Viewing Montag's relationship with Milred I found that they are very distant. What would happen if Bradbury made the people interact socially and not antisocially, as Bradbury called it? Clarisse was considered an antisocial; do you think that this is an appropriate title? Is it trying to show the irony of human physiology and socialism?
I believe that Bradbury titled people that were antisocial to be the ones that did not talk in large groups, but with only a few people themselves. I do not believe that Bradbury labeled these people the way that they would be in the world we live in today. Many people only talk to a few friends all of the time and can not talk in large groups. Social people shouldn't be labeled that way just because they know and talk to a lot of people all of the time. They may know the person who they are talking to by name, but they may not know anything about that person as an individual. People can not be judged to be social or not just because of how many people they know and talk to.
I do think that Montag and Mildred loved eachother. If Mildred hadn't loved Montag, she wouldnt have sat down with him and attempted reading the books. I think that since Mildred was raised in a sheltered society her interactions with others are different than our own interactions and ways of showing our feelings. If Mildred had been exposed to more people or to literature like Montag had been she too could have been more social or loving.
Whoa, I don't think that Clarisse can be considered an antisocial. o.o How can she be anti-social if she goes up to strangers and starts enlightening them about the world around them? If she were anti-social, she wouldn't go home to her uncle every day. If she were anti-social, she would keep all her thoughts and views to herself and none of the story would have happened.
[This message has been edited by Voct (edited 08-26-2004).]
Posts: 9 | Location: USA | Registered: 25 August 2004
I agree with the past response on how Clarisse indeed did seem social. Although in the book she would seem "antisocial" since she didnt conform with the rest of everyone. She was one who took the time to smell the roses and actually have thoughts beyond the parlor. So in that case she would seem antisocial. I find it funny that they actually send her to a physchologist for that reason. She was one of the few who thought out side of the box, more like outside the parlor!
Posts: 3 | Location: Lemont IL USA | Registered: 26 August 2004
I tend to believe that Clarisse was, as she described, anti-social. The arguement was brought up that she was the one that initiated the conversations with Montag in the first place. However, did she not say that she thought him different? When he asked her why she randomly started to talk to him that night, she specifically said that she saw something different in his eyes. If this was the reason she approached him, she must not have done the same to others as well, solidifying the arguement that she was in fact, anti-social. Another point to be explored was that the term "anti-social" has a different context in this book. In our world, anti-social means that one is uninclined to talk to others, and hides from the light of society and human interaction. But in Clarisse's society, she was not as much "anti-social" in our terminology as she was nonconformist. She spoke just as much as we do to her uncle and other family, however, her entire was seen as "anti-social" because they did not exist like the other people in the book did. They sat on the porch and enjoyed each other's company. There was no specific reason for them not to interact with the neighbors, but they simply did not act socially with other more normal people. Therefore, Clarisse was described as anti-social, and although she was by the definition of her society, it may not seem like that to us. This is why, in the context of the book, I believe Clarisse is anti-social.
People in the book didn't socialize much with eachother for a reason similar to the reason behind burning books. If people interacted with eachother, it is almost inevitable that a disagreement would come along somewhere. Disagreements sometimes lead to protests of governmental ideas a and unwanted uprises. Thus, if people interact with a plot line, and "people" who only care about drama, then conflicting ideas are less likely to occur.
Posts: 4 | Location: Lemont, IL USA | Registered: 25 August 2004
I think that this book could have went a whole other direction if people would have interacted with each other. For example, in Montag's situation, if he would have interacted with Mildred she wouldn't be as depressed and they would have a healthier relationsship. There also wouldn't be the screens that Mildred talked to everyday because she would have a healthy social life. If people outside of Montag and Mildred's situation interacted socailly with each other I don't believe that books would be as big of a problem because people would be aware to the reality in society, they wouldn't have to be scared to know the truth. I think that Clarisse was one of the only "social" people in this book. She was the only person who didn't want to know what, but why?
I think that if Montag and Mildred really did love another, the story would be drastically altered, and Montag would be dead. How is this? In order for the two of them to love one another,Mildred would have to be less of the stereotypical human in F451 (the shallow, TV-for-blood shell of a person she was) and more like Montag; not afraid to take risks, not afraid to THINK. Mildred would've then helped him with his cause, and Montag's house would've never ended up burning since Mildred would never have called the police. Thus, both of them (and Faber) would've stayed in the city...just in time for the bomb. So, in order for Montag and Mildred to REALLY be in love, Mildred would have to be a completely different character from what she was...and provided Bradbury really didn't change anything about the actual story, this would've led to Montag's doom.