Fahrenheit 451

ISBN: 844507119X
ISBN 13: 9788445071199
By: Ray Bradbury

Check Price Now

Genres

Classic Classics Dystopia Dystopian Favorites Fiction Literature Sci Fi Science Fiction To Read

About this book

Guy Montag es un bombero, y el trabajo de un bombero es quemar libros, que están prohibidos porque son causa de discordia y sufrimiento. El Sabueso Mecánico del Departamento de Incendios, armado con una letal inyección hipodérmica, escoltado por helicópteros, está preparado para rastrear a los disidentes que aún conservan y leen libros.Edición Aniversario: Fahrenheit 451, con un postfacio de Ray Bradbury, y los cuentos: "El parque de juegos", "Y la roca gritó".

Reader's Thoughts

Manny

The strange thing about Fahrenheit 451 is that the bits I found most moving, and that I remember most clearly, are all quotations from other books. The passage where Montag is trying to memorize "Consider the lilies of the field" over the sound of the toothpaste ad is one of my favourites. I also love the scene where he reads out Dover Beach to his wife and her friends, and they become weepy and distraught without understanding why.Given that it's all about how wonderful books are, that seems entirely right. He made the correct artistic choice in gracefully ceding the floor to his more distinguished colleagues at the critical moments, rather than trying to hog the limelight himself, and I greatly respect him for it. Applause, Mr. Bradbury!

Jason Pettus

Ray Bradbury has never sat comfortably in the world of literature, nor with me; considered a "genre writer" by some and meant as an insult, a "serious writer" by others and meant as a compliment, it seems that I am always going back and forth about his merits in my head too, especially the farther away we get from many of the books' original publication dates. That said, how can you not love Fahrenheit 451, a virtual blueprint for the Cautionary Science Fiction Tale with Modern Political Overtones? Boldly envisioning a future where the general populace is hooked on mindless television, Bradbury subverts our modern "fire department" to one now in charge of starting fires, in this case the various paperback books occasionally found in people's homes that are now illegal. It's clunky, yes, a little pat now as well; but it's a very important book from a historical standpoint, not to mention still a great little story (not to mention the inspiration for one of François Truffaut's best films).

Keely

Farenheit 451 has been analyzed and reinterpreted by every successive generation to change its meaning. This is chiefly because the book is full of assumptions and vague symbolism which can be taken many ways, and rarely does anyone come away from the book with the conclusion the author intended, which would suggest that it is a failed attempt.There are grounds to contend that even the title is inaccurate, since contemporary sources suggest paper combusts at 450 degrees Celsius, which in Farenheit would be more than 800 degrees. The truth is, paper combustion is gradual and dependent on many factors; even if some paper might combust at 451F, his title is at best an oversimplification, but Bradbury was more interested in a punchy message than in constructing a thoughtful and well-supported argument.It's not a book about book censorship, but a book about how TV will rot your brain. Bradbury himself has stated this again and again, as evidenced in this article which quotes Bradbury and in videos from Bradbury's own website.This book falls somewhat short of its satirical mark based on this cranky lawn-loving neighbor's message. Then again, it was written in the course of a few days in one long, uninterrupted slurry (mercifully edited by his publishers, but now available utterly restored). Contains archetypes, misconceptions, and an author surrogate; but can still be seen as a slighting view of authority and power, and of the way people are always willing to deceive themselves.Unfortunately, Bradbury did not seem to recognize that reading has always been the province of a minority and that television would do little to kill it. More books are written, published, and read today than at any other point in history. Most of them are just redundant filler, but so is 90% of any mass creative output, books, art, movies, or TV, as Sturgeon said. And there's nothing new about that, either: cheap novels have been a joke since the Victorian.Television is a different medium than books, and has its own strengths and weaknesses. Bradbury's critique of TV--that it will get larger, more pervasive, and become an escape for small minds--is just as true of books. As for television damaging social interaction, who is less culturally aware: the slack-jawed boy watching television or the slack-jawed boy reading one uninspired relic of genre fiction after another? I read a lot of books as a kid and watched a lot of TV, and each medium provided something different. Neither one displaced the other, since reading and watching aren't the same experience. There is an egalitarian obsession that people are all capable of being informed and intelligent. We now send everyone to college, despite the fact that for most people, college is not a viable or useful route. The same elitism that values degrees values being 'well-read', and since this is the elitism of the current power structure, it is idealized by the less fortunate subcultures. Bradbury became informed not because he read, but by what he read. He could have read a schlocky pop novel every day for life and still been as dull as the Vidscreen zombies he condemns.He has mistaken the medium for the message, and his is a doubly mixed message, coming from a man who had his own TV show.

Kinga

It’s easy to see why ‘Farenheit 451’ is a cult classic, beloved by the majority of bookworms. Oh, it validates us, doesn’t it? Here is a future world where books are banned, and look at this; it has gone to the dogs. The saddest of all post-apocalyptic worlds, the bleakest dystopia, what a nightmare – NO BOOKS!The good are those who read, the bad are those who watch the TV. Yes, this is what we like to read to make us feel all warm inside. And because of that we are seemingly willing to forgive Bradbury for a lot of things: really poor world-building skills, lacklustre characterisation, inconsistencies. Oh, and sexism. The women in the books are generally brainwashed bimbos, except of course for the wonder-child Clarisse from the beginning of the book, who is a representation of a very annoying archetype as well. And you would think that, since the book is mostly an endless roll call of all the authors and books that need to be salvaged from the fire, at least ONE female author would get a mention. Nope. Zero. They can all burn for all that Bradbury cares. After all, the secret gang dedicated to preserving the world literary heritage is made up entirely of men. Now, this to me does look like a very sad world indeed.Go and read Farenheit 451. It’s not a novel in its fully developed sense, more of an allegory, a hyperbole and Bradbury occasionally produces sentences of startling beauty. The problem with this book is the same problem there is with a world without books – it’s somewhat flat, somewhat numb.

Brian

I am in 6th grade. My Language Arts teacher assigns us a book report; tells us we can choose the book but that our grade will be based on the maturity of the novel the report is based upon.My mother and I are in K-mart. I've mentioned to her about this book report to be done, and so before we leave with a basket filled with clothes I know I will be embarrassed to wear, we stop by the rack of books. She selects a few pulp paperback titles, throws them into the cart.A few days later she hands me Fahrenheit 451. "I've read those books I purchased," she says. "I think this is the best of the bunch. You should like it."I am skeptical. When does a 12 year-old boy like anything that his mother does? I admit to myself that the cover looks really awesome - a black suited, menacing man shooting flames over something that looks like books. I give it a go.Tearing through the pages, the chapters, the three sections, I finish it over a weekend and am in awe. A fireman that starts fires? Books are outlawed? I look at the small library that I've had since childhood; a shelf of about 30 books. They now look to my 12 year old eyes as books of a child. Fahrenheit 451 is the book that launched me from childhood, my first book dealing with the adult world.I ask my mother to box up my old books and put them in the attic. I am proud to start a new library with this novel as my first edition. I carefully, lovingly, sign my name on the inside cover. Let the firemen come, I think, I am proud to be a book-reader. I continue to read this book again and again through the years. I enroll in a college course at Penn State my freshman year, simply because this book is on the course materials. I memorized the entire poem Dover Beach because it is the selection Bradbury chose to have Montag read aloud to his wife and her friends. As the years roll by, and I age through my 20s and 30s, I noticed that fewer and fewer of the people I know read any books. Even my avid reading friends from childhood moved on to their careers, their marriages, their children. In the late 1990s a friend invited me to his house to show off a proud new purchase - a television screen the size of one of his walls. I mention how frightening this was, that he was basically mainlining Bradbury's foreshadowing. He handed me a beer and fired up Star Wars; told me to relax. I watched the movie and felt like a traitor.The last time I read F451 was about 10 years ago - I think I was afraid that if I were to pick it up again that it would diminish in its importance to me - much like Catch-22 and The Sun Also Rises. But on this first day in May I have a day-trip to Socal for business and I bring this book with me. And I love it, all over again, as if reading it for the first time. Until Infinite Jest came along, this was my favorite book. I remember why.I joined Goodreads in 2009 with low expectations. I am not a social media person. I've given up twice on Facebook; the last time for good. But there was something I found here that reminded me of Montag's joining the campfire of fellow readers. We may all be from different walks of life from places all around the world, but we come here often and with excitement - because we love books. They are some of the most important things to us and our lives would be ruined without them.So to you, my fellow Goodreaders, tonight I raise a glass to each of you, and I want to say thank you thank you thank you for making my life better, for exposing me to authors I would have never known, and for reminding me that although I'll never get to all of the books I want to read in this life, I can stand on the shoulders of you giants and witness more of the wonders of the written word.

Guillermo Jiménez

Dejé de leer porque leer me alejó de las personas que amo. Me deshice de todos mis libros porque ellos me robaron mucho tiempo al lado de las personas más valiosas. Dejé de leer, porque a medida que veía escenarios, personas, comportamientos, atmósferas, relaciones, etcétera; impresas en las páginas de los libros, comencé a tomarlas como alternativas de vida, como comportamientos que debieran ser socialmente aceptados o asimilados a la vida cotidiana, es decir: perdí la noción de diferenciar entre lo 'real' y lo 'imaginario'. Antes de dejar de leer comenzaba ya a blandir el argumento de que la ficción es tanto más real y verdadera que la historia en sí. Que la ficción puede ser, más que un retrato fiel de la realidad, su profecía, su predicción. Aún lo pienso así.Entiendo la memoria y el recuerdo como una construcción mental. Así que, poco a poco recordé que yo era una persona que leía y agarre un libro. Agarré un libro dentro de una lista de libros de una persona que leyó a mi lado por algunos años y que decidió leer otro libro donde yo no figuro como personaje.Leí las primeras cinco o seis páginas a fuerza. Obligándome a interesarme por la trama para encontrar algo que me animara a seguir con la historia, y entonces, tal vez, volver a leer como sé hacerlo: buscando, indagando, cuestionando al texto página a página, para que me respondiera la pregunta de por qué debo seguir leyéndolo o para que me convenciera que quiero seguir leyendo.Papá ha sido un asiduo lector de sci-fi, y nunca, hasta que me animé a leerla entendí porque puede ser necesaria. Bradbury es una apuesta segura, creo, porque es un autor dentro del canon de este género y que además, es reconocido por el canon oficial como un buen escritor.Sabía, grosso modo, de que iba la novela, pero, nada me había preparado para comprender lo que entendí a través del personaje de Guy Montag. El libro es indispensable como respuesta a la comprensión de la historia del hombre sobre el mundo. Como este muere y renace, una y otra vez. Como no desiste en su andar, porque, andamos.La lectura nos hace comprender... algo que no comprenderíamos de otra manera. A través de ella realizamos procesos mentales o vivimos experiencias únicas, en ocasiones tan intensas o profundas como la vida misma, pero, desconfiamos, dudamos del poder de la palabra, es más: nos asusta. Le tememos tanto a los libros y su poder porque los ignoramos. Estamos ante los libros como nuestros antepasados lo estuvieron frente al fuego. Un libro en las manos puede quemarnos. Una mala lectura nos puede hacer pendejos y otra buenísima nos puede hacer más pendejos: osados, presuntuosos, taimados, ridículos. Es más, todo este asunto de Goodreads como concepto puede ser la perdición de la lectura: leemos para decir a los demás qué leemos y cómo lo leemos y, sobre todo: cuánto leemos.Pareciéramos destinados como el uróboros a estar persiguiéndonos por toda la vida. Cazándonos. Destruyéndonos. Y volviendo a darnos vida después del incendio. ¿Qué hacer mientras tanto? Escribir un poco para que otros leamos y escribamos sobre lo que leemos y otros lo lean y escriban. Y en los ratos de ocio, en los ratos donde la luz incandescente o halógena haya cansado nuestros miopes ojos, en esos momentos, entonces, dejar el libro de lado, tomar la mano de la persona que hay a nuestro lado, ¿quién? Quien sea. Tengan por seguro que esa persona le tenderá la suya a la siguiente y así, sucesivamente, quizás, la lectura tenga un sentido humano. Quizás.

She-Who-Reads

Somehow, I have gotten through life as an English major, book geek, and a science-fiction nerd without ever having read this book. I vaguely remember picking it up in high-school and not getting very far with it. It was an interesting premise, but far too depressing for my tastes at the time.Fast-forward 15 years later. I just bought a copy the other day to register at BookCrossing for their Banned Books Month release challenge. The ALA celebrates Banned Books Week in September, so one BXer challenged us to wild release books that had at one point or another been banned in this country during the entire month. Fahrenheit 451 fits the bill -- an irony that is not lost on anyone, I trust. (Everyone knows Fahrenheit 451 is about the evils of censorship and banning books, right? The title refers to the temperature at which paper burns.)I didn't intend to start reading it. I really didn't. Somehow it seduced me into it. I glanced at the first page and before I knew it, it was 1:00 in the morning and I was halfway through with the thing. It's really good! No wonder it's a modern classic. Montag's inner emotional and moral journey from a character who burns books gleefully and with a smile on his face to someone who is willing to risk his career, his marriage, his house, and eventually his life for the sake of books is extremely compelling. That this man, product of a culture that devalues reading and values easy, thoughtless entertainments designed to deaden the mind and prevent serious thought, could come to find literature so essential that he would kill for it...! Something about that really spoke to me.It raises the question: why? What is it about books, about poetry, about literature that is so essential to us? There is no doubt in my mind that it is essential, if not for all individuals (although I find it hard to imagine life without books, I know there are some people who don't read for pleasure, bizarre as that seems to me), then for society. Why should that be? Books don't contain any hard-and-fast answers to all of life's questions. They might contain great philosophical Truths, but only subjectively so -- there will always be someone who will argue and disagree with whatever someone else says. In fact, as Captain Beatty, the evil fire chief, points out, no two books agree with each other. What one says, another contradicts. So what, then, is their allure? What is it that made Mildred's silly friend start to weep when Montag read the poem "Dover Beach" aloud to her? Where does the power of literature come from?I think the reason that books are so important to our lives and to the health of our society -- of any society -- is not because they give us answers, but because they make us ask the questions. Books -- good books, the books that stay with you for years after you read them, the books that change your view of the world or your way of thinking -- aren't easy. They aren't facile. They aren't about surface; they're about depth. They are, quite literally, thought-provoking. They require complexity of thought. They require effort on the part of the reader. You get out of a book what you put into the reading of it, and therefore books satisfy in a way that other types of entertainment do not.And they aren't mass-produced. They are individual, unique, gloriously singular. They are each an island, much-needed refuges from an increasingly homogeneous culture.I'm glad I read Fahrenheit 451, even if the ending was rather bleak. It challenged me and made me think, stimulated me intellectually. We could all do with a bit of intellectual stimulation now and then; it makes life much more fulfilling.

Alex

"The good writers touch life often. The mediocre ones run a quick hand over her. The bad ones rape her and leave her for the flies."That is a very unpleasant metaphor, and Fahrenheit 451 is an unpleasant book. It feels like it was written by a teenager, and if I were his teacher I'd give it a B- and not let my daughter date the weird little kid who wrote it.Its protagonist, Montag, lacks any character; he changes as Bradbury's shitty story requires him to, from the dumbest kid on the world (his cousin once offered to pay him a dime to fill a sieve with sand and he sat there for ages crying and dumping sand into it - I understand that's a metaphor, but it's a metaphor for a moron) to a mastermind (telling Faber how to throw the Hound off his scent). You ever see film of someone skipping a pebble in reverse? Me neither, but I bet it's like this: plop plop skip skip wtf?Each other character exists solely to advance the plot. There's the hot underage Manic Pixie Dream Girl - "her face fragile milk crystal" - who teaches him how to smell dandelions (and whose beauty is harped on endlessly) and then disappears off-stage; Faber, who's all of a sudden like best friends and then disappears off-stage; the bonfire circle of retired professors who happen to be right there when he stumbles out of a river looking for them.There's his wife - "thin as a praying mantis from dieting, and her flesh like white bacon." He seems to loathe her, and all real women."Millie? Does the White Clown love you?"No answer."Millie, does - " He licked his lips. "Does your 'family' [TV entertainment] love you, love you very much, love you with all their heart and soul, Millie?"He felt her blinking slowly at the back of his neck. "Why'd you ask a silly question like that?"There's a real conservative streak to this book. It looks backwards, as conservatives do. Bradbury blames his world's disgust with books on "minorities," what we nowadays call "special interest groups":"Colored people don't like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don't feel good about Uncle Tom's Cabin. Burn it."These are the only specific examples given during Captain Beatty's central speech about why literature has been banned.There are some nice moments here. A disturbed and immature but intelligent kid flailing around will hit a few marks. The central idea? No, no props for that; book-burning was invented centuries ago. But the moment when the TV instructs all citizens to open their doors and look for Montag, that's nice. And the suicidal Captain Beatty is the book's only living character, although his speech is littered with what I swear are just random quotes. I even like the idea of a circle of book-readers, each responsible for remembering a certain book - but it's dealt with so lamely here. "We've invented ways for you to remember everything you've ever read, so it's no problem." Well, in that case I got like half the Canon, y'all can go home. Losers. Wouldn't it be cooler if these people had to work for it? Point is, those little flashes of competence are so overwhelmed by terrible philosophy and so ill-sketched themselves that I have no idea how this book has escaped the bonfire of apathy, the worst and most blameless fire of all. It's just a lame, lame book. I wouldn't burn this or any book. But I'll do worse: I'll forget all about it.

Sean

What if books ceased to exist? What if the society you live in, goodreaders, brainwashed you into thinking books were bad? Every single printed word on bookshelves, in homes, in libraries, in schools was forbidden and to own a book meant that you would be imprisoned or (even worse) killed for such an action. What if you knew that such printed words were important? What if you believed maintaining their existence was a necessity regardless of the serious consequences of preserving their survival? Guy Montag, a fireman, whose primary job in a dysotopian reality is to set fire to these books instead of putting the fires out. But he knows there is something fundamentally flawed about this concept. He doesn’t want to burn books. He wants to preserve them so that mankind can continue to acquire knowledge instead of witnessing ideas and works of imagination cast into the flames of censorship. The world around him does not understand this conviction. To do so would be extremely dangerous. Guy Montague is willing to take that risk and go against the very society that made him question his role in the world.

Traveller

Since this book, Fahrenheit 451, is about burning texts, and Goodreads is currently indulging in burning our texts, and will delete my review regardless of whether what I write here is ON TOPIC or not (yes Goodreads staff member, this book is about burning books, so if I write that here, what I write is both ON TOPIC and ABOUT THE BOOK (you obviously have not read the books on which we have written reviews that you've been deleting)), I will not bother to write a review, since some pretext will be devised to delete it anyway.

karen

so i decided that this is the summer i read all the books i "should" have read by now- all the classics i have not gotten around to. this was, oddly, sparked by that asshole that said to alyssa "this is why small bookstores are better - no one in big bookstores knows anything about books". which is, of course, inaccurate and ridiculous - poor alyssa is a nineteen year old girl who has not read any philip roth, and wasnt able to recommend a title to the (fifty year old) man but has probably read more books than most people you will pass on the street today. (unless you live on bookland ave) and i love small bookstores, but that is not the point. another thing that is not the point is that there are other people in the store besides the nineteen year old girl who is really not the target audience for philip roth, and between tom and greg alone, all the philip roth books have been read. so i just started thinking about all the books i havent read that are canonical (not philip roth - ive read four and its plenty) but, say, fahrenheit 451. so long review short, i read this yesterday. and its pretty much what i expected. even if you havent read it, you know what it is about, and i think it makes important points, but it just wont make my all-time-favorite list. but im glad i read it. his afterword is very good - i think i may have liked it more than the novel itself. so.

Sithara

In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury has created a world that chillingly seems to reflect our present and near future. In this upside down dystopia, firemen burn books, women congregate with their fake wall (television) families, youth engage in high speed car chases, killing themselves and others, and products are promoted on 200 ft billboards, and hawked by Jesus Christ. In this world where supposedly everyone has everything one wants, no one is truly happy, no one loves anyone, and unhappy people overdose on drugs. No one slows down to smell the flowers, taste the rain, sit by a fire, talk with friends, or just sit and think. No one cares that that the world seems to have been at war for as long as anyone can remember, with fighter jets streaking above their homes everyday. After all, no one has to sacrifice anything; its always someone else's spouse or child that dies.Guy Montag was a faithful citizen of this world, satisfied with his job of burning books, until he has a chance encounter with his new neighbor, a strange, precocious 16 year old who is wise beyond her years. Clarisse McClellan changes his views of the world dramatically with her strange habits of tasting the rain, gazing at the moon, and asking pointed questions as to why he became a fireman, whether he loves anyone or whether he is happy. An awakened, transformed Montag, after failing to impress and change his shallow and depressed wife and others around him with his new-found wisdom, is discovered, hunted, and is forced to flee the city. He joins a vagabond group of outlaw-professors, who plan to restore the world by imparting the wisdom they have gained by memorizing books.This is the best novel depicting our future world that I have read. Other books, like Brave New World present a frightening, realistic future, but have poor plot and characterization. On the other hand, books such as 1984 and Animal Farm are thrilling and well told, but really do not reflect our future very well. FAHRENHEIT 451 does both, and does so brilliantly. Apart from depicting a realistic and scary future, Bradbury writes a tight, exciting plot packed with suspense, including fires, chases, murder, suicides, and nuclear war. I could scarcely put the book down, wondering what Montag was going to do next. Although it is but a short story, the characters, including Montag, his shallow but deeply depressed wife Millie, the youthful but insightful Clarisse, the cowardly but wise Faber, and the disillusioned arrogant bully Beatty are engaging and fully realized.

Abdullah

من يملك الصبر لقراءة الكتاب كاملاً بترجمة الساقي يستطيع أن يمضي بعيداً في حياته محققاً كل إنجاز مهما بدا مستحيلاً. مخزية الترجمة و لا تليق بدار مبتدئة حيث ستظل الرواية مزيج من الهراء غير المترابط. ربما لو اعتمدت ترجمة قوقل لكانت أفضل حالاً من هذه الترجمة.

Huda Yahya

"الأفكار ليها أجنحة ماحدش يقدر يمنعها توصل للناس"ـــــــــــــــإذا كنت قد شاهدت الكتب تحترق في فيلم العبقري يوسف شاهين ووقعت في غرام الفيلم والمشهدفربما هذا الكتاب يكون لك*-*عندما تصبح قراءة الكتب جريمةفي هذه الرواية يطرح راي برادبوري أسوأ سيناريو لعشاق الكتبماذا لو كنا نعيش في عالم تخلص نهائياً من الكتب وجرم من يحملها أو ينقلها أو يحتفظ بها؟مونتاج هو بطل الرواية يعمل كرجل حريقومهمته ليست إطفاء الحرائق كما قد تظن بل إشعالها!وقبعات رجال الحريق تحمل الرقم 451 ومنها إستمدت الرواية عنوانهايصحو مونتاج من النوم ، ينظر إلى زوجته ، ترقد جواره كجسد في قبرلا يشعر بشيءربما بعض الأسى ، اللامبالاة ، وكثير من الملل والاختناقيخرج لسانه لوحش اللإضطراب النفسي الذي ينهشهماتبتلع الزوجة قرصاً ،، تشاهد التلفازستقوم كالعادة بمحاولة إنتحار جديدةيمضي مونتاج إلى عملهكان من الممتع أن تحرقIt was a pleasure to burn! مونتاج يعمل في المؤسسة الحكومية الكبرى لبلد شمولي(أي تحت نظام سياسي يحتكر فيه حزب واحد كامل السلطة ولا يسمح بظهور معارضة)ـوهذا الحزب يكرس كل إمكاناته في محاربة الكلمة المكتوبة يفتش عنها بشهوة في الليل ولا مانع أبداً يا مونتاج من حرق المكان الذي يحوي الكتاب إن إستلزم الأمر أو خرجت الأمور عن السيطرة*-*احشِ الناس بالحقائق سريعة الاحتراق حتى يشعروا بأنهم أذكياء لاتنسهذه رواية خيال علميهناك كلاب إلكترونية ،، وآلات ناطقةوكبسات الزر هنا لا نتنهيوعالم التلفاز يحتل كل الوقت ما تبقى من العقولفأي حكم شمولي كالذي قد تراه في رواية أخرى كرائعة جورج اورويل 1984وفي عالمنا الحقيقي تعيش بعض مشاهده كل يومهذا النوع من الحكم يهدف إلى السيطرة على العقولغسيل الأدمغةوحشوها بمعلبات جاهزة تشعر من يتلقاها بأنه ذكي ومثقفبينما هو في الحقيقة مجرد ترس في آلة كبرى تعمل لمصلحتها أولاً واخراًالمخابيل يفضلون الموت مع كتبهم .. هذا نمط سلوكي معتاد أظنني من هؤلاء المخابيلوهي كلمة وردت على لسان أحد زملاء مونتاج عن عجوز أبت أن تترك كتبها وفضلت الاحتراق معهاومونتاج يتعلميقابل من يحدث شقاً في عقلهيحاول منه طرح الأسئلةما الداعي لاغتيال الكتب بهذه الطريقة؟يحاول أن يجد جواباً ويبدأ في سرقة وقراءة الكتب بنفسهيقابل الثواروهم أناس يعيشون على أطراف هذا العالم المجنون*-*عندما تصبح أنت كتاباًتصور أن تكون مهمتك في الحياة هي الحفاظ على تراث العالمثقافتهتخيل نفسك كتاباً يمشي ويتنفسهؤلاء هم الثوارواحد منهم هو ماكبث يحفظها حتي يصير هو المسرحية نفسهاالثاني فاوست تغلغلت بداخله كل كلمة منها وكل نقطة وكل حرفالثالثة جمهورية أفلاطونلا ينادونها بغير ذلكوهكذا تتجسد الكلمة حية من لحم ودمتتوارثها الكائنات الحيةوتحفظ للعالم حقه فيها*-*راي برادبوري واحد من أعظم كتاب الخيال في العالمو هو هنا يستخدم كل ما هو ممكن أدبياً لصقل روايتهفلن تجد كلمة واحدة في غير موضعهاأو صفة بلا تلميح ساخرأو إسم لا يعني شيئاً ما يرتبط بالروايةمن الممتع أن تقرأ لهتعيش في قصصهتستمتع باسلوبه وصورهتطارده مثلي بين عشرات القصص التي أقرأها له ولا أشبع!*-*قدمت دار الشروق نسخة عربية للروايةولكنني أظن أن ترجمة أحمد خالد توفيق (ضمن سلسلة روايات عالمية للجيب) ستكون أفضل

Emily May

As I write this review, the year is 2012. We do not live in a perfect world; in fact, in many ways we don't even live in a good world. But one thing I believe with all my heart is that we live in a world which, on the whole, is better than it was fifty years ago. Now, I know I'm writing with limited perspective and that progression and development hasn't been the same all over the globe and even the definition of those words can change depending on what part of the world you live in. But here's what I do know: the average world life expectancy is higher, the infant mortality rate is lower, access to education is greater and the amount of countries that hold regular, fair elections has increased.On average, people today are smarter than they were fifty years ago. And I know this is where older generations throw up their hands in indignation and start yelling about how exams were much harder in "their day" and they really had to work for it. I am not disputing this, I have no idea if it's true or not. But what is true is that more people today than ever before are going on to further education after high school, the barriers that once stopped the working class from being as smart as society's more privileged members are slowly starting to break down bit by bit. Literacy rates have been on the rise the whole world over:It's true. We have entered the age of computers and electronics, social networking and personal media players... and the world has not ended, the robots haven't taken over and people haven't become so stupid that they feel the need to rage a war against books. And this is the main reason why I think Bradbury's dystopian tale is out of date and ineffective. The author was writing at a time when technology was really starting to get funky, the digital age was still decades away but people were doing all kinds of crazy things like listening to music with little cones plugged into their ears. Bizarre. Readers often choose to view Bradbury's story as one about censorship instead of technology because that allows a more modern reader to connect with the world portrayed. But taken as it was intended, I just don't share the author's sentiments. Not all technology is good, but I'm of the opinion that the good outweighs the bad: medical advancements, entertainment, access to information via the internet... I'm the very opposite of a technophobe because, in my opinion, forward is the way to go. And I'm sure it's because of the age I was born into, but I cannot relate to the apprehension that Bradbury feels when he tells of this true story (note: this is not in the book):"In writing the short novel Fahrenheit 451 I thought I was describing a world that might evolve in four or five decades. But only a few weeks ago, in Beverly Hills one night, a husband and wife passed me, walking their dog. I stood staring after them, absolutely stunned. The woman held in one hand a small cigarette-package-sized radio, its antenna quivering. From this sprang tiny copper wires which ended in a dainty cone plugged into her right ear. There she was, oblivious to man and dog, listening to far winds and whispers and soap-opera cries, sleep-walking, helped up and down curbs by a husband who might just as well not have been there. This was not fiction."I know many still think today that we are becoming a completely unsociable species because of mobile/cell phones, social networking sites, etc. but I have made friends from all over the world thanks to technology. I have talked to people that fifty years ago I would never have known, I have learned about different cultures and ways of life because I have access to most areas of the world through the web. So, no, I'm not scared of this so-called technological threat that is somehow going to turn our brains to mush and create a society where we cannot concentrate long enough to read a book. And here is where I (finally) get on to details of this novel.What I am supposed to believe in here is that - because of technology - humanity has become so stupid that they couldn't concentrate on books. So books were simplified at first for easier understanding, then banned, then burnt. Why? I am okay with the realistic aspect of "people have short attention spans because of technology so they don't want to read books", but why burn books? I don't see why this would need to happen and why it would become a criminal offense to have books in your home. This is where I understand why so many people prefer to apply this novel's message to censorship, because it works so much better that way. The argument for the technological side of it is weak - even for the time in question.The best thing about this whole book is the discussion about the phoenix and the comparisons made between the legendary bird and humanity: in the same way that the bird dies in flames only to be reborn again from the ashes, humanity constantly repeats mistakes made throughout history and never seems to learn from them. Secondly, to give credit where it's due, the writing is suitably creepy for a dystopian society and I understand why people who do actually share Bradbury's concerns would be caught up in the novel's atmosphere. But, overall, this wasn't a great dystopian work for me, I didn't agree with the point it was trying to sell me and I don't think it made a very successful case for it. Furthermore, I had some problems with the pacing. The book is split into three parts and the first two are much slower and uneventful than the last one - which seems to explode with a fast sequence of events in a short amount of time and pages. Disappointing.

Share your thoughts

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *