When Montag says that the sun burns time i think that he is talking about the sun ending the day and that the sun will never stop (hopefully) but he can stop the burning of books.
I think that it burns away time, like time is going on and running down but the sun is still flaming and burning brightly. It's like a gas fire; even though you begin to run out of gas the fire still burns.
I think he meant that he cant burn books because everyday the sun is burning time and time is wasting. everyday that he keeps burning books he is loosing time to save books and read them and gain knowledge. I agree with Holly and Nicole
I think you guys might be overthinking the symbolism of this. The sun is just how we keep track of time. The sun burns throug time because time seems to go fast and you can't ever get the time back.
I agree with Nicole in that the time is "burnt" so to speak and you cannot get it back just like when you burn a book, you cannot get that back either.
I agree with Jack that this represents that the society isn't very productive and the sun just burns throughout time. The way the society does things is basically a waste of time.
I agree with Grace. She said that as a gas fire runs out of gas, the fire keeps burning. I think Montag's analogy of the Sun and Time is to just solidfy (?) his belief that his journey has reached a peak and that time is burning. The sun keeps going, but time is lost.
i agree with jack it destroyes what time you have. and any time you have is gone in a flash. he also says that time will go on no matter what and that makes sense because the time will go on wether they have their books or not.
I usually judge characters by my first impression of them because once that seed is planted in your mind of what they come off as, that will usually remain.
I think that Montag is pretty obviously a good character because he has tried to leave his mark on the world and is trying to help the society to become better ( if the society actually thinks it will be better ).
I think that a good way to identify good and evil is to read between the lines. Sometimes the authors foreshadow something good or bad that the character is planning to do.
I think it depends on your perspective. Everyone has different morals. Characters in books chagne so maybe in the start of the book a character is viewed as evil but as the books goes on they are seen as a better person. This relates to life and not just books. different people look at people differently and peoples opinions on eachother change through our actions.
I think Montag is a good charactor. He learns and grows which is the best that we can hope for on this earth. On the other hand, I do not think that Beatty is evil. He doesn't understand the good that comes from books, so he is a blind follower. He isn't trying to make the society worse even though he is. He truely is doing what he thinks is best.
Rebecca is right. A character is good or bad depending on your perspective. To the police, Montag is bad because he read books and murdered Beatty but to me Montag is some what the good guy because he wanted to change what he thought was bad in the world.
I think that Montag is good, although he does do evil things, for example murdering Beatty and the other fire fighters. But, out of all the evil acts he does, he does it to contribute to a greater good.
I think that the perception of good or evil comes from which stance you take. The railroad people think that he is good but the society looks down upon him.
Megan briings a good point that has been debated. Is it really okay to kill someone in self defence, and was Montag's situation considered self defense or did he just snap out of frustration of Beatty?
I think a lot of how the character is evil or not, matters wheather you think that they are or not. Each character in a book can be interperated differently. For example, someone, sometime in history, may have thought that Clarrise was evil, because she was the outsider in the book, along with Montag. And possible even thought that Beatty was the good guy because he always stuck to his own cause.
I agree with Kara. Everybody does have different ideas of what is wrong. Sometimes things that seem completely okay to us might be obscene to other people. For example, one elementary school banned Halloween parties at their school because some of the people considered it "devil worshipping". However, most people think it is a harmless holiday and a fun time to go and get free food.
Thats a good question. without people going against the rules, rules would never be changed whether there good rules or bad. even though when montag killed beatty it was viewed as a positive thing, it was still against the law and overall murder. Is that right because it was for something that was bigger then beatty?
But again Daniel, does Beatty really not know what books can do or does he really know and is sort of "helping" Guy move towards an overall goal of changing society's perception.
I agree with Kelsie. It depends on how you see the person on whether or not to define them as good or bad. The soceity sees Montag as a criminal because he reads books, while others see him as a hero for standing out for books.
Emma's 'greater good' comment reminds me of Harry Potter, when they want to enslave people 'for the greater good.' When things are being done for a cause, the question is does the majority of people think it is a just cause? There are always different opinions.
Nicole/Mrs. Moritz-- I do feel bad for the guy they "thought" was Montag. But I don't necessarly think they were confused. They just wanted a scapegoat.
Emily, I agree, they never come out and fully tell you who is good, bad evil and average, reading between the lines is a really good way to gather your own point of view.
I don't think that, in this society, that they would even consider the murders as self defense. Montag killed a man higher in power than he was, therefore they have to get rid of him. Also, like Megan said, they probably don't have trials, they just persicute people on their beleifs or people who threaten their way of life.
I think that I would much rather want to think that our government is not hiding things but i dont think that it matters in their society because they just want entertainment.
I agree with Daniel when he says Beatty isn't evil. Beatty might appear to be evil, but the reality is that he is just doing his job. His job is to eliminate books from anyone and everybdoy no matter how good of a friend they are. Everybody in this society fears books, so they want to get rid of them and Beatty is no different.
Nicole (inner circle)-- I think I would... I don't know what I would rather hear. Imagine there was a crazy killer on the loose, in Denver, or even Littleton. I honestly think I would rather know that he was on the loose, because then you could prepare yourself, like locking your door, etc. But in this book, I think the majority of people would rather think that he was dead.
I agree with Garrett when he said the society just wants entertainment. Frankly, the chase of Montag sounded more like a horse race than a criminal pursuit to me.
I think that the change will not be perfect, no matter what they do. Too much was lost to completely recover. Also, I think that they could do both, remember the books and destroy the fireman's houses.
I think that the government had no choice but to kill that man because if people know that there is a "fugitive" on the loose, they will start to wonder which may bridge them into critical thinking.
@Kelsie: I agree with you, it was not TOTAL self- defense. But in a way, Beatty was looking to push Montag to the edge. He wanted him to snap. Maybe to add another charge to an arrest, we'll never know. All I am saying is that Beatty was at some sort of fault for egging him on, but it was Montag in the end who finally snapped
@Zach: I think that eventually people would find it out. The press would try to get involved and this information would be leaked. We see information that wasn't suppose to be released to the public get leaked out. The point is that I think they would be able to, but eventually everybody would find out.
Off of Holly's question, I don't think that the people in this society will realize "Hey, if he can do it, so can I!" I just think that they will agree with the rest of society and think he's a fugitive and want to put him behind bars
Megan- I agree. In a society like this you need someone to shine through (Montag) and show the way for the rest of them. However, what really happened was much different because the rest of society did not see the "light" well enough. They were all too absorbed in what they were doing.
Zach, I don't think they could actually censor, there are too many people against what the gov. thinks(news, reporters), and would help to get the truth out.
they thought it would be interesting but they get so destracted so easily so they dont really realize when something happens and then they just believe if its really important than it will be brought up again
That is an interesting point Jack. why didnt Ray Bradbury include a solid ending of what Montag did? I also agree with Nicole that they have to completly start over in order to improve on their failures.
@Daniel: I agree. It almost seems like we skipped an era of time. We went from the introduction of technology to where we are today and completely skipping a step of letting the technology process and settle in, and going staright to where we start becoming fearful of progress.
I think i would choose a book that displays good values (possibly the Bible, etc.) in the book because the values in the book could possibly end up shaping the values in real life.
If i could choose one book I would pick a history book, or if it had to be fiction, I would choose something along the lines of The Davinchi Code, only because the different ideas in the book can cause some sort of controversy that could [hopefully] trigger free thinking.
I think I would choose a book that impacted society in a big way. That way if society did break down, I could use that knowledge of the book to affect people the same way it did before.
I would choose a book of poetry, so it could be from all different spectrums and authors...on one day I could think about Edgar Allen Poe, and another Walt Whitman, and so on. Since I love many books, it would be the best possible compromise.
I would choose the Bible, of course. After that, I would memerize The Lord of the Rings. It has a lot of symbolism, it is also very enjoyable, and it shows history in a lot of ways. It is a very well balenced book.
I dont know if i really have a specific book that i would memorize but i would not choose the bible. I think religion sparks alot of contreversy and judgement and we go to almost obey it instead of doing what we think is morally right. I think I would memorize something that was truely important and that had a good message but wasnt so obvious so people could use intelligence to find out. I dont think you can choose something that truely defines yourself, something that would help society and not just something that appeals to you.
I don't know what I would pick, but I love the Book Thief, as well as The Outsiders. I couldn't live in this society without books, I need the thoughts it creates.
I agree with Sydney. The Book Theif is a good book. I would have trouble living in a society without books, because I get a lot of ideas from books. Books provoke many thoughts, which can bring out cool new ideas that will help our society as a whole.
sydney, i agree because i like that point where you get to imagine the people and inagine all the little details in your mind. This helps you learn more for yourself and others.
I agree with Jack in saying that there isn't any substance in what people are doing, or in Montags example, eating.I think he's saying that what everyone is doing is useless.
I think it means that people are just doing, there's no thought or substance behind what they're doing. Steam may look good from the outside, but when you eat it for lunch, it doesn't do anything for you
Emma, I really like that idea, there would be some big type of thought to bring everyone back. Because we all have opinions and feel a need to have them voiced, we all want to be right.
The river is something that seperated him from the people that are not really living and enjoying the values of life. He is so ready to leave the people that think they are living a fulfilling life when in reality they are just passing through life.
I agree with Kara. Religion is a subject that creates most of the arguments and bad happenings in our world. Maybe it would be best to just leave those ideas out of the society. Although the Bible does spark some good in the world, it might be better to get a book that creates more positive thoughts and ideas, rather than judgement.
I also agree with Jack that they are on autopilot. No offense to the people in this society, but they are pretty useless, because they can't think for themselves. When you can't think for yourself, nothing changes in society at all.
I have slightly tweaked my entry, haha. I would choose a complete compilation of Edgar Allen Poe's works, because his poems are haunting, beautiful, and amazing. They capture such a wide range of emotions that they would be perfect for any situation.
Rebecca brings up a good point. I disagree with the book, I value people for who they are, and when they pass away, you miss being with them as a person
I think it refers to their society's function, I think that it is an analogy for their society living their everyday lives and not growing or getting any substance out of it.
@Zach, that's a really good thought. It fills them but doesn't sustain them. SO, maybe people will realize that they're not truly "full" and they might search out "real food."
I think we value people for our relationships, which really is what they do for you. If they listen, help change you, or become apart of you. When they die, that part of you is missing so you morn.
I do agree that our actions and our impact on the society is how we are defined ( no one ever remember the kid in the back of the room that never says anything ).
@ Michaela: I think that not everybody values people for who they are but what they have. I know people who only hang out with people because of their money or their connections and if something were to get bad with the person with the money and/or connections, the people that they call "friends" would leave them in a second.
I agree with Abby. Sometimes people will look at you like you are "two faced" becuase you are shy around some people and crazy around others (crazy in a good way, by the way).
I agree with Abbie, because even though I don't talk much in this class, I talk to my friends a lot more. It's not being two faced, but some people are just shy when it comes to other people.
@emily i agree that people do judge and value people based on what they have but true realationships are based on waht people are and not what they have.
We would ban and censor many things; we would censor most books because, like they thought back then, they provoke thought and that gives people ideas which can threaten other people.
Megan- That is true that Montag didn't really value what Mildred did, because to tell the truth, she really didn't do much at all. The only thing he values her for, is what she was to him.
I feel the same way as Emily. Some people I don't feel as comfortable with as I do with others. Once I get to know a person better, I become more social around them.
@ Daniel: I think that your actions make you who you are. Kind of like Zach said, your actions are the way that people will judge you. For example, some of the celebrities are judged for their good and their bad. Good because they accomplished becoming a celebrity and Bad because sometimes they do stupid things. Lindsey Lohan used to be one of the celebrated celebrities and let's just say that's not quite the case anymore.
Even though I'm not religious, I agree with Daniel- it's not what you say, it's what you do. Not the promises you make, the promises you keep. Famous people in history- Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks, etc., not only said they would fix things but took action to prove their words right.
If our society today became like it is in the book, we would ban honors classes. Because, like Megan said, we think outside the box more than a normal English class and and we won't want thought provoking classes.
I agree and disagree with Jack. We don't go on the internet to look up chemistry, but we do use it a lot for school and research. I use it almost every day for school.
Like Jack said we are a really technology saavy country and with that comes cencorship. Some material isn't appropriate for younger kids but then that creates controversy over who has the cencorship rights. The society of Farenheit 451 is over cencorized. Who do you think had the rights to do this?
@ Kelsie: I agree. If our society became like it is in the book, then chances are everyone would be in the same class and learn the same thing. This happened to me in elementary school up until the fifth grade, when they started grouping kids based on their abilities. It would be similar to elementary school.
@sydeny: I'm talking about people like mildred, who probably take up about 99% of the citizens. They are married to be married, and together becuase everyone else is.
the computer is now a part of every day life for highschoolers. there isnt one night this year so far that i havent had to go online just to do my homework
Well, it was the people that began the "censoring". They chose to shorten, delete, and destroy what was in their society. The government just took advantage of this for their own use.
@everyone (kind of off topic) How long ago do you think society was "normal" in our eyes, when critical thinking and reading books was not frowned upon.
@Michaela, they could eventually. Right now, honors class, school, and books are the norm. Years from now, it might slowly change and we won't have honors classes and we wouldn't even know that it was happening.
Nicole says that sometimes we feel shoved down due to our intellectuality. I completely agree. In some of my classes, I feel like the stupid kid. However, sometimes I get teased for being smarter than the average kid in my class.
@Corey, I think it was a long time ago from when the book takes place that things were "normal." I think it would take a long time for things to change that drastically
I think that diverstiy is just like books, they create thought processes and diversity makes the society move along. I blame the low change in the society on the low diversity.
Holly says that if everything was equal, then we wouldn't feel the need to compete. That would be true. Nobody would even consider competing for anything and we would never even be able to discover who we are or what our purpose is. Without competition, we won't have extreme amounts of purpose. We will still have some, however I think a big part of our life is based on competition whether we like it or not.
@Michaela, True, i don't think that people would let that happen but I'm saying that what if it just changes, over a long period of time that no one even really thinks that it changes, we don't even realize it
I agree with Becca. I think diversity does create competiton but competiton is viewed badly but it cause people to strive to be better and work harder. When you take diversity away then people never grow and change. Losing is something apart of life and you have to lose to be able to win, and if you look at loosing negativly than you will never win but if you seeing loosing as a chance to get better than competiton creates great characters.
Mrs. Moritz-- I think that have better grades is more efficent that being a sports star. Sure, as a professional football player we get paid like crazy, but wouldn't you want more money for doing something that benefits the world?
I agree with Abbie. I would rather be academically inclined the athletically inclined. Most people I know have wanted to be professional sports people. But How many people really become professional athletes? If you aren't one of those people who become professional athletes and you don't get on pro teams, then what are you going to do for a job?
But Griffin, I think that unless your a real "loser", being below someone will usually give you the drive to achieve to the standards of that other person.
I agree with Haley- competition is essential, whether it is in business or everyday life. Someone mentioned the Space Race...without the struggle with Russia we might have never landed on the moon, or orbited the Earth. It's like lighting a fire under someone, so to speak.
Megan- We advance through our time, by discovering different things, and without having the initiative to discover and learn new things, nothing will ever have the chance to advance.
@Daniel, I think society does need to advance, it will always need to advance. For example, when you think you can't invent anything because everything's already been invented, back in the 1800's, everything was already invented, 1900's, same thing. Literally, there is no limit to what can happen or what you can do. Society will always need to advance and it always will
@daniel I think society does need to advance. In order to acheive all the things we have now, like the internet, space exploration, tvs, ect, our society had to advance. All the things that seem so normal to us now were caused by technology advancing and people thinking.
Just because you are competitive doesn't mean that you have to play sports. The academic world is equally competitive. It's not easy to get into a great college. It's not easy to become the top of your class.
I agree with Megan. People think that sports dont give you anything to fall back on, but sports do give you characterstics that help you suceeed in life. education does to but it depends on what your are passionate about and what you go after. If you do that than you did something that is truely valuble in your life.
Rebecca- I don't think that many people think about their fall back right now. They are really thinking about their immediate futrue and what they want to do. For exampple-- models. They model from age 16-around 25. After that, what do they do? Most don't make it out to be the next Tyra Banks. Where do they go from there?
I don't get how there is no competition in the society of Fahrenheit 451. There is competition within everything (sports, money, looks, education, cars, personality). They must be brainwashed or how else would their society work? Everyone has the ability to think and are their own person. When whoever decided to burn books everyone who lived in the generations of books would have to die or everyone would have to be brainwashed.
I agree with Kelsie, Garrett, Michaela, Grace… the sun burns the time away, I suppose. But it isn’t just the sun, is it?
I think Kara brings up a good point – Montag is too busy doing the wrong things that he is in turn losing time to turn around and do the right things.
I agree with Emily, and I suppose then with Jack… society is just wasting time. The way of life is so boring and regular and superficial that… I don’t know – does time go by fast, or by slowly for them?
An interesting way to look at it, Michaela… knowing one definition enables us to defien another. There must be both sides.
Yes, Zach – Montag turned himself around.
Yes – it is from OUR SOCIETY’S point of view that makes us believe that Montag is a good person. Someone somewhere might think that Millie and Beatty are the heroes of the story; whereas we wouldn’t doubt that Montag is the hero. Makes you think about point of view; makes you think about everything in the world, and how many ways things can be interpreted. It also ultimately relates back to Beatty’s speech – everything is offensive to someone.
I also agree with Kara – it speaks about our morals.
Haley brings up a great connection – the evil within us all.
I agree that they wanted a scapegoat for the fact that they weren’t able to find Montag during the chase. The poor man.
I disagree with the opinion of some that Beatty is not evil. He came off to me as evil, and he still pretty much stays that way… but, again, consideration of point of view. I agree with Grace and Garrett – usually, if there is a dangerous criminal on the loose, most people wouldn’t be waiting and watching and becoming excited, it seems. I think that the society has faith in the authorities, and that is why they’re able to enjoy the chase instead of fear for themselves. That and the fact that television rules their lives.
Mark, I’m not sure if they could ever see “the light” Montag was apparently shining. The society, the way of life, the beliefs, I just don’t think it would be possible for people to see it. It’s not like they’re extremely educated too. How will they see the light?
Corey, I agree that values in a book could shape values in real life. What we read influences what we do and who we are.
I agree with Kara. I believe that books should not necessarily tell us what to do and what to believe. They should instead guide us into our own minds, so to speak. If I would choose a book, well… I believe it would be fiction. I think most great novels make us question ourselves. In this way, Clarisse is like a book that Montag has begun to read. Again, depth. Much of it is about depth, it seems. Looking inside and discovering what is important in life. I mean, I still have to learn it.
I also agree with Mark. If we were able and felt the need to memorize a book, everyone’s book should be the one that means the most to them. That is why we have so many books. They are always being written and they are always being read. An author will write about something that means something to them. So, we have viewpoints and ideas and knowledge that vary from each other.
When Michaela says that everything that they are doing is useless, we are returning to the sun burning up time. I think that in life we really have to figure out what is important – TO US.
The conversation with Daniel about the Gilded Age – everything looking good on the outside, but horrible on the inside, or lacking real quality… it relates to everything. Is fame really that great? Is it what everyone should want? On the outside… everything you could dream of, everyone knowing your name. But at the same time – think about how many celebrities have committed suicide. Gotten lost with drugs. Been miserable. Will money buy happiness? This also relates to Inherit The Wind – Drummond uses his story of the Golden Dancer to reveal the same concept to Cates.
In saying that the Bible provokes some good thoughts and much judgment, and saying that many books besides it should be valued because of thought rather than judgment… you have to wonder. Won’t someone feel judged? Isn’t there always someone, something, in every book that is being judged? It comes back to Beatty’s whole idea of offending someone. Let’s learn to deal with differences. Someone will talk about you behind your back. Someone will call you a rude name. Someone will call you stupid. But in the novel, when there appears to be only one side to every story to avoid offending someone, isn’t there the fact that presidents are elected on their appearance and the fact that possibly, Mildred doesn’t want to have a friend because the person is ugly? When knowledge is gone, appearance takes its place. It has the role. What would happen if judgment based on appearance was no longer acceptable, like in Harrison Bergeron? There is a book with no words. Soon, the book has no cover. What’s the use of the paper? Get rid of it. What will remain? Nothing.
Michaela said that you value a person because of who the person really is. Again with the appearance. Get rid of character, you have a body. So then what? Who the person really is matters more than the money they make. Maybe. To pay attention to the actions which really reflect the type of human the person is.
Like Moritz always says, Zach and Kelsie, FOOD FOR THOUGHT!
Emily, I also think that many assumptions are made based on amount of money, etc. And I have to admit, the entire situation, or conflict, boggles my mind. I am always confused. Will I mean something if I am not famous, if I do not have piles and piles of money? What if I do not feel as smart or as good as someone famous – that is, for a good reason?
With Mildred’s death, I agree with Garrett. I don’t think he was sad. I think he was confused and perhaps a bit guilty as to why he wasn’t sad. I can relate, in some situations.
But Mark – what was Mildred to Montag? I think absolutely nothing. Maybe a poster, a commercial wife for life.
I have to wonder – if all this censorship everyone was talking about and how it couldn’t be at all possible – how was it nearly all the way succeeded in Fahrenheit? I will acknowledge the fact that today we are quite far. It would be more difficult. But in Fahrenheit, whenever it takes place, they are were they are. The were where they were.
Alyssa – I know, we all use computers. Sometimes I just freak out. What is going to become of us? I worry about the future in this sense.
Michaela – do we have to be the best?
And what if competition takes over? My swim team’s sport physcologist talks about how being the best is not what is important. We must have some peace. I don’t think I’ll be able to survive all life is is competition. In a way, though, it is. But, I am overwhelmed when I see fashion magazines and when I see actresses looking beautiful and having fun. Isn’t it competition? Will there be people left in the world that really know how to live? Is there every TOO MUCH competition? Just a thought. I agree that competition is necessary to progress and become better. Are there points when we break from pressure and stress and comparison, etc.? It’s SO difficult to feel good about who you are, especially when we are living now. The difficulty level of the whole concept, to be, is unbelievable. And Zach, yes, it would appear that if there is a winner there is also a loser. But what if losing is actually winning, depending on the circumstances? Think about it. How much are we able to grow from both apparent and basic outcomes of competition? I believe quite much. Just like in Macbeth – fair is foul and foul is fair… losing would appear foul, would it not? But is there a possibility that it can be reversed? Ex: just as someone may be making some bank, does that mean that they are making some feelings of happiness?
Yes, Kara – viewpoint on the situation can ultimately determine whether you won or lost. It is the lesson learned, I think, that matters… not who crossed the finish line first.
Corey – do other people matter (in the sense that you were talking about)?
Does everything happen for a reason? There are many instances that I wish that I sincerely believed that it does. “There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be…”
I think the conversation about limits is interesting. I don’t know my answer, though.
Sports, smarts, college, the top of your class… it’s so stressful.
I think he means that the sun goes up down and makes the days pass so it burns the days away sort of
ReplyDeleteWhen Montag says that the sun burns time i think that he is talking about the sun ending the day and that the sun will never stop (hopefully) but he can stop the burning of books.
ReplyDeleteI think that the phrase "The Sun burns Time" means that as the Sun lives on, it takes up time. So time is being "burnt" as the sun lives.
ReplyDeleteI think that it burns away time, like time is going on and running down but the sun is still flaming and burning brightly. It's like a gas fire; even though you begin to run out of gas the fire still burns.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kelsi. It's like everything in Montags life happened so fast. Like all of the bad things that happened.
ReplyDeleteI think he meant that he cant burn books because everyday the sun is burning time and time is wasting. everyday that he keeps burning books he is loosing time to save books and read them and gain knowledge. I agree with Holly and Nicole
ReplyDeleteIsn't he just saying that time is burning. It's running out. He does want everything to get destroyed by the time his time burns out.
ReplyDeleteI think you guys might be overthinking the symbolism of this. The sun is just how we keep track of time. The sun burns throug time because time seems to go fast and you can't ever get the time back.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jack that Time will always go on and that we should go on to and not burn away out time here.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nicole in that the time is "burnt" so to speak and you cannot get it back just like when you burn a book, you cannot get that back either.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jack that this represents that the society isn't very productive and the sun just burns throughout time. The way the society does things is basically a waste of time.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Grace. She said that as a gas fire runs out of gas, the fire keeps burning. I think Montag's analogy of the Sun and Time is to just solidfy (?) his belief that his journey has reached a peak and that time is burning. The sun keeps going, but time is lost.
ReplyDeletei agree with jack it destroyes what time you have. and any time you have is gone in a flash. he also says that time will go on no matter what and that makes sense because the time will go on wether they have their books or not.
ReplyDeleteDaniel makes a good point. Sort of like that Montag thinks that time will eventually run out and we shouldn't waste it by burning
ReplyDeleteGood defines evil as evil defines good. Without evil, we cannot have good, and without good, we cannot have evil.
ReplyDeleteI usually judge characters by my first impression of them because once that seed is planted in your mind of what they come off as, that will usually remain.
ReplyDeleteI wonder what Time Montag is talking about, the Time of eternity or the Time in his own life...it seems like it could be either.
ReplyDeleteI think that Montag is pretty obviously a good character because he has tried to leave his mark on the world and is trying to help the society to become better ( if the society actually thinks it will be better ).
ReplyDeleteI thought he only knocked the firefighters out, not killed them...?
ReplyDeleteNo character is all good, so I would define Montag as good, because he changed his thinking after realizing the bad he was doing.
ReplyDeleteI think that a good way to identify good and evil is to read between the lines. Sometimes the authors foreshadow something good or bad that the character is planning to do.
ReplyDeleteBut Garret,like Becca said it is only from our society's point of view that Montag seems good.
ReplyDeleteI think it depends on your perspective. Everyone has different morals. Characters in books chagne so maybe in the start of the book a character is viewed as evil but as the books goes on they are seen as a better person. This relates to life and not just books. different people look at people differently and peoples opinions on eachother change through our actions.
ReplyDeleteI think Montag is a good charactor. He learns and grows which is the best that we can hope for on this earth. On the other hand, I do not think that Beatty is evil. He doesn't understand the good that comes from books, so he is a blind follower. He isn't trying to make the society worse even though he is. He truely is doing what he thinks is best.
ReplyDeleteThere is evil in everyone. That seems like a common theme in the literature we've read so far.
ReplyDeleteRebecca is right. A character is good or bad depending on your perspective. To the police, Montag is bad because he read books and murdered Beatty but to me Montag is some what the good guy because he wanted to change what he thought was bad in the world.
ReplyDeleteI think that Montag is good, although he does do evil things, for example murdering Beatty and the other fire fighters. But, out of all the evil acts he does, he does it to contribute to a greater good.
ReplyDeleteI think that the perception of good or evil comes from which stance you take. The railroad people think that he is good but the society looks down upon him.
ReplyDeletei agree with zach... everyone has some bad side. and as meghan said... is it ok to fight for certain things in this government? or is it frowned apon?
ReplyDeleteMegan briings a good point that has been debated. Is it really okay to kill someone in self defence, and was Montag's situation considered self defense or did he just snap out of frustration of Beatty?
ReplyDeleteHaley, you are so right! That is definitely a reoccurring theme in the literature we've read this year
ReplyDeleteI think a lot of how the character is evil or not, matters wheather you think that they are or not. Each character in a book can be interperated differently. For example, someone, sometime in history, may have thought that Clarrise was evil, because she was the outsider in the book, along with Montag. And possible even thought that Beatty was the good guy because he always stuck to his own cause.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kara. Everybody does have different ideas of what is wrong. Sometimes things that seem completely okay to us might be obscene to other people. For example, one elementary school banned Halloween parties at their school because some of the people considered it "devil worshipping". However, most people think it is a harmless holiday and a fun time to go and get free food.
ReplyDeleteThats a good question. without people going against the rules, rules would never be changed whether there good rules or bad. even though when montag killed beatty it was viewed as a positive thing, it was still against the law and overall murder. Is that right because it was for something that was bigger then beatty?
ReplyDeleteBut again Daniel, does Beatty really not know what books can do or does he really know and is sort of "helping" Guy move towards an overall goal of changing society's perception.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kelsie. It depends on how you see the person on whether or not to define them as good or bad. The soceity sees Montag as a criminal because he reads books, while others see him as a hero for standing out for books.
ReplyDeleteEmma's 'greater good' comment reminds me of Harry Potter, when they want to enslave people 'for the greater good.' When things are being done for a cause, the question is does the majority of people think it is a just cause? There are always different opinions.
ReplyDelete@Michaela, I don't think it was self defense because Beatty wasn't hurting him or threatening him, he was just taunting him.
ReplyDeleteNicole/Mrs. Moritz-- I do feel bad for the guy they "thought" was Montag. But I don't necessarly think they were confused. They just wanted a scapegoat.
ReplyDeleteEmily, I agree, they never come out and fully tell you who is good, bad evil and average, reading between the lines is a really good way to gather your own point of view.
ReplyDeleteEither way, Corey, he is doing good. I still think he is not evil.
ReplyDelete@Kelsie: Yes, but like Montag was explaining to Faber, he was taunting, waiting for Montag to snap. Montag says, "Beatty wanted to die".
ReplyDeleteI don't think that, in this society, that they would even consider the murders as self defense. Montag killed a man higher in power than he was, therefore they have to get rid of him. Also, like Megan said, they probably don't have trials, they just persicute people on their beleifs or people who threaten their way of life.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point Grace, no one is ever going to fully agree, there will always be people who think the opposite of the "cause".
ReplyDeleteI think that I would much rather want to think that our government is not hiding things but i dont think that it matters in their society because they just want entertainment.
ReplyDelete@ Michaela, that's true, but it's still was not self defense necessarily.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daniel when he says Beatty isn't evil. Beatty might appear to be evil, but the reality is that he is just doing his job. His job is to eliminate books from anyone and everybdoy no matter how good of a friend they are. Everybody in this society fears books, so they want to get rid of them and Beatty is no different.
ReplyDeleteNicole (inner circle)-- I think I would... I don't know what I would rather hear. Imagine there was a crazy killer on the loose, in Denver, or even Littleton. I honestly think I would rather know that he was on the loose, because then you could prepare yourself, like locking your door, etc. But in this book, I think the majority of people would rather think that he was dead.
ReplyDeleteI would want to know the truth. Even if the government tried to censor the truth, could they get away with it in our current society?
ReplyDeleteI think that the saving of books in our memory is more effective because you cant just go around burning peoples heads.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Garrett when he said the society just wants entertainment. Frankly, the chase of Montag sounded more like a horse race than a criminal pursuit to me.
ReplyDeleteI think that the change will not be perfect, no matter what they do. Too much was lost to completely recover. Also, I think that they could do both, remember the books and destroy the fireman's houses.
ReplyDeleteI think that the government had no choice but to kill that man because if people know that there is a "fugitive" on the loose, they will start to wonder which may bridge them into critical thinking.
ReplyDelete@Kelsie: I agree with you, it was not TOTAL self- defense. But in a way, Beatty was looking to push Montag to the edge. He wanted him to snap. Maybe to add another charge to an arrest, we'll never know. All I am saying is that Beatty was at some sort of fault for egging him on, but it was Montag in the end who finally snapped
ReplyDelete@Zach: I think that eventually people would find it out. The press would try to get involved and this information would be leaked. We see information that wasn't suppose to be released to the public get leaked out. The point is that I think they would be able to, but eventually everybody would find out.
ReplyDeleteOff of Holly's question, I don't think that the people in this society will realize "Hey, if he can do it, so can I!" I just think that they will agree with the rest of society and think he's a fugitive and want to put him behind bars
ReplyDeleteMegan- I agree. In a society like this you need someone to shine through (Montag) and show the way for the rest of them. However, what really happened was much different because the rest of society did not see the "light" well enough. They were all too absorbed in what they were doing.
ReplyDeleteZach, I don't think they could actually censor, there are too many people against what the gov. thinks(news, reporters), and would help to get the truth out.
ReplyDeletethey thought it would be interesting but they get so destracted so easily so they dont really realize when something happens and then they just believe if its really important than it will be brought up again
ReplyDelete@Michaela, I guess that's true that it is Beatty's fault that he died
ReplyDeleteThat is an interesting point Jack. why didnt Ray Bradbury include a solid ending of what Montag did? I also agree with Nicole that they have to completly start over in order to improve on their failures.
ReplyDeleteI relate the society's mistakes to lying. The society will never completely be able to stop the mayhem just like humans will always lie.
ReplyDeletePractically everyone, besides Montag and a few others, were too dumb to learn from their mistakes and, therefore, they suffered a brutal death.
ReplyDeletebridge to taribithia... it helps you learn lessons
ReplyDelete@Daniel: I agree. It almost seems like we skipped an era of time. We went from the introduction of technology to where we are today and completely skipping a step of letting the technology process and settle in, and going staright to where we start becoming fearful of progress.
ReplyDeleteI feel that most people would choose the Bible because many people live their life according to what it says.
ReplyDeleteI think that it doesn't matter what they choose because they really just choose whatever they can get their hands on!!!1
ReplyDelete@Mark, what mistakes are you referring too?
ReplyDeleteI think i would choose a book that displays good values (possibly the Bible, etc.) in the book because the values in the book could possibly end up shaping the values in real life.
ReplyDeleteIf i could choose one book I would pick a history book, or if it had to be fiction, I would choose something along the lines of The Davinchi Code, only because the different ideas in the book can cause some sort of controversy that could [hopefully] trigger free thinking.
ReplyDeleteI think I would choose a book that impacted society in a big way. That way if society did break down, I could use that knowledge of the book to affect people the same way it did before.
ReplyDeleteI would choose a book of poetry, so it could be from all different spectrums and authors...on one day I could think about Edgar Allen Poe, and another Walt Whitman, and so on. Since I love many books, it would be the best possible compromise.
ReplyDeleteI would choose the Bible, of course. After that, I would memerize The Lord of the Rings. It has a lot of symbolism, it is also very enjoyable, and it shows history in a lot of ways. It is a very well balenced book.
ReplyDeleteI dont know if i really have a specific book that i would memorize but i would not choose the bible. I think religion sparks alot of contreversy and judgement and we go to almost obey it instead of doing what we think is morally right. I think I would memorize something that was truely important and that had a good message but wasnt so obvious so people could use intelligence to find out. I dont think you can choose something that truely defines yourself, something that would help society and not just something that appeals to you.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I really don't think that it matters what you choose because as their society they dont know the meaning of the book yet.
ReplyDeleteI don't know what I would pick, but I love the Book Thief, as well as The Outsiders. I couldn't live in this society without books, I need the thoughts it creates.
ReplyDeleteBut Garrett, think about what book you would choose in OUR society.
ReplyDeleteI think memorizing a book that has a deeper meaning to you, would be better, so no one else could get the same exact thing out of it.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Sydney. The Book Theif is a good book. I would have trouble living in a society without books, because I get a lot of ideas from books. Books provoke many thoughts, which can bring out cool new ideas that will help our society as a whole.
ReplyDeletesydney, i agree because i like that point where you get to imagine the people and inagine all the little details in your mind. This helps you learn more for yourself and others.
ReplyDeleteI think that this refers to the fact that the society is in such a monotone way of living that there is nothing of substance
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jack in saying that there isn't any substance in what people are doing, or in Montags example, eating.I think he's saying that what everyone is doing is useless.
ReplyDeleteI think it means that people are just doing, there's no thought or substance behind what they're doing. Steam may look good from the outside, but when you eat it for lunch, it doesn't do anything for you
ReplyDeletePeople just survive, there is nothing in what theyare eating. It may fill them, but it doesn't truly sustain them.
ReplyDeleteEmma, I really like that idea, there would be some big type of thought to bring everyone back. Because we all have opinions and feel a need to have them voiced, we all want to be right.
ReplyDeleteIt's like the guilded age! Gold on the outside, but when you look closer it is lacking real quility.
ReplyDeleteThe river is something that seperated him from the people that are not really living and enjoying the values of life. He is so ready to leave the people that think they are living a fulfilling life when in reality they are just passing through life.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kara. Religion is a subject that creates most of the arguments and bad happenings in our world. Maybe it would be best to just leave those ideas out of the society. Although the Bible does spark some good in the world, it might be better to get a book that creates more positive thoughts and ideas, rather than judgement.
ReplyDelete@Garrett, that's a really good point. It's flat, there's nothing to it
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Jack that they are on autopilot. No offense to the people in this society, but they are pretty useless, because they can't think for themselves. When you can't think for yourself, nothing changes in society at all.
ReplyDeleteI have slightly tweaked my entry, haha. I would choose a complete compilation of Edgar Allen Poe's works, because his poems are haunting, beautiful, and amazing. They capture such a wide range of emotions that they would be perfect for any situation.
ReplyDeleteI think that we can relate this to the sieve and the sand that nothing sticks in this community ( especially knowledge ).
ReplyDeleteRebecca brings up a good point. I disagree with the book, I value people for who they are, and when they pass away, you miss being with them as a person
ReplyDeleteI think it refers to their society's function, I think that it is an analogy for their society living their everyday lives and not growing or getting any substance out of it.
ReplyDelete@Zach, that's a really good thought. It fills them but doesn't sustain them. SO, maybe people will realize that they're not truly "full" and they might search out "real food."
ReplyDeleteBecca- I think that we value both the actual people and what they do, because what they do, universally, is what they are.
ReplyDeleteI think we value people for our relationships, which really is what they do for you. If they listen, help change you, or become apart of you. When they die, that part of you is missing so you morn.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that our actions and our impact on the society is how we are defined ( no one ever remember the kid in the back of the room that never says anything ).
ReplyDelete@ Michaela: I think that not everybody values people for who they are but what they have. I know people who only hang out with people because of their money or their connections and if something were to get bad with the person with the money and/or connections, the people that they call "friends" would leave them in a second.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Abby. Sometimes people will look at you like you are "two faced" becuase you are shy around some people and crazy around others (crazy in a good way, by the way).
ReplyDeleteI agree with Abbie, because even though I don't talk much in this class, I talk to my friends a lot more. It's not being two faced, but some people are just shy when it comes to other people.
ReplyDeleteWe value people based on how they leave their mark on the world. Whether they changed a life, or did something else, that is how we judge them.
ReplyDeleteA lot of people think that God judges bassed on your heart, or who you are. Aren't your actions who you are?
ReplyDeleteI don't think Montag was sad for Mildred, i think he was sad for what happened. He was sad that she had wasted her life with her "family" (TV)
ReplyDeleteI really don't think that Montag was to distraught about Mildreds death but rather was just thinking back on why he wasn't sad.
ReplyDelete@emily i agree that people do judge and value people based on what they have but true realationships are based on waht people are and not what they have.
ReplyDeleteWe would ban and censor many things; we would censor most books because, like they thought back then, they provoke thought and that gives people ideas which can threaten other people.
ReplyDeleteMegan- That is true that Montag didn't really value what Mildred did, because to tell the truth, she really didn't do much at all. The only thing he values her for, is what she was to him.
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way as Emily. Some people I don't feel as comfortable with as I do with others. Once I get to know a person better, I become more social around them.
ReplyDeleteHolly, we would HAVE to ban the internet and all technology like it, (kindles, ipods, etc). There is too much information in them.
ReplyDelete@ Daniel: I think that your actions make you who you are. Kind of like Zach said, your actions are the way that people will judge you. For example, some of the celebrities are judged for their good and their bad. Good because they accomplished becoming a celebrity and Bad because sometimes they do stupid things. Lindsey Lohan used to be one of the celebrated celebrities and let's just say that's not quite the case anymore.
ReplyDeleteEven though I'm not religious, I agree with Daniel- it's not what you say, it's what you do. Not the promises you make, the promises you keep. Famous people in history- Nelson Mandela, Rosa Parks, etc., not only said they would fix things but took action to prove their words right.
ReplyDelete@Emily/Kara-- I agree with both of you. there are not any "true" relationships that are based off personality in Farenhiet451
ReplyDeleteIf our society today became like it is in the book, we would ban honors classes. Because, like Megan said, we think outside the box more than a normal English class and and we won't want thought provoking classes.
ReplyDeleteThe goverment would never do this. I think it would be too much of a struggle to handle. There would always be one person who would rebel.
ReplyDeleteI agree and disagree with Jack. We don't go on the internet to look up chemistry, but we do use it a lot for school and research. I use it almost every day for school.
ReplyDeleteMichaela- what about Montag and Clarisse?
ReplyDelete@Kelsie: Would people allow honors classes to be banned? Like Nicole said, it would be impossible for this to happen.
ReplyDeleteLike Jack said we are a really technology saavy country and with that comes cencorship. Some material isn't appropriate for younger kids but then that creates controversy over who has the cencorship rights. The society of Farenheit 451 is over cencorized. Who do you think had the rights to do this?
ReplyDelete@ Kelsie: I agree. If our society became like it is in the book, then chances are everyone would be in the same class and learn the same thing. This happened to me in elementary school up until the fifth grade, when they started grouping kids based on their abilities. It would be similar to elementary school.
ReplyDelete@sydeny: I'm talking about people like mildred, who probably take up about 99% of the citizens. They are married to be married, and together becuase everyone else is.
ReplyDeletethe computer is now a part of every day life for highschoolers. there isnt one night this year so far that i havent had to go online just to do my homework
ReplyDeleteWell, it was the people that began the "censoring". They chose to shorten, delete, and destroy what was in their society. The government just took advantage of this for their own use.
ReplyDeleteHaley-Everyone has a different level of censorship that they need, so we have to lower it to the level of the people who need the most.
ReplyDelete@everyone (kind of off topic) How long ago do you think society was "normal" in our eyes, when critical thinking and reading books was not frowned upon.
ReplyDeleteNicole-- I think diverstiy is a good thing. It challenges us to work harder and try to be the best.
ReplyDelete@Michaela, they could eventually. Right now, honors class, school, and books are the norm. Years from now, it might slowly change and we won't have honors classes and we wouldn't even know that it was happening.
ReplyDeleteNicole says that sometimes we feel shoved down due to our intellectuality. I completely agree. In some of my classes, I feel like the stupid kid. However, sometimes I get teased for being smarter than the average kid in my class.
ReplyDelete*sydney (correction)
ReplyDeleteCompetition is what helps our society advance. Without competition there is no reason to get better.
ReplyDelete@Corey, I think it was a long time ago from when the book takes place that things were "normal." I think it would take a long time for things to change that drastically
ReplyDeleteWhat Becca said goes back to what I talked about on my letter to Beatty about how competition raises standards and other people's abilities.
ReplyDeletenowa days everyone gets a ribbion
ReplyDeleteI think that diverstiy is just like books, they create thought processes and diversity makes the society move along. I blame the low change in the society on the low diversity.
ReplyDelete@kelsie: still. I think that no one would let such a thing to happen.
ReplyDeleteHolly says that if everything was equal, then we wouldn't feel the need to compete. That would be true. Nobody would even consider competing for anything and we would never even be able to discover who we are or what our purpose is. Without competition, we won't have extreme amounts of purpose. We will still have some, however I think a big part of our life is based on competition whether we like it or not.
ReplyDeleteYou need competition to progress. There is no incentive to get better if everyone is the same. Like Daniel said, to be a winner there must be a loser.
ReplyDelete@Michaela, True, i don't think that people would let that happen but I'm saying that what if it just changes, over a long period of time that no one even really thinks that it changes, we don't even realize it
ReplyDeleteDoes society need to advance?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Becca. I think diversity does create competiton but competiton is viewed badly but it cause people to strive to be better and work harder. When you take diversity away then people never grow and change. Losing is something apart of life and you have to lose to be able to win, and if you look at loosing negativly than you will never win but if you seeing loosing as a chance to get better than competiton creates great characters.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Moritz-- I think that have better grades is more efficent that being a sports star. Sure, as a professional football player we get paid like crazy, but wouldn't you want more money for doing something that benefits the world?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Abbie. I would rather be academically inclined the athletically inclined. Most people I know have wanted to be professional sports people. But How many people really become professional athletes? If you aren't one of those people who become professional athletes and you don't get on pro teams, then what are you going to do for a job?
ReplyDeletethere is always a runnerup
ReplyDeleteBut Griffin, I think that unless your a real "loser", being below someone will usually give you the drive to achieve to the standards of that other person.
ReplyDeleteMegan- That has been my thought throughout the whole book. They have a controlled advancement, the gov. regulated what we can and can't think, do, be.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Haley- competition is essential, whether it is in business or everyday life. Someone mentioned the Space Race...without the struggle with Russia we might have never landed on the moon, or orbited the Earth. It's like lighting a fire under someone, so to speak.
ReplyDeleteMegan- We advance through our time, by discovering different things, and without having the initiative to discover and learn new things, nothing will ever have the chance to advance.
ReplyDeleteGarret-- I am super competetive, but i agree with you. You have to have some kind of fall back for when you are older and can't play sports anymore.
ReplyDelete@Daniel, I think society does need to advance, it will always need to advance. For example, when you think you can't invent anything because everything's already been invented, back in the 1800's, everything was already invented, 1900's, same thing. Literally, there is no limit to what can happen or what you can do. Society will always need to advance and it always will
ReplyDelete@daniel I think society does need to advance. In order to acheive all the things we have now, like the internet, space exploration, tvs, ect, our society had to advance. All the things that seem so normal to us now were caused by technology advancing and people thinking.
ReplyDeleteJust because you are competitive doesn't mean that you have to play sports. The academic world is equally competitive. It's not easy to get into a great college. It's not easy to become the top of your class.
ReplyDeleteYou have to have a "fall back". As everyone has said, there is nothing that lasts forever. But as Megan said, do it for the time you can.
ReplyDeleteBut Allysa, that runner up will want to achieve more and may possibly get to that other person's letter.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Megan. People think that sports dont give you anything to fall back on, but sports do give you characterstics that help you suceeed in life. education does to but it depends on what your are passionate about and what you go after. If you do that than you did something that is truely valuble in your life.
ReplyDeleteI think that if you create to much focus on your fallback then you are expecting yourself to fail.
ReplyDeleteRebecca- I don't think that many people think about their fall back right now. They are really thinking about their immediate futrue and what they want to do. For exampple-- models. They model from age 16-around 25. After that, what do they do? Most don't make it out to be the next Tyra Banks. Where do they go from there?
ReplyDeleteI don't get how there is no competition in the society of Fahrenheit 451. There is competition within everything (sports, money, looks, education, cars, personality). They must be brainwashed or how else would their society work? Everyone has the ability to think and are their own person. When whoever decided to burn books everyone who lived in the generations of books would have to die or everyone would have to be brainwashed.
ReplyDeleteLast thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Kelsie, Garrett, Michaela, Grace… the sun burns the time away, I suppose. But it isn’t just the sun, is it?
ReplyDeleteI think Kara brings up a good point – Montag is too busy doing the wrong things that he is in turn losing time to turn around and do the right things.
I agree with Emily, and I suppose then with Jack… society is just wasting time. The way of life is so boring and regular and superficial that… I don’t know – does time go by fast, or by slowly for them?
An interesting way to look at it, Michaela… knowing one definition enables us to defien another. There must be both sides.
Yes, Zach – Montag turned himself around.
Yes – it is from OUR SOCIETY’S point of view that makes us believe that Montag is a good person. Someone somewhere might think that Millie and Beatty are the heroes of the story; whereas we wouldn’t doubt that Montag is the hero. Makes you think about point of view; makes you think about everything in the world, and how many ways things can be interpreted. It also ultimately relates back to Beatty’s speech – everything is offensive to someone.
I also agree with Kara – it speaks about our morals.
Haley brings up a great connection – the evil within us all.
I agree that they wanted a scapegoat for the fact that they weren’t able to find Montag during the chase. The poor man.
I disagree with the opinion of some that Beatty is not evil. He came off to me as evil, and he still pretty much stays that way… but, again, consideration of point of view.
I agree with Grace and Garrett – usually, if there is a dangerous criminal on the loose, most people wouldn’t be waiting and watching and becoming excited, it seems. I think that the society has faith in the authorities, and that is why they’re able to enjoy the chase instead of fear for themselves. That and the fact that television rules their lives.
Mark, I’m not sure if they could ever see “the light” Montag was apparently shining. The society, the way of life, the beliefs, I just don’t think it would be possible for people to see it. It’s not like they’re extremely educated too. How will they see the light?
Corey, I agree that values in a book could shape values in real life. What we read influences what we do and who we are.
I agree with Kara. I believe that books should not necessarily tell us what to do and what to believe. They should instead guide us into our own minds, so to speak. If I would choose a book, well… I believe it would be fiction. I think most great novels make us question ourselves. In this way, Clarisse is like a book that Montag has begun to read. Again, depth. Much of it is about depth, it seems. Looking inside and discovering what is important in life. I mean, I still have to learn it.
I also agree with Mark. If we were able and felt the need to memorize a book, everyone’s book should be the one that means the most to them. That is why we have so many books. They are always being written and they are always being read. An author will write about something that means something to them. So, we have viewpoints and ideas and knowledge that vary from each other.
When Michaela says that everything that they are doing is useless, we are returning to the sun burning up time. I think that in life we really have to figure out what is important – TO US.
ReplyDeleteThe conversation with Daniel about the Gilded Age – everything looking good on the outside, but horrible on the inside, or lacking real quality… it relates to everything. Is fame really that great? Is it what everyone should want? On the outside… everything you could dream of, everyone knowing your name. But at the same time – think about how many celebrities have committed suicide. Gotten lost with drugs. Been miserable. Will money buy happiness? This also relates to Inherit The Wind – Drummond uses his story of the Golden Dancer to reveal the same concept to Cates.
In saying that the Bible provokes some good thoughts and much judgment, and saying that many books besides it should be valued because of thought rather than judgment… you have to wonder. Won’t someone feel judged? Isn’t there always someone, something, in every book that is being judged? It comes back to Beatty’s whole idea of offending someone. Let’s learn to deal with differences. Someone will talk about you behind your back. Someone will call you a rude name. Someone will call you stupid. But in the novel, when there appears to be only one side to every story to avoid offending someone, isn’t there the fact that presidents are elected on their appearance and the fact that possibly, Mildred doesn’t want to have a friend because the person is ugly? When knowledge is gone, appearance takes its place. It has the role. What would happen if judgment based on appearance was no longer acceptable, like in Harrison Bergeron? There is a book with no words. Soon, the book has no cover. What’s the use of the paper? Get rid of it. What will remain? Nothing.
Michaela said that you value a person because of who the person really is. Again with the appearance. Get rid of character, you have a body. So then what? Who the person really is matters more than the money they make. Maybe. To pay attention to the actions which really reflect the type of human the person is.
Like Moritz always says, Zach and Kelsie, FOOD FOR THOUGHT!
Emily, I also think that many assumptions are made based on amount of money, etc. And I have to admit, the entire situation, or conflict, boggles my mind. I am always confused. Will I mean something if I am not famous, if I do not have piles and piles of money? What if I do not feel as smart or as good as someone famous – that is, for a good reason?
With Mildred’s death, I agree with Garrett. I don’t think he was sad. I think he was confused and perhaps a bit guilty as to why he wasn’t sad. I can relate, in some situations.
But Mark – what was Mildred to Montag? I think absolutely nothing. Maybe a poster, a commercial wife for life.
I have to wonder – if all this censorship everyone was talking about and how it couldn’t be at all possible – how was it nearly all the way succeeded in Fahrenheit? I will acknowledge the fact that today we are quite far. It would be more difficult. But in Fahrenheit, whenever it takes place, they are were they are. The were where they were.
ReplyDeleteAlyssa – I know, we all use computers. Sometimes I just freak out. What is going to become of us? I worry about the future in this sense.
Michaela – do we have to be the best?
And what if competition takes over? My swim team’s sport physcologist talks about how being the best is not what is important. We must have some peace. I don’t think I’ll be able to survive all life is is competition. In a way, though, it is. But, I am overwhelmed when I see fashion magazines and when I see actresses looking beautiful and having fun. Isn’t it competition? Will there be people left in the world that really know how to live? Is there every TOO MUCH competition? Just a thought. I agree that competition is necessary to progress and become better. Are there points when we break from pressure and stress and comparison, etc.? It’s SO difficult to feel good about who you are, especially when we are living now. The difficulty level of the whole concept, to be, is unbelievable. And Zach, yes, it would appear that if there is a winner there is also a loser. But what if losing is actually winning, depending on the circumstances? Think about it. How much are we able to grow from both apparent and basic outcomes of competition? I believe quite much. Just like in Macbeth – fair is foul and foul is fair… losing would appear foul, would it not? But is there a possibility that it can be reversed? Ex: just as someone may be making some bank, does that mean that they are making some feelings of happiness?
Yes, Kara – viewpoint on the situation can ultimately determine whether you won or lost. It is the lesson learned, I think, that matters… not who crossed the finish line first.
Corey – do other people matter (in the sense that you were talking about)?
Does everything happen for a reason? There are many instances that I wish that I sincerely believed that it does. “There’s nowhere you can be that isn’t where you’re meant to be…”
I think the conversation about limits is interesting. I don’t know my answer, though.
Sports, smarts, college, the top of your class… it’s so stressful.