the novel, after Montag just escaped the police, an innocent man labeled as Montag is televised being killed for the entertainment of the people and for the sake of the government's image. Because the people are so concerned with the entertainment factor of the whole event, nobody questions the government , allowing for an innocent man to be killed and for Montag to get away. This is shown in the quote, "The victim was seized by Hound and camera in a great spidering, clenching grip. He screamed. He screamed. He screamed!. Blackout. Silence. Darkness," (Bradbury 149). This quote shows what monstrosities the government is capable of for the entertainment of the people. As for the people watching, they have become so de-sensitized, they do not give any second thought to any real issues; only to what's on TV. This is best shown in a certain outbreak of Montag's when he says, "Oh God, the way they jabber about people and their own children and their husbands and the way they talk about war… I can't believe it!" (Bradbury 98). These two quotations serve as point of views from both ends of the world of Fahrenheit 451: the government's view and the people's view. The first quote shows how the government can basically kill the innoscent without question. This is shown why in the second quote as it shows how numb the public are to what is happening in the real world; they simply accept what is being presented to them on their parlor walls. The people don't care what the government has to show them in the real world because they are too busy being sucked into what is presented to them in their safe world of the parlor TV.
Reply
Dixie O'Connell
7/25/2015 07:00:02 pm
Ray Bradbury's quotation shows that the demise of original human thoughts and development are not strictly the product of government limitations but more so the product of Television and technology. In the novel "Fahrenheit 451" this theory is proven accurate. Something that is brought up throughout the novel is color. The main character Guy often describes things as pale or talks about bright colors. Bright colors are considered to be distracting and attracted to the eye. At one of the peaks of Mildred's frustration with Guy and his fascination with books and absorbing their knowledge she compares her 4D television experience "Books aren't people. You read and I look all around, but there isn't anybody!...My 'family' is people. They tell me things: I laugh, they laugh! And the colors!" (73 Bradbury). This excerpt shows how the flashy colors on TV are enough to entertain in this current society. It also shows Mildred, a common civilian, needing to surround herself with people and action to relieve boredom. Mildred is not simple minded because the government controlled her to be so, but because she surrounds herself with non stop noise and technology exposure. Second of all, the people in this dystopian society that seem to be the common housewife type characters have the memory spans of goldfishes. They are constantly bouncing from one topic to another with no necessary dwelling or buffer on conversation. When Mildred has her friends over they are discussing war and death. Mrs. Phelps is describing her arrangement with her husband if the time comes where he is killed what she should do. The arrangement she is describing is very cold blooded but Mildred merely interrupts to ask "did you see that Clara Dove five-minte romance last night in you wall? Well it was all about this woman who..." the group bounces from a topic like death of a spouse to trashy romance television without a bat of an eye (Bradbury 95). They seem numb to any non superficial conversation and would not change even if they were called out on lacking depth. These woman have lives they spend large portions of watching this intense television program where they develop the strongest relationships in their life but with people who do not exist. The government did not encourage people like Mildred to branch out but they also did not corner them into such a life of routine and dullness as television did. Bradbury's fear was not irrational it was wishing the truth was not true and not known.
Reply
Harry Jain
7/26/2015 05:54:23 am
In his novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury astutely demonstrates that people have a natural fear of knowledge because it reveals the flaws in human society and consequentially destroys the false sense of security created by ignorance. Furthermore, he illustrates that these flaws are a quintessential part of human nature, as flaws emphasize the strengths of society and demonstrate the fronts on which improvement is necessary. Throughout the novel, Bradbury depicts a world in which people prefer ignorance to facing their problems, as evidenced by Mrs. Phelps’s nonchalant reaction to her husband going to war; she repeatedly asserts that she is not worried, saying “He’ll be back next week. The Army said so. Quick war. Forty-eight hours, they said, and everyone home” (Bradbury 94). However, when Montag reads the poem, “Dover Beach,” she finds herself sobbing uncontrollably. The poem’s final line, “Where ignorant armies clash by night,” seems to shatter the aforementioned sense of security she possesses (Bradbury 100). Despite not fully understanding the breadth of her emotions, the poem appears to have opened Mrs. Phelps’s eyes to the war-ridden society in which she lives, bringing her great distress. However, without knowing these flaws in their society, they cannot truly live. Instead, they act like robots, glued to their television walls and mindless entertainment. Right before this interaction, Faber explains the value of books to Montag. He says, “Because they have quality. And what does the word quality Mean? To me it means texture. This book has pores. It has features” (Bradbury 83). Faber’s use of the words “texture” and “pores” demonstrates the ability of books to show the flaws and strengths of society, creating a certain “texture.” This texture is what is inherently absent from the forms of entertainment in Fahrenheit 451, whether it is the television walls, the amusement parks, or the seashell radios.
Reply
Christian Galindo
7/26/2015 06:02:47 am
Ray Bradbury, along with his National Book Awarded "Fahrenheit 451," presents his audience with the idea that there are often two variations of happiness. More often than not, average people will choose the false type happiness, or the quickest possible solution for satisfaction. Examples of this fake happiness include breaking strict laws, overdosing on medication, and so forth. Bradbury sets the stage of "Fahrenheit 451" in a town plagued with boredom and depression. Mildred Montag, wife of protagonist Guy Montag, is one of the many victims of the town's uneventful and dull environment. Not long after the start of the novel, Guy Montag finds his wife lying unconscious, cold and white as winter snow. "Her face was like a snow-covered island upon which rain might fall, but it felt no rain;" (Bradbury 13). The exact reasoning for Mildred's overdose on sleeping pills is never addressed in the novel. However, one can be certain that she was not pleased with her life, and was looking for any form of happiness to improve her lifestyle. Desperate, Mildred overdosed on these pills, but no satisfaction was ever met. Here, Bradbury declares his argument explaining that the average person will choose the quickest possible answer to their the depression, even if it is not certain to provide them any joy. Likewise in the present, Diana Spechler, of the New York Times, attempted using medication to achieve happiness as well. But again, false happiness captured another victim. "Ecstatic on 300 milligrams of bupropin, sometimes I couldn't retrieve simple words," (Spechler 1). Here, Spechler explains her happiness under the effect of a specific drug. The depressed author explains how this false joy comes at a price of ignorance, confusion, and drowsiness. Fortunately, the price the author encountered was not as severe as the effects of Mildred's sleeping pills. Within her article, Spechler confirms Bradbury's argument: it is clear that everyday people will find and choose the simplest form of happiness rather than a happiness that may require effort to find or to enjoy. Examples of this true happiness include spending time with family/friends, taking up a hobby, and so forth. However, similar to Bradbury's argument, there are two kinds of happiness in the world, and people will choose the false happiness for immediate gratification.
Reply
Brigid Fahy
7/26/2015 07:10:08 am
The quotation from Ray Bradbury states that the main antagonist in his novel Fahrenheit 451 is not the harsh controlling government, but the passive people who have no desire to stop this government. Bradbury addresses how ignorant and just plain lazy humans can be with characters like Mildred. She does not wish to think too hard about her circumstances or even pay attention to anything that bothers her, for example, the jet bombers that frequently fly over head. As long as she is happy everything is fine. She even admits to running over squirrels and dogs with the beetle in order to rid her of bad emotions. Bradbury shows Mildred's indifference in the following quote: “‘Did you hear Beatty? Did you listen to him? He knows all the answers. He’s right. Happiness is important. Fun is everything. And yet I keep sitting here saying to myself, i’m not happy, i’m not happy’. ‘I am.’ Mildred’s mouth beamed. ‘And proud of it’” (Bradbury 65). Mildred, along with almost every other person living in Bradbury’s dystopia, do not care about what they might be missing, or what they could accomplish if they wanted to because they are simply content and that is all. Lots of people today are reliant on the concept of instant gratification. As long as things are fast and entertaining people will be satisfied. You could make your own delicious pizza with home grown ingredients but why would you if you can defrost a pizza in the microwave in just a few minutes. Even though people are well aware that they have an option that will lead to a much better outcome, they will take the easy way out instead. The people in Bradbury’s novel (with the exception of a few) do not try to make themselves a better life and why would they? They are happy enough and that is all. Bradbury is right in his claim that people without care or ambition are very much part of the problem.
Reply
Griffin Cole
7/26/2015 07:24:21 am
This quotation stated by Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451, shows how TV and other commercial events or objects can influence a person and their actions more than a strict and feared government. One of the major characters affected by TV would be
Reply
Luke Devine
7/26/2015 12:03:48 pm
In his famous novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury describes how people react to books after television and other technology has taken over peoples' lives. In this futuristic America, people no longer interact with one another in person as much as they interact with people on 4D TVs. Citizens are given an hollow, fake feeling of happiness with this system, and therefore they feel that books are unnecessary. Philosophy in books can cause controversy in the population, rather than TV which gives facts. Because of this idea people chose not to read books, and they are burned to keep conflict at a minimum. Many critics of this novel claim that the government banned books, but rather the citizens gave them up on their own. The government is merely imposing ideas created by its own people. According to Captain Beatty, "It didn't come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God" (Bradbury, 58). Had the government banned books while the people still enjoyed them, a riot may have ensued and books would be more popular than TV. Therefore the government let the people do what they wanted, and only outlawed books when the public had no use for them. Ray Bradbury's novel Fahrenheit 451 is filled with controversy as some people think that the government in the novel was the cause of the problem, when in reality it was the people.
Reply
Seamus Cochrane
7/27/2015 03:25:57 am
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, one of the main themes is the passive state of mind of the people, and the fact that our society is afraid of those who are different, or who have different beliefs. This theme is portrayed by the law that bans books of any kind. The law prohibits the owning, reading, and production of books. and while the novel points out that this is the fault of the people, the author's message is misinterpreted as being anti-government, when in reality Bradbury is calling attention to the cattle-like state of society. In the novel, 4D tv's became so popular, and books so unused, the government decided to just ban books to save resources. But did the people rise up against this new doctrine? Did they stamp their feet and protest? No, they merely grunted at their TV's and returned to their vegetable-like state. One character named Faber, an old man, calls attention to this by saying, "No one wanted them back. No one missed them," (Bradbury 89). Faber is talking about how when books were outlawed, no one cared, and those who did care (like Faber) were too cowardly to do anything about it. Personally, I agree with Bradbury's idea. Modern society is force-fed these rules and ideas, and no one is brave enough to do anything about it. There is so much horror and strife taking place, and yet people do nothing. For example, in the middle east, terrorists are killing, raping, and pillaging their way into history. But is anyone doing anything about it? With the exception of the armed forces and a few brave souls who volunteer to help out, nobody cares. They'll read about it or see it on TV, but they won't care. They'll look to their families, comment about how awful it is, then go back to their meals. Ray Bradbury was trying to give society a wake-up call with his novel Fahrenheit 451, but unfortunately, he was grossly misunderstood. I believe that he was right though. Society is much too passive. As a people, we need to find our voice. And that all starts with you.
Reply
Hannah McLoone
7/27/2015 08:40:48 am
In one of his most famous novels Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury shows that although it was the government who outlawed books and replaced them with TVs, it was also the people. What he means by this is that the people just stood off to the side and did nothing about it. Of course there were a few that were brave enough but as we learned, they went with the books. But most people just didn’t care because it was replaced with television, and that’s what Bradbury was trying to get across to the readers. TV is consuming our society and if nothing is done about it, this fictional novel could come true. In the novel, one of the characters, Faber, explains to Montag the extinction of the books by saying “’no one wanted them back. No one missed them,” (Bradbury 89). It’s frightening that people in the future will never appreciate what it’s like to sit down and relax just by reading a book. Sure, a book requires the reader to think a little more than they would while watching TV, but that’s what most people love about it. One of the characters in the novel that is an example of how the government has controlled society is Montag’s wife, Mildred. She explains this when she tells her husband “’[Beatty is] right. Happiness is important. Fun is everything. And yet I keep sitting here saying to myself, I’m not happy, I’m not happy. I am.’ Mildred’s mouth beamed. ‘And proud of it”’ (Bradbury 65). Today, most people want what’s easy and accessible, not really trying hard because they simply don’t have to. Books are so complex that if they were to go away, people would not be as smart, even with all of the technology. This society is in trouble, and people need to take action instead of sitting back and allowing it to happen.
Reply
Erica Soya
7/27/2015 09:04:29 am
In Ray Bradbury's classic novel Fahrenheit 451, he believes that the main conflict has nothing to do with the government, but instead is all about the effects of the futuristic technology on the citizens. This is claiming that it is their own fault, because of how they have let themselves go. They have no desire to learn, no desire to read or write, and no desire to question their knowledge. The people feel as if there is nothing wrong with how little they know and therefore rot their brains with the giant televisions they have displayed on each wall. In their minds, there is no need for books, because everything they could ever want pops up on their screen, tricking them into believing anything it says. Towards the middle of the novel, Beatty asks Montag to return the book, into which he does and then joins the other men in a game of poker. While this happens, Beatty picks a fight with Montag telling him what a waste books are. He consistently jabs Montag with his words, and later states, "What traitors books can be! You think they're backing you up, and they turn on you. Others can use them, too, and there you are...in a great welter of nouns and verbs and adjectives," (Bradbury 107). In this quote Beatty clearly mocks Montag, explaining that books are useless; no matter how well someone can support themselves using books, others can read them just as easily, knocking them back down the way they get up. Neither is superior, because they both have the same amount of knowledge. Shortly after this scene ends, the men get a call for another house to be burned. When they pull up, Montag sees that they stop in front of his house. Mumbling in disbelief, he also watches Mildred run out of the house with her suitcase into a taxi. During this, she quietly talks to herself saying, "Poor family, poor family, oh everything gone, everything, everything gone now..." (Bradbury 114). This gives evidence to Bradbury's statement that it's the people's own fault, not the government. It proved how obsessed Mildred was in that TV, how she was all wrapped up in it and believed every bit. She was so fooled that she couldn't ever listen to her own husband; she thought he was just crazy. In a way, it seems that the TV controls Mildred, as it did with thousands of other citizens. She revolved her daily routine around it, and was rarely seen out of the parlor. It even seemed as though she loved and knew more about the "family" than any other real human being in her life. She is one example of how their world lives, and how they believe the television more than each other. Overall, this technology controls their lives, rots their brains, and keeps the people from thinking. They are their own worst enemies, because they form their own boundaries.They truly need more people like Clarisse and Montag, to find answers and go beyond the limits. Otherwise, they will all continue to live without ever asking how, what, or why.
Reply
Lacey Riegler
7/27/2015 09:56:36 am
Bradbury, author of the acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451 stated in a profile that the culprit of the novel "is not the State -- it is the people" bringing to light the idea that the higher power is not the one to blame but instead the people are the problem. The novel is based around these 'firemen' who instead of putting out fires like the ones we know, they are the ones who set the fire. And the fires are only set to collections of books to keep knowledge from the public. The people instead are surrounded by technology to keep them entertained and keep them in line in a sense. The novel does in fact back up the man's claims with quotes such as one where Bradbury has written, "Surely you remember the boy in your own school class who was exceptionally 'bright', did most of the reciting and answering while the others sat like so many leaden idols, hating him. And wasn't it this bright boy you selected for beatings and tortures after hours?" ( Bradbury 58 ). This quote may not seem like much but upon further analyzation more comes to light. Such as in this certain society, supposedly our own in years to come, there is less thinking and intelligence of such important things and instead there is more leisure. And while it may have been the State and government who started such a thing, the people did propel it, by buying into such things. And when someone came along who was like the old ways, who wanted knowledge of the world, how things worked and why, others would drag them down. Belittle them for such a thing before they even had a chance to blossom. Therefore the people are beating down these ideas, and furthering the States work. In current real life times, there is similarities such as recent cases where a person of color is killed for such trivial matters. To be more specific, the recent case of Sandra Bland, a women of color who wound up dead. To quote from the New York Times, "Ms. Bland, an African-American woman from the Chicago area, was found dead three days after she was arrested by a state trooper during a traffic stop in Waller County, Tex. She was initially pulled over for failing to signal a lane change." This is only one case that is added upon many others. An issue of racism and how people of color are more likely to have physical force used against them and sometimes even killed for things white people would walk away without a scratch. And in comparison to the novel. The state came be seen as the higher power, in this case the police officers and such. And some unjust officers use such force and kill people of color for the simplest things. And the general public buys into the lies of how these innocent people were to blame. Even furthering the problem. So I believe I do agree with Bradbury in this case. The state, the higher power, starts such a thing but then it is the people who further it. It is the people who do not question such a thing. So the people are the problem. For they sit by in silence, agreeing and going along with the wrongdoing, bringing the blame upon themselves.
Reply
Melissa Velazquez
7/27/2015 10:59:38 am
In Ray Bradbury's novel, "Fahrenheit 451" it is often misinterpreted of censorship from the government only in one place. As Bradbury said before his death, "It is not a state- it is the people" The society that this book takes place is as if life were scripted. Such as, having scripted conversations and the effects of TV controlling people's lifestyle. Any object that requires reading or can be educational is banned. The government does not want the citizens to have more knowledge than them. Guy, the main character never questioned it. More likely because he is unaware of what is taking place and is a fireman. You would think save places from being burned down instead of causing it. Clairisse, as any adolescent, asks many questions about society and very curious leads Montag to question it as well. We are born into various of lifestyles. For example, religion and beliefs. Just people are born into religion, the characters believe that that burning anything that can inform you or educate is acceptable. Thus why no one ever opposed to it. Mildred, Montag's wife is a well fit example of their society. She represents how the technology provided controls her life and mind."His wife stretched on the bed, uncovered and cold, her eyes fixed to the ceiling by invisible threads of steel, immovable. And in her ears the little Seashells, the thimble radios tamped tight," (Guy montag, 1.76) Seashells are ear phones. She listens to other people's conversations. Mildred and other people can not listen to lyrical music as it can teach you how to feel. Just like music today influences us. Mildred is depressed and needy because of this. The human mind can not think inside the box. It needs to explore.Ray Bradbury expressed this through this novel.
Reply
Bridget Tobin
7/28/2015 01:06:17 am
In Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, he clearly showed that the people were the problem in society. Although the government decided to eliminate books from the population, it was the people who truly chose to sit back and not try and challenge this terrible rule. The people became content with TV instead of books, and nobody questioned authority to try and gain their books back. That quote from Bradbury demonstrates this idea. The main character in the book, Guy Montag, is one that believes everyone is getting sucked into these TVs. Everyone sits around and watches them. Guy is talking to his wife one night and starts hollering, “Nobody listens anymore...I can’t talk to my wife; she listens to the walls (TVs). I just want someone to hear what I have to say” (Bradbury 82). Montag realizes the problem with the world and that no one takes the time to sit down, read a book, and think, or listen to someone say something that would pass on useful knowledge. An example of Bradbury’s theory following through in our real world now is that people are getting so attached to their mobile phones...they are practically mini TVs that are always in peoples’ hands and eyes are always caught staring at the bright screen. Car accidents happen frequently as a result of these handheld devices and everyone is becoming so attached to them. There are not a lot of people who step up to try and have people ease off of their devices and just sit down, think, learn, and absorb the beauties of life. A man invites Montag to sit alongside them while he is running away from the police one night, and there are five men laying around a fire. Montag had lived in a house with the TV on a continuum and had finally stopped to “[listen] to the warm crackle of flames” (Bradbury 146). Montag had always created fires and never realized the beauty it brought to the world. This scene shows me that sometimes people need to stop and observe their surroundings to realize how gorgeous the world is and to take in everything. In conclusion, this book shows readers that the people are the ones that can change the world and make it a better place; the government can set the guidelines, but the people do not always need to do exactly what they say.
Reply
Chloe Sharpe
7/28/2015 01:16:08 am
In his acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury extrapolates trends of his day, especially the impact of television on daily lives; however, I think smart phones in particular have replaced television as the real concern. The author focuses on the isolation and detachment between people as a result of captivating technologies like the “Parlor.” The Parlor, as Bradbury describes it, is a three-wall room in which a fictional family includes the viewers in their daily life (creating the illusion of connection), showing similar characteristics to modern-day television. Bradbury’s point in making this connection to television and entertainment in general was to show how TV today is making humans disconnected, anti-social, and withdrawn, and he demonstrates this aloofness very well through his character, Mildred. When the main character, Guy Montag, comes home (looking for consolation after a hard day at work) to see Mildred, she only greets him with preoccupation while focusing on her wants of a fourth-wall for the Parlor: “‘It's really fun….How long you figure before we save up and get the fourth wall torn out and a fourth wall-TV put in? It's only two thousand dollars.’ ‘That's one-third of my yearly pay.’ ‘It's only two thousand dollars,’ she replied. ‘And I should think you'd consider me sometimes….We could do without a few things.’ ‘We're already doing without a few things to pay for the third wall. It was put in only two months ago, remember?’ ‘Is that all it was?’ She sat looking at him for a long moment. ‘Well, good-bye, dear,’” (Bradbury 19). This quote clearly shows the grave seriousness of human’s absorption of technology. Millie has become so focused on her own wants of a fourth wall that she is too selfish to hear herself speak. She is putting her own bare necessities (and Montag’s, too) after her entertainment—that is scary. Additionally, Bradbury shows the readers that the Parlor and television have gone so far as to make the viewers think they are actually in the show and to think of the written fictional characters as one of them. This is demonstrated when Mildred tells Guy about the play she’s watching, when Guy says, “‘All right if you say so….What's on this afternoon?’ he asked tiredly. She didn't look up from her script again. ‘Well, this is a play [that] comes on the wall-to-wall circuit in ten minutes….They write the script with one part missing. It's a new idea. The home-maker, that's me, is the missing part. When it comes time for the missing lines, they all look at me out of the three walls and I say the lines….Isn't that fun, Guy? It's sure fun,’ she said” (Bradbury 20). Again, the horrifying seriousness of this detachment from real life is written well by Bradbury. Mildred’s insensitivity towards the household is a direct result of her captivation by the television. One could go as far to say that Mildred thinks of these characters as her real family, or is unable to tell the difference….
Reply
Makenzie Lowrey
7/28/2015 02:57:02 am
Ignorance is bliss, but it's also empowering. Ignorant people often choose to sit back, because they're happy with the way things are. If it isn't affecting them, why should they bother to try to change anything? Except it does affect them. Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451" reflects on the ignorance of people and how damaging it can be to society. During a scene in "The Sieve and the Sand", two women came to the Montags' house to watch the "family" on their parlor wall. Montag comes into the room with a book, and Faber (communicating through a radio) ask what he's trying to prove. Montag yells, "Scare the hell out of them, that's what, scare the living daylights out!" (Bradbury 98) Montag is one of the only people left in that world that is awake and aware. He hopes to scare these ignorant people awake by reading to them. He accomplishes this, but pays the price. Montag's wife leaves him (and eventually dies), his house is burned to ashes, and he's forced to live the rest of his days as an unwanted fugitive. Another thing Bradbury meant to touch on is the constant rebirth of civilization itself. At the end of the novel, Granger begins talking about the phoenix, and uses it to describe society. "We know all the damn silly things we've done for a thousand years and as long as we know that and always have it around where we can see it, someday we'll stop making the goddamn funeral pyres and jumping in the middle of them." (Bradbury 163) Granger's hope is that, if there are a couple of people to remember our mistakes, we'll improve until maybe we won't need to anymore. I agree with Bradbury in saying that it's the people who were to blame in his novel. The state is only as powerful as the people let it be. It was their ignorance and fear of the truth that got books burned in the first place. Now, they sit in silence as all hell breaks loose around them.
Reply
Kristin Dingelstedt
7/28/2015 02:57:54 am
In his novel “Fahrenheit 451,” Ray Bradbury wants his audience to realize that technology is detrimental to society, especially with regards to one’s relationships. Guy Montag, Bradbury’s protagonist, does not understand his wife, Mildred’s, obsession with the television. She always seems to enjoy watching her programs more than spending time with him, and would rather be with her television “families” than her real husband. Mildred is not even troubled by the fact that she cannot remember important details about her marriage, including where she and Montag first met. Bradbury indicates Montag’s frustration with this technological advancement for ruining his love life, with his statement, “Well, wasn't there a wall between him and Mildred, when you came down to it? Literally not one wall, but so far, three” (Bradbury 44). Montag feels that the televisions in their home destroyed the connection he and his wife once had. Similar to the idea Bradbury proposed in his novel more than half of a century ago, recent surveys show that a considerable amount of people believe technology is weakening their relationships with friends, relatives and partners. Smartphones, tablets, computers and televisions all take away attention from loved ones. In an article from the Irish Examiner, “Always Turned On: The Negative Impact Technology has on Relations,” many psychotherapists agree that the internet is an unnecessary distraction in relationships, as substantiated when Lisa O’Hara states, “It can have a stronger draw than the person sitting next to you. You can be in the same room as a person and yet you're not really there,” (Irish Examiner). O’Hara implies the idea that when any type of technological device is present, a relationship is vulnerable to destruction because one cannot control his desire to use the gadget. Through “Fahrenheit 451,” Ray Bradbury allows the reader to realize that technology’s worst effect is its tendency to gradually damages all relationships, and this message can still be applicable to anybody in today’s world, confirming Bradbury’s concerns that technology, whether it be television or smartphones, will never be beneficial to the public in any way.
Reply
Roshni Tyler
7/28/2015 06:32:27 am
In Ray Bradbury’s novel he does prove points about how the government can have a heavy effect on the people in the society, but at the same time the effects on the people were also their faults. With them just sitting back and not taking charge and watching more and more TV instead of trying to bring back books, the effects of the TV effected them in a negative way. The main character Guy Montag realized this, he started to realize this when he started to have conversations with a special girl named Clarisse. Their conversations were real, they got to talk about personal subjects and they actually were able to hold a conversation. With Clarisse being part of Guy’s life, his outlook on the world starts to change. He starts to think against his job and he starts to think that the TV shows that his wife and the people are watching isn't the best for them, that maybe books should come back into the society. “ is not the State- it is the people…” Ray Bradbury. Ray is trying to say that again even though the government is the one that is banning the books and trying make sure that the citizens didn't know as much as they should of, its the peoples fault that they should be the ones to try and make an effort to change the situation. “ There was only the girl walking with him now, her face bright as snow in the moonlight, and he knew she was working his questions around, seeking the best answers she could possibly give” (Bradbury 7). The description that Guy said to describe Clarisse shows how different she is compared to most people. Also shows how even though the government is telling them to do one thing she is doing the other which is what most people should be doing and is what Bradbury believes that they should be doing.
Reply
Rachel Kline
7/28/2015 07:54:59 am
In Ray Bradbury’s book, Fahrenheit 451, he brings up that the cause of decline in knowledge of people is not because of the government, but because of the overuse of technology by the people, television specifically. The main character in Fahrenheit 451, Guy Montag, has a wife, Mildred, who only cares about her “family” on the television. She would rather spend time in the parlor being with the “family” than being with her husband. Mildred is talking to Guy and says, “‘Books aren’t people. You read and I look all around, but there isn’t anybody! ... Now my ‘family’ is people. They tell me things: I laugh, they laugh!’” (Bradbury 73). This quote demonstrates the strong opposition towards the value of books because they are not people. This is an ironic statement because Mildred does not like to be around real people like her husband, but instead, the fake people on her television screen. This statement is also very relevant in modern day. A lot of people would rather be alone with their phone or their laptop or TV rather than being with another person and having to give them all their attention. Being anti-social is much easier than having to put effort into listening to another person and keeping up a conversation with them. Brianna Ellison, a writer for “The Breeze” makes a very similar point by saying, “With a focus on conversations occurring through technology, we neglect any upkeep to maintain our relationships with those physically near us” (Ellison). Bradbury’s predictions are correct. People have stopped being social and sharing knowledge because of technology. Walking into a restaurant, most of what is seen is people “spending time together” while not even looking at each other but instead being on their phone the whole time. They talk about nothing or very little that does not have to do with technology if they even talk at all. Knowledge is lost among people and cannot be shared. Our addiction to technology destroys the pursuit of knowledge, leaving us powerless and ignorant. The accuracy of Bradbury’s predictions is terrifying when modern day is represented in his book.
Reply
Nicole Gaillard
7/28/2015 08:03:11 am
In Fahrenheit 451, a classic written by Ray Bradbury a very unwelcoming society is pushing resources away instead of using them. Although the government was the reason books were destroyed no one thought to stand up for what they wanted or eagerly wanted to find. Therefore I blame the people, for this none except for a handful were courageous enough to become the smart ones of the environment, but they all went down as well. TV was the new source of "knowledge" and people were delighted since it was an easier way of doing things. No one wanted to dare put effort towards something when there was simply a more accessible way to engulf it. TV is now the number go to for these individuals instead of reading. In our society today it seems as though this is also becoming a frightening reality. In the novel it says, "Number one: Do you know why books such as this are so important? Because they have quality. And what does the word quality mean? To me it means texture. This book has pores. It has features." (Bradbury 83). It seems as though so few really cherish books and how much treasure can be reached deep within, you just have to find it. See, that's the whole problem people are becoming lazier and lazier each and everyday because of the fact that we have the technology to have something do it for us. People take advantage of the given technology in this world and in the novel, people are so overly obsessed in our world today that they'll kill someone just to get the latest phone or whatever they desire. Mildred, his wife can not understand why books were ever a thought in someone's mind and it proves it here, "He searched the house and found the books where Mildred had stacked them behind the refrigerator. Some were missing and he knew that she had started on her own slow process of dispersing the dynamite in her house, stick by stick." (Bradbury 102). Mildred, so unfazed by the outside world of adventures that are in these paper back things called books just relaxes inside zoned out watching TV. Our society is slowly caving in to TV and turning our backs on books. We are just relying on technology to take over for us. Soon robots and things will take over our jobs and it will take away from our learning opportunities. This is becoming a huge issue that we need to address or our world and generations to come are heading down a dark road ahead.
Reply
Finn Smith
7/28/2015 09:49:20 am
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury expresses how the people are their own enemies and that their constant use of technology is causing them to be less aware of the things going on around them. I agree that this is not really a novel about government censorship but instead a warning against the danger created by excessive technology. What he means by this is that the people are distracting themselves with the constant use of technology, specifically television, so that they do not have to focus on what the government and people around them are doing. They stayed silent as the government began the ban of books and they did nothing to stop it. People became so distracted by television that they stopped caring about the world around them. This is illustrated when the main character, Guy Montag, sees the bomb about to be dropped on the city. He thinks of his wife, Mildred, in her hotel room staring at the television. He sees her “leaning towards the great shimmering walls of color and motion where the family talked and talked and talked to her, and where the family prattled and chatted and said her name and smiled at her and said nothing of the bomb that was an inch, now a half inch, now a quarter inch from the top of the hotel”(Bradbury 159). She is so wrapped up in the show that she never noticed the bomb that was going to kill her. This shows how scary technology can be, it can dull us down so much that we will not see our own death coming let alone what the government is doing. In my opinion, Bradbury is absolutely correct. In the world today, digital technology is everywhere. It never leaves us. One of the main reasons we have all of this technology is to have a distraction. We use smartphones so we are distracted from our boring lives. We live in a virtual world, not in the present. We look at our phones so we do not have to face the fact that most of us are doing nothing to better society. Just like in Fahrenheit 451, we are distracting ourselves with technology so that we do not have to look at what is going on around us. If we do not stop to look around, we may end up being our own enemies and we might end up living in a society not far off from the one in Fahrenheit 451. That is, if we are not living in it already.
Reply
Tyler Brunson
7/28/2015 11:13:48 am
Reply
Olivia Barkey
7/29/2015 01:16:06 am
In Ray Bradbury's novel Fahrenheit 415 he expresses how the media, mostly TV, can have a detrimental affect on the people. The constant watching of television in the book causes the people to become not in touch with their surroundings. In fact, the reader could go as far as to say that the people have become brainwashed by the TV. I agree with what Bradbury said about his novel "(Bradbury) says the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government.". Montag was became aware of this media overload after he became exposed to books. And when he tries to talk to his wife Mildred about it, she doesn't even listen! She is too enraptured with what is on television to hear what Guy has to say. As he says in the novel, “Nobody listens anymore...I can’t talk to my wife; she listens to the walls. I just want someone to hear what I have to say” (Bradbury 82). This society of not listening is leading to its demise. The people are becoming unintelligent and unaware. The practice of burning books "for the good" is backwards and just not right. And all the people need to do is listen for once. They listen to the TV, sure. But they don't listen to themselves. They aren't listening to their concise. This is why Mildred dies. Because she cared more about what the TV had to say than what her own mind and survival instinct had to tell her. In this book, TV causes the detriment of society. Not the government.
Reply
Lauren Berbrick
7/29/2015 03:00:52 am
In one of Ray Bradbury's famous novels, Fahrenheit 451, he shows valid points of how society created the problems for people. Instead of reading books and learning from them, people sit and watch the TV screen for endless hours which leads them to not knowing as much. Some things that are "programmed" into our head are from watching the dull TV and being persuaded by what they show us. One of the main characters in this novel, Mildred, cares mostly about her "family" which is shown through the TV. Bradbury tries to prove his point by stating that books are very important and should be brought upon to everyone. You can easily see that throughout the novel Mildred and Guy Montag's relationship slowly took a downfall once books came into play. Back and forth they exchanged what they had to say each on their part. Mildred says to Guy Montag, "Books aren't people. You read and I look all around, but there isn't anybody" (Bradbury 67). Mildred and Guy Montag's relationship is falling apart for the reason of his frustration of the books. They both come from opposite ends of this argument and both think highly of their opinion. Guy Montag is someone who closely observes his surroundings. As a fireman, starting fires is "beauty" to him. Technology has its advantages and disadvantages. Mildred sees that the world of technology has changed generations in positive ways and does not specifically see the damage it has caused for our society. Guy Montag notices what technology has done to our world and tries to stop it, which causes the fight with his wife, Mildred. Ray Bradbury expresses the wrongs and rights of what the world of technology and books have brought us to. There is no right or wrong to this settled argument, what really matters is how society turns this world in to generation by generation.
Reply
Rashaad Pratt
7/29/2015 03:46:31 am
Ray Bradbury, author of Fahrenheit 451, believes that the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is the people, not the State, that the media has dwindled the human mind down to a simpler state. This ideal of Bradbury's is correct by all means. The media, mainly Television, has dulled the mind to idiotic proportions. This state of stupidity has been not only spreading through the world but increasing, forming a population of the mentally challenged and millions of diagnostics for ADHD. Within Fahrenheit 451 there is the main character Montag living in an America where books have been banned, and the protagonist fights to bring them back into the American lifestyle. It is also revealed the although the government enforces this rule now, they just compromised with the idea, its the people who rid the country of them. The character Beatty implies this idea in his statement, "Surely you remember the boy who was exceptionally bright. Did most of the reciting and answering while others sat like idiots. .. Wasn't that the boy you selected for beatings and tortures after hours?"(Bradbury 58). There is also contribution to this idea further in Beatty's speech when he claims, "Our civilization is so vast we must not upset the minorities... Colored people don't like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don't like Uncle Tom's Cabin. Burn it."(Bradbury 59). Destroying these books was just the governments way of dealing with the peoples problem in a way that most would accept.In the modern world, the whole world is complying to the demands of the common, simplified man. Taking a look at the movie industry, there is a great rise in comedic movies than anything else. The movie the Matrix, made in 1999, made a profit of 39.8 million, and the movie Intersteller made about 47.5 million on its opening weekend in 2014. That is a steady increase, however, the movie The Emperor's New Grove made 13,6 million in 2000. This movie is nonsensical and is more or less pointless comedy, the opposite of the Matrix. The Matrix is a serious drama that made more money than its counterpart. In the current year, 2015, the movie Minions came out. The movie is about short yellow creatures traveling Earth. The movie has no subtitles and the creatures speak a language not know to any culture on this Earth. The movie Minions made 115.7 million in its opening weekend. This is over 3 times as much as Intersteller. This shows the the common man is more prone to pay attention to nonsense. Colorful things that don't require thought to understand. The world is just com[promising with this. This is why most of the movies that are being written are comedies and horrors. They do not take a level of knowledge to enjoy. This is why comedy is so lazily written without any well clever jokes. Bradbury was correct in his opinion. It is the peoples fault for the decrease in intellectual thinking and dulled minds. For the simple and basic world they all want to believe they're in. The population is growing more simple minded every year and its been getting worse every year. Thinking for one self has turned from a common ability to a rare treasure. The way of the world must change but that chance may already be gone.
Reply
Lauren Keale
7/29/2015 05:24:35 am
In the novel, “Fahrenheit 451”, written by intellectual author Ray Bradbury, he writes about a society controlled by technology and the government. Bradbury wants his audience to apprehend how the evil comes from people too fearful to speak up for what they believe, even when it comes to improving the community. In the novel, Bradbury illustrates how if the members of the town had spoken up earlier, they would have been able to strain from the current beliefs in the society. The people of the society would be able to read books and believe what they want without being punished for it. For example, Faber, a character in the novel says, “I said nothing. I’m one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the guilty but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself (Bradbury 82).” Within this quote readers understand how Faber had a chance to make it right but didn’t and is now facing the consequences. I believe that Bradbury is trying to tell his readers the importance of speaking up right when one thinks oppositely of what is going on. If not, things can turn for the worse such as intense events that are going on around us and in history. One example of that in society today is child labor that is a big problem over seas. Faber represents the customers who don’t speak up and out against it but continue to buy the clothes made from the children. Ray Bradbury writes about an important theme that he represents through the character Faber about speaking up for what is right against authority and not becoming apart of the evil.
Reply
Molly O'Mara
7/29/2015 05:33:19 am
Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, demonstrates a time period where people are controlled by the government and technology. Through this novel, Bradbury wants his readers to understand that people keeping their opinions to themselves and not standing up for what they believe in can form evil. Bradbury demonstrates that people in the corrupt society in the novel could have made a better world for themselves if they had spoken up. A main character in the novel, Faber, says “And when finally they set the structure to burn the books, using the firemen, I grunted a few times and subsided, for there were no others grunting or yelling with me, by then. Now it’s too late.” (Bradbury 82). This quote illustrates how Faber could have spoken up then realized no one was arguing with him and backed down. This can easily relate to modern times in the sense of racism. While you think you’re individual actions are not making an impact, the littlest acts against other races are adding to the overall evilness of the situation. All in all, Bradbury’s theme could help teach people the importance of speaking up.
Reply
Stephen Navitsky
7/29/2015 05:38:12 am
In Ray Bradbury's famous novel "Fahrenheit 451" many opinions and arguments could be made to determine what the theme or message of the novel is. A clear theme I have noticed throughout the novel would be the idea of Knowledge vs. Ignorance. Guy Montag, Faber, and Beatty's struggle revolves around the tension between knowledge and ignorance. The fireman's duty is to destroy knowledge (books) and promote ignorance in order to equalize the population. Montag's encounters with the old woman, Clarise, start the fire in him about doubt in this approach. This approach destroys the normal, regular, lifestyle of ignorance he shared with mostly everyone in his community. "If you hide your ignorance, no one will hit you and you will never learn." (Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451) This quote is saying that you have to be ignorant before you are able to realize a change that can be made. Montag experienced this by being ignorant along with everyone else and being able to spot the difference and make it. That was a big challenge for Guy in the novel and also a challenge to some people in our daily lives. The writer of a article "Knowledge Is Power, Ignorance Is Bliss: Happiness Is Striking The Perfect Balance" named Paul Hudson stated "You have to chose for yourself what you learn and what you ignore". This quote falls right in line with the message Bradbury was going with in the novel. The quote states that YOU make the decision to learn or to be ignorant, and that is what Guy experienced in the novel, Knowledge vs. Ignorance
Reply
Rebecca Crosby
7/29/2015 06:37:54 am
Ray Bradbury's’ most famous novel, Fahrenheit 451, is not about the government but is about how the people can no longer think for themselves. In this well known novel, no one reads books anymore, but entertains themselves with “the walls” or “the parlor”. These talking walls are basically our equivalent to our reality television shows today. Our protagonist, Montag the “Fireman” asks his wife, "Will you turn the parlour off?" (page 48). "That's my family," his wife responded. This quote demonstrates that the wife, Mildred is so infatuated with the “walls” and it’s programming that she believes that the “wall” characters are real. The wall characters are programmed to speak her name out loud, and to have other interactions that make her believe they are part of her “family”. Bradbury’s prediction that in the future, people would read books less and become more obsessed and attached to television was spot on, in my opinion. Nowadays people are extremely attached to reality television (like “Keeping up with the Kardashians” and “The Housewives”) in addition to “binge watching” their favorite shows and becoming more emotionally attached to the characters in them. According to L.A Weekly, “Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.” I believe that if the Western World continues on this path of television and technology 24/7, we run the risk of creating a non-reading and non-thinking dystopian society, as written about in Fahrenheit 451.
Reply
Sarah Keale
7/29/2015 07:57:33 am
In one of Ray Bradbury's most inspiring and meaningful novels, "Fahrenheit 451" people can differ and conflict on what the main theme or message he tried to convey while writing this piece. One of the most significant themes that stood out to me what that hiding your opinion on what you think is right can form more evil than the physical activities creating the problem. Faber, who was one of the main characters in this novel, said a few sentences that really caught my eye and summed up the theme of this book onto one portion of a page. He said, "Montag, you are looking at a coward. I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing." (Bradbury 82) What Faber was trying to say here is that him not speaking up, and telling society how what they were doing is wrong, created most of the evil. People need to speak up and voice their opinions by finding that small bit of braveness and courage inside of them. The plot of Fahrenheit 451 was how the town’s firefighters were burning all of the books because they wanted people to be happy and not think about the sad things in the world. People were turning into robots and Faber was one of the people that could have rebelled when he saw everything changing. By him not voicing his opinions and what was correct, things got worse and it started ruining the world. Even nowadays, TV, society, the Internet, and different types of social media have been taking over books, articles, newspapers, magazines, etc. We need to find the good and educational lessons in the things that are not digital or electronically ran. The society can twist our minds into having one opinion about a topic, which can be involved in racism as an example. If people don’t speak up about problems like this they can get worse and worse, and our world can become a horrible place. Voicing your opinion is only needed by a little bit of courage inside of you, and with this courage you can do something extraordinary.
Reply
Genevieve White
7/29/2015 07:59:08 am
In the classic novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury demonstrates how it is not the government to blame for the technological takeover but the citizens’ fault. They question nothing that the government does. I very much agree with the Ray Bradbury’s statement that the antagonist is the people, not the government.
Reply
Amy Lonergan
7/29/2015 09:32:33 am
In Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451, he writes about how a future city becomes engrossed and taken over by future technology, and the society’s government. Many people while reading this novel thought it was the government’s fault that the society was like this. When Ray Bradbury heard this he was shocked, and wanted to put all the misinterpretations to bed. In a profile he expressed his mind by telling the author, the author then published it saying “(Bradbury) said the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State-it is the people…He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government.” This is shown in his novel when one of the characters Faber said, “No one wanted them back. No one missed them. And then the Government, seeing how advantageous it was to have people reading only about passionate lips and he fist in the stomach, circulated the situation with your fire-eaters” (Bradbury 89). What he meant in these statements is you cannot blame the government when no one ever stood up for the books. Everyone just went along with the law, never questioning it, or trying to change it. This allowed the government to take advantage of situation, having it escalade. Today we still struggle with technology controlling our lives. If you look around yourself in a crowed area at least every other person if not everyone will have a smart phone in their hand. Those devices although helpful in desperate situations they also distract us causing major accidents while driving, distracting us causing us to miss major milestones in lives of the ones we care about, and they also allow people to have access to us at every moment of our lives so you never really leave work do you. Ray Bradbury was correct on his theory that technology ruins our lives and we the citizens of society have the opportunity to either stop it or let it go allowing the government to advance because of it.
Reply
Erin Ostrowski
7/29/2015 11:04:54 am
In the classic novel by Ray Bradbury, a futuristic America is riddled with senseless war and people just sit around, sucked in by their life-size TVs. Nothing is put on TV that could make people think or cause controversy so everyone can live perfectly happy lives and books are illegal to own in order to keep people ignorant of many touchy subjects. Citizens can’t make political decisions; they watch everything unfold in front of them in overdone television displays. The only political event regular citizens are involved in are elections. Even then, the votes are only given based on appearance and other meaningless things. For example, Mildred Montag and her friends discuss the previous election as follows, “Fat, too, and didn’t dress to hide it. No wonder the landslide was for Winston Noble. Even their names helped,” (Bradbury 97). The women didn’t even consider how the two candidates felt about things like war and making their country a better place; the only thing they cared about was the face of their country not the brain. Technology is making people mindless and shallow. Mildred even defends the ‘family’ (the actors on TV) when she and Montag have an argument. That is the top priority of most people in this novel. To continue, people can’t do anything for themselves and with books being illegal, they don’t even have the urge to learn and make society educated again. I agree that it is the people that chose technology over knowledge so banning books didn’t make a difference to them. It is their fault that the world around them turned out the way it did. An example of how this is happening in modern times is that people are always on their cell phones. We would rather look down at our phones than interact with people around us. Technology gives us a reason not to talk to people and, like Mildred, treat it like a person that we can’t live without. Our society could turn into this dystopia in a blink of an eye if we’re not careful. Books like Fahrenheit 451 really put things into perspective for us which is why they are so important. Another quote that supports my opinion that the people are at fault in this novel is when Mildred shows us how obsessed she is with television, “How long you figure before we save up and get the fourth wall torn out and a fourth wall-TV put in? It’s only two thousand dollars,” (Bradbury 20). It costs a third of their annual income but that doesn’t put any guilt on her conscience, she just cannot be put at ease until she gets that fourth TV in her parlor. Overall, people in this novel are the ones who created this mess of a society where there is no knowledge of anything useful and we must also be careful and learn from this novel so we don’t let today’s technology take over us like TVs took over them.
Reply
Hannah Daitz
7/29/2015 11:04:59 am
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury was making the point that the government and TV programs and news are not the problems in society, but are the people who mindlessly consume the information and agree with it. In order for the government to control the people, they had to limit what was shown on TV and broadcasted on the radio, and eliminate information from other sources, i.e., books. Books were seen as negative because they allow people to learn about different things, expand their knowledge, and have different ideas. To be intelligent and have a mind of your own was frowned upon because then you would question the government’s motives. When people are given the same limited information, they all begin to think alike. This is supported by the quote, “…the word ‘intellectual,’ of course, became the swear word it deserved to be.…We must all be alike. Not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal.” (Bradbury 58). So the problem with the people in the town was that even though the government limited what was being shown on TV, they were satisfied by what was given to them and they never questioned it. Today, people will believe anything they hear, read, or see in the media without questioning the source. Often young adults will check their twitter or gossip sites to get information on top celebrities regardless of the accuracy. Adults usually get their news from newspapers or TV shows that support their preexisting viewpoint. They read gossip magazines and believe the stories even though they know they can’t possibly be real. Most people don’t listen to or look for another viewpoint because they are not open-minded and they want to be entertained. This is supported by an article Joe Keohane wrote in the Boston Globe in 2010. He states, “If we believe something about the world, we are more likely to passively accept as truth any information that confirms our beliefs, and actively dismiss information that doesn’t.” (Keohane) This relates back to the novel because Montag’s wife, Mildred, grew up with the idea that books were bad, so when Montag brought them to her and tried to encourage her to read them, she refused and turned him in. In summary, Ray Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451 to show that the people who don’t challenge their minds are the problem with society, not the government.
Reply
Trey Soya
7/29/2015 12:23:38 pm
In his novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury reveals how technology, such as television, harms society and makes us less intellectual. Throughout the novel Bradbury writes about how advancements in technology have had a negative effect on society. At one point in the novel, Captain Beatty goes to Montag’s house to talk to him about how the world came to be. Captain Beatty says, “School is shortened, discipline relaxed, philosophies, histories, languages dropped, English and spelling gradually neglected,” “Why learn anything save pressing buttons, pulling switches, fitting nuts and bolts?” (Bradbury 55-56). Captain Beatty means as time went on, technology became more advanced so there was less of a need for people to learn, because all they had to do was press buttons instead of using their brain. Captain Beatty was basically saying that society has become less and less smart. In TIME Magazine, Annie Paul writes about how technology affects us today. She writes about researchers conducting an experiment on children texting. The first of two groups had children who texted, and the second group had children who did not text. In the end, Paul writes “kids who sent three or more text messages a day had significantly lower scores on literacy tests than children who sent none.”(Paul 5). This experiment shows that technology is becoming harmful to society in an intellectual way.
Reply
Suubi Mondesir
7/29/2015 02:32:56 pm
In Ray Bradbury's novel, Fahrenheit 451 he believes many of the issues brought up throughout the novel are not due to an oppressive government, but due to the people who value entertainment over knowledge. The dulling effects of technology, but more specifically television cause a large part of that problem. The television creates a mindless obedience in the people because it gives them a sense of entertainment, which translates into happiness. The following quote shows this mindless behavior of the people when they are asked to open their doors and windows to find a “fugitive” named Montag, late in the night. “Everyone in every house in every street open a front or rear door or look from the windows…. the doors opened” (Bradbury 138). This quote is a perfect example of mindless obedience because there is no knowledge being passed around that is allowing the people to think. For example no one questioned why they were asked to open their doors so late at night or even just disobeyed the request simply because they didn’t feel like getting up, which goes back to why this society is failing. A lack of knowledge and a need for entertainment is the problem not an oppressive government, which further explains Bradbury’s point. Another example of mindless obedience is a character named Mildred. In my opinion Mildred exemplifies the perfect role model for this society. She mindlessly follows the rules, loves the TV parlors and most of all wants to remain entertained and happy. The following quote depicts Mildred’s uninsightful mindset. “Did you hear Beatty? Did you listen to him? He knows all the answers. He’s right. Happiness is important. Fun is everything” (Bradbury 65). This quote shows Mildred blindly following and believing instead of thinking and questioning, another example of why the people are the problem, not an oppressive government.
Reply
Peter Gibbons
7/30/2015 12:54:28 am
In his novel, “Fahrenheit 451,” Bradbury believed that new technology such as television was harmful to people’s intellect, but he did not foresee the benefits and knowledge that come from the Internet. In Bradbury’s dystopian view of future society, people are not allowed to read books and it is the job of firemen to burn the books. Instead of reading, people spend most of their time watching television, which has a dulling effect on their minds. Bradbury has the fire chief, Beatty, explain that this mindlessness was chosen by people, not imposed by their government.
Reply
Ruthselvi Gonzalez
7/30/2015 03:05:51 am
In his novel, Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury decides to explain how technology began to take over. Many people lost interest in books and became more interested about the TV. They feel as if the TV gives the same information as books do and they now think it is useless, which is why Guy Montag does what he does. Guy Montag was a fireman whose job was to burn books as well as homes. Bradbury said “(Bradbury) says the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State - it is the people... He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government.” I agree with Bradbury. Guy never questioned about his job, all he knew was to burn every book he see’s. Everything he had on his mind changed until he met a girl named Clarisse. Clarisse was different she did not feel the same way as others did. Which is why I agree with Ray Bradbury. Clarisse said “You know, I’m not afraid of you at all. So many people are. Afraid of firemen, I mean. But you’re just a man, after all.”(Bradbury 7). No one stepped up and decided to stop the fireman’s or change the fireman’s minds about burning books. Mildred, Guy’s wife, was one of the people that didn’t care about books, her eyes were only focused on Technology. Not her husband. Technology changed people's’ lives and how they see things. In that society all they cared about was technology except for Guy Montag and Clarisse McClellan. People caused the burning of the books, it was not the state.
Reply
Zoë Kelleher
7/30/2015 03:18:43 am
In his well known novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury demonstrates various themes and conflicts on a city full of citizens corrupt by their own government and new technology. One of the themes that was brought to my attention was the power that technology had over the city. The TV was the main enemy throughout the novel. These modernized wall to wall TV screens were a bright and “happy” substitute for all knowledge, making people uninterested in literature. Beatty, the city's fire captain, was the main supporter of the televisions. He said, “Any man who can take a TV wall apart and put it back together again, and most men can, nowadays, is happier than any man who tries to slide-rule, measure, and equate the universe, which just won't be measured or equated without making a man feel bestial and lonely.” (Bradbury 61) In this quote, Beatty is stating that the TV provides happiness because it is easy, and doesn’t require thinking, while learning causes unhappiness because it demands thought and difficult tasks. This is the reasoning behind why the government made all literature illegal. Mildred, Guy Montag's wife, was one of the many lifeless drones that watched TV all day. She replaced her family, and friendships for the fake families shown in programs played on the television. People like Mildred hid behind these artificial lives that technology provided, so they didn’t have to face reality. Bradbury’s theme can relate to social media today. Social media plays a huge role in society nowadays. Like Mildred uses the fake families on TV to provide temporary happiness, people can use their social media accounts to show a ‘happy’ and fraudulent version of themselves, masking their true identity. This leads me to believe that Bradbury’s fear of technology corrupting society is accurate, and is a serious problem throughout the world.
Reply
Savannah Suarez
7/30/2015 04:34:39 am
In the novel “Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury, he introduces the theme that the people are controlled by technology. When the government in this society tries to tell the people what to do, everyone listens even if they don’t agree, because they are too afraid to speak their opinion. The government in this society does not want the people to be more intelligent than they. There is also an ironic point that is made in this novel, that point being the fireman don’t put out the fires, they start them. The item that the firemen focus on burning is books. The burn the books because in this society the people don’t read, they just sit around and watch television. Since the government has banned books, it makes the opportunity for the people’s education very slim. One of the fireman that we get to meet as a reader would be Guy Montag. He has never really thought too hard about what he does as anything special. He just thinks of it as a job. Suddenly his views on his occupation changed after he met a girl named Clarisse. Clarisse is far from normal according to Guy and his society. She wants to learn, loves nature, and thinks out side of the box, which Guy is not used to seeing. Clarisse introduces Guy to a new way of thinking, and really opens his eyes to the world. “’I rarely watch the ‘parlor walls’ or go to the races or Fun Parks. So I’ve lots of time for crazy thoughts, I guess. Have you seen the two hundred-foot-long billboards in the country beyond town? Did you know that once billboards were only twenty feet long? But cars started rushing by so quickly they had to stretch the advertising out so it would last.’ I did not know that!’ Guy Montag laughed abruptly” (Bradbury 9). After Guy was telling Clarisse that she thinks too much, Clarisse started spewing out facts that she knew, and ended up impressing Guy. Clarisse is probably one of the few people in this society that thinks about why things happen, or how they happen. She shows Guy that it’s ok to think for yourself and not have other people do it for you. Mildred, Guys wife, is a great example of how the government has practically taken away her ability to think for herself. Mildred would rather sit in the Parlor and watch television all day than be with her husband. She is so influenced by technology, that she even thinks that the people on the television are her real family. “’Now, said Mildred, my family is people. They tell me things: I laugh, they laugh! And the colors!’ Yes I know.’ and besides if Captain Beatty knew about those books-‘ She thought about it. Her face grew amazed and then horrified. ‘He might come and burn the house and the family” (Bradbury 73). Mildred ended ups getting riled up when Guy brought out a book. Guy starts to talk about all of the things they are missing in the world, because everyone is glued to their television. In the novel, Ray Bradbury is trying to make the point that even though the government is telling the people what to do, that they still have choices and should stand up for themselves if they want to make a difference. The people are too afraid to go against what the government tells them to do, that they won’t stand for their beliefs.
Reply
Maggie Davis
7/30/2015 04:42:39 am
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, the author, Ray Bradbury, wants his readers to understand that it is the people, rather than the government that are responsible for the destruction and evil that technology has created. In this novel, books are banned causing knowledge, education and thought to disappear. People no longer read and form their own thoughts, rather they just watch TV and are influenced by whatever the media says. Ultimately this is no ones fault but the people because they chose to watch TV rather than fight for books to not be banned. To illustrate, while Montag is talking to Faber, he says " I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing. I'm one of those innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the 'guilty', but I did not speak up and thus became guilty myself" (Bradbury 82). Clearly, Montag saw what was happening when the books were being banned. He realized that eventually people will no longer think for themselves and develop their own ideas, instead technology will do it for them. Due to the fact that he realized this and chose not to speak up when he could, he has to live with the guilt of knowing that he could have possibly saved the books and knowledge. This idea in this quote, that people are responsible for the evil created, is portrayed in society in a multitude of different ways. To illustrate, all around the world innocent people are facing poverty and hunger, and all around the world people watch it happen and choose to do nothing about it. Many people will walk down the streets and see homeless people struggling to survive, and rather than giving them money, they will grab their child's hand and pull them away from the person. It is the people like this that create more evil and destruction by not helping others out and taking action when they can; they just go back to worrying about their families rather than other innocent families struggling to stay alive. Ultimately, it is clear that Bradbury wants his readers to understand that it is not the government that creates evil, rather it is the people who chose not to speak up and take action.
Reply
Emma Flynn
7/30/2015 05:46:45 am
Author Ray Bradbury wrote the book Fahrenheit 451 focusing a lot on the notion that citizens were more concerned about the nonsense on tv then what the strict government was doing right under there noses. As you read you are made to see how the people are enablers to the government's actions. This novel was essentially about a disturb society that enable the government was able to go around doing as they wish, because the people were way too caught up in useless tv to care. Characters like Mildred and her friends were seen as the everyday person in this book, and show how unconcerned citizens truly are about the society they live in. A conversations between Mildred and Mrs. Phelps first talks of Mrs. Phelps husband fighting at war, but goes on to say “ Did you see the Clara Dove five-minute romance last night in your wall?..” as if it some how relates to her situation with her husband(Bradbury 95). In situations like this characters don’t discuss the war or the possible death of her husband, but do discuss it as if it could be a tragic love story played out on their wall just as the one they saw the other night. This is a huge testimony to Bradbury’s focus throughout the book. The women are not discussing any actual problems with the war or their concerns about their husbands safety. They are talking about a tv show. In my opinion the idea that a society would be too engulfed in their tv to not care what the government is doing around them is an impossible concept. There are always going to be those people who are followers that enable others, but there will also always be people like Guy Montag, the protagonist, who are searching for more knowledge than what is being fed to him by the government. As long as we have people like Montag who states “We do need knowledge.” this could never be a possibility (Bradbury 86). To conclude, the notion that is presented by Ray Bradbury is a far out idea that could only occur if applied to one type of person.
Reply
Brandon Trani
7/30/2015 05:51:14 am
This quote from the profile of Ray Bradbury states that in his novel Fahrenheit 451 the people responsible for the dystopian world they live in is not the government, but instead the public. Bradbury felt that the public people were not resisting the dominant oppressive hand that the government used on them, and that is more dishonorable then what the government has done. In today’s society the ideal is still present that if we don’t rebel against the unjust policies in the government then we will be part of the reason the problem stands. In the novel the main character Guy Montag is a part of the problem by burning books as a fireman. This system that the government has put in place on burning books is meant to deny the public of their own opinion and free thinking. Montag is in the mindset that everything that’s happening is ok, until he meets society’s rebels in the form of Clarisse and Granger. Around the beginning of the novel Clarisse asks Montag if he’s happy with his life, to which he reply’s no. In her conversation with him she says, “You're one of the few who put up with me. That's why I think it's so strange you're a fireman, it just doesn't seem right for you, somehow.”(Bradbury 23-24) This thought of not enjoying his life leads him to think there could be a better world and that he can make a change. Granger helps with Montag’s pursuit of happiness and a better world by telling him how it is. He says that man will do incredible things with the knowledge they acquire, to inevitably just tear it down and fall into a dark age they are in now. This seems like it would discourage Montag because it implies the thought of no hope for the future of mankind. Instead Grangers finishes with this, “But that’s the wonderful thing about man; he never gets so discouraged or disgusted that he gives up doing it all over again, because he knows very well it is important and worth the doing.” (Bradbury 153) By stating this, Granger inspires Montag to further his effort in bringing back the knowledge of books to a distraught world. Without the help of Clarisse and Granger, Montag would have not been able to rebel against the ideas of no books. Their ideas and thoughts allowed him to get away from his job as a firefighter and to join in the effort to remember books for future generations.
Reply
Kaitlyn Viola
7/30/2015 07:03:10 am
In the novel by Ray Bradbury, “Fahrenheit 451”, the author believes that the main problem is not the government or actions by the government, but the people who submerge themselves in, and become hypnotized by things like new technology. I thoroughly agree with this belief for numerous reasons. In the novel, Guy Montag’s wife, Mildred, is completely mindless and corrupt by TV. Mildred is a perfect example of how people are far too influenced by TV and other technology. When she is asked, “Will you turn the parlor off?” Mildred replies, “That’s my family.” (Bradbury 46). This quote shows that Mildred would rather be engaged with her “family” on TV, then converse with her husband and have real-life experiences with the people she loves. She would rather remain in the parlor and gain artificial satisfaction from the things she sees on TV. She is content with the convenience of observation as opposed to the authenticity of experiences. The idea of society being corrupt by technology is a problem to this day. In a recent article about technology addiction, the article tells about a woman named Jennifer Hoffman who was eating dinner at a restaurant with friends on vacation. The author quotes Hoffman: “I’m so addicted to this device that I stopped mid-bite to rush to send this message.” Though the woman was on vacation, enjoying dinner with friends, she found herself distracted by technology. She is lessening her experience by letting her phone suck her in. She can no longer appreciate her current surroundings to the best of her ability, now that she has let technology get in the way, similar to the way Mildred draws her attention to TV instead of spending time with her husband and experiencing what life has to offer. In conclusion, I agree with Ray Bradbury’s belief that the problem is not the government, but the people who fall to technology.
Reply
Veyra Juarez
7/30/2015 07:05:08 am
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury presents the idea that the worse influence on society is technology rather than a strict government. He demonstrates this idea by displaying how many people don't remember or know about the world before books were prohibited and fireman had the duty of official censors, judges, and executors. People can no longer remember memorable and significant events in one’s life. Ray Bradbury defends this concept by stating “Funny, how funny, not to remember where or when you met your husband'r wife” (Bradbury 430). At this point in the novel Guy Montag is questioning his wife if she remembers when they met since it was brought to his attention by a young teenager named Clarisse McClellan that he wasn't in love. This shows again how the government never at one point deprived them of their past memories that could answer many question of how life was before but technology is brainwashing many people’s minds. Technology is consuming and brainwashing minds to forget important milestones in one’s life but not allowing for one to forget anything that happens in the “Parlor.” Another example of how technology is negatively influencing people is by changing how they view life. People will get attached to unreal things rather than living things around them. Bradbury demonstrates this idea as well when he writes, “"Will you turn the parlor off?" he asked. "That's my family."” (Bradbury 48-49). Mildred, Montag’s wife, refuses to turn the Parlor off because she is so connected with the Parlor that she has made herself believe thats its so significant and important that it can be classified as family. Family is generally known to be always put before other things and most important in one’s life. Therefore when Mildred refuses to turn the parlor off because its family it can be interpreted that she sees the parlor as more important than her husband. This again proves how technology, in specific television has disrupted her mind into pushing her to put television above her own husband’s wants and needs. This relates to many teenagers now a days. Teenagers of this generation have grown with technology surrounding them. I have personally seen how a group of friends may be gathered but are all on their phones. Instead of interacting and talking to one another they choose to check statuses and message other acquaintances. They are being brainwashed to believe that it is socially acceptable to do. Friends are choosing to be on their phones rather than making memories and socializing with others, this is an example of how technology is negatively impacting society. In addition to not socializing with friends due to technology it has caused for people’s communications skills to significantly drop. This has been allowed to happen due to how anything could be said or done through technology. Once again Ray Bradbury’s idea of how technology can harmfully impact society than a heavy-handed government continues.
Reply
Courtney Fenty
7/30/2015 07:06:27 am
In Ray Bradbury's novel, "Fahrenheit 451" he claims that it is not the government that is at fault, it is the people who refuse to take anything more from life than the entertainment of television and technology. Technology has brainwashed the lives of the people in the novel "Fahrenheit 451". They find more reality in television than they do in the world in which they live. One quote shows the relationship between Mildred and her television, " 'Will you turn the parlor off?' he asked. 'That's my family' " (Bradbury 48-49). The society has gotten so used to this constant behavior of no interaction but the entertainment of television and technology that they consider the actors to be their family. Another example of the way the society has become brainwashed is when Clarisse, one of Montag's neighbors, was talking to him about scenery and becoming more open minded. Montag says to Clarisse, "You think too many things." (Bradbury 9). The society seems to be shut off from reality. The outside world has become a blur. Talking is uncommon among the people. Their reality sits behind a screen among the parlor walls. This behavior and idea that Bradbury portrays in the novel can be connected to the real world because families in modern day would prefer to interact with others on their cell phones than with each other. In an article from HumanKinetics.com about the impacts of technology and society states that some negative effects are a lack of sociability and can cause you to become isolated. In the society in "Fahrenheit 451" Montag's wife Mildred is very much isolated and sometimes does not notice when Montag comes home. This zombie-like attitude in Ray Bradbury's book causes the society to have little to no interaction and a lost sense of reality because of the impact technology has made on their lives.
Reply
Caroline Cahill
7/30/2015 07:21:18 am
Ray Bradbury stresses a common theme in this quotation and in his famous novel, Fahrenheit 451. Bradbury believes that the people, not the government are to blame for the domination of technology and simple entertainment and the loss of books and details. It was the government who forbid books, but the people were the reason why the books were never read. No one spoke out against the government and fought for books, everyone gave in, and stopped reading. Many people opposed authority’s rules and secretly appreciated the meaning books provide but were never brave enough to question the government. Main character Guy Montag befriends a man named Faber who is one of these people afraid to stand up for their beliefs of knowledge and meaning. Faber admits to this saying, “I’m one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the ‘guilty’ but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself,” (Bradbury 82). This quote explains that when an individual sits back and lets evil things occur, they too become guilty of evil. In my opinion, this is the most important theme portrayed in Fahrenheit 451. It demonstrates Bradbury’s fears that all people will become bystanders in the rise of technology and the decline of books, deep thinking and appreciation for little things in life. I think Bradbury’s fears are confirmed in today’s social media and in the popular high technology lifestyle. Everywhere you look you can spot someone who is too busy looking at his or her phone to look up and see all life has to offer. So many people get wrapped up in social networks, TV shows, texting, etc. that they do not pay attention to the details in life at the dinner table, in a car or train, or even when walking on a sidewalk. Bradbury is trying to tell people not to let technology run your life. Everyone has the power to stop the “evil” by speaking up and embracing life’s meaning. Bradbury’s theme in Fahrenheit 451 is a great lesson to society.
Reply
Megan Moran
7/30/2015 08:21:58 am
Incompetence can kill as well as a flame. The State or government didn't make the people blind to the seemingly dystopian society they live in; the people followed along with the injustice the government was doing to them. In "Fahrenheit 451", the author Ray Bradbury creates a society of people ruled by technology and an extreme lack of knowledge. In this futuristic-dystopian society the people know little to nothing of their past and don't care about it. Even the people who act as authority figures, the "firemen" have no idea of what is happening. The “firemen” is this society are used to make fires and burn books, so the people can’t learn of their past. The government doesn’t control the people, forcing them not to read, they simply enforced the rule. The people take it upon themselves to act on the law and not rebel at all. “’Do you ever read any of the books you burn?’ He laughed. ‘That’s against the law!’” (Bradbury 8). This just shows how brainwashed the people are into thinking that reading and learning is a crime. For some reason they never questioned why learning was a problem, the people just followed along with the ridiculous laws. Things like this happen in present day also. On July 19th 2015 Samuel Dubose was shot by a white officer for being at a traffic light. Murders like this happen too often and on a rare occasion is something done about it. Just like in “Fahrenheit 451” authorities are allowing crimes to be committed. Police officers are murdering innocent people because of their race. An article from the “New York Times” states, “A University of Cincinnati police officer was indicted Wednesday on a murder charge in what a prosecutor called ‘a senseless, asinine shooting’ of an unarmed man during a minor traffic stop.” and “The death of Mr. Dubose, who was black, at the hands of Officer Tensing, who is white, joined a string of recent cases — in places including Staten Island; Cleveland; Baltimore; North Charleston, S.C.; and Ferguson, Mo., among others — that have raised hard questions about law enforcement’s use of force and the role of race in policing”. People cannot blame government for the crimes they actually commit.
Reply
McKayla Prestininzi
7/30/2015 10:14:04 am
Ray Bradbury, Author of Fahrenheit 451, posses the thought that the protagonist weighing down the people into a set minded state is not the heavy handed government, but the controlling effects of TV and the absence of books. After reading the novel, I can could not agree more. At the midpoint of the novel, when Montag and Faber meet and discuss plans for the first time, Montag mentions how his wife says that books are not real. Faber replies, “Thank God for that. You can shut them, say ‘Hold on a moment’… But who has ever torn himself from the claw that encloses you when you drop a seed into a TV parlor? It grows you any shape it wishes! It is an environment as real as the world. It becomes and is the truth. Books can be beaten down with reason.… as you see, my parlor is nothing but four plaster walls” (Bradbury 84). When Faber says this, he merely means that books do not control you, or shut down your thoughts of reality, as opposed to TVs. What Faber, Montag, Clarisse, and really Bradbury, are trying to prove throughout the novel is that the people are allowing these simple TVs in their plaster- walled parlors to control and overcome their lives, and take away their feeling for emotional events. According to LA Weekly, “[Bradbury] wrote that at first they condensed the books, stripping out more and more offending passages until ultimately all that remained were footnotes, which hardly anyone read. Only after people stopped reading did the state employ firemen to burn books.” As seen here, the problems with society are not to be blamed on the government banning books, and providing TV, it is the peoples’ choice to succumb to the controlling effects of their TVs and ignore the dwindling books before them. I can relate this to ISIS, a group of people where only one kind of thinking is acceptable. These people, both in Bradbury’s novel and the middle east, need to realize that sometimes the problem is inside of them, as a population, and that every person’s decisions make a difference.
Reply
Evan Bardinas
7/30/2015 11:36:06 am
The book, "Fahrenheit 451", introduced many themes of the people of the society being the "lames" and not arguing or even thinking about rebelling or thinking for themselves against the government. Throughout the entire book there was shown evidence of the people, not the government, ignoring all of the crimes and troubles in the world. One such example is the war going on in the book. This war is mentioned many times in the book and shows the absolute ignorance that the people have towards the things happening around them, and people just mindlessly believing the lies that their trusted government is feeding them. This all proves Bradbury's thought of, "So few want to be rebels anymore." by none of those people, in my example, having any motivation to dig deeper into the government, or to even wonder why the government bans books and other learning materials. They act this way because they are happy and seek no further enlightenment, or change in their worlds. A good quote on this subject from "Fahrenheit 451" is brought to our attention by Captain Beatty. Captain Beatty was the Captain of the fireman and Guy's boss. He was against rebelling and thought that if everyone just listened to the government that everyone would be happy. When he talked to Guy when he was "sick" he says, "With school turning out more runners, jumpers, racers, tinkerers, grabbers, snatchers, fliers, and swimmers instead of examiners, critics, knowers, and imaginative creators, the word 'intellectual,' of course, became the swear word it deserved to be. You always dread the unfamiliar." (Bradbury 58) This quote shows how brainwashed Beatty was by the government. Beatty also represents the general mass in this book. With him mindlessly listening to the government and being happy with his job and his place in life. Since Beatty was brainwashed so was the mass of people in the society, and if they were all the same and believed in this quote and the government it would cause none of them to want to rebel, but instead stay home and watch their television because they are satisfied with their lives. That is why i agree with Bradbury and his quote about no one wanting to rebel anymore in his book. In modern times people are dulled by not the government or TV but by their phones and social media. This is where I disagree with Bradbury a little bit. TV is a way that people who can't get a hold of a newspaper or are there themselves keep up with the problems in the world. Social media on the other hand is what is dulling the people. People focusing on making sure their picture or comment gets enough likes or favorites, or whatever, are whats keeping the people from understanding all of the troubles in the world. Since they are so absorbed in their own little world they never think about others. With all of these pictures that the post to make their life look much better than it actually is they have other less fortunate people trying to measure up to them. With this endless cycle of the popular and the unpopular people are giving themselves a false reality, making them think that their lives are much better and problem-less than they actually are. That is why I believe that social media is brainwashing people much more than the TV or any other type of media is. "Photography, as we all know, is not real at all. It is an illusion of reality with which we create our own private world." -Arnold Newman.
Reply
Olivia Smelas
7/30/2015 12:16:27 pm
Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, is perhaps one of the most controversial works of science fiction out there, and is renowned for being as applicable and resonant today as it was when it was published, over fifty years ago. A wide debate frequently surrounding this novel is whether its story tells of the "silencing effect of a heavy-handed government", as Bradbury states in the quotation, or of the mind-crippling effects of television and other technologies on society. Bradbury stands by the latter as expressed by his given quotation. The novel tells of Montag, a fireman who blindly set fire to books in order to rid society of any and all intellectuality and awareness. Ignorant firemen like Montag burning books, burning the past, allowed for total domination by televisions, and "Parlors", a three to four wall technology which portrayed a "family" and other entertaining novelties. Montag set about his work gladly, living with a three wall parlor of his own, with his aloof wife Mildred, until he happened upon Clarisse, his new neighbor. Clarisse shares with Montag her fascination with books, and all aspects of life as it used to be... non technology dominant. Throughout their meetings, a similar fascination is created in Montag. Since reading is not allowed, the people haven't the slightest idea about their pasts, and they are too preoccupied with their parlors, and televisions to care. The enemy here is not the State for not allowing reading, but is in fact the contrary... The masses are the enemy, for following the law, for being so wrapped up in their technologies to care about their slowly deteriorating brains, for simply not rebelling. If enough people were to rebel like Montag did, there would most definitely be a change in government. This is expressed in the text when Faber says "I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing. I'm one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the 'guilty', but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself. And when they finally set the structure to burn the books, using the firemen, I grunted a few times and subsided, for there were no others grunting or yelling with me, by then. Now it's too late" (Bradbury 82). Faber describes how he became part of the mass by neglecting what he saw instead choosing to stay quiet, while the society around him crumbled down to illusive steels, metals and a whole bunch of ignoramuses. Because Faber, and the rest of the population stayed for the most part quiet while society changed around them, they became the ones to blame, not the government as aforementioned. It is the responsibility of the people to respond to changes in the government, and if needed provide a suitable reaction. Therefore, the citizens of the city are responsible for its inward collapse because of their unawareness and preoccupation by technology. Bradbury's fears of a technology controlled society are completely reasonable, and unfortunately, all too realistic. According to an article found in the Huffington Post, "Challenging Digital Boundaries" by Jill Goldsmith, technology not only currently dominates our social and personal lives, but extends its rule to the workplace. Goldsmith writes "a report by Knowledge at Wharton revealed that 83% of professional workers check their email after work, 66% take their technology with them on vacation, and more than 50% report sending emails while having a meal with family or friends" (Goldsmith). Technology is ruling even time that is supposed to be spent enjoying others. Everyone is so addicted to their devices that the client to professional relationship is often controlled by technological communications more so than face to face contact. People are withdrawing behind their keyboards and fluorescent screens, even in their jobs, making Bradbury's fear perfectly applicable, if sadly so. One has to wonder if technology of all kinds were to cease to exist, would our society be be more intelligent, self-sufficient, and united through our lack of distraction and social boundaries, or would we revert back to a prehistoric state of ignorance, softened by our previous ease of life...?
Reply
Sydney Gannon
7/30/2015 12:24:50 pm
In his famous novel, Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury shows readers that people go along with anything anyone else does. The government took away books and told everyone all the information they would need to know would be on television. Everyone followed, and that’s what makes people the culprits. Technology is taking over society and citizens go along with it, with the exception of a few. One night when Montag’s wife had a few friends over, Montag had all his anger built up and let it out by reading them poetry. Mrs. Bowles chimes in after Mrs. Phelps starts to sob and says “I knew it would happen! I’ve always said poetry and tears, poetry and suicide and crying and awful feelings, poetry and sickness; all that mush! Now I’ve had it proved to me,” (Bradbury 100-101). They can’t feel the beauty of poetry through their hatred of books and being taught what was “right.” Everyone is obsessed with television and technology, and that shows when everyone is watching the news about Montag being chased. Everyone watched as the Mechanical Hound found “Montag,” “On the screen, a turned a corner. The Mechanical Hound rushed forward into the viewer, suddenly. The helicopter lights shot down a dozen brilliant pillars that built all about the man. A voice cried ‘There’s Montag! The search is done,” (Bradbury 148-149). All the people watched, listening to every word until Montag was found and killed, even though it was not actually him. Technology cannot replace or even substitute for the power of books. They are full of history aging back to the beginning of time. If people continue to go on to do things the government or anyone tell them to do “for the better,” we are in trouble.
Reply
Robert Duncan
7/30/2015 02:07:38 pm
As the each day of my life goes passing, I see more and more people: texting, snap-chatting, taking selfies, playing apps, and sitting and waiting for a notification to go off on their phone. To me it seems that less and less people are having face to face conversations and most conversations are done by texting. It seems like everyone is in their own little bubble. Ray Bradbury, author of the novel Fahrenheit 451, said “the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." What Bradbury means by this is that, the reason books became outlawed and the world that Guy Montag lived in was the way it was, is not because of the government. Instead, it was caused by people adjusting to a lifestyle that was influenced heavily by technology. Throughout the course of the novel, Bradbury clearly shows the reader that people caused books to become illegal and burned, and not the government. For example, in the book one of the main characters is a man named Faber who was an English professor before books became illegal. In the book, Faber talks to Montag and tells him how, “If he hides his ignorance, no one will hit him and we will never learn.” (Bradbury 104). What Faber means by this, is that if Montag does not make mistakes,or does question why things are the way they are, then he will never learn from those mistakes. Most if not all of the people in Montag’s world do not question why books are illegal and why they are burned. People didn’t want to read books, they wanted a book to be summarized into one page and handed to them. People didn’t want to think in Montag’s world. Similar in ways to the way our society is slowly becoming dependent on technology. With increasing usage of smartphones, teens and adults rely on their phones for everything. Definitions, answers, the time of day, weather, communication, and just about anything you could think of. It makes you question how far away a world without books is.
Reply
James Norton
7/30/2015 03:16:24 pm
In the classic novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, a main topic is how people are dumbing down their minds by only focusing on things such as technology. The public does not care about what is going on around them, as right in front of them they have technology to help pass the time and dull their minds. This is shown vividly through the characters such as Mildred Montag, who is heavily affected by television and other technologies. She lets her entire life and routing be dictated by technology, as evidenced by the fact that “every night the waves came in and bore her off on their great tides of sound floating her, wide-eyed, toward morning.” (Bradbury 41) This shows how Mildred and many like her simply fall into a routine where using their technology is all they ever do and they never actually attempt to think for themselves or challenge authority. They simply fall into line and accept whatever government or celebrities do or say. An example of this in the modern world would be social media. People spend all their time worrying about how many followers they get on Twitter, how many likes they get on Instagram, or how many snaps they get on Snapchat. We have become so engrossed with following what people are doing at all time, that we simply devote all of our attention into things such as social media and don’t pay attention to what’s going on around us. As Bill O'Reilly said, once you have these apps and you get into them, “it is hard to stop looking at your screen every two minutes.”, and this is because the public always wants to be constantly updated on people's social lives, rather than what is actually going on in the world. Examples such as this confirm Ray Bradbury’s fears in Fahrenheit 451.
Reply
Tyhler Harty
7/30/2015 03:21:43 pm
Reply
Olivia Winberry
7/30/2015 11:14:23 pm
Reply
Alia Baron
7/30/2015 11:36:18 pm
In Ray Bradbury’s book, Fahrenheit 451, it focuses on a world where the government thought that doing the wrong things were considered to be right and doing the right things were considered to be wrong. If you lived in a world where you could rob a bank and not get in trouble for it, would you take advantage of it? This book is very interesting to read, not only because it is the opposite of what a society to us is supposed to be like, but also because people get discouraged for making the right choices. In the beginning of the Fahrenheit 451, it starts off with a man who is allegedly a “fireman”. In our society a fireman is someone who helps and protects the public. But in the book a “fireman” is literally a man who likes fires and burns down peoples houses for fun. In their society reading a book is considered to be wrong. Imagine how many kids in our society would be thrilled if they found out that reading was considered to be “bad”. “Books aren’t people. You read and I look all around, but there isn’t anybody!” (Bradbury 73). This quote really demonstrates how books aren't valued in their society. The only things that are valued in their society are people and making the wrong choices. If kids today keep acting how they are and stay on their phones 24/7 rather than reading books or hanging out with friends, then our future generations could end up to be a lot like the society in Fahrenheit 451.
Reply
Keira Albano
7/31/2015 12:02:01 am
In the novel "Fahrenheit 451", Ray Bradbury tries to get the readers to comprehend that the people themselves were the antagonists and not the government. Throughout the novel, any sort of books were banned from society to read, which stops education, and knowledge of history. Due to this people are becoming brainwashed by the technology. They find themselves wanting to be more in a world which a TV provides then the world they are living in. One situation which clearly highlights this is in the "Parlor". "'Will you turn the parlor off?' he asked. 'That's my family'". (Bradbury 48-49). Montag's wife Mildred refuses to turn off the TV due to the strong urge to have a life like the one in the TV. Mildred herself knows how her life could be destroyed by having the books but still cares more for the technology. The society as a whole is so attached to the TV that the government even televised the hunt for Montag and killed an innocent man. "The camera fell upon the victim, even as did the hound. The victim was seized by the hound and the camera in a great spidering, clenching grip. He screamed" (Bradbury 149). The society are sucked into these shows but since they are they are ignoring the problems of education and knowledge. The government didn't force the society to use technology, so in doing so makes the society the antagonist.
Reply
Andrew Costa
7/31/2015 12:51:54 am
In Ray Bradbury’s classic novel, Fahrenheit 451, he believes that in a futuristic world, television and the media will become so popular that it will eventually lead us to our own doom. Guy Montag is a citizen who burns books for a job, but after meeting a girl named Clarisse, he begins to want to save books for mankind. Granger, one of the rebels who want to preserve books, says, “It’s not pleasant, but then we’re not in control, we’re the odd minority crying in the wilderness. When the war’s over, perhaps we can be of some use in the world,” (Bradbury 146). One thing that I think Bradbury tries to show in this novel is that the books Montag burns seem minuscule and makes them come across as a nuisance. I think that the books in Fahrenheit 451 are a metaphor for this futuristic society becoming so digitalized that they do not even care about what has been teaching us for hundreds of years, books. It’s not like Montag’s job is to get rid of all traces of books, such as making sure no one has digital copies of them, his job is burning them. Burning the physical books. Early in the book when Montag is talking to Clarisse, he says, “burn ‘em to ashes, then burn the ashes. That’s our official slogan,” (Bradbury 6). Clarisse even asks him if he ever reads the books he burns, all he replies with is saying how that is illegal. Ray Bradbury makes us really think in this book and makes us question how much we care about physical copies of books. Maybe you're a huge reader, but what does burning books say about a society? To me, that is like cutting off the final string of human life, and at that point our world is so digitalized all we can care about is technology and television.
Reply
Alexis Disbrow
7/31/2015 01:24:25 am
In the novel "Fahrenheit 451" the author Ray Bradbury explains how society blames the government for something that they controlled. Bradbury shows how technology took over and as it advanced education started to decrease. Many people lost sight of what they really thought was right because they never stood up for what the believed in. Books provided the knowledge for people to have different opinions and question things they felt were wrong. Without the books people were happy because there was no controversy and the information people knew was limited. People didn't speak up for what they believed in because they felt they wouldn't make a difference. "I'm one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the 'guilty,' but I did not speak up and thus became guilty myself" (Bradbury 82). This quote shows how people didn't say anything and then felt guilty when it was too late. An example that relates to this quote is bullying because people feel like they can't make a difference alone and feel guilty when its too late to say something. Technology took over peoples lives and made them more robotic. Mildred referred to the program on the parlor as her family and wouldn't turn it off for Montag when he was sick. She is so involved in the program that she won't even help her sick husband. This shows how interaction between people was less frequent which is represented today by people who would rather be on their phones than have a conversation with someone.
Reply
Michael Deitz
7/31/2015 01:46:00 am
Michael Deitz
Reply
Brycen Greco
7/31/2015 01:49:01 am
Ray Bradbury wrote his dystopian novel, Fahrenheit 451, over sixty years ago displaying the loss of empathy and the desire to question. This dullness of thinking and ability to question is demonstrated when Mrs. Phelps talks of her husband “Oh, they come and go, come and go. In again out again Finnegan, the army called Pete yesterday. He’ll be back next week. The Army said so. Quick war. Forty-eight hours they said, and everyone home. That’s what the Army said...” (Bradbury 90). She goes on to express her lack of concern, “Anyway, Pete and I always said, no tears, nothing like that. It’s our third marriage each and we’re independent. Be independent, we always said. He said, if I get killed off, you just go right ahead and don’t cry, but get married again, and don’t think of me” (Bradbury 91). Mrs. Phelps’ entire lack of distress and/or care for her husband’s deployment and life is exhibited while she annoyingly waits for Guy to turn the TV back on. She is untroubled by the reality that some women will lose their husbands, in fact she is rather detached from the reality that her own husband may not come home. She has develop a greater attachment to the parlor rather than the man she married. The lack of empathy for human life is abundant in the story, whether it be Mrs. Phelps and her husband, Mrs. Bowles and her children, or even the kids that try to hit Guy. I agree that media, TV, videogames, and even music have dulled human care and our desire to think for ourselves. As an American teenager, I have experienced how our empathy for human life has lessened while watching American Psycho with my friends. A man kills a homeless man who you at first think he is going to help. The death doesn’t seem to phase any of them, however when that same man kills the man’s dog, many of my friends become distraught and said “why did he have to kill the dog?” The world is losing empathy and it seems their senses have dulled. In October of 2011, a two year old toddler was hit by a small, white van. The driver stopped but then proceeded to keep driving, crushing the child under his rear wheels for a second time. However, the lack of care doesn’t seize, at least eighteen other people walk straight by the young girls body. The life of a homeless may be seen as less than that of a child’s yet neither saw much of a reaction from viewers, while death and questioning were more frequent 100 years ago, or 50, or even 10 years ago because people had less to distract them from what life really consists of.
Reply
Victoria Lloyd
7/31/2015 03:15:32 am
As our generation plunges into the age of "newer, lighter, faster" there is a clear negative correlation between use of technology and quality of understanding and comprehension. The use of technology in the modern world as a way of absorbing information creates a generation of citizens with an extensive knowledge in what Ray Bradbury disdainfully calls "factoids", or information without the substance of thought. In Ray Bradbury's dystopian novel Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury aims to provide insight to the reader as to the reality of technology. What makes technology an ideal candidate as topic for a dystopian novel is its ability to produce a false happiness in the observer that replaces actual thinking. As the age of technology dawned upon humanity, people began to notice a change in their thinking - while the written word dominated the information industry, interpretation was open to the reader and thinking was encouraged; as technology presents itself to the masses, the observer quickly realizes that the idea of interpretation is null as the information is presented in the form of incontrovertible evidence. As it is put in Bradbury's novel, "But who has ever torn himself from the claw that encloses you when you drop a seed in a TV parlour? It grows you any shape it wishes! It is an environment as real as the world. It becomes and is the truth. Books can be beaten down with reason. But with all my knowledge and scepticism, I have never been able to argue with a one-hundred-piece symphony orchestra, full colour, three dimensions, and I being in and part of those incredible parlours."(Bradbury 58) In addition to providing unarguable evidence to prevent the observer from engaging in original thought, it aims to engage the observer by replacing the characteristics of human interaction that make socialization so appealing. By providing an observer with not only unarguable facts but also emotional stimulation akin to being in a real relationship, technology is able to pull off an impressive feat: it is able to recreate reality within the mind of the beholder. To emphasize this, Ray Bradbury uses his novel to explain how invested in technology humanity can become, writing "'Will you turn the parlour off?' he asked. 'That's my family.'"(Bradbury 46) With writing Bradbury exemplifies that there is a substance and depth which can be debated and investigated further. Meanwhile, technology can only go so far as to penetrate the senses and instead only documents what is proven and cannot be questioned so as to eliminate further thought. These scenes from the novel explain how deeply technology could potentially infiltrate the human lifestyle. By replacing curiosity and original thinking with irrefutable "factoids" and social relationships with a faux reality, technology could quite possibly decimate the generation of intelligence and innovation that designed it and send our race into the dystopia depicted in Bradbury's novel. Bradbury's novel has additionally captured an issue which has become prevalent in our modern society: the matter of unrelenting devotion to technology no matter the costs. In the news today, one can see a multitude of articles voicing concerns of cyber security, the cost that comes attached to the level of technology we have achieved at this point in time. While the large portion of citizens that use technology without complete knowledge of the potential cost constantly hears about the dangers of releasing personal information and whereabouts on aspects of technology such as social media, it is the utter devotion and trust that drives them to keep posting. Most recently, there was an explosion in the media concerning the NSA installing back doors on the technology it recommended to a multitude of institutions, as released to the public by ex-CIA employee Edward Snowden. In the wake of this, technologically adept citizens have become paranoid about the privacy of their online actions. Contradictorily, they continue to store private information online because of their devotion to the advancement. Further, with each chant that drives our technology to its fullest potential, Bradbury aims to warn his readers that there is nothing provided without cost, and the cost of modern technology could potentially be functional society.
Reply
Brad Chavero
7/31/2015 03:50:56 am
In Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, a theme presented throughout the book is that a population’s actions have power. Bradbury insists this through the society’s norms where books aren’t read, but instead burned by firefighters whose job is to set them on fire. This procedure, seemingly impossible to occur today, was in fact the result of the population’s own actions, or lack thereof. Bradbury through Faber explains that this lifestyle in the novel is possible because “So few want to be rebels anymore. And out of these few, most, like myself [Faber], scare easily” (Bradbury, 87). In other words, Faber explains that it was the peoples’ mass ignorance, fear, and lack of eagerness to fight back that lead to the society he lives in. Although the people’s power (not much in the novel because of that lack of speaking up) lead to the bookless society of Fahrenheit 451, I believe that Bradbury should not be concerned with a similar life in today’s modern world as the people of today are not as quiet as those of his book. This can be seen today, by people protesting and standing up for what they believe in as just last month, a local news site of Charleston posted that “Police [said] someone spray-painted the message ‘Black Lives Matter’ on a statue memorializing the Confederacy in Charleston several days after a shooting at historic black church” (Kelly 1). Although the protestors’ actions were illegal, they were making their concerns well known to the authorities; something that the people in Fahrenheit 451 failed to do which is why their society ended up the way it did. In closing, Ray Bradbury’s intended theme for his novel Fahrenheit 451 is that populations and their actions have power. These actions can contribute to society in a negative way like in the book where no one did anything to stop books from going away; or in a positive way like in today’s world where people protest in different ways (including illegally) to make sure their beliefs are acknowledged by the authorities. Populations have power; it is up to the people within them to manipulate that power for the best for their world.
Reply
Alice McKeon
7/31/2015 03:57:25 am
“Fahrenheit 451,” by Ray Bradbury, is not about censorship through the government, but censorship through the masses. Bradbury bemoans the misinterpretations of his novel, stating that it was the media (more specifically, television) that had censored society. This theme is clearly illustrated throughout the novel- especially in Captain Beatty’s speech. Beatty arrives at the Montag home and explains to the conflicted Montag how the fireman profession had evolved from putting out fires to starting them. Wrapping up his explanation of the ban on books, Beatty declares, “It didn’t come from the government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God,” (Bradbury 58). In that passage, Bradbury wrote outright that the government was not to blame. Through the loquacious Captain Beatty, it is explained that technological advancements and an expanding, diversifying population resulted in the censors and current state of intellect. Radio, movies, and television were developed and could be accessed by anyone. Therefore they had to appeal to everyone; television was dulled so that everyone could enjoy it. As the population grew with minorities, the media could not offend anyone, and opinions and thoughts were restrained. Although this novel is fictional, it has an eerie resonance with current times. In the quote above, it is explained that the people indirectly forced the media to censor society. Original thought rarely exists in the universe of “Fahrenheit 451.” Again, Beatty has an explanation for this: “More sports for everyone, more group spirit, fun, and you don’t have to think, eh? Organize and organize and superorganize super-super-sports. More cartoons in books. More pictures. The mind drinks less and less. Impatience,” (Bradbury 57). Many members of the teenage generation today are incredibly impatient. They are raised to be that way with the technology they are growing up with. For example, twitter posts are limited to 140-characters. Most posts stay well under that limit. However, this was not short enough. Twitter accounts were abandoned for Snapchat. On Snapchat, videos are usually limited to ten seconds and can be accompanied by a short caption. Just as Beatty said, there are more pictures and less patience. Technology, mass exploitation, minority pressure, and impatience caused the bland and thoughtless society in “Fahrenheit 451.” These factors in reality could easily do some damage in today’s world. Already, impatience has further deteriorated social media. The masses (and the media catering to them) are responsible for the censorship in the society of “Fahrenheit 451” by Ray Bradbury.
Reply
Morgan McIntyre
7/31/2015 04:19:24 am
In Ray Bradbury’s well known novel, Fahrenheit 451, he expresses that the government is not entirely to blame for people’s excessive use of technology, but it’s rather the fault of the people themselves. I agree with Bradbury’s point in the novel and his quote regarding the book. In the story, most of society is glued to their televisions, and having a meaningful, logical conversation is a thing of the past. Montag is content with his job as a fireman until he talks to Clarisse, who makes him realize that books and communication are crucial. Everybody is oblivious to the world around them. They aren’t paying attention to anything real, including the war. They are instead too involved with their “families” in the parlor and not missing a single thing on those TVs. Nobody is taking the time to explore what’s real. Bradbury expresses this idea of being heedless when Clarisse says, “White blurs are houses. Brown blurs are cows. My uncle drove slowly on a highway once. He drove forty miles an hour and they jailed him for two days” (Bradbury 9). The previous quote is showing how a majority of people are blowing through life, not paying attention to fine detail. But when somebody is brave enough to slow down, they get criticized and punished because that is not the way life is supposed to be. If more people would venture out, they’d be able to make a difference and realize that there is more to life than just technology. Too many people didn’t respond when books were diminishing, so the few who are left and enjoy books, like Faber and Clarisse’s uncle, become targeted for being different. More people should’ve spoken up if they didn’t like what was happening to them, so I completely agree that it’s their fault that their society is stripped of books and thinking. Bradbury’s idea that people are limiting themselves is not only a problem in his novel, but it’s a growing problem in the real world. According to Toby Daniels’ article with TMZ news entitled “Technology wants you as its Slave,” nearly 100% of people have looked at their phone while driving, even if it was just once. It’s crazy that people will risk someone life, along with their own, just to check a text, social media post, or email. Daniels explains how although technology is taking away from people interacting with one another, “we don’t have to let her treat us this way. We can still have control” (Daniels 1). That quote is agreeing with Bradbury’s idea that society is the way it is because of the people. Everybody still has the option of breaking away from the phone, even just for a little while, but unfortunately mostly everyone is stuck in the technology whirlpool. Bradbury’s fear has come to life. I wonder what our world would be like if technology hadn’t swallowed everybody, but I guess it’s too late to find out.
Reply
Edison Quesada
7/31/2015 04:38:45 am
Edison Quesada
Reply
Sydney Sileno
7/31/2015 04:40:24 am
Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, shows the effect of technology when people start to use it for the wrong reasons. The society Ray Bradbury created revolves purely around the people’s entertainment. The technologies range from wall sized televisions to a radio that fits in your ear. The scary thing is that these futuristic ideas are realities in our modern day society. However, we know how to use them, when Bradbury’s society do not. They let these advancements change their way of thinking and even went as far as to value their wall sized televisions over children and spouses. In a rant from Bradbury’s protagonist Montag, he says “Go home and think of your first husband divorced and your second husband killed in a jet and your third husband blowing his brains out, go home and think of the dozen abortions you've had, go home and think of that and your damn Caesarian sections, too, and your children who hate your guts! Go home and think how it all happened and what did you ever do to stop it?” (Bradbury 101). The people of Montag’s society no longer value people. Children are sent away and parents dread the days they see them. Spouses are practically expandable, and as long as they have entertainment they are happy with loving materials over people. There is even a show on tv where people are killed for entertainment. The shows broadcasted are very basic to keep people from forming there own opinions. The only thing people think can make them happy is entertainment. This is why Mildred wants yet another tv or “wall” even though it is very expensive and they are “already doing without a few things to pay for the third wall” (Bradbury 21). This shows just how much they value these technologies. The difference between our modern society, and Ray Bradbury’s society is that we use our modern advancements to better our society not to replace our human needs.
Reply
Curran Lane
7/31/2015 04:48:51 am
The misinterpretation of the State being to blame rather than the highly moldable people in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, as pointed out by Bradbury himself, is quite understandable after reading the book. When overlooking certain details it makes sense to blame the government, after all they banned books but as Beatty points out to Montag, “It didn’t come from the Government down” but rather “technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick”.(Bradbury 58). This quote shows how the State was not the enemy of Montag, but rather the public for being so easily brainwashed by their television parlors, their fast cars, and their in-ear radios broadcasting whatever the media wanted, that what the government did made the already evident truth official: books were no longer necessary. A similar technology over paper is taking place today with newspapers. Bradbury’s fears are coming true as good old fashioned newspapers are being replaced by glowing screens delivering the news the media wants us to hear, not what we need to. Today’s case is not as bad as the one described in the book where the news has “got to have a snap ending”(Bradbury 148), although it does seem as though news will do anything for viewing. Similar to how it started in the novel, the government didn’t decrease newspaper production but the market just disappeared. It is almost as if the book was a warning for the future it held in itself but was simply waved off as a fictional tale.
Reply
Matthew Vanderveer
7/31/2015 05:33:37 am
"(Bradbury) says the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." This quote from Bradbury explains that his novel Fahrenheit 451 was written to show that a heavy handed government is only possible because of the people who can not think for themselves. The problem in this book was not the government it was the excessive use of television and lack of socializing between people.”’Will you turn the parlor off?’ he asked ‘Thats my family’” This quote shows that Montag’s wife considers a tv show her family. Instead of turning off the tv as asked by her true life husband she simply cant go without knowing what her “family” is doing. But later when she is asked what is going on and why some of the characters are fighting she doesn’t know. She says that the characters on the show are her family and this shows how attached she is to the show. She is more interested in what the television characters are doing than what her actual husband is doing. I believe that his fears can be connected and confirmed by many things happening today. One of the things that confirms his fears is the social websites that most people use excessively. Many people can not go a day without their phones. Also much like the schools in the book, school districts in the present are making sports carry greater importance and they are taking up a lot of time. Also sports are being looked at by colleges and can help people get accepted to better schools.
Reply
Shelley Banfield
7/31/2015 05:34:37 am
Ray Bradbury, author of the novel Fahrenheit 451 believes his book is about people hating and burning books containing controversial topics in an effort to stay happy and avoid conflict during their lifetimes in the future. This system failed to perform its intended duty since many citizens have committed suicide including Mildred, the protagonist’s wife. After she nearly dies, Guy has a conversation with the operators of the machines that revived Mildred after she overdoses and they say, “We get these cases nine or ten a night. Got so many, starting a few years ago.” (Bradbury 15). This brings up the topic of suicide which is very prominent in the current society but it does not occur as often and in such a small area as it does in this novel. Multiple times throughout the novel, the individuals in the novel resorted to watching a television show named ‘family’ or listening to seashell radios in an effort to maintain happiness. One time after Guy had read a poem from a banned book to Mildred and her friends until one of them started crying, Mildred comforted her by saying, “Come on, let’s be cheery, you turn the ‘family’ on now. Go ahead. Let’s laugh and be happy now, stop crying, we’ll have a party” (Bradbury 101). This occurs on a really small scale nowadays, most people avoid reading or working on projects and try to distract themselves using television and other forms of technology for a small amount of happiness until they actually have to face the task. Ray Bradbury was somewhat correct about his worst fears of the people in the future not reading books and focusing more on technology rather than the information novels tell.
Reply
Marie Davidson
7/31/2015 05:43:17 am
Ray Bradbury’s famous novel “Fahrenheit 451” is often misinterpreted as a book about censorship. Bradbury became frustrated with this error, as he meant for his work to call attention to the effects of television on society. This was an ongoing concern as technology grew during this time and how it might affect people in the future. In an interview, Bradbury stated how he concerned he was about “the dulling effects of TV on people”. This is shown in the book through the characters, especially in those close to, the main character, Guy Montag. On page 100, Guy reads a poem to his wife, Mildred, and two of her friends. Afterwards, one of Mildred’s friends, begins to cry. Guy witnesses the women’s confusion and hesitance at the action, “‘Clara, now, Clara,’ begged Mildred, pulling her arm. ‘Come on, let’s be cheery, you turn the ‘family’ on now. Go ahead. Let’s laugh and be happy now, stop crying, we’ll have a party!’” (Bradbury 101) This quote shows how the people don't understand how to handle real feelings, whether others’ or their own, and use television to distract themselves from having to deal with it. The only solutions present seem to be forms of distraction, usually television, or suicide. In today’s world, people have a better idea of how to help others and themselves. However, they also try to distract themselves in order to pretend the feelings or responsibilities they do not want to deal with, are not there.
Reply
Olivia Jordan
7/31/2015 05:43:47 am
“Speed up the film, Montag, quick. Click, Pic, Look, Eye, Now, Flick, Here, There, Swift, Pace, Up, Down, In, Out, Why, How, Who, What, Where, Eh? Uh! Bang! Smack! Wallop, Bing, Bong, Boom! Digest-digests, digest-digests-digests. Politics? One Column, two sentences. A headline! Then, in midair, all vanishes! Whirl man’s mind around about so fast under the pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters that the centrifuge flings off all unnecessary, time-wasting thought!” (Bradbury 55) This rant by Captain Beatty expresses Bradbury’s belief that media in general and television specifically, inhibits a society’s ability to think for themselves. He opposes the proliferation of technology as an information tool, trusting only the knowledge derived from books to create a better world. However, in 2011, a number of rallies and demonstrations broke out in many Arab countries protesting government repression and state-sponsored internet censorship. This so-called Arab Spring was led by young Arabs, who are credited with using social media, which is a technological advancement of television, as a means of organizing, communicating and raising awareness of government oppression. The article Social Media: Enemy of the State or Power to the People written by Pierre Omidyar illustrates the present effects media has on our world. “In my eyes, social media is one of the most important global leaps forward in recent human history. It provides for self-expression and promotes mutual understanding. It enables rapid formation of networks and demonstrates our common humanity across cultural differences. It connects people, their ideas and values, like never before.” (Omidyar 1) The success of the Arab Spring uprisings, which led to the ouster of the ruling parties in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen, clearly demonstrates that Bradbury’s notion of technology having a diminishing effect on a populace to gain, interpret and act upon knowledge is incorrect. The knowledge these protesters gained from an uncensored internet was instrumental in providing them with an invaluable tool for organizing collective activism. This technologically inspired awakening propelled these young Arabs to rise up against the oppressive, tyrannical governments that were inhibiting their freedoms. Censorship and government propaganda should have been Bradbury’s concern, not peoples’ reliance on technology to gain knowledge. I find it somewhat amusing and ironical that we are using a social media blog to post our opinions of Bradbury’s warning about technology retarding knowledge.
Reply
Allie Talavera
7/31/2015 06:07:05 am
In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury illustrates how although, the government outlawed books, the citizens let it happen by letting the world of technology take over their lives. There are however, a handful of people that went with the books and weren't brainwashed by the power of the TV. Montag's wife, Mildred, is an example of the society that has become. Montag asks, "Will you turn the parlor off?" and Mildred replies, "that's my family" (Bradbury 48-49). In the world that they live in, "family" has a completely different meaning. To Mildred, the TV is more important because like many others, she sees the TV as her number one priority and over time, society has substituted the TV for knowledge. Books no longer become important because it requires us to think and in society's eyes, that is too much work and watching TV is much more convenient. Today people want what is easy and TV is much more convenient than reading a book. Later in the story, Montag tried to change Mildred and her friend's opinions on books by reading them a poem, Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold. Reading the poem frightens Mildred and her friends because they have never been exposed to this before and they become very emotional. "It's melancholy, long, withdrawing roar, retreating, to the breath of the night-wind, down the vast edges drear and named shingles on the world" (Arnold 25-28). These lines in the poem suggest that the loss of faith results in an empty life. These few lines relate to the story itself because it refers to how the loss of books results in society living an empty life with no real knowledge. When Bradybury says that it's not the state and it is in fact the people, I completely agree because those in the story that have stayed with the books did not allow themselves to be brainwashed by technology. It is the peoples' own fault for allowing themselves to be brainwashed.
Reply
Abby Decker
7/31/2015 06:17:34 am
Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury depicts the world as what most conceive to be an extreme version of today’s technologically dependent world. This world created by Bradbury is based on entertaining the people, or in other words, turning them into robots. They watch television all day, calling the people on the screens and on the radio “family”. Faber, an old English professor, is one of the few people who know that this world is messed up, however Faber is too afraid to take action. Meanwhile, his philosophies are on point, but he only shares them with Guy Montag. He says, “My grandfather ran off the V-2 rocket film a dozen times and then hoped that someday our cities would open up more and let the green and the land and the wilderness in more, to remind people that we’re allotted a little space on Earth and that we survive in that wilderness that can take back what it has given, as easily as blowing its breath on us or sending the sea to tell us we are not so big.” In saying this, he means that the people take nature for granted and feel superior to things like the sea, that can take everything away so easily. This ties into another quote Montag uses, written by Bradbury replacing nature versus ignorance with ignorance versus those who understand the problem, such as Faber and Montag later in the novel. He says, “Burn them or they’ll burn you” (Bradbury 123). Montag is saying that the force of the people taken over by technology is so strong that one must fight it before it takes them over.
Reply
Willow Martin
7/31/2015 06:18:31 am
While Bradbury asserts that his novel Fahrenheit 451 illustrates the negative effects of television, both current events and Bradbury’s novel itself prove that all technology —including television— can have a positive impact on society. Guy Montag, a fireman who has been stealing and stashing books for about a year, finally decides to share his secret with his wife Mildred. He pleads with her read the stolen books with him. As they read, bomber planes fly overhead the house, triggering Montag's recollection of the United States’ grim history in atomic warfare. He deliberates aloud the American people’s ignorance to the struggles of the world, from international war to global hunger, in an effort to prove to Mildred that through conversations (like the one he is initiating) and books, humanity may be able to gain enough wisdom to cease repeating its destructive cycles. However, instead of engaging in the discussion, Bradbury illustrates Mildred’s unwillingness to face reality, as she ignores Montag and picks up the phone, laughing and stating to her friend over the phone “‘Yes, the White Clown’s on tonight!’,” evading facing harsh reality, by switching her focus to the comforting facade of television (Bradbury 74). Mildred, an advocate watcher of TV, desires to remain entertained and thoughtless. She much prefers viewing purposeless programs over actually thinking about the world and all its injustices. The interactive qualities of the parlor televisions, causing characters on the programs to say Mildred's name and ask her questions, provide the satisfying illusion of thought, without stimulating any independent, creative thinking whatsoever. But when Mildred is approached with the opportunity to genuinely think and formulate individual opinions, she turns away from it, retreating back into her cave and isolating herself from the grief and guilt of reality. Bradbury uses Mildred and her apathy to display the impact that constantly viewing television has on human beings. Bradbury believes that television is noxious to humanity. Humans, according to him, become enveloped in the fake, pleasant world television creates, and lose touch with reality. In fact, all the technology, ranging from televisions to mechanical hounds, in the city Bradbury depicts helps to keep mankind in its own self-destructive loop of warfare and ignorance. However, technology used throughout the US today, is helping to break this loop and provide enhanced awareness to the people.
Reply
Kaushik Kallam
7/31/2015 06:28:16 am
In Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury creates a dystopian society that sucked into technology and media for entertainment. Guy Montag is a fireman who burns books for a profession. They burn books because society doesn’t read and are just hooked on to TV. Books no longer become important because it makes us think and society believes it is too much work. The government tells society what to do and the people are afraid to stand up for what they believe. His wife Mildred has replaced all her real friendships and family and gave them up for the ones on TV. One day Guy meets a girl named Clarisse who then changes his perspective the more these two communicate. Montag grows dissatisfied with life the more he talks to Clarisse. He starts to wonder if books aren’t really that bad and steals one from a house he burns down. Mildred and her friends are the lifeless people in society that were seen as the everyday person. During a scene in the parlor, Guy asks Mildred to turn it off. “Will you turn the parlor off?” he asked. “That’s my family.” “Will you turn it off for a sick man?” “She went out of the room and did nothing to the parlor and came back. “Is that better?” (Bradbury 48 & 49) She refuses to turn off the TV and in the quote above Bradbury says, “She went out of the room and did nothing to the parlor.” What does that say about Mildred? She wants to have a life like the “family” on the television and tries so hard to have it like the way she wants to. Mildred and her “friends” set off the fire alarm and Guy has to burn down his own house. His captain of the firemen was named Beatty who became very suspicious of Guy. Guy burns his house and Mildred gets in the car and drives away. She didn’t even stop to say anything to Guy or look at him. That shows how she doesn’t even care about her husband as much as the “family” on television.
Reply
Kelly Farley
7/31/2015 06:59:31 am
The novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury has a constant theme of TV being an important part of the characters lives. In this novel, the TV is constantly on, so is has a controlling effect on their everyday lives. It is at the point where they believe that it is a necessity because it is on so often. One of Mildred’s close friends makes a comment about her children when she says, “I plunk the children in school nine days out of ten. I put up with them when they come home three days a month; it's not bad at all. You heave them into the 'parlor' and turn the switch. It's like washing clothes: stuff laundry in and slam the lid...They'd just as soon kick as kiss me. Thank God, I can kick back!” (Bradbury 96). This quote is showing that the characters use TV to influence others as well as themselves. Mildred’s friend acts as if watching her children is something she would rather not be doing. She tries to get it done in the quickest way possible without putting in the effort. Like Mildred’s friend, many people currently use the TV as a form of babysitting their children. A recent study found that “A quarter of parents of young children in the UK admit using the television as a babysitter” (BBC news). Together these quotes show that TV is commonly used to babysit children. Although sometimes TV can be a useful form of entertainment, it is being overused in this novel. The characters are mesmerized with the fictional events going on on the TV instead of the important and real things that are happening around them. Things such as their children, the war, or the government taking control. Unfortunately, Bradbury was correct in his prediction that TV would soon take over people’s lives.
Reply
Juliet Provost
7/31/2015 07:39:20 am
In Ray Bradbury's novel, "Fahrenheit 451", he takes us to a futuristic time where people's lives revolve around technology and owning books is a crime. Contrary to what most people might think, the government did not cause the decrease in education and increase in technology. It was the people who thought making books illegal would increase their happiness by making life simpler where they wouldn’t have to think about anything except the programs on the television. Mildred, Montag's wife, is so attached to the programs on the television and absorbed in her parlor that she considers the characters on the television her family. "'Will you turn the parlor off? he asked.
Reply
Giulia Dostie
7/31/2015 08:13:11 am
In Ray Bradbury’s reflection on his novel, Fahrenheit 451, he believes that the government is not always at fault for corrupting their people, but the people’s fault for corrupting themselves by consuming their lives with technology. As technology, or in this instance television, advances, it leads to a less intellectual society. Bradbury displayed television as something that is more harmful than helpful. Television manipulates the mind by giving the watcher a false sense of happiness. In the novel, Bradbury displayed Montag’s wife, Mildred, as a person full of false happiness. She sits in front of the television and has conversations with the characters on it. To her, these actors are her “family”, who love and are always there for her with a click of a button. But in reality, technology has corrupted her mind so much that she will believe anything to feel happiness in her life. Bradbury writes, “ And the uncles, the aunts, the cousins, the nieces, the nephews, that lived in those walls, the gibbering pack of tree apes that said nothing, nothing, nothing, and said it loud, loud, loud…. No matter when he came in, the walls were always talking to Mildred” (Bradbury 44). This quotes is a great example of manipulation that takes place in their lives. These actors give Mildred false happiness, so that she believes the way they are living is the best. In Mildred’s option, there is no need for knowledge as long as you are happy. With dull minded people like Mildred in this society, it makes it a lot easier for the government to get away with things without anyone questioning it. For example, the burning of books. In the beginning of the book, Clarisse asks Montag a very important question, “ ‘Is it true that long ago firemen put fires out instead of going to start them’” (Bradbury 8). Montag, not knowing any differently, said that it has always been this way. No one questions why the firemen are burning all those books, because that is all they know, and changing anything in their faulty system could lead to chaos. All they care about is pleasing themselves, and in order to please themselves, they have to please the government. This all ties back the the non intellectual society that they are living in. As long as the government gives them their happiness, the people won’t question anything. In today’s society, there are plenty of scenarios in which manipulation and false happiness takes place. One example is Malala Yousafzai. Malala is a Pakistani girl who wanted to get an education, and go against the terrorist group, the Taliban, who believed that girls from ages ten and up should not be allowed go to school. Just like the firemen, the Taliban would literally burn books so that no one was knowledgeable, and able to think for themselves. In order to gain followers, the leader of the Taliban made promises that would come true if they followed and obeyed him, thus creating the manipulation and false happiness that the followers believed in. Just like in Fahrenheit 451, the people that believed knowledge was key, burned with the books. Malala also paid the price for going against the government by getting shot three times. In conclusion, I agree with Bradbury’s statement that it is not always the governments fault for the actions of people, but the peoples fault for not being knowledgeable about their actions. Knowledge is the key to success, so don’t be afraid to open the door sometime.
Reply
Paul Schoening
7/31/2015 08:14:06 am
Ray Bradbury, through his critically acclaimed novel Fahrenheit 451, suggests a unique point of view. With this view, he stresses that in a society in which the government feeds its people with ignorance, the people are guilty, not innocent, for accepting this treatment. For instance, by watching television all day long and shutting the rest of the world out with their ‘Seashells,’ the people in Fahrenheit 451 do more harm to themselves than the government does by securing their ignorant ways of life with surveillance and by reinforcing social norms. This is a concept and theme that I wholeheartedly agree with, as evidence for this belief is quite abundant within the book. When Montag and Millie fought verbally over the true importance of the three-walled television and Millie’s favorite show, the White Clown, it becomes apparent just how much they consume her life. This begins with Montag asking “‘Millie? Does the White Clown love you?’ No answer. ‘Millie does--’ He licked his lips. Does your ‘family’ love you, love you very much, love you with all their heart and soul, Millie?’ He felt her blinking slowly at the back of his neck.” (Bradbury 77). By asking this, Montag tries to get Millie to realize that she has absolutely no meaningful connection with her television shows, and that they can’t love and care for her like people can, so it is a waste of time for her to watch them all day long. When millie responds to this, asking why Montag would ask such a silly question, it shows how watching television all day and relaying ignorant thoughts and feelings to her friends has alienated her so much from the real world that she can’t understand a simple question about love. To me, this was a turning point in the book because it showed just how devoid of regular human emotion the citizens of Fahrenheit 451 are and how if the government tells them that intelligent thoughts and connections are unnecessary, then so be it and never will it be questioned. This feeling of extreme unwillingness to question or challenge the words of the government was also captured when Faber is explaining to Montag what exactly he has done with his time since the government took over. Faber says "Well I played the market and built all this and I've waited. I've waited, trembling, half a lifetime for someone to speak to me. I dared speak to no one." (Bradbury 90). By saying this, Faber explains to Montag that even though he realizes just how corrupt their government is, he is a coward all the same by not rising up and instead by waiting for unlikely help to come. This helped me realize that bystanders like Faber are undoubtedly just as detrimental as the government, doing nothing but keeping their knowledge to themselves, too afraid to speak up. Considering all of this and the fact that this book was written in 1953 makes me wonder how incredibly worried Bradbury would be if he could see society today, with most people willing to look up from their phones for very few things, all the while drowning out the world around them with their earbuds and headphones. In any case, it seems safe to say that Ray Bradbury’s fantasy dystopia is becoming more and more of a reality in this overwhelmingly technological day and age.
Reply
Akin Gaddis
7/31/2015 08:33:04 am
People have the ability to do things however, that doesn't mean that they always should. This point is illustrated repeatedly in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 and is illustrated in the case of the infamous plane hack. In the book Fahrenheit 451, people have become mindless and reject anything that makes them actually think. A perfect example of this is when the main character Guy Montag reads poetry to his wife's friends. “I've always said poetry and tears, poetry and suicide and crying and awful feelings, poetry and sickness; all that mush!”( Bradbury 101) Montag thought that he needed to “break the ice” or stir up the emotions of the people which would eventually benefit them. Was it necessary for Montag to cause this chaos that would benefit them in the future? An example of this is the plane hack that almost took place in April 2015. The cyber security expert, Chris Roberts, meant no harm but wanted to alert the authorities of the possibility that hacking a plane and taking control of it is possible. Roberts also stated that he had repeatedly made this warning to the plane manufactures and no action has been taken. “This ordeal also reveals a potentially dangerous flaw in airplanes. Roberts said he took to Twitter out of frustration that Airbus and Boeing - the world's two largest plane manufacturers -- aren't listening to warnings he's made for years.” (Pagliery) Roberts felt like he needed to “break the ice” similar to how Montag broke the ice help let out the emotions that his wife’s friends felt out. People can easily get set in their ways or “freeze”, the ice needs to be broken so that new ideas, emotions, etc. can flow. This breaking of the ice symbolizes the ending of their stagnant state of being and allows ideas to flow. Breaking the ice is a hard process and a radical action is often needed. This brings us back to the original question, just because someone can cause another pain for their well being should they?
Reply
Liam Tyler
7/31/2015 08:41:55 am
Liam Tyler
Reply
Bridget Kelly
7/31/2015 08:47:52 am
In Ray Badbury's famous novel "Fahrenheit 451" he writes about technology and its takeover on society. In the novel, the interaction with books is completely banned by the government which also removed the way for people to gain knowledge and be creative with their own minds. Without books, the people only have television which basically brainwashes them all with the same information. Yes, the government was the one to ban the books, but Bradbury seems to lead us to blame the citizens more than anyone. They are told to get rid of their books and are demanded not to read and no one speaks up, no one fights against it. There is a handful of people in the society who wish they would have done that in the past. While everything was happening, they knew it was wrong, but they couldn't find the courage or strength to tell the government they were wrong. One of these people was Faber. Main character Guy Montag was talking to Faber when he said "I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing. I'm one of those innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the 'guilty', but I did not speak up and thus became guilty myself" (Bradbury 82). This quote explains how he knew what was going on was wrong but he chose not to say anything. He was aware of what could happen to the society and how greatly it would be affected by this change. Since he stood and watched it happen, it considers himself guilty for what has happened. The main reason of this quote is to blame people and show that he's scared of this situation happening all because of people. That people themselves will eventually abandon books completely for TV, computers, phones, etc. and it will feel as if books were banned because of how people avoid them. Sadly, this vision Bradbury has may occur in the future. Everyone is obsessed with the technology now and very few people, especially teens, read books these days. With our generation being so involved in technology, it wouldn't be a surprise is books were abandoned by everyone.
Reply
Stephen Zacks
7/31/2015 09:01:56 am
Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 depicts a dystopian society in which books are burned, and TV is the main source of all information and entertainment. Bradbury has talked about how he wanted to stress the dangers of the effects of TV on people more than the dangers of a corrupt government in this novel. He illustrates this point very well. In the novel, after Faber gives Montag his earpiece, Montag hears in the news that one million men have been mobilized in preparation for the war. After hearing this, Faber says, “Ten million men mobilized. But say one million. It’s happier” (Bradbury 92). This quote shows how TV is used to manipulate the way people think and feel. In this case, the government is trying to keep people calm about a war which is understandable, but still dishonest. But what if it was a bigger lie than this? Today, often times news stories have some spin on them to make them more positive or dramatic. People can watch this news at any time of the day to learn about what is happening around the world. People believe what they hear because they trust that they are being told the truth. However, sometimes the news can lie to manipulate their viewers. The biggest example of this, although it is not recent, is the news during the Vietnam War. Everyone in the United States was led on to believe that the war in Vietnam was being won, when, in fact, it was being lost. The news holds a lot of power, and if it is abused, it can corrupt society. This use of the news is shown in the novel. When Montag is with Granger, he watches his own chase scene come to an end. As they are watching Granger says, “It’ll be you; right up at the end of that street is our victim. See how our camera is coming in? Building the scene. Suspense. Longshot” (Bradbury 148). Shortly after Granger says this, the chase focuses on an innocent man that is said to be Montag. This innocent man is killed just so the government can keep all of its people feeling safe and thinking that they live in a perfect place. These lies might make the news more pleasing and interesting but it is still lying. When news is purely used for manipulation of the people, is it even news anymore? If people are expecting the truth, then whatever they are told will be received as the truth. This is the true power of television. Bradbury was correct to fear the effects of television. Now, with the world becoming more focused on TV and media, people can only hope that Ray Bradbury was not too accurate with this analysis.
Reply
David Gilday
7/31/2015 09:11:11 am
The novel Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, is often mistaken for focusing on government censorship. However, the theme Bradbury wants his dystopian to demonstrate, is how the people are the enemy of themselves. This is shown when Beatty, the fire chief, describes to Montag how firemen and the burning of books came about. “There you have it Montag. It didn’t come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, Thank God. Thanks to them, you can stay happy all the time…” (Bradbury 58). This explains that the people were too caught up with being “happy” that they turned their backs on books denying knowledge that could better them. An example of how Bradbury’s fears coming true is how kids do not want to go to school. In doing so, they are denying themselves knowledge that could be beneficial. People would much rather try running each other over than get an actual education.
Reply
Emily Sauer
7/31/2015 09:39:01 am
Television is a villain in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Characters use TV to replace history, and interest. Conversations are no longer had. Relationships fall apart. Guy Montag’s job as a fireman is to start fires, but he begins to question what his job really means to him. His wife, Mildred, does not agree with his view on literature and his job. She thinks he is over thinking why books, poetry, etc. are no longer acceptable in society. Mildred is happier when she is watching TV, or when she isn’t forced to think. She refers to the TV as her “family.” “‘Will you turn the parlor off?” he asked. “That’s my family.’” (Bradbury 48-49) Everyone in this society has forgotten what the word “family” means. Not only does Montag later reveal that he wouldn’t be sad if his wife died, but Mildred’s friends also say the same about their husbands. Without knowing that family is sharing a relationship about love, the people on the screen could be her family just as much as Montag. TV and technology as a whole are excuses for society to neglect their surroundings. “Technology should make your life easier....,” says Thomas Hansen, the Worldwide Vice President of small and medium businesses at Microsoft. Technology makes life easier in Mildred’s society because when watching television her mind goes blank. She does not have to think about anything, so it makes her life easier. Society is corrupted of the ordinary world by the use of technology.
Reply
Laura Neff
7/31/2015 09:51:52 am
In his novel, Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury explores the damaging effects of a dystopian society taken over by technology. While some readers interpret the culprit in the novel to be the state, Bradbury says that one responsible is indeed the people. The people were the ones who became content with the idea of using only TV and never reading books in their life, until they were completely obsolete and seen as ridiculous, useless objects. Bradbury demonstrates the dulling effects technology-specifically TV-can have on people. One character Bradbury uses to demonstrate these dulling effects is Mildred, Guy Montag’s wife. Mildred is enamored with and lost without her TV, shown when Montag turns off her beloved TV and forces conversation amongst her and her friends. Ray Bradbury demonstrates their uncomfortable behavior when he writes “the three women fidgeted and looked nervously at the empty mud-colored walls” (Bradbury 94). Mildred and her friends long for the loud colorful screens to amuse them. Many people is the present today are affected by TV and technology this way too. While the main focus was on TV in the novel, today the number one distractor is cell phones. Their small screens pull attention away from everyday things, from something small like a rock in the way all the way to avoiding human contact. The screens, as small and fragile as they are, pull attention away from the more important things in life. Walking down the street, people stand side by side, but instead of having a conversation, they are texting, tweeting, snapchatting, and everything in between. It does not stop there though. People not only are based with phones, but are obsessed with the idea of getting the newest and latest phones. The need for the most advanced technology in cell phones is ridiculous, with people ditching their model from one year ago for a phone coming out in a month. Its a hunger that will never be fulfilled. This relates to how Mildred was a fourth wall for their parlor. She says “"It's only two thousand dollars, she replied [to Montag], 'And I should think you'd consider me sometimes. If we had a fourth wall, why it'd be just like this room wasn't ours at all, but all kind of exotic people's rooms. We could do without a few things" (Bradbury 20). Mildred is willing to ditch some of the things in her house in order to get the new wall. She also wants to spend immense amounts of money to achieve this. People today will also ditch the dream of buying something and spend that large amount of money for the newest cell phone. The desire for this technology is so great, almost everyone wants it. So in reality, what happened to the people in Bradbury’s novel is happening to people in the present. The government did nothing; it is the people who have created this dull technology world.
Reply
Ian Birn
7/31/2015 09:53:20 am
Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 presents an idea of a futuristic society where the people are the culprit for their own mental dampening. Meaning that humans are no longer doing the things that they enjoy because technology has taken over their lives. In the novel, things like television and Parlors are substituted in for going outside and personally seeing what's happening. Instead of congregating with family, Parlors are set up to be a substitute for family by having animations and voices that are interactive. Bradbury uses Mildred to show the mental dulling in her statement, “‘Now,’ said Mildred, ‘My ‘family’ is people. They tell me things: I laugh, they laugh! And the colors!” (Bradbury, 73). In this quote from Bradbury’s novel, Mildred shows how much technology has corrupted her into thinking her “family” were actual people apart of her life. This proves Bradbury’s quote from his profile because it shows how the government has little to no effect of the mental dampening of humans and the people are the ones at fault. Mildred chose to only use the Parlor instead of going out and having a real conversation. Mashable’s article titled Japan’s New Robots Are Scary states “With the exception of Telenoid, these robots look remarkably lifelike, have eerily expressive faces and are designed, in a limited sense, to move and communicate like real people.” This quote explains how research and testing is being put into creating robots that can act, look, and communicate like a human. Just like how Bradbury predicted there would be some sort of technological human to speak with. I believe that Bradbury is correct about how humans are becoming corrupted with TV and technology. If you walk outside it is more than likely too see somebody with their face buried in their phone and not paying attention to their surroundings. Technology is also used to medicate humans and to help carry out our daily lives. However, the average consumer is most commonly seen using technology for personal pleasure, and not for its intended purpose. The article from The Southern News called Technological World Taking Over Our Society states “These technological aspects of our lives are so huge that there is hardly a life without them. It is how businesses are starting to sell and promote things, how events and bands get larger, how some people meet and fall in love.” The article clearly says that our society has become so involved and caught up in tech that without it, life is nothing. I think that Ray Bradbury predicted correctly in thinking that society today is too caught up in tech, TV and the pleasure it brings that we’ve lost some of the human that we used to be. Bradbury’s envision into the future shown in Fahrenheit 451 correctly summarizes our society today in the general sense that the people are the culprit for our their own mental dampening.
Reply
Jackelyn Rosas
7/31/2015 10:08:18 am
"Bradbury says the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." I believe that Bradbury had every right to believe what he felt about the the technology and how it would effect every person in the world. "Will you turn the parlour off?" he asked.
Reply
Cammi Plage
7/31/2015 11:02:45 am
Reply
Carleigh Dalton
7/31/2015 11:09:57 am
In Ray Bradbury's novel, Fahrenheit 451, demonstrates how people's lives consist of only technology and it being more important then reading a book or having a verbal conversation. I strongly agree with Ray Bradbury when he demonstrates that the overuse of technology is not totally the governments fault and that it is the peoples themselves. Everyone is is obsessed with the new technology and would be scared to leave it. This includes Montag himself until he meets Clarisse who makes him realize how delusional he is for just destroying books that are meaningful. Overtime, futuristically, technology will just take over peoples lives and the important and real things will be left in the past. "I'm afraid of children my own age. They kill each other. Did it always used to be that way? My uncle says no. Six of my friends have been shot in the last year alone. Ten of them died in car wrecks. I'm afraid of them and they don't like me because I'm afraid. My uncle says his grandfather remembered when children didn't kill each other. But that was a long time ago when they had things different." (Bradbury 30). The quote above stated by Clarisse, just proves how society has changed tremendously in a bad way. If people wanted to do something about what was happening they should have spoke up. Most people just sat and watched TV and were with their "families" in the parlor. Although there are few people who cared about their books but were punished if they tried to save them. This new idea of burning the books caused people to commit suicide. After all this, the TV shows weren't even important and were for only amusement. Bradbury's theme expresses this and worries that people will be too caught up with their phones or technology when something serious does happen in actual life. This novel is very likewise to today's life. A new's article states that "The addiction of children to their mobile phones could threaten the very fabric of society, a study suggests."(Kendall). This proves that I strongly agree with Bradbury and that in this novel and today technology can be evil and it shouldn't take over real conversation and books.
Reply
Sofia Fernandes
7/31/2015 11:10:49 am
Ray Bradbury claims that the theme of his novel Fahrenheit 451 is that the people are the true wrongdoers in the futuristic world. Bradbury believes that some of his readers have misinterpreted the novel and the message he is trying to portray. Bradbury claims that he wrote his novel in such a way that the offenders are the people rather than the powers controlling them. These powers are the government and television. According to Bradbury, the people in his novel were the antagonistic characters because they allowed themselves to be brainwashed by television, radio, and the government. Bradbury believes that they could have easily overthrown these powers, but they chose not to and chose to remain ignorant. Bradbury shows that he wrote Fahrenheit 451 in such a way that displays the people as the culprit rather than television and government when he writes, “Don't ask for guarantees. And don't look to be saved in any one thing, person, machine, or library. Do your own bit of saving, and if you drown, at least die knowing you were headed for shore” (Bradbury 86). I do not agree with Bradbury’s claim. I believe that the true culprits are television and the government. All that the people truly desire is happiness, and they are able to achieve that by being ignorant and brainwashed. Their lives are made simpler and most of their thoughts are unoriginal, so their only source of happiness is through the thoughts and ideas of those who have established who they really are as a person. The people do not know that they are being cheated of information and they do not question whether or not they know the full truth because they are happy with the fake information they are being fed. Since their false sense of cognizance makes them feel content, they feel no need to search any further. Bradbury contradicts his claim when he writes, “Any man who can take a TV wall apart and put it back together again, and most men can, nowadays, is happier than any man who tries to slide-rule, measure, and equate the universe, which just won’t be measured without making man feel bestial and lonely” (Bradbury 61). In conclusion, Bradbury believes that the people are the culprits for allowing themselves to be influenced by the information that television forces on them. On the other hand, I believe that the true culprits are in fact those who run the government and television programs because they strategize to steal the innocence from people from an early age and inject them with their thoughts and ideas and do not give people a chance to develop their own ideas which in the future causes them to feel that the things shown on television are normal.
Reply
William Spencer
7/31/2015 11:21:35 am
The quotation above that was said by Ray Bradbury explains how it is not only the government's fault, but it is also the peoples fault. It is the people's fault for believing the government and listening to it. He also goes on to say that “he was far more concerned on the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." What he is saying is that the people are being heavily persuaded into what the media says and what others think then their own opinions. In his mind, this is worse than what the government is doing. The government persuades the people into doing a certain thing, the people listen, and then promote it. The people promote it through the media, which is open to almost everyone. Soon, people will rely on the media so much that it will control their everyday lives. In the novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, the protagonist tells Faber that “Nobody listens any more. I can’t talk to the walls because they’re yelling at me, I can’t talk to my wife; she listens to the walls.” This quote is showing how the “walls” are the media. He doesn’t talk to them, because they’re mad at him. He can’t talk to his wife, because his wife listens to the media too much and is driven by it. He refers to it as the wall because there’s no going through it, and it is hard to break. Trying to “break the media” is very difficult in the setting that he is in. What Montag said is a perfect representation of how the media persuades people today. Some forms of the media tend to tell only one half of the story, which can be extremely persuasive towards the average listener. Such as when the Ebola virus came to the public. Most people thought it was the next black plague, because the media acted like it. When in reality, Ebola was a very rare disease to get, which the media failed to emphasize. Articles on CNN say how it was “out of control” (CNN.com). They failed to say how it can be prevented in that specific article. Overall, people need to dig deeper until they make assumptions.
Reply
Lily Woodrow
7/31/2015 11:37:45 am
Through his famous novel, Farenheit 451, Ray Bradbury expresses his ideas of a futuristic society, and their burgeoning addiction to technology. This society revolves around television, radios, and their choice of ignorance. The people living in the book would rather remain oblivious to the bounteous conflicts within their civilization, than step out of their comfort zones to resolve an issue. Bradbury explains he believes the people are at fault for this, not their heavy handed government. The people are quick to follow each other's leads, or "jump on the bandwagon" as one may say. These people do this with the intention of a more peaceful, happy community, this is confirmed through the quote “If you hide your ignorance, no one will hit you and you'll never learn". However, this plan backfires. They live with minimal face-to-face contact, in a bland society. They feel a stronger connection to their "families," than actual humans beings. This is what Bradbury tries to warn the audience about, the dangerous influence technology can have. A perfect current day example of this is the way the Isis uses technology and social media to recruit ill-informed young people. Technology through social media has the power to blind and manipulate those who are oblivious. If we follow the path of those in Fahrenheit 451, which we seem to be doing, we are walking a slippery slope. Books and literature are two of the few things that can continue to solidly educate us. Guy Montag expresses this when he says that, "the books remind us what asses and fools we are." In closing, I believe as advanced as technology is, it also restrains us.
Reply
Victoria oconnor
7/31/2015 12:16:58 pm
In the classic novel Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, emphasizes the argument that it's not always the government who is the cause of restricting the public; but the fault of the people for ignoring its consequences. By using the distractions of modern day technology, the public now believes this is the only true happiness for the fear of change and feelings.The book majorly deals with the theme of fearing knowledge and only believing in a lie of everlasting happiness. Yet the government and modern day society has brainwashed almost everyone but yet a select few had remained who realized the true gift of knowledge, thought, and power behind the literature that the government did not want discovered. Farber, one of the few who still believe in the power of knowledge, gives the explanation of the outlaw of books stating that, “ No one wanted them back. No one missed them” (Bradbury 89). Which shows that a society had chosen the ease of watching a modernized tv screen for all their needs of what they think is a great life. In this new society, thinking through situations, family, real friends, feelings, and many humanly thoughts had now been looked down upon. Technology had put all these things on the tv so no one would have the problem of thinking out a tough situation or anything that could make you essentially unhappy; leading the lazy public to believe that this would be a “ happier and healthier” lifestyle which in reality was far from it. The true damage of the state and mindset of most of the population was heavily shown in Montag’s wife, Mildred. Montag asks, “ Will you turn off the parlor?” Mildred then replies, “ that’s my family” (Bradbury 48). After Mildred admits this, it shows how society is now all based on a technological fantasy brainwashing the minds of humans in order to create a false happiness but more like a feelingless human. In order to do this the government needed to get rid of all things thought provoking which includes books. I agree with Bradbury’s statement that the government is only gonna get more powerful as the people let it happen in fear of change and unhappiness. It was the public's failure to not realize the power of knowledge, and to instead fear reality, which led to the burning of books. The accuracy of Bradbury's book in correlation to reality of our lives becoming more and more entangled into the world of smart phones and tvs; his pediction is not very far off to what could become the distant future.
Reply
Zach Mueller
7/31/2015 12:38:29 pm
In Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451, one of the main ideas presented is the fact that the government is not to blame, but the people for conforming without argument and being afraid to speak up. The example pertaining to this idea being the fact that in the novel, books were outlawed by the government and replaced by TV as books promote free thinking, while TV is a manipulatable stream of information. The public didn’t put up much of an argument as this idea TV over books quickly caught on. This is shown when Faber says, “The firemen are rarely necessary. The public itself stopped reading of its own accord”(Bradbury 87). While the government did enact the rule, the people could have very easily opposed it and made change. Instead, they could have cared less and did nothing, and as a result the books were easily outlawed. I definitely agree with Bradbury about this idea. Many people in today’s world do not make decisions for themselves, but rather align themselves with what ideas the government and/or the majority are pressing on society. An example from the novel of this is when Faber says, "But remember that the Captain belongs to the most dangerous enemy to truth and freedom, the solid unmoving cattle of the majority. Oh, God, the terrible tyranny of the majority"(Bradbury 104). What this means is once something catches on with a large group of people, many people will tend to go with whatever the majority or figurehead is doing. For example, when there is a political issue or disagreement, many people will just listen to whatever their chosen party leader or what the majority says rather than forming their own opinions on the issue and voicing them to others. This is basically taking path of least resistance to avoid creating an issue or a disagreement. This is most certainly not how it should be. The more opinions that are heard, the more dimensions and viewpoints are added to the discussion, and this leads to the problem being solved in a way that benefits everyone. This is opposed to one group or party making all the decisions that benefit only a handful of people or a decision that is detrimental to society, which is the issue put forth in novel. So ultimately, I would agree with Bradbury in his claim that people are mostly responsible for their own condition, not the government.
Reply
Anthony Buonantuono
7/31/2015 12:39:18 pm
In the novel Fahrenheit 451 we are introduced to a very different, vague society where opinion, literature, and knowledge of the past are close to nonexistent. Ray Bradbury, the author, claims that it is the people and their technology that ruined what used to be life. And after reading through Bradbury's evidence throughout the novel, I have to agree. Though the government is powerful enough to make laws and rules, the people (the majority) have the power to rebel and change what the government shapes society to be. Unfortunately, the only thing the majority is changing are the channels on their TVs. Guy Montag, the protagonist, is one of the only characters to rebel, along with Faber. They, unlike their brainwashed, plain neighbors have a vision to change their society and convert the occupation of fireman to what it once was. Notice that these to characters are different from the rest; they have read books, understood ideas, meanings and developed their own opinions. This attempt of seeking knowledge rather than sitting in a parlor on a couch mindlessly staring at 3 or 4 flat screen TVs exposes Guy and Faber to be the minority...the rebels. The rebels should have much less potential than the majority, but thanks to brainwashing technology and boring lifestyles, the roles have been flipped. Bradbury presents how the majority is weakening themselves with technology when Professor Faber states, " 'But remember that the Captain belongs to the most dangerous enemy to truth and freedom, the solid unmoving cattle of the majority. Oh, God, the terrible tyranny of the majority' " (Bradbury 104). Faber refers to the people/majority as solid unmoving cattle. The people have done nothing to stop the reforms of literature in any way, though they have the power to do so. The entertainment that comes with technology has acted as a substitute for literature, and has spread to engulf much more of people's lives. In our world today, technology is everywhere, and is the reason why the majority is not changing the world we live in. If we executed our time wisely toward other important things, and without technology playing such a large roll as entertainment, we'd impress ourselves and Bradbury.
Reply
Katherine Feldkamp
7/31/2015 12:42:37 pm
In Ray Bradbury’s famous novel, Fahrenheit 451, he expresses that the blame is not to be completely put on the government for the over usage of technology, but it should be put more on the citizens themselves. The effect of the newest technology is what forced the citizens to outlawing books and replacing all books with TVs. Without the force of immediate change from the citizens themselves, nothing would have been changed. Bradbury explains how the citizens believe that using technology non-stop is more important than reading or having any form of face-to-face communication. For example, Mildred, Montag’s wife, is always glued to her seashell, which distracts her from the rest of the world around her. “Mildred watched the toast delivered to her plate. She had both ears plugged with electronic bees that were humming the hour away. She looked up suddenly, saw him, and nodded.” (Bradbury 18) Her distraction from the world causes her to not communicate with even her own husband or anyone else around her. This is the perfect example of the theme that Bradbury expresses throughout the book of how their lives revolve solely around technology. Just like with the TVs, Mildred seashell had major effects on her own life, along with affecting many others in the process. Even though this is a futuristic book, it relates to our society and the world today in many ways. In our present day society, technology seems to have also taken control of our lives in more ways bad than good. In the article “Negative Effects of Technology on Society” from teenink.com, the author states that “[he] believes that people have too readily embraced technology seeking only the benefits, and ignoring the many downfalls”. What I believe that the author is trying to express in this is how everyone talks up all the good things of technology, but they never take the time to think about the many tolls that technology has taken on our society as a whole. This idea from the world today relates back to Bradbury’s book in the same way citizens of Montag’s city worshipped TV and burned books, because they believed that anything you learn in books can be understood better from the glowing box, otherwise known as the TV. I agree with Bradbury completely on the fact that it is not the state, but rather it is the people because they are the ones forcing these types of things to occur and making themselves use electronics instead of world interaction or reading of books. For many reasons, Bradbury’s point is more agreeable especially because of the fact that it is so relevant to our world today.
Reply
Katherine Neff
7/31/2015 12:45:18 pm
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, a dystopian society run by technology is illustrated. Although Bradbury agrees that the government can be held accountable for the increasing usage of technology, he believes that the people in their society are the real culprits of this rising issue. The people in the novel sat back and watched as books were belittled to their faces and burned to ashes. Sure, government workers were the ones feeding these thoughts to people, but that did not mean that people needed to believe them. Even if there were more people in the world like Guy Montag who did not support the growing trend of technology, they were too scared to speak up for what they believed in because they feared confrontation. Because of this, the entire population needed to be satisfied with the world they lived in, a world without books. Montag’s wife Mildred was one who was especially drawn to technology. She was constantly in her parlor watching something on any of her three television walls. Not only did she have three already, but she would hint at the beginning of the novel that she wanted a fourth. It almost seemed as if she craved technology. She hated the idea of books so much that when her husband pulled one out in front of her friends, she had an excuse as to why he had it. She explained to her friends “Ladies, once a year, every fireman’s allowed to bring one book home, from the old days, to show his family how silly it all was, how nervous that sort of thing can make you…”(Bradybury, 99). To Montag, this just seemed like Mildred’s cover up for her husbands actions when in reality she was really revealing what she thought of books when she said that they were silly. She does not realize that she is being cheated of valuable information and history because she is so set on the fact that technology is great. People like Mildred and her friends would believe anything that they saw on TV. When the police killed an innocent bystander on live television who they claimed to be Guy Montag, they believed it. They thought that anything they saw on television was true. A problem in todays day that relates to Mildred’s situation is false advertising. Many products advertised on television or social media are made up to be better than they actually are. Whether it be a skin product that does not actually work the way it claims or a toy that does not work as flawlessly as the commercials make it out work, it usually still sells regardless. If we keep falling for these tricks and gimmicks than our generation will become as clueless and gullible as people like Mildred. Books and research are important sources of information and seeing them go to waste will have a negative effect on people today. In closing, technology may have its many advantages but not all of it can be trustworthy. Sticking to trustworthy sources is definitely a better solution.
Reply
Andrew Hall
7/31/2015 01:05:37 pm
Ray Bradbury's novel, Fahrenheit 451, explains how people no longer use the outdoors as entertainment instead, they use technology for entertainment such as television. The futuristic society in this novel is full of book burning people glued to their electronics. Firemen in this society burn things down such as houses and they burn books, they do not put the fires out. Guy Montag burns books but later discovers how empty his life was because of this technology. Montag finds out because a seventeen year old girl, who doesn't pay attention to technology and her innocence and "craziness" drove Montag to show how the world has such beauty. The misunderstood statement that says it is the fault of the state's but Bradbury says differently. Bradbury says it is the people's fault. Clarisse is an outcast because she does not do what other kids her age do. Clarisse entertains herself outside like fooling around in he rain. Her psychiatrist also thinks she is crazy only because she doesn't use technology. Montag begins to learn about Clarisse's life towards the beginning of the novel. Clarisse says, "People don't talk about anything... They name a lot of cars or clothes or swimming pools mostly and say how swell! But they all say the same things and nobody says anything different from anyone else...(Bradbury 28). In this quote it shows how nobody wants to lead and rebel to live in a healthier society and they do whatever everybody else does to "fit in." Ray Bradbury's prediction abut the future is very close to correct. Most of America's society is entertained and informed about everything from social media, TV, video games, etc. We, ourselves, are the culprit of this society of being so corrupt from the real world.
Reply
Isabel Halloran
7/31/2015 01:19:06 pm
While Ray Bradbury was writing "Fahrenheit 451," he was not focusing on the oppressive government, but taking the stance that people oppress themselves by spending their time doing mindless activities, specifically watching television. "In Fahrenheit 451," to ignore their problems, the characters spend all of their time behind TV screens. While talking about Guy’s wife’s obsession with the screens, Bradbury states, “But who has ever torn himself from the claw that encloses you when you drop a seed in a TV parlor? It grows you any shape it wishes!” (Bradbury 84). Bradbury meant that the television is an all-consuming, easy escape that pulls you in, and gives you a temporary sense of happiness. I partially agree with Bradbury’s opinion that people damage themselves when they use these activities to hide from problems that are too painful to confront. However, I can also see the other point of this argument, that people can be oppressed by institutions. A recent article in The Chicago Tribune summarized how a few students from Lane Tech High School have started a book club where they only read books that were banned from the school. "Fahrenheit 451" and another book I read this past school year, "The Absolutely True Diary of A Part-Time Indian," by Sherman Alexie, both make the list. In a quote from that article, students explain how they decided on their first choice: “...the first book was Sherman Alexie's 'The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian,' which has some random controversial elements but also had an instant talking point because the Lane Tech mascot is a Native American, which you are either for or against, but it's something” (Borrelli 1). The story about this book relates to Ray Bradbury’s "Fahrenheit 451," because the novel was also removed from the curriculum for possessing ideas that people would rather ignore than face. The students of Lane Tech High School were stripped of their right to read "Fahrenheit 451," so they formed a book club, aptly named 451 Degrees, as a way to stand up to their controlling school system. It is ironic how a book with a theme that I interpret as censorship was censored from a school.
Reply
Meghan Pawlak
7/31/2015 01:21:08 pm
People have argued on what the main focus is in the novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Many have said that the book tries to bring out the topic of censorship such as people not being able to read books or thinking outside of the box. However in Bradbury’s comment he says that he has worried about what TV and the internet have done to the average person’s mindset. Of course in this day in age no one can go anywhere without their phone or a wifi hotspot. I agree with Bradbury that things have started becoming unnecessarily overboard with the internet world. This shown quite greatly when Beatty comes over to check on Montague and has this whole great speech with lines such as “Films and radio, magazines, books leveled down to a sort of pastepudding norm” (Bradbury 54). With people such as Clarisse and Faber Montag was able to see past the ways in which he was brainwashed into thinking. Before them he was just a simple fire man burning books without understanding their worth. This book reminds me that of The Book Thief by Markus Zusak with all the book burnings and being restricted of knowledge. Zusak said “The words. Why did they have to exist? Without them, there wouldn’t be any of this.”. I believe that Bradbury wanted us to accept the fact that some times in our live we must take a step back and look our big picture of a life. Notice if there is something you should change for your well being than it must be changed, and not be so consumed in what others feel is right for their well being. Thinking for yourself and finding answers is the best that you can for yourself.
Reply
Ava Nevad
7/31/2015 01:32:39 pm
In the novel Fahrenheit 451 written by acclaimed author Ray Bradbury, the readers have their attention drawn to the subject of people being consumed and completely distracted by the television. Bradbury states that the message of the novel is misinterpreted and he is more focused on the state of the people rather than the awful things that the government is doing. Although the government plays a very big role in the terrible things that are happening in the novel, the humans desire to be completely focused on television and have no interest in books or anything other than their television family is a bigger issue. When the idea of a book is talked about or brought up in a conversation, the feeling turns into a very awkward and tense situation. Besides for a few people, the idea of books is not discussed or explored. Like most people, Guy’s wife is obsessed with the television and her television “family”. “It's really fun. It'll be even more fun when we can afford to have the fourth wall installed. How long you figure before we save up and get the fourth wall torn out and a wall-TV put in. It's only two thousand dollars.” (Bradbury 20). Guy’s wife, Mildred is so obsessed and consumed by the TV that all she can do is talk about her television family, leaving Guy to explore books on his own. The government has taken their power to make all people believe that books are bad. By doing this and setting up systems to get rid of all books and temptations, the government has made books seem so bad that it is even easier for the people to be sucked into and taken in by the television. By disposing of all books and making the allure of books almost obsolete, it cannot be easier for people to use this as an excuse to only focus on their electronics and not have to use their brains for anything because they are led to believe it is bad. Although Bradbury states that the subject of his novel is misinterpreted, I believe that the governments control goes hand in hand with the peoples dullness but instead of exploring what the government has decided is bad, the people take the easy way out and corrupt themselves. I agree with Bradbury’s statement that the state of the people is their own fault and not the government’s.
Reply
Kathleen Patterson
7/31/2015 01:50:53 pm
While Ray Bradbury did touch upon the idea of government control, the novel Fahrenheit 451, however the main point he wanted to express was in that television and other electronics were causing a diminishing of important interactions, ideas, expressions, and all around life values. Evidence of this theme was shown through The Mechanical Hound, as well as the comparing and contrasting of books and the electronic “parlor families”. To begin, while The Hound symbolized a few things, I took it to represent the impending disconnect between electronics and the heart and soul of humanity. While The Hound seemed as though life coursed through its electronic veins, it always had a negative, never fully complete energy, as “The Mechanical Hound slept but did not sleep, lived but did not live in its gently humming, gently vibrating, softly illuminated kennel” (Bradbury 24). The Hound was let out of its kennel for two reasons. The first being as a source of entertainment for the fireman, similar to the way television is entertainment for the average person. The second is to do the only thing that it knows how to do-destroy-which shows the disconnect. It doesn`t know any better, whereas humans could. This destruction forebodes the further destruction in the novel, as well as the world, both in the world of the characters, and in the present and future world of the reader. Furthermore, the contrast of “parlor families” and books is apparent the words of Faber and Millie's immersion in the world of the parlor. The people on tv in the parlor would come to life in the wall, and were programmed to know the viewer's name, creating the illusion of intimacy, and a poor substitute to talking to people face to face and observing the world. Millie, Guy`s wife, is one of the people who immerses herself in these “families”. As Montag begins to question the world he has come to know, he asks, “Millie, does... your ‘family’ love you, love you very much, love you with all their heart and soul, Millie?”, to which she replies “Why’d you ask a silly question like that?” (Bradbury 77). Through her response, it is proved that Millie cares about their wellbeing and almost wholeheartedly expects them to be able to reciprocate. To further illustrate the emotional and mental connections lacking in their world, Faber comments that the world is merely missing “some of the things that were once in books. Some of the things that should be in ‘parlor families’ today.... The magic is only in what books say, how they stitched the patches of the universe together into one garment for us”(Bradbury 82-23). Here, he touches upon the fact that while certain connections can be made through electronics, like how they can say the name of the viewer and appear to have a connection, the things that they are lacking are the connections. One can see the diminishing of connections in our world if they simply go into public and observe. Rather than talking to people, everyone is on their phones. Ideas are expressed in texts and emojis rather than the spoken word, as most of the younger generations don't even bother to make calls anymore. People in public are much more selfish in their ways, sticking to their smartphone screens rather than talking to those around them, or observing the world. These ideas and impending destruction that we were thoroughly warned about through Bradbury's story are coming true, and it must come to an end or be changed before it is too late. In summary, The novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury expresses that television and other electronics are causing a diminishing of important interactions, ideas, expressions, and all around life values.
Reply
Anya Tewari
7/31/2015 01:52:52 pm
Fahrenheit 451, a novel written by Ray Bradbury, displays a society completely run-over by technology. The people in the book are constantly watching tv, listening to the radio, and living in ignorance. They are content with swallowing whatever information the government feeds them, and don’t question authority. It’s like they are afraid of knowledge, and afraid of change. For this reason, Bradbury states that “the culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the State — it is the people...He was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government." I agree with his statement. No matter what rules the government sets,if enough people rebel, then they can make a change. The problem is, no one rebelled. They just went along with it. When books were banned, the majority of people didn’t do anything. They simply switched to TV and radio which conveyed only the government’s point of view (whereas books had lots of information from many different perspectives.) This can be demonstrated when Faber says, “The firemen are rarely necessary. The public itself stopped reading of its own accord”(Bradbury 87). The firemen are used to eliminate any remaining books found, but Faber says they’re not even needed because no one wants to read anymore. No one feels the need to explore, but rather they are content to live blindly. This can in a way be connected to the present. Everyone is connected, but disconnected by technology (smartphones, computers, etc.) It may not be as bad as the situations depicted in Fahrenheit 451, but modern technology has definitely changed society, and maybe not for the better. This comes back to the main point, that not all the blame should be put on the government for the overwhelming use of technology in everyday life, but also on the people for going along with it, quite like shepherds and sheep. The government guides and the people simply follow.
Reply
Daisy Major
7/31/2015 02:00:44 pm
In Ray Bradbury's book "Fahrenheit 451" the government is not the enemy but the people and society that live under the government. They are not allowed to read books or have any way of intellectual education, but just sit at home watching TV or listening to the radio through seashells which are headphones. The main character of the book, Guy Montag, was an ordinary person who followed all the rules of society and was a fireman. A fireman in this futuristic society would start fires to burn books instead of put them out. He was all that until he met a bright eyed young woman named Clarisse. Clarisse was a teenager who had a lot of questions. She wondered about books and what life used to be like. When Clarisse and Montag would have conversations they would have real conversations and talk about things that were meaningful and personal. Clarisse changed Montag. After only a couple of conversations with her, he started to realize that maybe people could learn from books and watch less TV and actually interact. He begins to steal books from book collections he burns and starts to think less of being a fireman. "(Bradbury) ... is not the State - it is the people..." Bradbury is explaining that even though the government is making all of the rules and banning books, the people are the ones that go along with it. They should be trying to change it but they hit decide to leave it as it is. Clarisse is the one who opens Montag's eyes to this situation. One quote that shows how Clarisse made Montag change his opinions, " And then, very slowly, as he walked, he tilted his head back in the rain, for a few moments, and opened his mouth... (Bradbury 24)" Clarisse told him to do this and at first he thought it was silly, but then he did it. The state is not the enemy here but the people who do nothing about it.
Reply
Jackie Izzo
7/31/2015 02:52:03 pm
Ray Bradbury’s quotation from Fahrenheit 451 is explaining how the government that put this law into order is not the significant issue, it is the people who follow the government's rule and continue to be controlled by the state. Society is giving into the government and ignoring the call for change. The people refuse to rebel for what is right and sit back, watching society crumble into decline. Guy Montag, the main protagonist, began as a fireman who burned books and did his job without question. He lives a happy life with his wife, Mildred, in a society where reading and having knowledge is considered illegal. They live in a technology based world and are extremely happy. After a long day of burning books he meets an out-of-this-world girl named Clarisse. Her curiosity always gets the best of her while exploring and examining different ideas. She describes the way she loves to read and the importance of these unique ideas. She gives Montag newfound ideas of rebellion and changing the way society lives. Montag also realizes the impact books have on the people who have hidden them when he is on duty. “The woman knelt among the books, touching the drenched leather and cardboard, reading the gilt titles with her fingers while her eyes accused Montag” (Bradbury 35). These books mean the world to this woman because she would rather sacrifice her life than see her priceless books be destroyed. This illustrates that people still love to read in the society and hide their books and feelings of insurgency. They refuse to stand up for what is right. I agree with the statement that the government is not the problem. The people are the concern because secretly a select few cherish books but fear the consequences of rebellion. If someone believes something is unfair they should give it their full effort to try to change it even if the consequences are severe. Although the government feels books are a source of unhappiness and pointless, people may feel differently. There are not enough people rebelling. This society is similar to society in the United States. Even though the United States has the freedom of speech and free thinking, most people don't utilize these rights and are fearful of criticising the government's law. In the novel, the members of society who enjoy illegal reading do not have the courage to stand up for their beliefs. Many citizens throughout the book feel that this law is nonsense, but are apprehensive of the result of speaking their minds. There are many laws in the United States that people find unreasonable but feel it is the best decision to not speak out. Laws such as exceedingly high property taxes in New Jersey is a huge problem for the citizens in New Jersey. The high taxes result in people leaving the country because they cannot afford to live in New Jersey. Their houses are foreclosed and they cannot pay the taxes. This is an unfortunate law that people are exorbitantly mad about, but they choose not to speak out. Furthermore, the novel Fahrenheit 451 shows that the people in this society fear the government and will never speak their minds. They believe that they should let the government continue burning the books while society remains quiet. Never will they decide to stay strong and fight for the books.
Reply
Hanorah McAtasney
8/1/2015 04:36:33 am
Its amazing how much of an impact the worlds opinion has on the characters in the novel. "My uncle says the architects got rid of the front porches because they didn't look well. But my uncle says that was merely rationalizing it; the real reason, hidden underneath, might be they didn't want people sitting like that, doing nothing, rocling, talking; that was the wrong kind of social life." (Bradbury 63). All the architects had to say is front porches didn't look right, they get a few people to agree with their statement and away with front porches. Its the same with books in Fahrenheit 451. Its obivous that the government (I assume) is behind all of it, however, no one questions it. Maybe a few people protested or wondered why but they were easily silenced. Bradbury constantly places Mildred in front of the television. It seems as if this is a large symbol of how everyone relys on what information the program is giving them. The government wants everyone to be and feel equal. Books, time to think, etc could stop them from being alike in multiple ways.
Reply
Corbin Nielsen
8/1/2015 04:43:18 am
The quotation given by Ray Bradbury explains that the antagonist of the novel is not the government nor the state, but the people who live under it. Guy Montag, the main protagonist of the novel Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, started originally as a man that, by the customs set in place, was completely "normal", and enjoyed his job heartily, which was burning books. However, his world is completely changed when he meets Clarisse. She tells Montag of her secret love of books, which were considered illegal. Montag finds a new love for books, and wants to help Clarisse. Montag realizes how much books can help people in the times that they live, and this quote from the novel illustrates it well: "The woman knelt among the books, touching the drenched leather and cardboard, reading the gilt titles with her fingers while her eyes accused Montag” (Bradbury 35). It shows how Montag realized that books can set a person into joy, sorrow, fill anyone with emotions, and help them escape from where they live now. However, this also illustrates how people strive to stand up against "the man", but lack the strength to do so. They try their hardest to stop the one against them, but fail in the process. The government may be the root of the problem, and possibly the state, but if the people who wish to fight stand idly by and watch with tears? Then it will be our problem.
Reply
Caroline Pearce
8/1/2015 09:06:49 am
After analyzing the text of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, I believe that in some ways Bradbury is correct, but is as equally incorrect in his claim that “The culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is not the state—it is the people.” In the novel, Bradbury writes of a distant, fast-paced future, where books are banned and people love their TVs. “Beatty leaned forward in the faint mist of smoke from his pipe… ‘With schools turning out more runners, jumpers, racers, tinkerers, grabbers, snatchers, fliers, and swimmers instead of examiners, critics, knowers, and imaginative creators, the word ‘intellectual,’ of course, became the swear word it deserved to be… We must all be alike. Not everyone is born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal’” (Bradbury 58). In this part of the novel, Bradbury had the Fire Captain, Beatty explain to the protagonist, Guy Montag why things are the way they are. This literal and figurative smoke is continuously brought up throughout Fahrenheit 451 because when fires are started and the smoke becomes thick enough, it blocks out all light, and after awhile, if you couldn’t settle with living in the dark, some part of you would die trying to find the light, whether it be your courage, your creativity, or yourself. Professor Faber explains to Montag, “‘Montag, you are looking at a coward. I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing. I am one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the ‘guilty,’ but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself…’” Faber continued to explain to Montag, “‘The same infinite detail and awareness could be projected through the radios and televisions, but are not’” (Bradbury 82). Here, Faber enhances the idea that television and electronics are not the problem; the problem is that we misuse them. There are different types of technology, “techne” that is a way of seeing the beauty in things and being able to reveal what is concealed and “enframing,” which is when natural elements are seen only for the potential resources they hold. In Fahrenheit 451, books were techne because they showed the beauty of real things and the “TV falilies” were enframing. The culprit in Fahrenheit 451 is both the people and the state, the state was the cause of what had happened to make the United States the way it was, while the people allowed it to happen and allowed themselves to become mindless drones.
Reply
Samanthat Feder
8/10/2015 07:25:59 am
The presence of technology in Bradbury’s dystopian society is linked to the malcontent blanket laying over that same society. People, such as Mildred’s friend Mrs. Phelps, are so much more interested in the lives of the ‘family’ on TV that they would rather watch them than have a family of their own. Mrs. Phelps says “No one in his right mind, the good Lord knows, would have children!” (Bradbury 96). Later in the book when Mildred pulls the alarm, she has no despair in leaving her house and belongs. However she is horrified at the idea of leaving her ‘family’ in the parlor. As she gets into a cab she is mumbling “Poor family, poor family,” (Bradbury 114). This is not the first time that the accuracy of this book had been presented in the modern day. Technology is the bases of the American society and whoever pretends that they wouldn’t consider a computer or cell phone a very high priority is bad liar. Bradbury’s future is now our present leaving us with a blanket of technology that we cannot function without.
Reply
Catherine Mellor
8/11/2015 06:07:47 am
I agree with Bradbury in the sense that the people let this happen to them. They let TV overrule books which lead to them being dangerous. The government was not the antagonist, the people were. They even call their parlors or Television Rooms their "Families". They don't have close relationships with each other, Montag and Mildred can't even remember how they met. It's not just unnatural to have conversations and talk to one another, it's frowned upon. Clarisse McClellan unfortunately died in this book. She was different, she liked to talk to people, have interest in nature, and didn't agree with what the government said. According to Montag's captain she "(was) better off dead". It's better that she's not around to let the others realize that what she does that is "different" is actually right. Without her, people won't speculate different types of behavior, and go back to liking books and living the way people used to. Clarisse says that her uncle "drove slowly on a highway once... they jailed him for two days". This really shows how her and her family are differences from everyone else. They like to think. People don't want to think. It was their fault and decision which made television take over books and their lives.
Reply
Sarah Bailey Lakatos
8/11/2015 12:11:51 pm
In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury shows how just because the government put a ban on books, it wasn’t completely the government’s fault. The citizens in the society didn’t do anything to put a stop to it from happening. “The firemen are rarely necessary. The public itself stopped reading of its own accord”(Bradbury 87). This quote is basically explaining the fact even though the government enforced the banning of all the books; the society was too busy with all the social media to care. TV and social media became such a big part in the society that only a few people rebelled against the banned book laws. Montag's wife, Mildred, is an example of the society that has become. Montag asks, "Will you turn the parlor off?" and Mildred replies, "that's my family" (Bradbury 48-49). Mildred along with most of the people in the society, now believe that the social media and electronics are more important. She values them over anything else in her life and over time, the society feels the same way Mildred does. The government doesn’t like the citizens reading the books because it gives them to think and form their own opinions. The government wants all the citizens to think that their way is the best way so preventing the society from reading is their solution. Even in today’s society, people will choose what’s easier. Sitting down on the couch on your phone or watching TV is a lot easier then reading books. When Bradbury says that it's not the state and it is in fact the people, I agree one hundred percent because the citizens in the society stayed with the books did not allow themselves to be brainwashed by technology. It is the citizens own fault for allowing things like this to happen.
Reply
Josh Goldsmith
8/30/2015 09:30:59 am
In the interview about Fahrenheit 451, on the blog, Ray Bradbury was not trying to explain that his novel was about the dulling effects of television itself, but the content that is put on television. His world was one where people watched whatever garbage broadcast on TV. He knew that there could be better programs on television. He explains this idea through Faber on page 82 when Faber is talking to Montag, “It’s not the books you need, it’s some of the things that once were in books. The same things could be in the ‘parlor families’ today. The same infinite detail and awareness could be projected through radios and televisors, but are not.” He blatantly states that television and radio could be just as great as books. Television could have been used to open the eyes of that people in that world to the atrocities going on around them, but it was only used to seal their eyes shut. It seems like Bradbury was able to see the future with this novel. People seem to be reading less and less, because watching a TV show takes less effort. Bradbury saw this coming and realized that if books aren’t used anymore than movies TV and radio shows would have to fill the shoes of books. The problem was that people weren’t recognizing the potential that this technology could possibly grow into those big shoes. It doesn’t seem like books are going away, but nevertheless, movies and television shows have gained more of the “infinite detail and awareness” Bradbury had been hoping for them. It appears as though television and movies have grown enough that they could take the place of books. If there were no books left, then people could make more stories using television. Who’s to say that the stories will be mind numbingly awful? Misinterpretations of this book have created the idea that technology is distancing humans from each other, separating them in all sorts of ways. In reality technology has accomplished the opposite. If a war broke out on the other side of the world, the news would be in the darkness until someone physically brought the information all the way across the planet, which is not a quick trip. With technology the entire world can be aware of the news within seconds. Television can accurately show us what life is like in another country we may never go to in our lifetime, but thanks to this wonderful technology, we get a taste of life from a different point of view. This novel is not trying to imply that books are a necessity, it isn’t speaking out against censorship, or even discrediting technology. This novel is trying to show people that there is the potential for television, radio, and all technology, to be like books, or possibly even greater.
Reply
Lili Krupinski
9/2/2015 01:17:52 pm
The book Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury presents many messages. The one that stands out the most to me is the one that says what television can do to you. In this society Bradbury created, many people spend their time wrapped up in technology such as TV or their so-called "sea shells". You can clearly see the effect of this when Mildred had a get together at her house with her friends to watch a specific show. When Montag asks the women about their children, one replies "I plunk the children in school nine days out of ten. I put up with them when they come home three times a month; it's not bad at all. You heave them into the "parlor" and turn the switch. It's like washing clothes: stuff laundry in and slam the lid." (Bradbury 96). This shows what everybody watching TV has done to people. It has desensitized them. The women don't even care about their children anymore! Another women even goes to say that she and her husband wouldn't even care if the other died. She says, "Anyway, Pete and I always said, no tears, nothing like that. It's our third marriage each and we're independent. Be independent, we always said. He said, if I get killed off, you just go right ahead and don't cry, but get married again, and don't think of me." (Bradbury 95). No one cares about anyone else anymore. All they care about is watching their television shows. So I'd say, Fahrenheit 451 had an important theme of what watching to much TV can do to a civilization.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
AuthorMr. Justin Biggs Archives
August 2016
|