Scan barcode
izzylashley's review against another edition
4.0
Shorter than I thought it was gonna be, great message and a classic
sork's review against another edition
2.0
so boring. Guy is literally just a piece of white bread (without butter because it's much too spicy for him) he is literally whatever is necessary for the progression of the story. considering this book is literally just Ray Bradbury being angry for 194 pages (ASMR), I don't really think he cared to give Montag a personality, he just wanted to drive a point. The whole story is very catastrophic. And Montag is Ray Bradbury's self insert emo gary sue. this should just be essays by ray Bradbury if anything, save us the thirsting over a 17 year old girl.
justinreadsalot's review against another edition
challenging
dark
informative
reflective
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
sandydollreads's review against another edition
dark
emotional
hopeful
mysterious
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? N/A
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
4.5
tarnya_smith's review against another edition
2.75
This was one of the better classic novels I've read but still wasn't as engaging as I would have liked it to be.
katiegilley's review against another edition
4.0
A dystopian novel that has us living in a world where it is illegal to own books. The reference of Fahrenheit 451 is that this is the temperature at which paper burns - and it agonizingly does so.returnreturnThis is the story of Guy Montag, a fireman in the future. The roles of firemen have changed - buildings are fireproof, so firemen don't have to worry about saving people from fires. Now, firemen set fires. If the police department is alerted that a home may contain books, the firemen are sent to set the place ablaze. Guy is unhappy in his life - his wife attempts suicide, wants him to spend outrageous amounts of money on a fourth wall (the walls are giant interactive television sets), and after meeting Clarisse McClellan (a young girl next door) he begins to question his job and book burning. He even brings books home at the risk of his job and his home.returnreturnBradbury has definitely created a scary world, one that makes me cling to my books and public library card. I can't imagine a world that values television and pop culture more than sitting in a quiet room or a sunny park and reading a good book. Oh wait, yes I can. How interesting.
carlyxdeexx's review against another edition
3.0
Reading this made me think back to Orwell’s 1984 and wonder if it’s as good as I remember, because I remember 1984 being much better than this book.
Both deal with the censorship of knowledge in different ways. I’d argue Orwell’s censorship is more insidious while Bradbury’s is a spectacle, and both are frightening in their respective ways.
There were notable moments of resonant symbolism and wordplay I enjoyed. I can appreciate the reverence of communication, of silence in the presence of others, of introspection and philosophical thought. I understand why this book is considered a classic, why it’s on school booklists. But I can’t say it resonated with me as much as I’d hoped. The characters seemed more like shadows of characters. Even Clarisse, who is supposed to be compelling and vivid and vibrant, seems like a prop. Beatty as well. Honestly, everyone.
The real cherry on top of this book for me (here comes a bit of a tangent—you’ve been warned) had to be the Coda. I think this is the 1979 reprint I just finished, and the Coda is just. A true gift. It’s just Bradbury going on about present day (1979) censorship. Removing curse words, paring down and rewording classics for school anthologies, things like that. Ridiculous things that definitely shouldn’t happen.
But also, he poses that minorities are censoring books! Much like in this book, he points out, in which “the minorities” are the first to tear pages out of books they find offensive. He brings up how women have asked for rewrites with more women, POC have asked for rewrites with more nuanced characters of color, ugh, the audacity.
Here’s the thing. While I don’t think writers should be required to go back to their already published works and rewrite them for the benefit of those who write them letters, I do think one needs to acknowledge the fact that their past works a) have barely any women in them and b) have barely any POC in them and c) treat these characters as props when they do show up. Like if your books happen to completely center themselves around white het men escaping oppressive, censored cityscapes and joining up with more rebel white het men in the woods (no women among them, honestly bizarre), that’s fine and all. But like, own up to that and think about why that is. And maybe acknowledge that there are people who are barely represented in the books available to them, and understand why people are excited to think of more people like them in your story. Consider that an honor, maybe. You don’t have to rewrite your book. Nobody’s making you.
It’s better, in all seriousness, if you leave it as-is. Let it be a reminder of how bland and bizarre and unimaginative and censored the canon used to be in regards to capturing the essence of life. Let it have its good and bad bits. We can learn a lot from them.
This turned into a rant and I’m sorry, but also not really. 3 stars for this. Coda not included.
Both deal with the censorship of knowledge in different ways. I’d argue Orwell’s censorship is more insidious while Bradbury’s is a spectacle, and both are frightening in their respective ways.
There were notable moments of resonant symbolism and wordplay I enjoyed. I can appreciate the reverence of communication, of silence in the presence of others, of introspection and philosophical thought. I understand why this book is considered a classic, why it’s on school booklists. But I can’t say it resonated with me as much as I’d hoped. The characters seemed more like shadows of characters. Even Clarisse, who is supposed to be compelling and vivid and vibrant, seems like a prop. Beatty as well. Honestly, everyone.
The real cherry on top of this book for me (here comes a bit of a tangent—you’ve been warned) had to be the Coda. I think this is the 1979 reprint I just finished, and the Coda is just. A true gift. It’s just Bradbury going on about present day (1979) censorship. Removing curse words, paring down and rewording classics for school anthologies, things like that. Ridiculous things that definitely shouldn’t happen.
But also, he poses that minorities are censoring books! Much like in this book, he points out, in which “the minorities” are the first to tear pages out of books they find offensive. He brings up how women have asked for rewrites with more women, POC have asked for rewrites with more nuanced characters of color, ugh, the audacity.
Here’s the thing. While I don’t think writers should be required to go back to their already published works and rewrite them for the benefit of those who write them letters, I do think one needs to acknowledge the fact that their past works a) have barely any women in them and b) have barely any POC in them and c) treat these characters as props when they do show up. Like if your books happen to completely center themselves around white het men escaping oppressive, censored cityscapes and joining up with more rebel white het men in the woods (no women among them, honestly bizarre), that’s fine and all. But like, own up to that and think about why that is. And maybe acknowledge that there are people who are barely represented in the books available to them, and understand why people are excited to think of more people like them in your story. Consider that an honor, maybe. You don’t have to rewrite your book. Nobody’s making you.
It’s better, in all seriousness, if you leave it as-is. Let it be a reminder of how bland and bizarre and unimaginative and censored the canon used to be in regards to capturing the essence of life. Let it have its good and bad bits. We can learn a lot from them.
This turned into a rant and I’m sorry, but also not really. 3 stars for this. Coda not included.
djbagwell's review against another edition
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
5.0