Nick: I think it does because the city is at war and it is a time to hold on to everyone that is why the chase was so big. When the city was destroyed that control was also destroyed and therefore Montag is his own man.
Karyn--I was confused about the same thing. I was under the impression the war was between the country Montag lives in and other, smaller countries surrounding it.
James - I think the world was at war because the whole world was in that state of "making everyone equal" and trying to appeal to everyone's wants. The war could have been happenning because different ethnicities don't like others, and the government could be trying to "fix" the problem by eliminating other people.
Class> It is very... ironic that Montag spent his whole time running away from and trying to convince, challenging just became destroyed. Was the city the enemy or the hope? Will a phoenix rise from the ashes or will salamanders just scatter?
Karyn: I don't know if it ever specified who the war was against. Well if you think about it we did the exact same thing with the atomic bombs in Japan. We knew the exact effects those bombs would have when dropped but, we did it anyways.
James- I think that the war was used to keep the people not worrying about how the rest of the world works. If they just know that the world is in war, they will have no more questions.
Emily - I think the girl was Clarisse, because she's the only one Montag's met you can think of who'd do something so absurd and creative compared to the rest of society.
James- I think that another country(ies) might have had similar thinking to Clarisse, and how we think now, and some of the other countries might not have liked that, and wanted to censor them and the people, so the government could have total control.. But those countries didn't agree, so it started a war.
Nick - I think that the destruction of the city represents whole different meaning. I believe that like the idea of the phoenix, the city is rising from the ashes to be reborn. I think that the city in this case actually represents humanity, and Bradbury is hinting at a massive rebirth by the destruction of the city, and by the introduction of the group of intellectuals.
Class- Montag has continually said that he wouldn't be sad if he lost mildred, or if she died. However in the last several pages he thinks of her very often, do any of you think that he actually may have cared for her?
Ian- But wasn't Montag able to break free of the government once he decided to defy the system. In addition, I think that it shows the relationship between Montag and Mildred. Right before the city was nuked, Montag described how he didn't feel anything with Mildred through all of the years that they have been together.
Nick-The phoenix will only rise if the salamanders are gone, so any of the influencers like to corrupt government will continue to spread their ideas unless is not taken out in the first place
Nicholas S I think the destruction of the city is a new opportunity, a clean slate, and I think someone with a better idea of what humanity should look like and the world will take an entirely new shape.
Torri-Yes, I think that Montag grew to care for Clarisse, but as more of a friend. He did not truly love her, even admitting he would not cry if she died.
Kendall- They wanted to show the public what would happen if you tried to fight the system, like Montag did. That is also why they didn't say that Montag escaped, they had to make everyone think they got, and killed Montag, or people might start thinking.
Class: Montag walking during a long night of being a fugitive found the glass of milk, apple, and pear. Do you think this symbolizes anything? Do you think it was from the girl sitting inside braiding her hair?
Emily- Most people would see Clairsse because she was the only person that could know what anything could mean on a personal note or actually feel emotion. Bradbury did a very good thing with bringing her up as Montag is on the run.
James- I agree with Abby. The world is at war because everyone thought that they were all equal but then the people found out that they really weren’t. the government had convinced tem of this their whole lives and so they were surprised and upset to find that some people were better or worse than them.
Kendall: They were hoping to catch Montag running away. The people would do whatever the government told them to do so it would help if they all looked for Montag too.
Kendall- I think that the government did this because they wanted to implant more fear into the hearts of society. They wanted to show people what reading does to you and show how horrible of a thing it is.
Sean- I agree that because that future is foreshadowed when Granger said that all of the runaways had to go into the city in order to help all of the people out.
Torri> I believe that they might've loved each other once. As Montag escapes his brainwashing and Mildred escapes life, he remembers the true her. I think that the total brainwashing is fairly new, maybe 40 years based on Faber's story. I think that they forgot themselves in there. (Remember how they have no clue where they might, or when)
Torri - I think Montag actually did have feelings for Mildred, but him continually thinking about her later on in the book could also have something to do with a want of a return to normalcy. This could be showing that there is still a little part of Montag that still yearns for that fast-paced, careless life instead of all the thinking and challenging he's doing now.
Kendall - I'm not really sure...they weren't sending a message to other radicals because it was on TV. A book person wouldn't be glued to the TV. The only other purpose I can think of is entertainment. It gives people something to look at for five minutes.
James- We don't know, from the book alone. We might be the only country that wants to censor the people, or we might not be. I don't think we'd bomb ourselves, and if it was just us alone, against the rest of the world, we'd lose, so I'd assume we're not the only country.
Kendall - I think that the government did this not only to show that they are doing something, but rather to prove to the public that they will do this to anyone that disobeys.
Emily> I believe it also represents how society would be extinguished. It was on fire, and dying, and Montag saved himself by jumping in the river, like society, and could go anywhere from there.
Torri--I think Montag pitied Mildred more than he loved her, and was sad because she died without truly living or ever seeing the world outside her parlor walls.
Emily I think the symbolism of Montag letting himself be swept away by the river represents him realizing that he has done what he can and the world is winning.
Anna: I'm not quite sure if the girl did anything, but I think the milk, apple and pear represent pure life from nature and the simple beauty it holds itself.
Anna: I do think that the girl gave Montag the food and this could sybolize wholeness. This food was grown at this farm and hasn't been contaminated my the city. It could also symbolize hope and acceptance because it is hope that drove Montag on and that just made it easier to go and it could be acceptance because the family doesn't throw Montag out when they find out he is staying in their loft. It is acceptance because they must have seen the TV program but they don't care they still help him.
Kendall - I think putting it on live TV could be a threat from the government so that people would know what would happen to them if they tried to challenge the government. Also, the people in this society seem to enjoy watching violence.
Torri- I think that Montag actually might care about Mildred now because he understands love differently. I think that he didn't miss her until he realized that she was a big part of his life. However, I think he cares that she's gone but I don't think that he loves her.
Kendall- I think that the government put the Montag Chase on live television to win the support of the public to prove that books are bad. It gives books the persona that if you read books, you will become so crazy that you defy the "wonderful" system that Fahenheit 451 is set in.
Kendall - I think Bradbury was trying to provide closure to Montag. With a city and Mildred to go back to, his reasons for being on the road wouldn't be complete.
Kendall- Bradbury might have been trying to convey the purging of all the bad ideas and societies. It might also be showing that the government does not want anyone to know about his revolution, so they wiped out all evidence of what happened.
Ian- I don't agree. I think that it means that he 'won' the battle against the government, and that he escaped. His being 'swept away' is him being so relieved, and not caught and killed.
Anna- I thought that this was like Clarisse’s last message to Montag. I think that this could have symbolized a new beginning for Montag because after everything that has happened in this society someone is will to give and be kind to someone else no matter what has happened in their past.
Kendall - I think the writer hoped to show that there is a breaking point in everything, and I also think the destruction of the city could be symbolizing the phoenix: there could be a rebirth from the destruction into something new and hopefully better.
Kendall I think that Bradbury decided to blow the city up to show that only something catastrophic could bring the public to realize they don't have anything to live for except their technology and made up friends.
Karyn: Those are all really great points! Do you think since the family was that accepting that they would be willing to host him inside their home for a while? Would they help all the 'hobos' and other fugitives and give them the neccassary supplies to overthrow the government?
James- If there were other countries that wanted to censor the people, I think that it would be a large country, yes, because the larger countries would have more of a reason to censor the people. This book is far into the future, though; Haiti could be the largest and most powerful country then.
Kendall There was a war: the government is centered around making people happy and flattening a whole city would contradict what the government has been doing through the rest of the book.
Class- On page 139, Montag maskes his scent with the liquor he borrowed from Faber, but the he snuffs some up his nose; what does that do to help him hide from the hound?
Kendall- I think it is entirely possible. The government always kept close tabs on Montag, so they may have blown up the city because they were exposed to a books on a large scale due to him and he also was a fugitive who got away. They might have blown it up to get rid of Montag.
Kendall- I think that there really was not a war and the government wanted to convince everyone that something was going on so that they would be more afraid. I think that it probably was the government that ordered the bombing because the people in that society were starting to realize what was happening.
Lauren- I think that this remembrance could possibly symbolize that he realized he loved her. But I am not sure about that. I think that this shows that humanity doesn't remember that past or realize mistakes until it is too late.
Mariah: It partially changes his chemical balance because those chemicals are so harsh that they could burn some away. I'm not completely positive though.
Lauren: I think that the wilderness had helped him regain some of what he had lost. He remembered where he met Mildred and the book he is suppossed to remember. This shows that humanity can recover everything. We dig up dino bones and we uncover the truth through justice. It is just part of human nature to remember and learn.
Class- What are your ideas on the symbolism of new growing from the old? Do you think that that is what Bradbury wanted his readers to get out of the destruction of the city?
Ian- Yes, they do. But not nearly enough to even come close to what happens in the book. I'm sure you've seen those political commercials, and how the two canditates are just slamming eachother, because they're completely different.. If the government wanted to censor that, they would. But they don't.
Class - I think Bradbury was concerned about personal relationships and memories being sacrificed because those things are what define us and our morals and without them we're kind of empty. What is your take on it?
Mrs. Smith- I think that Bradbury was concerned about personal sacrifice because during the Cold War, many ideas were shut away in the effort to keep order. Plus, much of the information was burned or destroyed to keep the Russians out of the loop of current knowledge.
Mariah> One, I'm thinking this Guy needed some happy juice, and fast! Also, the breath is one of the most lasting features that smells the most on a person. People are more likely to notice if you haven't brushed your teeth than bathed. I also believe it represents how such a neccessary thing can kill you. This isn't like how Midas wanted gold, and ended up killing his daughter, that was want. This is like how drinking water straight from a stream (like in Africa) might kill you, but it is your only option.
Smith Our lives now are really centered around the links that join us. When those links are severed humans become very self centered and put the blinders on.
Sage - I think it reminds me of our symbol, the phoenix. I think the symbolism of the city being destroyed is that it is easier to create something from nothing than having to build over an already established society.
Sage - I believe that Bradbury saw destruction as the only way this horribly tainted society could heal. I believe his point was that even though this society seemed nice on the outside, the back story and content behind the physical appearance is so twisted that only complete destruction could give humanity a second chance.
Smith- I believe that Bradbury wanted to show his readers that personal sacrifice is hard to accomplish but it can lead to something good in the end. Like Logan just said about Jesus and phoenixes they both gave up their lives but something better comes out of their sacrifices.
Smith: Memories are precious things. Like Mariah said if you lose your memories you lose what is you because your past experiences make you a unique person. If someone forgets everything they had done they become no one and if this happens to everyone, everyone is the same. We now think that being the same is horrible but in their time it could be great because it is easier to control everyone. If you lose personal connections to then you become isolated and that could be great for the government because then a lot of information cannnot be passed along.
Smith- I feel as though Bradbury was really focused on having to sacrifice person relationships and memories for a few different reasons I think one of the big reasons is modern society. I feel as though it hits people really hard because thats what we currently base everything we do off of. People in these modern times would do anything to make sure a friend isn't upset with them. People are very socially relient and these are some of the things the would do nearly anything to make sure they don't change.
Ecckesuatstes 1:2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.1:3What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun? 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
What does this mean, and how does this relate to the book?
Sage- I think that just like a Phoenix new things that have potential to be better then the old. sometimes things just need to die and with that some things are born. those new things could be 1000 times better then the old. this is really hard to explain but I think you get the point.
Karyn - I agree with you that memories are precious, so are relationships. Those who sacrifice relationships have nothing and that's what those people become. Do you think Montag would sacrifice his memories for the sake of books?
Class- 'And on either side of the river was there a tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month; And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of nations.' What do you think the deeper meaning behind this was?
Ross-These trees could represent whats left of the thinkers in the world and if more trees grow, then more knowlage (fruits) are spread among the people
Sean, Abby, and Lauren- thank you and I agree with all three of you very good points and also I don’t know if you three realized this but in all of the books that we have read this semester there is some form of cleansing of the society. In Lord of the Flies they burned the island and then they got rescued. In Macbeth he was killed and Banquo’s children took over and that seem better for that society.
Ian- Yes, that is true. But there are also pockets of people who disagree with how the government works, and is in hiding because of that. Just like in the book. And for all we know, China could totally turn around, and let the people do what they want, and fight us because they want our people to also.
Nicholas S It means that everybody needs to know what they are working for, their purpose, if all else fails they will know what to do. Then each generation, each person needs to find their own purpose. This is like in the book when Montag realizes that he is not the center of the universe.
Mariah- It might be an illegal action, but I think that the government did not care that they were killing one random person, I think that they only cared about the bigger picture to them, having them believe that the man named Montag was dead, and having the people of society go back to their normal lives.
Ross- The trees being on both sides of the river could represent two different sides of life. One tree is one persons view on how life should be and the other tree is the opposing side.
Abby: I think he would because if the books were destroyed, which they already were being burned, Montag and the band of old men would remember them and put them down on paper later. I don't think Montag would give up anything he has just seen to save books because he had forgotten before and he doesn't want that to happen again.
Nicholas - Vanity by definition means feelings of excessive pride. I think this passage is saying that no matter what generation of people, there is always vanity within. But how do you think this applies to the book?
Ross> That is from the book of Revelations, after the good and evil have been sent to their place. The original thing that doomed mankind was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The tree of Eternal Happiness, however, lay unouched. What if the Tree of Life and the Tree of Eternal Happiness were a different kind of knowledge: Independant thought?
Mariah- I think it was more important for the government to maintain their control by showing that one person couldn't make a difference. They were asserting their authority, and in the process killed an innocent man, but I think it was more important for them to not have anyone question the power of the government.
Ian- Or maybe, the war started over resources, and over time, the government wanted to censor the people because they thought it was best. We don't know.
Class: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/cold_war.htm this cite has information on the cold war. It says that it was hot because we had nuclear weapons. Would this be the bombs in 451? Why? Why did this upset Bradbury so much?
Class: If you were in the position of Mildred/Montag do you think you would have stuck with it that long? How long would you have just gone along with the awful 'marriage' they held? Would you have tried anything different before just letting go of the entire relationship?
Class: what do you think Bradbury was trying to warn us about through his writing of this book? Ms. Smith - I think Bradbury was trying to warn us that our species tends to take things to the extreme when dealing with problems. That and the advance of technology left a dreary future to Bradbury back then, and I think he was warning us to think before we act and not let technology become too big a part of our lives.
Abby> These people only cared about themselves, and that care about oneself will always exist. That society had become entirely vane (All is vanity), but the verses also talk about a man who spent his time working under the sun. I believe that he will recieve the real fruits (view my post 1 above this one.
Smith- I think that Bradbury was trying to warn us about not letting technology get the best of us. He wanted us to keep using old ways of learning and seeing the world. If we forget about books and the history of our society then we will end up in that type of a world.
Anna- If I was stuck in the position of Mildred, I have a feeling that I would've stuck with it long, because I wouldn't know about anything different, so I would think that this lifestyle is completely normal.
Abby- I don't think that, at the time, he was trying to warn us of anything. I think it went more along the lines of him thinking 'Hmm.. Books. Knowledge. What this book is written on. What if.. Burning. Fire. Burining books?!'
Smith I think that Bradbury was trying to show us what could happen if we don't look back every now and then to see where we are moving as a whole. Bradbury may think that our civilization is heading down the wrong path and it might be too late soon.
Smith- Through his book, Bradbury is trying to warn us that this could possibly happen to our society in the future. He is saying that the path we are going on now could lead to this. We are steadily becoming more dependent on technology, and relationships are less personal. We converse through technology, and even marriage is not as important as it used to be.
Smith: I think that Bradbury was trying to warn us not to become materialized and remember that simple things are important as well. Nature, love, friends, books, and education are all important and mostly simple things. We don't need everything to advance to get the best out of something. Most of all I think Bradbury has a true passion for writing and reading and wanted to tell people that they can't neglect it or change it, because then it does not withhold its true meaning that it had originally.
Abby: I think he was. It was like the bombs are starting to fall do you really want the rest of what I have predicted to happen. It is a warning that we need to take a good look at ourselves and see what is wrong with our society.
Smith: In a way I think Bradbury was trying to save us from ourselves. I think with every single event that he put in the book, he was showing what we were as a society turning into. He was trying to show that our society was completely going back on everything we have worked for. We as Americans worked so hard to form such a stable country with very fair rights. Then in the book it shows with the growth of technology and the lazyness of people just puts us worse of then where we started.
Smith- yes back scratchers have a great purpose but what Bradbury was telling us was simply technology can make life easier, but it could have the potential to destroy a society.
Ian- what specifically was he warning us about regarding our path?
Kendall- two good points about technology and relationships. But could these "things" be like the phoenix and need to be destroyed in order to change? For example, do we need to redefine what good use of technology is or a good marriage is? Are we still using old fashioned standards but are living in a new society?
Mrs. Smith- I think that our society has improved a little bit. However, there is still an enormous amount of censuring of infomation in today's society. With all of the different news networks and places that information can be obtained, how could one be sure that all or even any of the information in accurate. The only way that our society has improved is the speed in which information is moved around. With Facebook and Youtube, the lastest news can travel around the world with fast enough speed that it cannot be tampered with. During the Cold War, nearly no information could travel around before the validity of it would be nullified.
Ross: They were going back because they were needed to help rebuild the city that was just lost. The city is destroyed and some people need to help rebuild it that is what these men are for.
Smith- that is true but I just meant that we need to take advantage of the technologies that advance our learning but not let them take over our lives. In the book Mildred is so focused and obsessed with her parlor walls that she doesn’t see the world. We need to be able to balance technology in our lives.
Smith-I think technology should be used as a tool, but it should not take over some areas of our life that are the most important. We shouldn't use technology as a substitute for family, or we shouldn't use technology to replace nature.
Mariah: That is a very valid point. I still can't help but think that maybe she would have thought back to her childhood at times. Do you think her parents had that kind of relationship? Or do you think since her parents had kid(s) that they actually loved each other and were as functional as any modern day family?
Smith- I think Bradbury was trying to show us that the pace the world is set to is terminal. He wanted to take the extreme of what happens when society is too concerned with spending time on tasks that they saw unvaluable.
Ross- They could possibly be going back to a different city, as their city was destroyed. The other city would not necessarily know that they are wanted. They would be safe.
Nick- so true. Well written and said. I think today we have more open information because of technology. We can expose corruption and falsities on a much more dramatic time scale because we can fact check what we hear instantly. During the last presendential debates, more people were Googling what Palin/Biden were arguing about then in any previous campaign. We were fact checking instantly. Also, think about websites like the Drudge Report.
Nick: With censoring information, I think that Bradbury is completely against it and trying to warn us against it because once we start "editing" information, can't the government start to "edit" society like the government does in the book?
Anna W I don't know because everything is different in this time, nobody else seems to be doing anything but marriage though so marriage might be the only thing accepted by society.
Emily-I just meant that we can let them go we might not use them on a daily basis but they are still important to our society. We still do use the old ways of learning today. For example the Bible is used today. Does that make sense? Do you get what I mean?
Smith- It could be that those things (relationships and technology) need to be destroyed in order to be recreated, but the question is have they become too different to change them back to the way things were. It could be too late to attempt to become less dependent on technology.
Jack- but what if technology helps a kid in Africa, see what a snowstorm looks like? or what about if technology allows for a kid to learn about what it would be like to be a fish in the ocean? These things would still be "nature" things, but only possibly through technology. Also, what about families who travel but stay connected through their iPhones or Skype?
Smith - I believe what Faber said is quite relevant. He stated that it wasn't the book that was important, but rather the ideas and information it held. So no, I don't think that it matters that the book itself must be read, but rather the contents.
Kendall- Not many people do what Montag did. And since his city got bombed, i'm sure the government assumed he'd go to a different city, so why wouldn't the government inform that city?
Smith Bradbury is trying to warn us that if we don't look at where our world is going and where its been, we won't know if our society is rising or falling.
Kendall- but maybe we should try to be more dependent on technology. Imagine having a laptop with you in every class. Your mom/dad could skype you whereever you are, track you wherever you are, you could talk to your teachers "face to face" at night if you are having questions, etc...Maybe our problem is that we want things to be like they were in the past, but the past isn't as we clearly remember it.
Ross - I think there's a little more symbolism than him just thinking of the idea of burning books. Knowledge has always been a grey area for the government, they want it balanced at a certain point so the people know just enough and I think Bradbury could have been thinking not only of burning books, but maybe just the government in general and how corrupt it can get.
Smith - He is warning us about more than this. Technology is not the only thing that is making people's relationships suffer. Back scratchers and TVs do help, but they don't MATTER. They're not helping anything important. A cure for cancer would help everyone much more, and save lives. Having a non-itchy back doesn't equate.
Smith: Isn't Bradbury trying to tell us NOT to destroy technology or never use it again, but rather keep us reminded of the simple and natural things in life as well?
Abby- I didn't just say that as a guess. I read the back of the book, after the actual book ends, and he dabbles on how he came up with the idea. It's not some huge, deep symbolic thing. He just came upon the idea one day, and thought it was a good one.
Smith: What you said to Kendall is borderline. There could be privacy issues or stalking issues if someone finds a way to track you through the computer.
Ross - That's a bit confusing to me because Ms. Smith has been talking about Bradbury's symbolism and how the book is so meaningful. Do you think that all this we're analyzing is just a story Bradbury just decided to make up?
Lauren- I agree because once one person begins to edit information, it turns into a game of telephone and the story becomes more and more twisted and out of context.
Justin- ok, back scratchers might not matter to you, but what about to someone who has a terrible itch? what about someone who can't itch their own itch?
TV gives people a voice. TV gives people a medium to visually demonstrate what they are trying to say. Most of these kids in our class wouldn't have 3-4 TVs if they didn't matter.
Smith- Technology helps improve our daily lives but we still live our lives so that it doesn’t consume how us. This is the message that I thought Bradbury was trying to convey to us.
Abby: Yeah, I think that technology can definitely be used in very positive ways, but people are always connected to more simple things in their thinking and most of their living. Therefore, there is a balance that should be withheld.
AnnaW> Let's start at the beginning: They forgot their true love, Montag is a happy fireman. Then they met Clarrisse. Montag drifts from her and sees just how hideous that behavior is. Montag reads. They both drift further from each other. He turns off the moniters and reads in front of the friends. Very far apart. If this had continued, they would've split very quickly, if it was legal. If they hadn't met Clarisse, they would've been fine and happy and stupid.
Nick: I agree, but do you think that editing could get to the level of government and make everything corrupt? What if they edit our history completely like in the book?
Abby- I'm not going to try to go against Smith. I might have read it wrong, but I read it three times, so I doubt that. And now, in current times, the book has more meaning. At the time it was written, nobody thought that it would have gained so much meaning and symbolism.
Smith Bradbury saw that we can't be mindlessly following what technology and the majority are telling us. We should use technology but not be fully reliant on it, is what I'm understanding from Bradbury.
Lauren - So with that balance, earlier in the book when we were discussing about how the society could have possibly ended up like this, do you think the government used this idea of balance to convince others to follow them?
Ross- no need to be scared of presenting your ideas. We are just talking. Nothing wrong with disagreement. No where have I ever said, I am right and you are wrong. That is all interpretation.
Class: Who is the war against and why would they be willing to bomb and kill a whole entire city?
ReplyDeleteClass- Does the battle over the city and finally the destruction of the city have anything to do with the chokehold that society has over Montag? How?
ReplyDeleteClass- Why do you think the world was at war in the first place?
ReplyDeleteClass-Could someone ask Smith for her Skype account name to call. I am trying to join from home.
ReplyDeleteClass- On page 142 Montag talks about a girl who had known what dandelions meant rubbed off on your chin. Does anyone else see Clarisse in this?
ReplyDeleteNick: I think it does because the city is at war and it is a time to hold on to everyone that is why the chase was so big. When the city was destroyed that control was also destroyed and therefore Montag is his own man.
ReplyDeleteNick
ReplyDeleteThe battle shows off the power of the government and is symbolic of the situation Montag is in where he can't budge in either direction.
Karyn--I was confused about the same thing. I was under the impression the war was between the country Montag lives in and other, smaller countries surrounding it.
ReplyDeleteJames - I think the world was at war because the whole world was in that state of "making everyone equal" and trying to appeal to everyone's wants. The war could have been happenning because different ethnicities don't like others, and the government could be trying to "fix" the problem by eliminating other people.
ReplyDeleteKaryn - I feel that in this society, bombing and destroying an entire city isn't all that bad... they wouldn't be destroying any meaning.
ReplyDeleteLogan: it anneemmasmith
ReplyDeleteClass> It is very... ironic that Montag spent his whole time running away from and trying to convince, challenging just became destroyed. Was the city the enemy or the hope? Will a phoenix rise from the ashes or will salamanders just scatter?
ReplyDeleteJames-Maybe war is not for freedom or to defend yourself, but to conquer other countries that do not think the way we do
ReplyDeleteEmily- Yes, Montag is directly meaning Clarisse as that girl.
ReplyDeleteKaryn: I don't know if it ever specified who the war was against. Well if you think about it we did the exact same thing with the atomic bombs in Japan. We knew the exact effects those bombs would have when dropped but, we did it anyways.
ReplyDeleteJames- I think that The world has finally reached a breaking point and turned savage because so the war was an excuse to do something.
ReplyDeleteJames- I think that the war was used to keep the people not worrying about how the rest of the world works. If they just know that the world is in war, they will have no more questions.
ReplyDeleteEmily - I think the girl was Clarisse, because she's the only one Montag's met you can think of who'd do something so absurd and creative compared to the rest of society.
ReplyDeleteAbby- If the government is OK with eliminating people from other countries, why didn't the just eliminate their own minorities/opinionated groups?
ReplyDeleteJames-
ReplyDeleteI think that another country(ies) might have had similar thinking to Clarisse, and how we think now, and some of the other countries might not have liked that, and wanted to censor them and the people, so the government could have total control.. But those countries didn't agree, so it started a war.
Nick -
ReplyDeleteI think that the destruction of the city represents whole different meaning. I believe that like the idea of the phoenix, the city is rising from the ashes to be reborn. I think that the city in this case actually represents humanity, and Bradbury is hinting at a massive rebirth by the destruction of the city, and by the introduction of the group of intellectuals.
Class- Montag has continually said that he wouldn't be sad if he lost mildred, or if she died. However in the last several pages he thinks of her very often, do any of you think that he actually may have cared for her?
ReplyDeleteClass- Why did the government put the chase for Montag on live TV? What did they hope to accomplish by doing that?
ReplyDeleteEmily: I think it is Clairsse because that is who Montag learned that from.
ReplyDeleteIan- But wasn't Montag able to break free of the government once he decided to defy the system. In addition, I think that it shows the relationship between Montag and Mildred. Right before the city was nuked, Montag described how he didn't feel anything with Mildred through all of the years that they have been together.
ReplyDeleteNick-The phoenix will only rise if the salamanders are gone, so any of the influencers like to corrupt government will continue to spread their ideas unless is not taken out in the first place
ReplyDeleteKendall,
ReplyDeleteThe government wants people to think that they are doing something, when they really can't do a lot.
Nicholas S
ReplyDeleteI think the destruction of the city is a new opportunity, a clean slate, and I think someone with a better idea of what humanity should look like and the world will take an entirely new shape.
Torri-Yes, I think that Montag grew to care for Clarisse, but as more of a friend. He did not truly love her, even admitting he would not cry if she died.
ReplyDeleteClass--What is the passage on page 165 symbolizing? How does it apply to the story?
ReplyDeleteClass- On page 140, Montag is letting the river take him away. Do this represent more? Washing away impurties? Montag finally being ok with life?
ReplyDeleteLogan- did you get my Skype account: anneemmasmith
ReplyDeleteKendall-
ReplyDeleteThey wanted to show the public what would happen if you tried to fight the system, like Montag did. That is also why they didn't say that Montag escaped, they had to make everyone think they got, and killed Montag, or people might start thinking.
Class: Montag walking during a long night of being a fugitive found the glass of milk, apple, and pear. Do you think this symbolizes anything? Do you think it was from the girl sitting inside braiding her hair?
ReplyDeleteRoss- So is it that the United states is a corrupt country and that is what Bradbury is trying to say?
ReplyDeleteEmily- Most people would see Clairsse because she was the only person that could know what anything could mean on a personal note or actually feel emotion. Bradbury did a very good thing with bringing her up as Montag is on the run.
ReplyDeleteJames- I agree with Abby. The world is at war because everyone thought that they were all equal but then the people found out that they really weren’t. the government had convinced tem of this their whole lives and so they were surprised and upset to find that some people were better or worse than them.
ReplyDeleteKendall: They were hoping to catch Montag running away. The people would do whatever the government told them to do so it would help if they all looked for Montag too.
ReplyDeleteKendall- I think that the government did this because they wanted to implant more fear into the hearts of society. They wanted to show people what reading does to you and show how horrible of a thing it is.
ReplyDeleteSean- I agree that because that future is foreshadowed when Granger said that all of the runaways had to go into the city in order to help all of the people out.
ReplyDeleteTorri> I believe that they might've loved each other once. As Montag escapes his brainwashing and Mildred escapes life, he remembers the true her. I think that the total brainwashing is fairly new, maybe 40 years based on Faber's story. I think that they forgot themselves in there. (Remember how they have no clue where they might, or when)
ReplyDeleteCarl
ReplyDeleteBut if the old influences don't have the upper hand anymore will the new ideas rise to the top?
Torri - I think Montag actually did have feelings for Mildred, but him continually thinking about her later on in the book could also have something to do with a want of a return to normalcy. This could be showing that there is still a little part of Montag that still yearns for that fast-paced, careless life instead of all the thinking and challenging he's doing now.
ReplyDeleteClass-What did the writer hope to convey by having the city blow up?
ReplyDeleteKendall - I'm not really sure...they weren't sending a message to other radicals because it was on TV. A book person wouldn't be glued to the TV. The only other purpose I can think of is entertainment. It gives people something to look at for five minutes.
ReplyDeleteJames-
ReplyDeleteWe don't know, from the book alone. We might be the only country that wants to censor the people, or we might not be. I don't think we'd bomb ourselves, and if it was just us alone, against the rest of the world, we'd lose, so I'd assume we're not the only country.
Smith- I called and it went to voicemail I will try again
ReplyDeleteKendall -
ReplyDeleteI think that the government did this not only to show that they are doing something, but rather to prove to the public that they will do this to anyone that disobeys.
Emily> I believe it also represents how society would be extinguished. It was on fire, and dying, and Montag saved himself by jumping in the river, like society, and could go anywhere from there.
ReplyDeleteTorri--I think Montag pitied Mildred more than he loved her, and was sad because she died without truly living or ever seeing the world outside her parlor walls.
ReplyDeleteEmily
ReplyDeleteI think the symbolism of Montag letting himself be swept away by the river represents him realizing that he has done what he can and the world is winning.
Anna: I'm not quite sure if the girl did anything, but I think the milk, apple and pear represent pure life from nature and the simple beauty it holds itself.
ReplyDeleteAnna: I do think that the girl gave Montag the food and this could sybolize wholeness. This food was grown at this farm and hasn't been contaminated my the city. It could also symbolize hope and acceptance because it is hope that drove Montag on and that just made it easier to go and it could be acceptance because the family doesn't throw Montag out when they find out he is staying in their loft. It is acceptance because they must have seen the TV program but they don't care they still help him.
ReplyDeleteKendall - I think putting it on live TV could be a threat from the government so that people would know what would happen to them if they tried to challenge the government. Also, the people in this society seem to enjoy watching violence.
ReplyDeleteTorri- I think that Montag actually might care about Mildred now because he understands love differently. I think that he didn't miss her until he realized that she was a big part of his life. However, I think he cares that she's gone but I don't think that he loves her.
ReplyDeleteKendall- I think that the government put the Montag Chase on live television to win the support of the public to prove that books are bad. It gives books the persona that if you read books, you will become so crazy that you defy the "wonderful" system that Fahenheit 451 is set in.
ReplyDeleteMegan- When did the book say that Mildred had actually died? I do not remember that happening.
ReplyDeleteKendall - I think Bradbury was trying to provide closure to Montag. With a city and Mildred to go back to, his reasons for being on the road wouldn't be complete.
ReplyDeleteKendall- Bradbury might have been trying to convey the purging of all the bad ideas and societies. It might also be showing that the government does not want anyone to know about his revolution, so they wiped out all evidence of what happened.
ReplyDeleteIan-
ReplyDeleteI don't agree. I think that it means that he 'won' the battle against the government, and that he escaped. His being 'swept away' is him being so relieved, and not caught and killed.
Anna- I thought that this was like Clarisse’s last message to Montag. I think that this could have symbolized a new beginning for Montag because after everything that has happened in this society someone is will to give and be kind to someone else no matter what has happened in their past.
ReplyDeleteKendall - I think the writer hoped to show that there is a breaking point in everything, and I also think the destruction of the city could be symbolizing the phoenix: there could be a rebirth from the destruction into something new and hopefully better.
ReplyDeleteKendall- The writer was hoping to convey that even though the city was so messed up,things still have cycles and new beginnings no matter what.
ReplyDeleteRoss- Do you think the countries that censor people are the ones with major power like us, the Chinese, and the Russian?
ReplyDeleteKendall
ReplyDeleteI think that Bradbury decided to blow the city up to show that only something catastrophic could bring the public to realize they don't have anything to live for except their technology and made up friends.
Class- So was there truly a war? Is it possible that the government could have blown up the city?
ReplyDeleteJames- I don't know if there are the same countries there are today.
ReplyDeleteKaryn: Those are all really great points! Do you think since the family was that accepting that they would be willing to host him inside their home for a while? Would they help all the 'hobos' and other fugitives and give them the neccassary supplies to overthrow the government?
ReplyDeleteClass: Why do you think Montag remembered where he met Mildred at the last minute? Do you think this shows something about humanity in general?
ReplyDeleteKendall- I think that Bradburry was trying to convey how hopeless the people were. And they were doomed from the begining.
ReplyDeleteJames-
ReplyDeleteIf there were other countries that wanted to censor the people, I think that it would be a large country, yes, because the larger countries would have more of a reason to censor the people. This book is far into the future, though; Haiti could be the largest and most powerful country then.
Kendall
ReplyDeleteThere was a war: the government is centered around making people happy and flattening a whole city would contradict what the government has been doing through the rest of the book.
Kendall- I believe that by blowing up the city it symbolized a new beginning. With all of the old gone new ways and ideas can flourish.
ReplyDeleteClass- On page 139, Montag maskes his scent with the liquor he borrowed from Faber, but the he snuffs some up his nose; what does that do to help him hide from the hound?
ReplyDeleteLauren- I think this symbolizes Montag finally being free from the clutches of the government. He is no longer a part of a brainwashed, naive society.
ReplyDeleteKendall- I think it is entirely possible. The government always kept close tabs on Montag, so they may have blown up the city because they were exposed to a books on a large scale due to him and he also was a fugitive who got away. They might have blown it up to get rid of Montag.
ReplyDeleteLauren
ReplyDeleteI think this symbolizes society's return to personal relationships and the importance of the people around you.
Kendall- I think that there really was not a war and the government wanted to convince everyone that something was going on so that they would be more afraid. I think that it probably was the government that ordered the bombing because the people in that society were starting to realize what was happening.
ReplyDeleteMariah-
ReplyDeleteIt would help hide the scent of his breath, because that also has his 'scent' in it.
Kendall - The government could've made a war to remind people of the outside world, but when it didn't work, they just destroyed the town. Possible
ReplyDeleteClass: why do you think Bradbudy was so concerned about personal relationships being sacrificed, or memories being sacrificed?
ReplyDeleteLauren- I think that this remembrance could possibly symbolize that he realized he loved her. But I am not sure about that. I think that this shows that humanity doesn't remember that past or realize mistakes until it is too late.
ReplyDeleteRoss
ReplyDeleteEven countries now censor what their people see, everything that goes onto the tv, radio, and advertising goes through the government.
Mariah: It partially changes his chemical balance because those chemicals are so harsh that they could burn some away. I'm not completely positive though.
ReplyDeleteLauren- I think it shows how slowly the brain processes in this society and how Montag finally learned how to process information.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSmith- Memories are one of the things that makes you you, so sacrificing memories is pretty much just like sacrificing yourself.
ReplyDeleteLauren: I think that the wilderness had helped him regain some of what he had lost. He remembered where he met Mildred and the book he is suppossed to remember. This shows that humanity can recover everything. We dig up dino bones and we uncover the truth through justice. It is just part of human nature to remember and learn.
ReplyDeleteKendall: Do you think it has anything to do with Mildred and his feelings for her?
ReplyDeleteClass- What are your ideas on the symbolism of new growing from the old? Do you think that that is what Bradbury wanted his readers to get out of the destruction of the city?
ReplyDeleteIan-
ReplyDeleteYes, they do. But not nearly enough to even come close to what happens in the book.
I'm sure you've seen those political commercials, and how the two canditates are just slamming eachother, because they're completely different.. If the government wanted to censor that, they would. But they don't.
Class - I think Bradbury was concerned about personal relationships and memories being sacrificed because those things are what define us and our morals and without them we're kind of empty. What is your take on it?
ReplyDeleteSmith- It may have something to do with Bradbury's past. He might have lost an important family member young and she could have helped him write.
ReplyDeleteLauren and Mariah- The chemical would alter his sweat by genetiacly altering his chemical compesiton.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Smith- I think that Bradbury was concerned about personal sacrifice because during the Cold War, many ideas were shut away in the effort to keep order. Plus, much of the information was burned or destroyed to keep the Russians out of the loop of current knowledge.
ReplyDeleteLauren- I think it partly does, but mostly about not being brainwashed anymore. He does care for her, but not as much as a couple would in our time.
ReplyDeleteMariah> One, I'm thinking this Guy needed some happy juice, and fast! Also, the breath is one of the most lasting features that smells the most on a person. People are more likely to notice if you haven't brushed your teeth than bathed. I also believe it represents how such a neccessary thing can kill you. This isn't like how Midas wanted gold, and ended up killing his daughter, that was want. This is like how drinking water straight from a stream (like in Africa) might kill you, but it is your only option.
ReplyDeleteSmith
ReplyDeleteOur lives now are really centered around the links that join us. When those links are severed humans become very self centered and put the blinders on.
Smith- Through sacraficing relationships it shows how much someone is behind a cause or supporting it.
ReplyDeleteSage - I think it reminds me of our symbol, the phoenix. I think the symbolism of the city being destroyed is that it is easier to create something from nothing than having to build over an already established society.
ReplyDeleteSage: I agree with the idea of new growing from the old, which also ties in with the phoenix and rebirth.
ReplyDeleteSage -
ReplyDeleteI believe that Bradbury saw destruction as the only way this horribly tainted society could heal. I believe his point was that even though this society seemed nice on the outside, the back story and content behind the physical appearance is so twisted that only complete destruction could give humanity a second chance.
Avery and Lauren- How would snuffing (putting some up his nose?) alter his chemical compensation and sweat? Does he sweat through his nose?
ReplyDeleteSmith- I believe that Bradbury wanted to show his readers that personal sacrifice is hard to accomplish but it can lead to something good in the end. Like Logan just said about Jesus and phoenixes they both gave up their lives but something better comes out of their sacrifices.
ReplyDeleteSmith: Memories are precious things. Like Mariah said if you lose your memories you lose what is you because your past experiences make you a unique person. If someone forgets everything they had done they become no one and if this happens to everyone, everyone is the same. We now think that being the same is horrible but in their time it could be great because it is easier to control everyone. If you lose personal connections to then you become isolated and that could be great for the government because then a lot of information cannnot be passed along.
ReplyDeleteRoss
ReplyDeleteTake China for an example though, it is illegal there to not agree with the government, and there are no political ads.
Smith- I feel as though Bradbury was really focused on having to sacrifice person relationships and memories for a few different reasons I think one of the big reasons is modern society. I feel as though it hits people really hard because thats what we currently base everything we do off of. People in these modern times would do anything to make sure a friend isn't upset with them. People are very socially relient and these are some of the things the would do nearly anything to make sure they don't change.
ReplyDeleteEcckesuatstes 1:2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.1:3What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
ReplyDelete1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
What does this mean, and how does this relate to the book?
Sage-
ReplyDeleteI think that just like a Phoenix new things that have potential to be better then the old. sometimes things just need to die and with that some things are born. those new things could be 1000 times better then the old. this is really hard to explain but I think you get the point.
Mariah- It would get to his brain then work its way all over his body (just a theory)
ReplyDeleteKaryn - I agree with you that memories are precious, so are relationships. Those who sacrifice relationships have nothing and that's what those people become. Do you think Montag would sacrifice his memories for the sake of books?
ReplyDeleteClass-
ReplyDelete'And on either side of the river was there a tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month; And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of nations.'
What do you think the deeper meaning behind this was?
Class- Isn't it an illegal action when the police killed the fake Montag when he's done nothing wrong?
ReplyDeleteNicholas- This relates to the book in the fact that the people are very vain and materialistic. And it is called Ecclesiastes.
ReplyDeleteMariah- He had read books, illeagle books.
ReplyDeleteRoss-These trees could represent whats left of the thinkers in the world and if more trees grow, then more knowlage (fruits) are spread among the people
ReplyDeleteSean, Abby, and Lauren- thank you and I agree with all three of you very good points and also I don’t know if you three realized this but in all of the books that we have read this semester there is some form of cleansing of the society. In Lord of the Flies they burned the island and then they got rescued. In Macbeth he was killed and Banquo’s children took over and that seem better for that society.
ReplyDeleteMariah- It is illegal. But, the people of the city will not know that because they thought they where killing a criminal.
ReplyDeleteAbby- Why would Montag have to sacrifice his memories for the books? Wouldn't it be possible for him to have both?
ReplyDeleteIan-
ReplyDeleteYes, that is true. But there are also pockets of people who disagree with how the government works, and is in hiding because of that. Just like in the book. And for all we know, China could totally turn around, and let the people do what they want, and fight us because they want our people to also.
Nicholas S
ReplyDeleteIt means that everybody needs to know what they are working for, their purpose, if all else fails they will know what to do. Then each generation, each person needs to find their own purpose. This is like in the book when Montag realizes that he is not the center of the universe.
Mariah- It might be an illegal action, but I think that the government did not care that they were killing one random person, I think that they only cared about the bigger picture to them, having them believe that the man named Montag was dead, and having the people of society go back to their normal lives.
ReplyDeleteNickM- great response. Has our society done anything different from the Cold War? or are we the same society?
ReplyDeleteMariah- It was definitely illegal. But the government thought they were above the law. They use any means possible to look good for the public.
ReplyDeleteRoss
ReplyDeleteThe society in the book could be the same and could even be the reason that this war that destroyed Chicago started.
Ross- The trees being on both sides of the river could represent two different sides of life. One tree is one persons view on how life should be and the other tree is the opposing side.
ReplyDeleteAbby: I think he would because if the books were destroyed, which they already were being burned, Montag and the band of old men would remember them and put them down on paper later. I don't think Montag would give up anything he has just seen to save books because he had forgotten before and he doesn't want that to happen again.
ReplyDeleteNicholas - Vanity by definition means feelings of excessive pride. I think this passage is saying that no matter what generation of people, there is always vanity within. But how do you think this applies to the book?
ReplyDeleteRoss> That is from the book of Revelations, after the good and evil have been sent to their place. The original thing that doomed mankind was the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The tree of Eternal Happiness, however, lay unouched. What if the Tree of Life and the Tree of Eternal Happiness were a different kind of knowledge: Independant thought?
ReplyDeleteClass: what do you think Bradbury was trying to warn us about through his writing of this book?
ReplyDeleteMariah- I think it was more important for the government to maintain their control by showing that one person couldn't make a difference. They were asserting their authority, and in the process killed an innocent man, but I think it was more important for them to not have anyone question the power of the government.
ReplyDeleteIan-
ReplyDeleteOr maybe, the war started over resources, and over time, the government wanted to censor the people because they thought it was best. We don't know.
Karyn - That's true and it reminds me of the sand and the sieve symbolism.
ReplyDeleteRoss
ReplyDeleteI think these could represent there is still life left in the world, and two different approaches to the new life.
Ross
ReplyDeleteI know but it could have been one of the contributing factors.
Nicholas: I think this is just connecting back to rebirth of society and how a new society will come of the destroyed.
ReplyDeleteSmith- Bradbury could be warning us for the overtaking technology and lost of true relationships in the future.
ReplyDeleteSmith - not letting technology take hold of us. Direct our knowledge to medical and scientific funding, not automatic back scratchers or TVs.
ReplyDeleteClass: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/cold_war.htm this cite has information on the cold war. It says that it was hot because we had nuclear weapons. Would this be the bombs in 451? Why? Why did this upset Bradbury so much?
ReplyDeleteClass: If you were in the position of Mildred/Montag do you think you would have stuck with it that long? How long would you have just gone along with the awful 'marriage' they held? Would you have tried anything different before just letting go of the entire relationship?
ReplyDeleteClass: what do you think Bradbury was trying to warn us about through his writing of this book?
ReplyDeleteMs. Smith - I think Bradbury was trying to warn us that our species tends to take things to the extreme when dealing with problems. That and the advance of technology left a dreary future to Bradbury back then, and I think he was warning us to think before we act and not let technology become too big a part of our lives.
Abby> These people only cared about themselves, and that care about oneself will always exist. That society had become entirely vane (All is vanity), but the verses also talk about a man who spent his time working under the sun. I believe that he will recieve the real fruits (view my post 1 above this one.
ReplyDeleteJustin- so, all he was warning us about was appropriate use of technology. Don't back scratchers serve a greater purpose? Don't TVs?
ReplyDeleteSmith- I think that Bradbury was trying to warn us about not letting technology get the best of us. He wanted us to keep using old ways of learning and seeing the world. If we forget about books and the history of our society then we will end up in that type of a world.
ReplyDeleteAnna- If I was stuck in the position of Mildred, I have a feeling that I would've stuck with it long, because I wouldn't know about anything different, so I would think that this lifestyle is completely normal.
ReplyDeleteAbby-
ReplyDeleteI don't think that, at the time, he was trying to warn us of anything. I think it went more along the lines of him thinking 'Hmm.. Books. Knowledge. What this book is written on. What if.. Burning. Fire. Burining books?!'
Sage- so books are our savior? What about if I read from a Kindle? or from the web? Can society only be good if I read a good old fashioned book?
ReplyDeleteSmith
ReplyDeleteI think that Bradbury was trying to show us what could happen if we don't look back every now and then to see where we are moving as a whole. Bradbury may think that our civilization is heading down the wrong path and it might be too late soon.
Smith- Through his book, Bradbury is trying to warn us that this could possibly happen to our society in the future. He is saying that the path we are going on now could lead to this. We are steadily becoming more dependent on technology, and relationships are less personal. We converse through technology, and even marriage is not as important as it used to be.
ReplyDeleteSmith: I think that Bradbury was trying to warn us not to become materialized and remember that simple things are important as well. Nature, love, friends, books, and education are all important and mostly simple things. We don't need everything to advance to get the best out of something. Most of all I think Bradbury has a true passion for writing and reading and wanted to tell people that they can't neglect it or change it, because then it does not withhold its true meaning that it had originally.
ReplyDeleteSage- By using old ways of learning, isnt that not getting us anywhere in the world.
ReplyDeleteAbby: I think he was. It was like the bombs are starting to fall do you really want the rest of what I have predicted to happen. It is a warning that we need to take a good look at ourselves and see what is wrong with our society.
ReplyDeleteSmith: In a way I think Bradbury was trying to save us from ourselves. I think with every single event that he put in the book, he was showing what we were as a society turning into. He was trying to show that our society was completely going back on everything we have worked for. We as Americans worked so hard to form such a stable country with very fair rights. Then in the book it shows with the growth of technology and the lazyness of people just puts us worse of then where we started.
ReplyDeleteClass-
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the book, Montag says that they're going back to a city. Why would they do that? Aren't they wanted?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSmith- yes back scratchers have a great purpose but what Bradbury was telling us was simply technology can make life easier, but it could have the potential to destroy a society.
ReplyDeleteIan- what specifically was he warning us about regarding our path?
ReplyDeleteKendall- two good points about technology and relationships. But could these "things" be like the phoenix and need to be destroyed in order to change? For example, do we need to redefine what good use of technology is or a good marriage is? Are we still using old fashioned standards but are living in a new society?
Mrs. Smith- I think that our society has improved a little bit. However, there is still an enormous amount of censuring of infomation in today's society. With all of the different news networks and places that information can be obtained, how could one be sure that all or even any of the information in accurate. The only way that our society has improved is the speed in which information is moved around. With Facebook and Youtube, the lastest news can travel around the world with fast enough speed that it cannot be tampered with. During the Cold War, nearly no information could travel around before the validity of it would be nullified.
ReplyDeleteRoss: They were going back because they were needed to help rebuild the city that was just lost. The city is destroyed and some people need to help rebuild it that is what these men are for.
ReplyDeleteSmith- that is true but I just meant that we need to take advantage of the technologies that advance our learning but not let them take over our lives. In the book Mildred is so focused and obsessed with her parlor walls that she doesn’t see the world. We need to be able to balance technology in our lives.
ReplyDeleteSmith-I think technology should be used as a tool, but it should not take over some areas of our life that are the most important. We shouldn't use technology as a substitute for family, or we shouldn't use technology to replace nature.
ReplyDeleteMariah: That is a very valid point. I still can't help but think that maybe she would have thought back to her childhood at times. Do you think her parents had that kind of relationship? Or do you think since her parents had kid(s) that they actually loved each other and were as functional as any modern day family?
ReplyDeleteSmith- I think Bradbury was trying to show us that the pace the world is set to is terminal. He wanted to take the extreme of what happens when society is too concerned with spending time on tasks that they saw unvaluable.
ReplyDeleteRoss- They could possibly be going back to a different city, as their city was destroyed. The other city would not necessarily know that they are wanted. They would be safe.
ReplyDeleteNick- so true. Well written and said. I think today we have more open information because of technology. We can expose corruption and falsities on a much more dramatic time scale because we can fact check what we hear instantly. During the last presendential debates, more people were Googling what Palin/Biden were arguing about then in any previous campaign. We were fact checking instantly. Also, think about websites like the Drudge Report.
ReplyDeleteNick: With censoring information, I think that Bradbury is completely against it and trying to warn us against it because once we start "editing" information, can't the government start to "edit" society like the government does in the book?
ReplyDeleteAnna W
ReplyDeleteI don't know because everything is different in this time, nobody else seems to be doing anything but marriage though so marriage might be the only thing accepted by society.
Emily-I just meant that we can let them go we might not use them on a daily basis but they are still important to our society. We still do use the old ways of learning today. For example the Bible is used today. Does that make sense? Do you get what I mean?
ReplyDeleteSmith- It could be that those things (relationships and technology) need to be destroyed in order to be recreated, but the question is have they become too different to change them back to the way things were. It could be too late to attempt to become less dependent on technology.
ReplyDeleteJack- but what if technology helps a kid in Africa, see what a snowstorm looks like? or what about if technology allows for a kid to learn about what it would be like to be a fish in the ocean? These things would still be "nature" things, but only possibly through technology. Also, what about families who travel but stay connected through their iPhones or Skype?
ReplyDeleteSmith -
ReplyDeleteI believe what Faber said is quite relevant. He stated that it wasn't the book that was important, but rather the ideas and information it held. So no, I don't think that it matters that the book itself must be read, but rather the contents.
Kendall-
ReplyDeleteNot many people do what Montag did. And since his city got bombed, i'm sure the government assumed he'd go to a different city, so why wouldn't the government inform that city?
Smith
ReplyDeleteBradbury is trying to warn us that if we don't look at where our world is going and where its been, we won't know if our society is rising or falling.
Kendall- but maybe we should try to be more dependent on technology. Imagine having a laptop with you in every class. Your mom/dad could skype you whereever you are, track you wherever you are, you could talk to your teachers "face to face" at night if you are having questions, etc...Maybe our problem is that we want things to be like they were in the past, but the past isn't as we clearly remember it.
ReplyDeleteSmith- I think that is connecting to the your family and nature using technology, but it is not replacing the your family and nature with technology.
ReplyDeleteRoss - I think there's a little more symbolism than him just thinking of the idea of burning books. Knowledge has always been a grey area for the government, they want it balanced at a certain point so the people know just enough and I think Bradbury could have been thinking not only of burning books, but maybe just the government in general and how corrupt it can get.
ReplyDeleteSmith - He is warning us about more than this. Technology is not the only thing that is making people's relationships suffer. Back scratchers and TVs do help, but they don't MATTER. They're not helping anything important. A cure for cancer would help everyone much more, and save lives. Having a non-itchy back doesn't equate.
ReplyDeleteSmith: Isn't Bradbury trying to tell us NOT to destroy technology or never use it again, but rather keep us reminded of the simple and natural things in life as well?
ReplyDeleteIan- you are still not answering my question, "So, where are we going?" "where have we been?" What specifically are you seeing that Bradbury saw?
ReplyDeleteAbby-
ReplyDeleteI didn't just say that as a guess. I read the back of the book, after the actual book ends, and he dabbles on how he came up with the idea. It's not some huge, deep symbolic thing. He just came upon the idea one day, and thought it was a good one.
Smith: What you said to Kendall is borderline. There could be privacy issues or stalking issues if someone finds a way to track you through the computer.
ReplyDeleteLauren - I agree with that concept of balance because too much or too little of anything is never good.
ReplyDeleteRoss - That's a bit confusing to me because Ms. Smith has been talking about Bradbury's symbolism and how the book is so meaningful. Do you think that all this we're analyzing is just a story Bradbury just decided to make up?
ReplyDeleteLauren- I agree because once one person begins to edit information, it turns into a game of telephone and the story becomes more and more twisted and out of context.
ReplyDeleteJustin- ok, back scratchers might not matter to you, but what about to someone who has a terrible itch? what about someone who can't itch their own itch?
ReplyDeleteTV gives people a voice. TV gives people a medium to visually demonstrate what they are trying to say. Most of these kids in our class wouldn't have 3-4 TVs if they didn't matter.
Smith- Technology helps improve our daily lives but we still live our lives so that it doesn’t consume how us. This is the message that I thought Bradbury was trying to convey to us.
ReplyDeleteAbby: Yeah, I think that technology can definitely be used in very positive ways, but people are always connected to more simple things in their thinking and most of their living. Therefore, there is a balance that should be withheld.
ReplyDeleteAnnaW> Let's start at the beginning: They forgot their true love, Montag is a happy fireman. Then they met Clarrisse. Montag drifts from her and sees just how hideous that behavior is. Montag reads. They both drift further from each other. He turns off the moniters and reads in front of the friends. Very far apart. If this had continued, they would've split very quickly, if it was legal. If they hadn't met Clarisse, they would've been fine and happy and stupid.
ReplyDeleteSage- how do we know if it is consuming us? Could there be a benefit or two about giving our lives over to technology?
ReplyDeleteNick: I agree, but do you think that editing could get to the level of government and make everything corrupt? What if they edit our history completely like in the book?
ReplyDeleteAbby-
ReplyDeleteI'm not going to try to go against Smith. I might have read it wrong, but I read it three times, so I doubt that.
And now, in current times, the book has more meaning. At the time it was written, nobody thought that it would have gained so much meaning and symbolism.
Smith
ReplyDeleteBradbury saw that we can't be mindlessly following what technology and the majority are telling us. We should use technology but not be fully reliant on it, is what I'm understanding from Bradbury.
Smith - I guess everything matters to someone
ReplyDeleteLauren - So with that balance, earlier in the book when we were discussing about how the society could have possibly ended up like this, do you think the government used this idea of balance to convince others to follow them?
ReplyDeleteSmith -...so technology will expand in every direction
ReplyDeleteSmith- This book is written about lifes given over to technology
ReplyDeleteRoss- no need to be scared of presenting your ideas. We are just talking. Nothing wrong with disagreement. No where have I ever said, I am right and you are wrong. That is all interpretation.
ReplyDelete