Fahrenheit 451 224
Greetings, all. I thought I'd let things settle down a little bit after my Cluetrain review, and try something slightly
safer. :-) It never ceases to amaze me how, in an age where we use the phrase "that's so yesterday!" without
flinching, the best lessons are those from "long ago." Book burning has been a hallmark of our century, although we
certainly did not invent it. From the blatant actions of the Nazis to the self-censorship of the post-WWII age to
today's filtering fights, the struggle to express ourselves has never ended. Come the middle of this century, at a time
when the status quo was as strong as it has been in recent memory, a man with a story reminded us of something
that Thomas Jefferson expressed two centuries before, that a little revolution now and then is a good thing. That
revolution may generate some uncomfortable instability, but in the end we as a society are better for it.
| Fahrenheit 451 | |
| author | Ray Bradbury |
| pages | 179 |
| publisher | Del Rey |
| rating | 10/10 |
| reviewer | Jason Bennett |
| ISBN | 0-345-41001-7 |
| summary | Although written in a "calmer" era, F451 still resonates with us today as uncomfortable views continue to be repressed. |
The Scenario
Since this is fiction, I'll keep this short to avoid giving away the story. Imagine the Jetsons in a time where owning a book is illegal, in a society dominated by mindless media. In other words, it's set in the present, as the present could be. Ok, I'm exaggerating, but not as much as I'd like to be. In this time, houses have been made completely fireproof, and therefore the firemen don't stop fires -- they start them, by burning down houses containing contraband (books). The rationale is quite simple: Books are divisive. There's always someone complaining, or feeling attacked, or generally unhappy that someone else knows something he shouldn't. But there's no need to repeat what Bradbury has so eloquently expressed.Jon Katz, fifty years early. Be afraid.Now let's take up the minorities in our civilization, shall we? [Giant list of every possible philosophical group] The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that! ... 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. [italics mine] ... Surely you remember the boy in your own school class who was exceptionally 'bright'.... And wasn't it this bright boy you selected for beatings and tortures after hours? ... And so when houses were finally fireproofed completely... [firemen] were given the new job, as custodians of our peace of mine, the focus of our understandable and rightful dread of being inferior: official censors, judges, and executors.
What's Bad?
I'm supposed to tell you what's bad about a classic of science fiction written around the time of my parent's birth? Yeah, right. I gave it a zero above for a reason: there's no way to rate this. Is this a better book than, for example, Cryptonomicon? In terms of influence and longevity, certainly. Will you like it more? Go find out for yourself! It's short!
What's Good?
The best books are the ones that last, the ones with the timeless lessons that speak across the ages. I felt this way with my first review for Slashdot, of The Mythical Man Month, and I feel the same now. Fahrenheit 451 expresses the issue just as well today as it did when it was written. Cyberpatrol, the CDA, and peacefire may have been decades away, but that only makes the lesson all the more poignant. In addition, there are more recent addenda in this edition written by Bradbury himself that relate some of what has happened since the original publication. All in all, a satisfying and poignant read.
So What's In It For Me?
A needle that will prick your heart, and a voice that will speak to your soul.
Purchase this book at ThinkGeek.
Table of Contents
- Part One: The Hearth and the Salamander
- Part Two: The Sieve and the Sand
- Part Three: Burning Bright
- Afterword
- Coda
451 (Score:1)
Everything by Bradury is great (Score:1)
Thanks for reminding me that it's time to check this one out again. And for pointing out that it may be especially relevent today.
Always and inevitably everyone underestimates the number of stupid individuals in circulation
An excellent book. (Score:2)
It makes a really good comment about political correctness. While it is a good thing, this book paints the nightmare scenerio where free thought is eliminated through the destruction of books and programming of people (with television). Even the bible was changed so that Jesus was one of the family.
I do agree that being sensitive to people is important. However, even though it may offend some, having a seperate identity is important - it's what makes us human. Otherwise, as was the case in this book, we're all the same. And is that a life worth living?
-leoglas
i've looked at love from both sides now. from win and lose, and still somehow...
It's scaaary :) (Score:1)
But the thing to remember here is.... (Score:2)
The governement in the book is the government the people wanted, but at least those in power knew it was wrong, and took steps to protect mankind (Not the citizens, per se, but the future generations) from the idiocies of the present.
And why yes, I own two copies presently, paperback, and an autographed hardcover edition.
And, BTW, I am still waiting for somebody to turn A Sound of Thunder into a full length movie.
F-451 (Score:3)
Too bad the younger generations are now growing up and reading too much crap. I mean, Shakespeare is all good and stuff. But how many Shakespeare books should a person read in school before its declared enough? 5? 10? All?
The reason why the teachers never mention these books is that they never read them. They don't want students to know something they don't. They don't want their students to learn new stuff.
I say, we should make reading one of those classic books [above] mandatory reading in schools.
This book. (Score:1)
This book is absolutely brilliant.
(The only thing that pisses me off is that I didn't think to do a review of it, even though I know it almost by heart. =) )
I'm a 21st century digital boy.
I don't know how to read, but I got a lot of toys.
Hooray for Slashdot Reviews! (Score:2)
This post will almost certainly get modded down as trolling or kissing up, but I just wanted to say hooray for Slashdot! :o)
If there is one book ... (Score:2)
I think everyone who can, should read this book. Reading it online will never do justice. Having it read will not be the same. And seeing the movie is almost blasphemous. If anything, it's a wonderful warning about how society can crush an individuals freedoms without vigilance. Not to mention a good story about a guy who is willing to fight the status quo for something as silly as some pressed wood and ink.
Fire is bright. Fire is clean. Burn all. Burn everything.
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
the movie (Score:1)
But like all ridiculously bad movies, it can be pretty funny to watch :)
-----------------------------------------------
The ISO 9000 compliant version is "Celsius 283" (Score:3)
George
Great, important classic (Score:2)
Re:the movie (Score:1)
What I couldn't deal with was the blatant alteration and misuse of just about everything in that was in the book. =)
I'm a 21st century digital boy.
I don't know how to read, but I got a lot of toys.
Right on (Score:1)
So if you haven't read this book yet, go to your closest library and read it. It is excellent. Don't forget to read Edgar Allan Poe as well, for some reason I always associate these two authors together, even though they are very different.
Opps! (Score:1)
dogma (Score:5)
451 has an edge over these other works, in that it preaches to the choir as few works of art ever have. After all, it is a book about how important books are, so the audience (people who read novels) are more apt to be shaken up by this nightmare than the average Joe.
Bradbury claimed that once he had the idea for this book he was able to write the entire book in one sitting. Just like "The Screwtape Letters" by C.S. Lewis, it is a story that almost writes itself, once the author invents the concept.
Perhaps because it was written so quickly, the narrative really flows. Reading this story makes for a great lazy summer afternoon. If you just recently finished pounding your way through the choppy prose of a William Gibson novel (say, "Virtual Light"), then F.451 is a great choice for something to clear the palate with (before moving on to "Idoru").
Book burning == Moderation? (Score:2)
Idle thinking out loud...
It's interesting to draw a parallel between book burning and the propensity for Slashdot moderation to silence those with strong opinions that go against the "popular culture". I'm not talking about Natalie Portman trolls, but opinions that are very strongly worded. Having been on the receiving end of "fascist moderation", I know that it happens.
Now, granted on Slashdot messages aren't destroyed per se. But it's interesting to note how often it happens that the tyranny of the Slashdot masses asserts itself to at least attempt to silence those voices that dare to question the conventional wisdom in too strong a manner.
Why take a shot a Shakespeare? (Score:2)
Re:It's scaaary :) (Score:5)
--
Re:F-451 (Score:2)
The movie is definitely worth a rental, too. (directed by François Truffaut, starring Oskar Werner, Julie Christie and Cyril Cusack); it features some spectacular acting, vaguely surreal visuals (in classic mid-60s European style) and the opening credits are spoken, which makes perfect sense when you think about it.
Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
In the limit of ab absurdum, given the choice between reading the Turner Diaries and F451, I would probably read F451. Would you prefer that everyone read F451 over the Turner Diaries? (Most people would) Does that mean that the book Turner Diaries should be censored? Albeit, this is a ridiculuous scenario, but you should see where I am going.
Self-censorship is a (paraphrasing TJ) God (creator, etc.) given right (pursuit of happiness). Now, if the majority of people prefer one book (idea, ethic, etc.) to another, does that mean the other is bad? Of course not. But, by touting one book (idea, ethic, etc.) over another, no matter what the subject matter, does just that (cf Cold War). By rating a book (a purely subjective pursuit), you are trying to impose your will on my reading habits--in effect attempting to censor what I read since I can only read so much.
The melieu depicted in F451 is a scenario (much like 1984 and Brave New World) achieved by incrementalism. Censorship is a slippery slope because power corrupts. It starts of with good intentions (ie removing curse words from elementary libraries) and ends up in hell (ie removing Mark Twain classics from an entire public school system).
Your moderation scheme here at /. is a form of censorship. I can filter out lower moderated comments. Someone else read them and deemed them inappropriate and I may never see these comments because of someone else's decision to censor (I knowingly keep my filter at >=1). While they are technically not censored, it would require a great deal of work if one were to find a jem in the trolls.
There can be no equal rights for all and everything as long as people have preferences (biases, prejudices, etc.) Of course, if people have no bias, then sound judgement cannot prevail (what is good judgement without a relative definition of good?). I will leave it to you to draw the obvious conclusion.
I've recently watched that movie (Score:1)
The new century is in for some nastiness (Score:3)
France wants to ban Nazi items.
Australia wants to ban porno.
America wants to ban gambling over the net and drug-related information.
China wants to ban all criticism.
God only knows what Iraq will want to ban when it finally gets its shit together.
It's pretty easy to see where this is all going to end up in a few years. There WILL be some sort of international treaty where all signatories agree to implement and enforce these bans. ISPs will be licensed and audited. Separate licenses will be required for T1 (and other high speed) backbone connections to the net. There's really only a handful of really big nodes in the US and probably the same is true in most countries. MAE EAST and MAE WEST anyone? Add in a dose of protect-the-children and anti-terrorism hysteria and kick it up a few notches with organized crime fears, Intellectual Property wars and BAM! it becomes all too clear. People, i.e. the Governments, will demand this wholesale control over who sees what. And the people who make those decisions will have absolutely no idea what they're doing or talking about. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
We, the enlightened ones, won't be able to stop it. We can't stop the RIAA or the MPAA. We're losing the DeCSS battle on the DVD front. Napster might be doomed, for all we know. The companies that have the money will get their way like dingos in a day-care center and THAT will set the precedents. Once the technical means are in place to impose content filtering on a large scale, then the really radical do-gooders will follow in their footsteps and screw it up but good.
I hate to say it but the Geeks and privacy activists and defense-of-rights groups are going to be left out in the cold like one-legged men in an ass kicking contest. Unless people start taking stuff like liberty seriously.
Up next -- Aristotle was a great philosopher (Score:1)
The whole "the 1950s was status quo conformism" is pure hogwash, apparently spouted by a reviewer with very little historical background of the era (not surprising from someone who actually lists as one of F451's goodpoints being that it is short.)
Finally, although the reviewer seems to extol "revolution" for its own sake even if it causes a little "instability" he should take a second from reading science fiction to doing a little historical research wherein he would find that revolutions which don't result in massive book burning are themselves in the minority. The American Revolution was the exception to the rule (and even those idiots immediately turned around and tired censoring each other with Sedition Acts, etc.)
Not too far in the future. (Score:1)
However, there is a possibility that our world may go the way of "Fahrenheit 451". The only difference is that paper books will be banned! their electronic counterparts will be forced upon readers.
As our world increasingly tends towards the hypertext-as opposed to fibertext(text on paper)-one wonders as to what licensing terms will accompany the new books.
Here's what I think:
The corporate tiger has tasted license. Now nothing else will satiate it. If the next generation of books is released only in electronic format, and can be read using only approved readers, then the books will be sure to carry the same licensing terms as those associated with todays closed source software.
By stretching my imagination a bit; I can arrive at:
"Pay-per-page-turn"
Critiquing will now fall under "reverse engineering". So publishers can suppress negative reviews.
-Travellers, old men and story tellers must be allowed their exaggerations.
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
I don't know if it would be fair to say that teachers don't want students to know something they don't. Any one person can not know everything, and I think most teachers know that. From my own personal experience with teaching friends and relatives about computers, I know that I enjoy it much more when I see them learning completely new things _on their own_ and then getting excited about it, and telling me about it. It's sorta like collaborative learning. Give them ideas, or a direction, and let them explore things that interest them.
I'm sure that this happens at a lower level in grade schools than it does in colleges, but the fact is, teachers (for the most part) are not as selfish or narrow-minded as you portray them.
But, anyway, the funny part of this story is that I ended up getting an A on my book report on F451, and then for the next 3 or 4 years, I reused the same report, with updated vocab words, cause I'm so lazy.
Re:Why take a shot a Shakespeare? (Score:1)
Why? (Score:1)
Its not even that good of a book. 1984 is much better, and actually more accurate to 'our current culture'
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
Oh, bull-pucky. I don't know what school you went to, but my English classes in high school (in New York and Helsinki) included 1984, Animal Farm and Brave New World as mandatory reading -- hell, in the IB program, there was an entire year about conflicts between individual and society, with horse doctor's doses of Camus, Ibsen, el-Saadawi, etc.
Of course, there are still some limits to what will be taught in school. Clockwork Orange is generally considered too extreme and graphic (although I still read it for the first time in the school library), and Huxley's post-60's work (Doors of Perception, Island, etc) is ignored -- not because the writing is any less skillful, but because portraying drug use or Tantric sex in a positive light would freak out the P.T.A. The contents of the curriculum tend to be set according to the collective sum of parental opinion, not because the teacher is Nazi in disguise.
Cheers,
-j.
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
Nobody is making you read at level 1, or 2 or 3. You have made that decision. You have made the decision to read posts at a level where most of the junk is not presented to you, and that you willingly lose some of the gems that just never get moderated up.
And of course, your statement was just a troll to begin with, so I don't know why I am even bothering to post a reply to it.
Other Suggestions (Score:2)
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
How close to our world? (Score:4)
Some days I get frightened by this world, and how it's starting to converge with the world of F.451...
...every time I see "America's Most Wanted", I think of the scene where the TV tells everyone to go out to the street to watch for Montag...
...in the clutter of banner ads, billboards, infomercials, and sponsorship logos, I hear "Denham's Dentifrice"...
...when my friend buys a big-screen TV, I think of Montag's wife in her "parlour"...
...when I hear about WAVE and profiling, I think of the young girl who moved in next door to Montag...
I could probably think of more, but it's been a couple years since I've read it... definitely will be pulling this one from the bookshelf again tonight.
________________________
Re:An excellent book. (Score:1)
not alone (Score:1)
Yes, recommended (Score:1)
Re:It's scaaary :) (Score:1)
That movie was on fairly recently on one of the cable networks. I remember being very pleasantly surprised at how well it followed the text of the book. And actually that can be applied to the version of 1984 featuring John Hurt as well. It's fairly ironic to see that on some things not even directors/producers feel they can improve them.
I own all of the books mentioned so far. I like to call it my Library of Sedition. If the schools here in the U.S. won't have them as required reading, I'll at least have them and will require my kids to read them carefully.
And I do mean sit down with the books and read them. The messages they contain are far too important IMHO. This is something I want my children to know. No strike that. This is something all children need to know.
Dissenting Opinion (Score:3)
Here is some more food for thought: if this is such a wonderful and classic book that warned us 30 years ago about the perils of censorship, then why is it that every year that goes by our reality
gets closer and closer to Bradbury's fiction? (hint: it has something to do with the fact that posting opinions to slashdot does nothing to change to world... go out there and do something about it!)
Re:Why take a shot a Shakespeare? (Score:1)
On video not so much. And if you're watching it reinterpretted with Ethan Hawke or Leo DiCarpio, definitely not. It's the writing that matters.
And you don't have to read Romeo and Juliet, or at least read it last.
Eloquence (Score:1)
don't confuse ray bradbury's writing
with that of katz.
Re:the movie (Score:1)
Really, really, really good book (Score:1)
Note: this is not the hollywood-ized, cheap, lame Sci-fi that gets panned (rightly so) for lack of purpose and crappy overall effect that many of Bradbury's works have been turned into. This is some impressive fiction and even today (when much of the world presented looks a bit 'silly') it carries the sense of realism. Yeah, read the thing!
-Elendale (grammer and punctuation were completely optional in this post)
Re:Everything by Bradury is great (Score:1)
----
Farenheight 451 (Score:1)
It is, quite simply, a stunning book. It is very well written and held my interest to such a degree that I never once put it down the whole time I was reading it. I kept thinking back to a short story I read once as a child about a man in the future who was arrested for "walking" at night. No other reason. I could feel the same insanity in F 451.
Even though it is entirely fiction, I can feel the history in it. What is even more disturbing, is tat I can also feel the future in it. I have seen similar acts to book burning where people have been forced to destroy somrthing of extreme value just to survive and that sort of imagery really disturbs me.
I may work in IT, I may like driving at high speeds, but I LOVE books and I think that the idea of detroying them is abhorant. I will even drive slowly round the country just to experience the sounds and sights of nature. The fact that a future culture that is not too dissimilar to our own would actively stop us doing that, disturbs me greatly. When I see the parallels between F 451 and the way "outsiders" are treated in schools today (computers kiddies being top of the list), I wonder where it will all end.
Will todays "Nanny State" become tomorrows "Big Brother"? I hope not.
Buy Link.. (Score:2)
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Also, it's worth bringing up here since we have all been ranting about censorship lately.
Offtopic comment: Maybe
My contributions to the SF list are
Of course, you are free to add your own books to the list.
Re:It's scaaary :) (Score:1)
Is it just me, or is this terribly, terribly ironic?
-----------------------------------------------
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
Yes, they should be required reading. Fortunately, they _are_ (and, hopefully, in most locales).
However, and I a hope that I am not the only dissenter here, but F-451 I find to be the most boring and laboriously told of any of the Bradbury fables. There is no wit, as the point is beaten home with a sledgehammer. To introduce a young mind to Bradbury, choose The Illustrated Man, or Something Wicked This Way Comes, or any of his marvellous anthologies. Choose The Martian Chronicles (again, a fable a bit too obviously told, and tainted in my mind by Rock Hudson, but still wonderful).
Just my
Re:Book burning == Moderation? (Score:1)
1) Your post may be moderated down, but you can still post.
2) This is only happening here - you are free to post your opinions elsewhere.
3) No one is going to come and destroy your means of communication or take your life (well, hopefully).
4) Slashdot is, in the end, has its own method of organization - its not perfect, it may change, but it has one that at least tries to work and gives people the chance to participate.
The real fear is when people start organizing to take the property of, imprison, and kill those they disagree with. The real fear is that you'll have nowhere to go when the hammer comes down.
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
I don't know how young the "younger generations" are that you're referring to, but as someone who recently finished highschool (I'm 20 now) I disagree that students today are reading too much 'crap'. With the exception of A Clockwork Orange, I had the opportunity to read all of the books mentioned above and a number of others most people would call "modern classics".
I really can't vouch for other schools (or school systems, for that matter) but when I went to highschool most of the books listed above were mandatory. Or, if not mandatory then still part of a grade 12 English lit class which was one of two choices for grade 12 English (does that make it 50% mandatory?). The course presented F-451, 1984, Brave New World, and a few others and discussed their recurring themes.
"Lord of the Flies" was a mandatory read in grade 11, and in grade 13 (I went to a Canadian school) we covered Joseph Heller's "Catch-22". Heck, in grade 8 I read the Chrysalids at my teacher's suggestion, though I can't claim that I fully grasped it at the time.
Just for reference, I read 4 Shakespeare plays in highschool - one for each grade except 12, and then I read Macbeth on my own time. There's something to be said for Shakespeare as well (though admittedly, 15 would be far too many).
Anyway, I certainly agree that most or all of the books mentioned should be taught in school, and my point is that they are. I think people are just too quick to criticize teachers and the educational system when they aren't fully aware of what is being taught.
You of course realize... (Score:3)
-Elendale (Not to mention it has something to do with my .sig)
Thats funny. (Score:1)
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
By calling one practice better than another, leads to conflict, discourse, solutions. To assume one practice is better than another and act upon it is fascism.
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:2)
Were there no moderation system, hence no "censorship", you'd not have any easier time finding those gems. Likely you'd have a worse time, as there'd be even more trolls.
/. moderation is a filtering system, not a censorship system. The difference being that it is voluntary for the reader. This means that if 99.99999% of
Too many people equate the freedom to not read what you don't want to read with censorship of the writer.
Re:F-451 (Score:1)
Re:Why? (Score:3)
There can be plenty of reasons.
Slashdot is read by many non-Americans. F451 is in all likeliness read by significantly less than 90% of the educated population in, say, Europe.
Books, films, articles etc. like all things tend to fade in one's memory. F451 makes points about the human nature that many feel are extremely relevant to today's and tomorrow's societies. I see no harm in paying attention to such relevant items, even if they're not the latest news.
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
----
Fix the link. (Score:1)
1. It' easier to jump directly into the ThinkGeek's page devoted to this book.
2. ThinkGeek might be upset
Also, someone mentioned long time ago a book searching engine a la pricewatch.com? Could you repost the link please?
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
My position is not against moderation just against the notion that there can be an absence of censorship (self-applied in the case of moderation and law-applied in the case of shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater). I personally agree with the censoring that occurs on slashdot and do not feel slighted. I personally thing F451 deserves the review it got. I just want to point out a meta-problem with reviewing. I have x amount of time to read (as do everyone else). I have to rely on others to choose what I read (I won't read a book with poor reviews if I have the opportunity to read on with good reviews). Therefore, I censor myself as to the reviewer I choose. If everyone chooses the same reviewer, then that is gross censorship.
Just a point and a meta-problem to free speech.
Re:Up next -- Aristotle was a great philosopher (Score:1)
1: /. writers are not very good, although they mean well.
2: Writing book reviews is easy, and a good way to start a discussion.
3: Most /. geeks like classic sci-fi.
4: Maybe ThinkGeek is planning on offering it for sale soon.
The whole "the 1950s was status quo conformism" is pure hogwash, apparently spouted by a reviewer with very little historical background of the era...
Nice to know there are a few "old school" geeks around here. :)
Check out the movie also (Score:2)
Bee Duffell (the lady who played the Old Crone in Monty Python and the Holy Grail) is the lady who gets burned with her books. Cyril Cusack plays the fire captain and is most ruthless in his treatment of the young firemen who let their hair grow too long.
Oskar Werner is Montag and does a very very good job at playing the part.
Some of the scenes in the film just send chills down my spine, like when the van drives down the street announcing "Calling all Citizens. Wanted for murder, the criminal is alone and on foot. Let each one stand at his front door, look and listen." Damn powerful stuff.
Seeing the fire truck is almost comical - it is very surrealistic for some reason. I don't quite know why. Perhaps because that truck is just so damn red, or that the fire truck is not on it's way to put out a fire.
Just do yourself a favor and read the book and see the movie. You will love both of them.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
agreed
agreed
agreed, maybe add the Foundation series
Never read it, should check it out
Never read it, should check it out
Disagree, I think Niven and Pournelle do much more impressise stuff, eg. The Mote in God's Eye.
agreed
een, too juvenile, replace with Stranger?
And I would add, for Science Fiction
Well, that's enough for now
George
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
Some people here may find moderation to not work for them, and chose the -1, oldest message first option.
It is only censorship when you force someone to read a certain way. The /. moderation gives increased freedom in that it provides multiple ways of looking at the data. Removing the moderation system and thereby forcing everyone to wade through the -1, trolls would represent less freedom. It would be forcing me to read a certain way because you want me to read that way.
The moderation system here is no more censorship then a spam filter is censorship.
Re:451 (Score:1)
Re:F-451 (Score:2)
In a way, I think that's the point. There's more to the story than just the words. The style speaks volumes as well.
As I remember the story (I read it in high school 4 years ago), society had become amazingly dull and boring. People didn't really know what to do with themselves. Some would engage in terribly dangerous sport just so they could feel that rush of living and dying. Life was boring. So the style was boring too. It helped set the mood and drive the boredom of the time home to the reader.
My $0.015.
l8r
Sean
Re:Fix the link. (Score:1)
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:2)
But only because you choose to read what they tell you to read!
If choice is involved, it is not censorship, and not even close to censorship.
Censorship would be me telling you that you must browse at 2 or, for that matter, that you must browse at -1.
"Censoring yourself" is not choosing what to read. It is choosing what to write.
Re:But the thing to remember here is.... (Score:1)
The governement in the book is the government the people wanted, but at least those in power knew it was wrong, and took steps to protect mankind (Not the citizens, per se, but the future generations) from the idiocies of the present.
No they didn't -- they took steps to hunt such people down (don't you remember the final chase?!) and drive them from the cities. They didn't want people to remember.
An excellent book, and I love its impassioned writing style. Better, even, than Gibson.
Re:Check out the movie also (Score:1)
read the book, read it again, and again.. i picked it up for the fifth time last month, it was as amazing as ever.
The Next Movie (Score:1)
c.r.
Re:Why? (Score:1)
Unpopular things are often censored (Score:1)
Re:Really, really, really good book (Score:1)
In a small way, you could say the net is like the theatre walls that entranced his wife so much, and bud earphones are the little seashells she plugged into at night.
And dare I mention Clarisse? More kids today are hospitalized and doped for "mental illness" than ever before.
A couple more decades and the whole book will become absolute truth.
----
Gauss 10K (Score:2)
Hey, front me 1.5 yrs salary and I'll finish the story!
A sad anecdote... (Score:2)
"Of course," he replied. "Fahrenheit 451. I remember because Jon Bon Jovi wrote a song about that."
I stopped breathing for a few seconds, then quizzed him on whether he knew who Ray Bradbury was. He didn't. Quickly, I got up and left the room, muttering, "...must resist...urge to kill..."
So remember -- no matter how important your contribution to modern culture, pop culture can still assimilate, digest, and distort your entire life's work.
Thomas Jefferson was right... (Score:1)
If you wipe the whole slate clean, you can start anew with something better. (But sometimes you wind up with something worse
This is what happened with all those German and Japanese cities we bombed. Heck, the Japanese rebuilt and jumped way ahead of American cities with public transportation - among other things. The Germans wiped us out in the steel industry, and AMD is fighting Intel using their fab in, of all places, Dresden.
What we need is a good wiping of the slate. It's harmful and would cost lives, and I'd rather, for instance, Los Angeles be evacuated, before we have some great slate-wiper-cleaner earthquake or some crap like that, but America needs it bad. We need an even bigger temblor in Washington, DC. Nature made, or more likely, not.
- Travoltus
(Hi, NSA! I guess this ruins my White House Dinner appointment...)
(Moderators please be merciful
========================
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:2)
Not only that, you can even turn off the display of scores, if you feel that it biases you towards reading some comments but not others. This must be some kind of censorship if people can choose not to see the scores!
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:1)
Hence moderation and meta-moderation.
If I were to "moderate" an extensive menu such that all tomatoe-based recipies [sic] were low and eveything with, say, head cheese were high, would you still feel the same way?
I think I'd probably do the same thing I do now: I'd read the whole thing, simply because I'm curious. If there's something down there in the dregs that I think people should know about, I let them know. If there isn't, I'm not losing much time. I like tomato-based recipes that include head cheese. People like me tend to go out and spread our practices - we try to encourage free thought and information exchange.
You are working against this; yes, you are (possibly) encouraging some to think, but on the other hand you are starting an argument that simply diverts energy (mine) into debunking your silly statements. You have the power to make the decisions about much of what you read. A book review is a suggestion, and a faceless one at that. No one is forcing you to do anything, no one is asking you not to do anything. The only censorship here is your 'self-censorship,' and as implied by that phrase, you have control of it. If you don't have time to read everything - and no one does - you have to make decisions about what to read.
Luckily, we don't live in a utopia, or else you'd also have to decide where to go, what to do, who to talk to... wait ...you do have to decide those things. I will leave it to you to draw the obvious conclusion.
I think it's about time you went to the trouble of doing that yourself.
It's not about censorship though... (Score:5)
The scarry thing is that present day society is heading right down this path. Look at today's society. People injur themselves due to an action that is entirely their fault, but they sue some company. Why? Because it's easier. It's easier to make company X pay you for your mistakes than it is to admit your mistakes. Parents don't want to raise their children, so they blame teachers, they blame the internet, they blame everyone but themselves.
Farenheit 451 isn't our future, it's our present. Replace book burning with law suit and it's our society.
I dunno about the Turner Diaries (Score:2)
Considering that I, and most people, haven't read the Turner Diaries, I'm not sure if this is a meaningful question. All I know is that the media has made it sound as if the TD were some sort of mind control device which can turn normal people into fanatic anti-government terrorists. It might be interesting to see what the fuss is all about, but it probably isn't interesting enough to risk being profiled as a potential terrorist by the governments of the western world by purchasing it.
Damn good point. (Score:2)
The media is filtered by what people want to see (ie, they only want to hear about themselves), not censored. The danger our society faces today isn't censorship by Big Brother, but filtration by market forces.
Want proof? Compare any CNN/NBC newscast to a BBC newscast. CNN/NBC are selling entertainment, not information. If they think an issue isn't going to get them viewers, it doesn't get covered.
The truth is out there, but the marketing folks don't think you want to see it.
Re:Book burning == Moderation? (Score:2)
Moderating down is a kind of book burning. And it illustrates one of the basic defects of democracy: the majority becomes invincible and minorities and minority viewpoints are trampled under the jackboots of the mob. That's one of the major reasons I never vote DeMOBlican, and instead vote Libertarian.
Re:Dissenting Opinion (Score:2)
I used to think about stuff like this. Then I started meeting people who actually talked and acted like someone who couldn't act or talk. Maybe actors and writers who seem bad, are really just doing really good jobs portraying badly done people?
Still, there's no excuse for Battlefield Earth.
Bad Mojo [rps.net]
Re:dogma (Score:3)
> it preaches to the choir as few works of art
> ever have.
I disagree. The book has been revered by book lovers, but it's origional popularity was also shared by the general public.
The book was written in a time where wholesale banning of books was still the norm, not just an occasional outrage. F-451 was banned from many libraries itself. McCarthy-ism (sic) was in full swing and anyone 'different' was targeted by society at large and frequenly labeled as a 'troublemaker', 'freak', or 'communist'.
Sound familiar?
There is a short story referenced by F-451, in which a man is stopped by police and arrested for walking for enjoyment, because it was against the norm.
Not only that, but the story was origionally published in a shorter form in a magizine (Harpers?), not in book form.
> Bradbury claimed that once he had the idea for
> this book he was able to write the entire book
> in one sitting.
And he pretty much had to. He was renting a typewriter in the basement of a local library for 10 cents an hour, in a time when he was dirt poor.
Re:Why take a shot a Shakespeare? (Score:2)
ERR 451 - Server on fire (Score:2)
One condition I wanted to report was colloquially described as "News is on fire" so I checked the appendix.
The 4xy series is for "Transient Negative Completion reply", i.e. errors which are temporary, indicating the client can try again.
The x5y series is for "These replies indicate the status of the receiver (mail) system vis-a-vis the requested transfer or other (mail) system action."
Since it was the first error in this series, I arrived at error 451, which gave me a chuckle...
Re:Book burning == Moderation? (Score:2)
It happened to me - I posted at +2 and the post was modded down as being overrated. Why? All the post said was that stories were being changed after being posted (admittedly it was only a few typos but once it's released than that's it. If they are going to change it say so.)
Was it wrong? No. Was it illiterate? No. Did it (indirectly) criticise /.? Yes. Not the first time I'd seen it either.
And Amazon is willing to ban Mein Kampf (Score:2)
Versus last century? (Score:2)
Let's see; two world wars. Huge death and suffering under Communism. Innumerable smaller wars.
At the beginning of the century, no antibiotics. Polio disfigured millions of children (Most of the churchbells in the US rang when the cure was announced).
Now let's see, at end of the last and beginning of this one, we have incredible medical advances. The world is (relatively) at peace, and borders are the most stable in history. There is more freedom that at any time in history. The Internet has created more free access to information than at any time in history.
And people whine that their "right" to steal music via Napster may be taken away. Oh yeah, no generation has ever suffered like this generation.
I've said it once, and I'll say it again: The people of today are the most spoiled in history. Instead of looking at the incredible upward curve of freedom and quality of life, they can only focus on "hardship" the current generation endures. Cry me a river.
--
Re: (Score:2)
more than just book burning (Score:2)
But the essence of the story really is the nature of the censorship. There's no 1984/Brazil-type monolithic central authority that's the source of the repression here, but a collective of unthinking people doing their part to keep the imagination of the individual under wraps. Note Mrs. Montag's lady-friends in the parlor tut-tutting over Guy's strange behavior, or the amoral teenagers driving fast on the highways looking for something to hit, or the blase half-interest in far-off wars on the TV. Even the chief fireman isn't presented as a functionary of central authority, but a dangerous anti-intellectual who functions with some autonomy but has no reason to change his relationship with society, because he's comfortable with his influence over others, not because he's pure evil.
Well chosen, a book that gets subtler upon rereading. Get it, read it often.
Re:Why? (Score:2)
"Rah rah, get tough, train tough, kill skinnies."
"Rah rah, get tough, train tough, kill buggies."
Not because of some lame marketing attachment.
The most interesting parts of the book, ie. the citizenship requirements, the generals jumping with the troops were barely dealt with.
I think a far superior treatment of the same theme is Haldeman's The Forever War.
George
Re:Inherent hypocrisy (Score:2)
Censorship is making a choice for someone against their will. That distinction is crucial.
Moderation does not stop a person from speaking. It may stop a person from being heard. That is a crucial difference. Free speech is about the right to speak. It is not about the right to be heard. The reason for this is that any "right to be heard" would infringe on someone else's right to choose what they listen to. Free speech means being allowed to stand on your soapbox and shout to anyone who will listen. It does not mean that you can demand that everyone must come listen.
The fact that people may decide not to post because they don't think anyone will willingly listen is does not show censorship, no more than the fact that people may decide that standing on a soapbox and shouting is pointless shows censorship.
You have a right to speak, not a right to force people to listen. The moderation system is merely a means whereby people decide what to listen to.
Re:A sad anecdote... (Score:2)
Pope
Freedom is Slavery! Ignorance is Strength! Monopolies offer Choice!
Re:DeCSS has one use (Score:3)
Call it what you want, but its still illegal.
All DeCSS does is dump a 4 gig file on your hard drive.
....
--
I had a censored version of this book once... (Score:2)
Re:An excellent book. (Score:3)
Allow me to append to the bolded quotation: in moderation. The simple problem that the book illustrates (along with various absurdities in the United States today) is a lack of moderation. No I am not talking Karma here, either.
Any special interest group is formed because the people involved share a set of opinions and priorities. When those groups suggest that the general public should or should not do X and give a valid reason, the public should listen, think about it, and usually agree to some extent. If, on the other hand, extremists in those groups are dictating public policies to the public and the public is simply acquiesing, that is the path to problems like F451 examines. Guess which one we are getting in the US? There is one version of zero moderation that we call fascism, and most people seem not to like it. This inverted version of it that arose from more liberal ideologies really just boils back down to fascism with a different coat of paint on it. Instead of starting with a majority and eliminating minority deviations, it starts with a federation of minorities and forging them into a majority that wipes out deviations within, then outside of the majority.
Are we in danger of this in the next year or two? Probably not. But unless people start making decisions based on their own ethics, representing themselves in society, and generally acting as a voice of "reason", they will continue to be trampled by the power of much smaller groups. I am not advocating any particular ideology, but stand up for whatever ones you believe in. As those of us who are not extremists drop out of the political picture in disgust, there are only the extremists left. Extremists come up with extreme solutions to problems. People are getting strange ideas from books? Get rid of the books. People are insulting minorities disproportionally? Make it a special, worse kind of crime that punishes anyone who insults a minority. People don't like Jews and Gypsies? Well, put them in special camps where they won't bother people.
As people complacently ignore political and societal situations, they tend to sit on their duff or pursue their own particular interests. (We /.ers tend to fall into the latter category from what I have seen.) With the TV right in front of them and nothing better to do, these people fall into the complete complacency of a world where nothing affects them. Those who lose themselves into their own interests tend to ignore or forget about the rest of the world unless it directly stomps in the way of their interests.
Who could change things and prevent the powers that control a government from doing the extreme things I mentioned? That middle group that isn't paying attention. Why aren't they paying attention? Because it is a lot easier to go with the flow and do everything according to the "right thing to do" of the moment. Who is keeping them content and uninterested? People who make money from having content and uninterested TV viewers. Hollywood makes such a disproportional amount of money to stage theatres that it isn't even remotely funny. Why would they ever want to give that up?
If people took every good-sounding idea and applied it in moderation, they would have a lot of things get better. When the good idea turned out to be not-so-good, there is a smaller mess to clean up. Oops! Burning books wasn't such a good idea! Good thing we only burned a few thousand instead of all of them!
B. Elgin
Re:DeCSS has one use (Score:2)
No, I visited your link and saw you were a gun nut.
I am all about having less government control, but that does not change the fact that DeCSS is illegal, and so is 90% of the mp3s on napster.
Hmm, if we had less government, perhaps 90% of the MP3s and DeCSS wouldn't be illegal. Not that I think copyright law needs to be done away with, just redefined. With less government.
Am I supposed to type in random words in hope of finding a cool band?
Well, I guess I can't help you here
Here's a few from the last few days.
Eminem
Brooklyn Funk Essentials
Billie Holiday
Type in those random digits from a monkeys fingertips, hit "search", and tell me again that Napster is a bad thing.
--
Re:Why? (Score:2)
However, in Paul Verhoeven's (the movie director) opinion, and my own, along the way he advocates fascist military government, and consequently the movie was a brutal satirisation of the book.
I had an interesting discussion with another Slashdot reader about the book a few months ago on whether Heinlein really intended to advocate a fascist political system in the book or not. After an exchange of fascinating e-mails, we agreed to disagree on the book.
I still think it's well worth a read now, just to decide for yourself what he was really on about.
My 5 paragraph review (Score:2)
I just read it for grade 11 english: My review
Fahrenheit 451 is about a time when books are banned in order to preserve the status-quo. Its author is Ray Bradbury. In the book fireman are the people who burn books for a living. People refer (not jokingly mind you) to their televisions as the "family". I throughly enjoyed the book and would recommend it to anyone who has an opinion about censorship, people who enjoy stories that force you to stop and think about the world. The book is good for a number of reasons. The book achieves it's goal fully, it's written in a very pleasant way and it let's the reader do most of the thinking.
The main goal of the author is to educate and to intice people to think about what books mean. Books have for a long time played an important role in society. Books allow people to imagine whole new worlds, books tell their stories, and teach people countless things. Fahrenheit 451 displays a world where the value of books has been lost. Only a few people still value books, they memorize books and then burn them to prevent themselves from being killed. The world portrayed by Fahrenheit 451 is a dismal place, people run over people while driving 100 MPH just for fun. The picture painted by Ray Bradbury lets people sit back and think about the value of books, therefore achieving its goal in the fullest sense.
One of the best ways to fail as an entertainer is to draw out the work needlessly. No one enjoys the part of the movie where nothing important is happening, the plot isn't thickening and people rant on and on about nothing; the same thing is true with books. Fahrenheit 451 never shoots itself in the foot by boring people, everything is important in one way or another. The books keeps the plot flowing and never has to backtrack just to clarify details. The book maintains a consistent connection and does not break the flow without a very good reason. The only place where more detail would have been nice is the ending, I would have liked to see a much more detailed portrait of the events. However, if Fahrenheit 451 were to draw itself out needlessly and continually force distraction from the normal flow it wouldn't have been as good a book.
Fahrenheit 451 lets the reader do most of the thinking, it doesn't distract from the train of thought and it doesn't explicitly tell the reader to think anything. By allowing the reader to think for themselves the book can achieve its goal more fully. The book only presents an underlying tone, but it doesn't shout out its message directly. The book's bias is obvious but it does provide a good counter argument for all of the points that it raises. The counter argument causes the reader to agree with one side more then the other, therefor sympathizing with certain characters more then others. Letting the reader think creates a whole new dimension in this book, it can change a happy ending into a sad, the "good guys" can become the "bad guys" just in how the reader choose to interpret the message.
Fahrenheit 451 achieves its primary goal very well, by not being overly complex, not dragging on forever and forcing the reader to make choices and gather their own opinions. When I finished I knew I would be reminded of images from the book. The book is very well written and provides a consistent path, letting the reader sit back and enjoy. No major mistakes were made, combining for a great read. To finish with a short quote from the book "The books are to remind us what asses and fools we are".
Aaron "PooF" Matthews
E-mail: aaron@fish.pathcom.com
To mail me remove "fish."
ICQ: 11391152
Quote: "Success is the greatest revenge"