FAHRENHEIT 451 - Ray Bradbury
3/5
Fahrenheit 451 is often regarded as a timeless classic, one of the best dystopia or sci-fi novels ever penned and published, and because of this, the book is compared to Huxley’s Brave New World or Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four. And in many ways the novel is truly timeless as prophetic literature: we are now a generation of wireless earphones and wall-sized curved flat screens, as in the novel, first published in 1953, Bradbury somehow managed to see the development of technology today. However, this might be because, in my opinion, Bradbury has failed as a writer:
Bradbury has stated time and time again that the novel was written as a warning to how television would turn the world population into brainless zombies, like Mildred, Montag’s wife. But in this way, the novel ultimately fails to predict the future and furthermore has ironic elements. We not only live in an age of constant media being shoved into our lives all day every day, but we live in an age where more books are published more than ever in human history. And, unlike what Bradbury suggests, the vast majority of these are as brainless as day time television, for me at least; the endless supply of cookbooks and self-help books have barely changed my entire world view!
To put this idea into context for both the modern world and the post-war life of Bradbury: news was slowly being distributed through radio, a medium which is in every way better than compressed tree pulp. Important news could be spread faster and more efficiently, not only could anyone know about worldly events while listening to the radio but also hear live interviews and full conversations and debates from kitchens nationally. Today, millions of people tune into the evening news, seeing live images from wars or protests globally on a daily basis. But Bradbury stated that one of the inspirations of Fahrenheit 451 was his horror at seeing a lady listening to the radio and walking her dog, weird how such an anti-technology author has managed to capture the hearts of sci-fi geeks.
In general, what many describe as ‘poetic’ prose is sometimes no more than vague metaphors, that are incomprehensible, or completely not needed. This vague language means that every generation comes to a different conclusion from Bradbury’s own, currently many believe the actual intention of the book is a commentary on book censorship, even though, quite ironically, one of parts of the book explicitly tells the reader that ‘the public itself stopped reading of its own accord”, so in this way, the book is more about self-censorship or the preference for empty factoid based pass-times rather than dangers of state-sponsored censorship.
Overall, it’s hard to ever hate Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 because of its empty and devoid of meaning allusions. Every reader will ultimately come to a conclusion about their reading of the book regardless of actually enjoying the prose. Some, like me, having almost hated the act of reading the novel, will still somehow manage to revel in the disturbing ideas Bradbury has crafted in his pages filled with perfectly bleak rainbows. However, I don’t believe that Bradbury’s masterwork should ever be compared with other classics in dystopian sci-fi which manage not to only convey a disturbing message but also create characters with real depth and motives that don’t only exist to be an author surrogate endlessly flinging misinterpreted ideals at the reader.
In conclusion, I would still recommend this novel, not as anti-technology propaganda and/or how not to convey your opinions through prose, but as a captivating reality of Nazi-inspired book eradication by not only fire but humanity itself.
