Mildred, leaning anxiously, nervously, as if to plunge, drop, fall into that swarming immensity of color to drown in its bright happiness. I believe that you're right, in that changing small insignificant details isn't a misuse of censorship, but I'm not entirely certain 'censoring' insignificant things is censoring at all. The people reading Fahrenheit 451 are those who value books as they should be valued. As violence becomes more and more custom, censorship is lost and the line between right and wrong becomes faded. When we view a movie, we must be the ones who determine its purpose, it Who Are They to Tell Us the Earth is Flat? Our society today is not necessarily obsessed with violence, but they are obsessed with everything about it. It is a world of confused speed, of apprehension that is not understood.
Although the people of the world appear happy, there is a remarkably high suicide rate. Ray Bradbury must not have been aware of the massive public reception of his book. A hearth is the floor of the fireplace; this is where a fire starts and continues to grow. I also like the way you highlighted the fine line between censorship and destruction and the idea that it doesn't take much to cross into destruction. A greater danger is the progression of our obsession with violence. Does the plot seem suited to its three-part format? Like in Fahrenheit 451 we lose a part of our humanity when we allow our entertainment to become a blood bath.
I view this as an issue. Most movie and book stories, including all the series mentioned above, end in a climactic and bloody fight between the forces of good and evil. Ray Bradbury, as author of Fahrenheit 451, has every right to explain to his audience what the text is about. Censorship In Fahrenheit 451, books are banned to the point of complete censorship. A book is just written communication, documented and used for the bettering of society, in most cases. He is transitioning from being a fireman who believes in what he is doing to being against what he is doing. We must also do likewise with books.
He even goes as far as to ask his boss if houses were always fireproof, something Clarisse challenged him on. One should be encouraged to formulate their own opinions of the text, and to express them openly. The bad ones rape her and leave her for the flies. Sure, this world could easily function without violence, but a world without violence is unobtainable. Instead of helping out her husband, Mildred would much rather have shallow conversations with people who are not even physically present. Through these video games, kids learn to love the high-intensity, adrenaline-rushing buzz they feel from playing the games, fearing nothing but losing that last life and even if you do lose that life, who cares when you can just restart the game anyways.
In the novel Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury, it is broken up into three chapters: the lighting of the fire, the burning of the fire, and the aftermath. Destruction A certain degree of censorship is necessary for the maintenance of a functioning society, but any benefit this brings is negated when that censorship crosses over to the brazen destruction of information. The world holds danger and violence in which society thrives on. I never thought about the men in the firehouse consciously choosing violence over other, less violent things. The sieve is an instrument that is not meant to hold sand, but yet sand is poured continuously. Montag went at it until his hands were sore. Still though, the book should be open to interpretation and no one should be allowed to decide which is the right message to be drawn.
Not only is violence present in every form of media, it is often portrayed as the best way to solve a conflict. Montag reflects as his wife and her parlor friends are eager to watch a violent clip on the screen. Do we take these kinds of things seriously anymore? Throughout this chapter Montag tried to sort out all of the new information he learned to uncover the truth. The television isn't the problem it's the lack of movement and thought that television offers by letting the user just siphon the information while laying on their couch. In Fahrenheit 451 Mildred attempts to console a tattered Montag, recommending he take a drive in the country, and if he is lucky he might hit a dog or other farm animal,a shocking statement. Choosing to destroy these books or movies, would be moderately reasonable, for such material should not be designed with all intentions to hurt a class of people.
Books are emotions, acts, dreams, senses, everything. This proves that they are characterized as the destructive fire of the salamander by destroying homes and book without any thoughts about what they are really doing. While these reasons do not support all violence, they do show that there are some cases when violence can be used in a positive manner. This made it so you could only get to know somebody on surface level and you never could make deep, personal connections with other people. Then Montag would have to go back to work, back to destroying, back to burning, burning of knowledge and identity. Mildred was occupied with her T.
There is a particular scene in which Montag comes back from Faber's house and he is eating dinner and Mildred's friends come over to watch the parlor. This particular story showed so many different things, from right verses wrong, to standing up to what you think is right. Violence is a prevailing force in every society, dating back to the early ages and still continuing today. While a completely peaceful resolution may not have been possible in all of the above stories, the supposedly good forces never even try exploring options other than fighting. The violence reflects an exaggerated result of present day society, if it's members were to continue acknowledging violent acts as a show rather than something to be frowned upon. He stand around knowing how society is slowly dying, turning almost robotic.