Scan barcode
A review by carlyxdeexx
Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury
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.