Fahrenheit 451--the temperature at which book paper catches fire, and burns ...
mass market paperback, 179 pages
English language
Published Jan. 1, 1988 by Del Rey / Ballantine Books.
Guy Montag was a fireman whose job it was to start fires...
The system was simple. Everyone understood it. Books were for burning...along with the houses in which they were hidden.
Guy Montag enjoyed his job. He had been a fireman for ten years, and he had never questioned the pleasure of the midnight runs nor the joy of watching pages consumed by flames...never questioned anything until he met a seventeen-year-old girl who told him of a past when people were not afraid.
Then he met a professor who told him of a future in which people could think...and Guy Montag suddenly realized what he had to do! --back cover
How much knowledge is necessary and how much too much? Who should decide?
How can I write a review for Fahrenheit 451, a book which has meant so much to me? How can I say some brilliant thing which will exhort you to read it? Reread it? May I tell you that I have extra copies of this book so that I may lend or give them should I find someone who has not read it but is willing to? Can I relate in a brief sentence the dream I had in which I read this book in response to a society no longer reading any book which lasted longer than a page?
I have been inspired and struck with urgency in every rereading of Fahrenheit 451. I see in the dystopian society of Ray Bradbury's envisioning a dreadful shadow of my own generation, and it frightens me, so I read the book again and it gives me hope to counter …
How can I write a review for Fahrenheit 451, a book which has meant so much to me? How can I say some brilliant thing which will exhort you to read it? Reread it? May I tell you that I have extra copies of this book so that I may lend or give them should I find someone who has not read it but is willing to? Can I relate in a brief sentence the dream I had in which I read this book in response to a society no longer reading any book which lasted longer than a page?
I have been inspired and struck with urgency in every rereading of Fahrenheit 451. I see in the dystopian society of Ray Bradbury's envisioning a dreadful shadow of my own generation, and it frightens me, so I read the book again and it gives me hope to counter the fear.
Among all the books I have read, this is my first recommended, among my most passionately praised as genius. I urge you, now, this very moment, take this book from a shelf - buy it, borrow it, come to me and I will lend it you - and read it, drink it in. If you've read it before, reread it. So much worth is contained in these few pages, it can do you no harm to invite this book to touch your life for the first or hundredth time.
I can't believe I never read this book. I also can't believe how amazing and poignant it is.
I can't decide what book I would be if I could be one. Which book would you be?
This McCarthy-era classic presents a dystopia of banned books where Firemen are responsible for burning and the knowledge they contain as American gathers around the mindless chatter of TV instead.I have been a little divided on this, feeling it a little reductive & with slightly frustrating prose. But also one of those novels, like 1984, that often gets trotted in facile indignation at particular criticism.
I’m beginning to suspect Mr Bradbury had a time machine after all. How portentous Fahrenheit 451 is of many of the aspects of our modern society. Indeed, the new HTTP code for legally restricted pages (eg. censorship or government-mandated blocked access) is 451 in honour of the book. Watching mindless TV. The dumbing down of the news. Even the mechanical hound is something not too far off current technology.
The root of the censorship is the desire to not offend anyone, meaning people stop speaking their minds. You can’t please everyone but that’s what the Americans of this world tried to do. So much was censored because it upset this group or that group. We do learn from reading differing opinions, from reading work that may be problematic. If we are never exposed to these things, how do we work out for ourselves what we really believe?
I do think …
I’m beginning to suspect Mr Bradbury had a time machine after all. How portentous Fahrenheit 451 is of many of the aspects of our modern society. Indeed, the new HTTP code for legally restricted pages (eg. censorship or government-mandated blocked access) is 451 in honour of the book. Watching mindless TV. The dumbing down of the news. Even the mechanical hound is something not too far off current technology.
The root of the censorship is the desire to not offend anyone, meaning people stop speaking their minds. You can’t please everyone but that’s what the Americans of this world tried to do. So much was censored because it upset this group or that group. We do learn from reading differing opinions, from reading work that may be problematic. If we are never exposed to these things, how do we work out for ourselves what we really believe?
I do think there’s a lot of tiptoeing around these days, maybe not so much in book topics, but definitely on the internet in certain circles. There should be room for freedom of speech as long as no one is forcing it down your throat. Freedom to choose what to read should be more important than freedom to never be offended. Actually, I think many of us secretly like a good rant, what if we stopped having anything to rant about? I’m not convinced humans could cope in a utopia, we’d only mess it up.
There’s an anti-war message as well as anti-censorship and a nod to the traditions of storytelling in the intellectuals that hold onto the great works in their heads. Stories will never die, unless we wipe ourselves out, that is.
It’s clear that Fahrenheit 451 originally started out as separate stories as the narrative flow isn’t cohesive enough. I enjoyed each part by itself and there is so much that is spot on, but I’m not convinced it needed to be turned into a novel. I'm looking forward to reading some of Bradbury's short stories, as I imagine that is his more natural storytelling form.
Well... this is a book that has not aged well.
Or maybe I've just outgrown its particular flavor of book-nerd wish fulfillment. TV rots the brain! Reading books is important for civilized society! People who read books are better than people who don't: they have richer interior lives, they question, they really see the world around them! Being plugged in all the time = bad! Kids these days, driving cars too fast and shooting each other!
On the whole it reads to me now like conservative pearl-clutching about how We Have Too Much Technology and We Should Return To A Simpler Time and stuff like that. Personally, my suspicion is that even before TV and the internet, there were plenty of people who were shallow and didn't lead rich interior lives and didn't engage critically with the world around them. And probably also plenty of people who saw this as …
Well... this is a book that has not aged well.
Or maybe I've just outgrown its particular flavor of book-nerd wish fulfillment. TV rots the brain! Reading books is important for civilized society! People who read books are better than people who don't: they have richer interior lives, they question, they really see the world around them! Being plugged in all the time = bad! Kids these days, driving cars too fast and shooting each other!
On the whole it reads to me now like conservative pearl-clutching about how We Have Too Much Technology and We Should Return To A Simpler Time and stuff like that. Personally, my suspicion is that even before TV and the internet, there were plenty of people who were shallow and didn't lead rich interior lives and didn't engage critically with the world around them. And probably also plenty of people who saw this as the decline of civilization.
But even so, I do like some of the writing. No one can deny Bradbury wields a mean metaphor.
Addendum: I could do without Bradbury's ridiculous 1979 screed, included as an addendum with the Kindle edition, that more openly gets at something the novel more covertly hints at. He describes women who wonder why he has so few female characters as "idiots" and rails against over-sensitive politically-correct "minorities" trying to censor him and meddle with his aesthetics (basically book-burners themselves, he outright states).
I'm willing to forgive the original text for being a product of its time, but the 1979 doubling-down does my opinion of Bradbury no favors.
It is clear why this book is considered a classic. Truly a great read!
I have now read 1984, brave new world and Fahrenheit 451 and all three books were very good in their own way. Fahrenheit like 1984 is pretty violent and oppressive, but on a smaller scale, in this book the story is focused on a few different characters in a small area.
I found it quite hard to get into the story as it takes a long time for things to be explained, once I was brought up to date I enjoyed the story.
The writing style is very interesting, it almost has a jazz free-flow style to it which makes you actually start reading faster and faster, I really enjoyed these bits as it makes things feel chaotic. Here is an example of what I mean...
"One, two, three, four, five, Clarisse, Mildred, uncle, fire, sleeping tablets, men, disposable tissue, coattails, blow, wad, flush"
Imagine a world where books are outlawed. The government dictates what you know. You receive information through television and radio. Technology is everywhere, and free thinking is suppressed. Fireman no longer put out fires, instead they start them, sent out on calls to burn the homes of people who have books.
Guy Montag is a fireman. He burns books for a living. His wife, Millie, lives in a world of television and sleeping pills, and can't (or won't) break away from her technology to really connect with the world, to think, to question. Guy slowly wonders what might be in all of these books being burned. The spark of knowledge takes hold. Montag's internal revolution begins, and opens his eyes to an entirely different world.
Often thought to be a book about the dangers of government censorship, Bradbury says it is instead about how he felt television was destroying literature. …
Imagine a world where books are outlawed. The government dictates what you know. You receive information through television and radio. Technology is everywhere, and free thinking is suppressed. Fireman no longer put out fires, instead they start them, sent out on calls to burn the homes of people who have books.
Guy Montag is a fireman. He burns books for a living. His wife, Millie, lives in a world of television and sleeping pills, and can't (or won't) break away from her technology to really connect with the world, to think, to question. Guy slowly wonders what might be in all of these books being burned. The spark of knowledge takes hold. Montag's internal revolution begins, and opens his eyes to an entirely different world.
Often thought to be a book about the dangers of government censorship, Bradbury says it is instead about how he felt television was destroying literature. I can see why Bradbury feared this, and I think it's important that we always balance our advancements in technology with open thought and discourse. Don't be afraid to speak your mind and argue. Don't be afraid to be wrong. Don't be afraid to learn.
This book an important reminder of how damaging censorship can be, and how important it is to challenge the status quo. Encourage people to read. Read things you don't like. Read things that make you think. Expand your horizons. Then put down your book, and talk about it with someone. Argue, or agree, but share your thoughts. Diversity of thought is vital to maintaining a strong society of advancement and innovation.
I finished this book back in August of 1996. The story was beautifully written and its message was absolutely terrifying. The protagonist lived in a world where people were not allowed to read books because their ideas caused too much confusion. I curled up in my bed that night and thanked whatever deity I was worshiping at that time that it was just a story.
I re-read it for a book club and I am now convinced that Ray Bradbury was quite the prescient mother****er. Don't worry about the book burning...I refuse to believe that will ever happen. Besides, like Dr. Faber says, the books are not the important thing - it's the ideas they represent. But read his description of how people live: everyone's got these "seashells" (like ear buds) in their ears at night so there's constant music and noise, everyone's walls are covered in giant televisions that …
I finished this book back in August of 1996. The story was beautifully written and its message was absolutely terrifying. The protagonist lived in a world where people were not allowed to read books because their ideas caused too much confusion. I curled up in my bed that night and thanked whatever deity I was worshiping at that time that it was just a story.
I re-read it for a book club and I am now convinced that Ray Bradbury was quite the prescient mother****er. Don't worry about the book burning...I refuse to believe that will ever happen. Besides, like Dr. Faber says, the books are not the important thing - it's the ideas they represent. But read his description of how people live: everyone's got these "seashells" (like ear buds) in their ears at night so there's constant music and noise, everyone's walls are covered in giant televisions that are constantly on showing the story of a family and all their drama (reality television), people don't want to think or be unhappy, so they're always popping pills, the teens are lost with no parental guidance driving over 100 mph and running people over for fun, there's a war going on but nobody wants to talk about it and act like it has nothing to do with them. The list is endless and SO #$%!ING DISTURBING. HOW IS THIS NOT A PERFECT DESCRIPTION OF OUR SOCIETY TODAY??? This book was written in 1953!!!
Anyway, great read (even with the bouts of depression it caused). Highly recommend it.
Somehow, I imagined the first book I’d end up reviewing here would leave me in an unfathomable state of trance. I was never more accurate.
Before throwing myself in the firestorm of Fahrenheit 451, I thought I’d check the back covering of my edition. I’m not sure whether it figures in your edition but mine states: “The classic novel of a post-literate future, Fahrenheit 451 stands alongside Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World…”
Being the type of person who tackles books with no expectations whatsoever, reading those lines irretrievably mutated my expectations from the default neutron state to the proton state.
After closing the book, guess how close it came to 1984. You see that little “o” in 1984? No not the one in nine. The smaller, more damaged one, in number eight. That’s how tangible it is to Orwell’s novel.
Bradbury’s supposedly dystopian world lacks pillars.
It’s simply …
Somehow, I imagined the first book I’d end up reviewing here would leave me in an unfathomable state of trance. I was never more accurate.
Before throwing myself in the firestorm of Fahrenheit 451, I thought I’d check the back covering of my edition. I’m not sure whether it figures in your edition but mine states: “The classic novel of a post-literate future, Fahrenheit 451 stands alongside Orwell’s 1984 and Huxley’s Brave New World…”
Being the type of person who tackles books with no expectations whatsoever, reading those lines irretrievably mutated my expectations from the default neutron state to the proton state.
After closing the book, guess how close it came to 1984. You see that little “o” in 1984? No not the one in nine. The smaller, more damaged one, in number eight. That’s how tangible it is to Orwell’s novel.
Bradbury’s supposedly dystopian world lacks pillars.
It’s simply not convincing. He wasn’t even trying to make it authentic.
Maybe he wanted to focus on the characters and shed some light on their motions and thoughts, right? Nein. The characters are mostly blank and see-through. The few characters that actually might have something to say suffer from existence disorders: you don’t understand how they pop in the course of events and you have no clue how or when they depart.
Mostly, I couldn’t follow Bradbury’s narrative lens, either because of its abrupt shifting or the time it consumed capturing all the possible metaphors one can think of in a beginner English writing class. Seriously, the book was a challenge to how many metaphors one can squeeze in a single literary work. And just when you’re about to overcome their abundance, you’ll surrender to their confusing cores and/or dull structures. Think I’m exaggerating? Try this sentence: “He felt as if he had left a stage behind and many actors.” Or this one: “There was a smell like a cut potato from all the land, raw and cold and white from having the moon on it most of the night.” That’s right. Moon-colored potatoes. Or even this one: “The boulevard was as clean as the surface of an arena two minutes before the appearance of certain un-named victims and certain unknown killers.” Tide commercial writers do better than this.
And here’s my favorite: “…out of the sky, fluttering, came the helicopter like a grotesque flower.” Because when you’re describing a critical chase in your dystopian community, be sure to compare your tracking- killing machine to a grotesque flower.
So after the engaging title and the scientific fact behind it, I began losing interest in the story, from its first couple pages. I felt quite betrayed to be honest. Ironically, I’m considering testing the temperature paper-burning fact on this particular book. Maybe I’ll even use the fire to bake some… moon-colored potatoes?
I'm not sure what I could say about this book that other folks haven't already, specifically if you were looking for literary merits or symbolism. Which, funny enough, is just a guess since I haven't actually looked up anything previously said about this book other than it's a stand against censorship, that still holds true today.
It was given to me by a friend, and I hadn't read it before, or seen the movie, or anything of the sort--but I read it anyway.
The language is beautiful. Ray Bradbury writing is poetic and intense, and full of vague symbolism while still painting a clear picture of events. It's beautiful language that still contains point and plot, and I enjoyed it immensely.
The story is simple, and I appreciate that. It gets to the point, and Montag is sympathetic toward the end of things. It's the story of a confused man, …
I'm not sure what I could say about this book that other folks haven't already, specifically if you were looking for literary merits or symbolism. Which, funny enough, is just a guess since I haven't actually looked up anything previously said about this book other than it's a stand against censorship, that still holds true today.
It was given to me by a friend, and I hadn't read it before, or seen the movie, or anything of the sort--but I read it anyway.
The language is beautiful. Ray Bradbury writing is poetic and intense, and full of vague symbolism while still painting a clear picture of events. It's beautiful language that still contains point and plot, and I enjoyed it immensely.
The story is simple, and I appreciate that. It gets to the point, and Montag is sympathetic toward the end of things. It's the story of a confused man, trying to do the right thing, while his friends are small and his wife is unavailable. His little world explodes, and in the middle of all his crisis and focus on books, there's a bigger picture with real threats that include The Hound, a fierce mechanical beast, and a looming war. It's a good story in three parts, with a man going from curiosity to full commitment.
If I had any cause for issue, I would maybe put it on Clarisse and Beatty. A lot of their dialogue wasn't so much dialogue, as it a method of delivery to insert a quick lecture on the state of things and where they're going. It didn't detract too much, but I did notice it was like wrapping what sounded like it wanted to be a lecture to the people inside of a fiction story. Which, it may have well been.
I suppose the end point, is that the book is good, I'm glad I read it--and lecture or not, I think this applies universally. Especially the Afterward and Coda where Bradbury gets angry over the editing of book.
Worth reading, and I suggest you pick it up if you have time.
Those who don't build must burn.
I have heard of Fahrenheit 451 but knew little about it so this story came out of left field and burnt my socks off. Why hadn't I read this book earlier? I have been reading a few dystopian novels but why was this so far down on my list? If you're like me and had not read this yet correct this wrong immediately.
Great story with a dreary future that had details slowly fed to you through the read. My only regret is that I wasn't able to read this book faster because it's a quick read and definitely a page ... burner.
Well this book was somewhat of a disappointment. It seemed so dated and heavy handed. The book was written in 1951 so here was America just coming out of WWII, a world that had seen the rise of fascist governments, the A bomb! the current cold war, McCarthyism... So I guess I can understand what "the future" might have felt like to a "thinking person". Face it, coming out of the war and the atrocities of mankind, the deprivations, people hungered for entertainment, good times, distractions. It might have felt that the real thinking, feeling, creative people were few and far between as America was distracted by buying houses and having children, buying cars and tv sets, plastic drinking glasses and bunk beds...
I feel, the real message here was not that books were "bad", not that television was bad and would rot your brain like the wife Mildred's, but …
Well this book was somewhat of a disappointment. It seemed so dated and heavy handed. The book was written in 1951 so here was America just coming out of WWII, a world that had seen the rise of fascist governments, the A bomb! the current cold war, McCarthyism... So I guess I can understand what "the future" might have felt like to a "thinking person". Face it, coming out of the war and the atrocities of mankind, the deprivations, people hungered for entertainment, good times, distractions. It might have felt that the real thinking, feeling, creative people were few and far between as America was distracted by buying houses and having children, buying cars and tv sets, plastic drinking glasses and bunk beds...
I feel, the real message here was not that books were "bad", not that television was bad and would rot your brain like the wife Mildred's, but that thoughts themselves were bad. Being a contemplative, introverted person meant perhaps you were questioning "why" when you should just go with the flow, let others in charge do the thinking and worrying. Reading books might lead one to think, to question, and thus be considered dangerous. If you consider McCarthyism and all the furor and blackballing that went in the early 50's it was almost as if you weren't even allowed to THINK about other forms of government, or question the status quo. Don't think like a commie for Christ's sake be happy you're in America, the greatest country in the world! go shopping, smoke a cigarette, relax. The war is over, forget about it.
I guess that idea is still relevant today. Consume, buy, be distracted by reality tv and smart phones. Reading books is boring. You can learn all you need to know on the internet! The IDEA still holds, I just think Mr. Bradbury went about telling his story in a clunky, one dimensional way. The character weren't believable or likable. The dialogue was lame. Why was there a war that destroyed the whole town in an instant? Did I miss something other than, yes, that can happen? This might be an important book. It's just not a great book!
This is a masterfully written book about the future and how people in the future will be 'trained' to use their mind. Or perhaps not. The story tells about the adventures of fireman Guy Montag who, at a certain moment in his life, starts thinking about his life, the life of the people around him, and about what he does for a living. Once he gets a grasp on that, everything around him changes.
It's an old book (published in 1953), and it is shocking to see how many things in this book are happening now, be it not to the extent that Mr. Bradbury described in his novel. If you are interested in the ways of how censorship is applied and also like a good book, I can recommend this book.
