i am in an 8th grade class. we are reading bradbury's fahrenheit 451. we are also reading a book after that of our choice. either 1984, a brave new world, or the house of the scorpion. because of the "subject matter" of some of these books, the course i am taking requires a permission slip to be allowed to enter, other wise the school is afraid that parents might get upset. does this not destroy a large part of the meaning of reading 451? they try to teach us about freedom of the press, and then they limit our access to reading materials! any comments?

I'm not sure that allowing parents to be aware of and have an influence on what their own children read is what F451 is focused on. What minors read/see/hear/experience has long been the domain of parents -- who presumably have the best experience of their children in mind and can combine that interest in life experience to help kids mature into an increasingly unrestricted access to information of thier own choice.

F451 deals with governmental controls and the restriction of information in the entire domain of the culture, and in the reality that man often censors his own information gathering through laziness, sloth, fear, or ignorance.

But it does seem ironic.

xaka etcetc:

Mentioned this long awhile ago, and failed to take the time to look for it. I'll find it yet in the John Adams papers. But what John Adams essentially said was, the freedom of the press is a freedom for those of a moral character who know how to discern truth. (And when I get the book of the shelf and take the time to find that passage... I will post it!)

I would be interested to know where the young poster resides and what level of separation exists in his school district between church, school & state.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
I'm not sure that allowing parents to be aware of and have an influence on what their own children read is what F451 is focused on. What minors read/see/hear/experience has long been the domain of parents -- who presumably have the best experience of their children in mind and can combine that interest in life experience to help kids mature into an increasingly unrestricted access to information of thier own choice.

F451 deals with governmental controls and the restriction of information in the entire domain of the culture, and in the reality that man often censors his own information gathering through laziness, sloth, fear, or ignorance.

But it does seem ironic.

[This message has been edited by Christos (edited 02-25-2005).]

i will be honest. i am a lucky sob. i am in the chicago area, so we are very liberal. Other than the fact that most teachers force standing at the pledge of allegence each morning, we do not have many of the problems that some other schools have. In fact, in most situations, teachers are very happy to support student's political endevors, for instance, we had an anti-war protest in fall with about 40 kids, and we were allowed to annonce it and hand out posters at lunch. also, i am trying to get the town to build a skatepark, and we are able to put up posters on some bulliten boards (not that anyone looks at them). maybe that is why i am complaining about this. i get to have this great supportive school, and all of a sudden we have one form of pseudo-censorship. i guess i really should be thankfull for what i have got. thanks for making me realize this Christos. and what exactly did u mean by separation between school and state?

Christos: you quoted my post in your entry. What was the connection between my post and what you said?

It's not a case of censorship when you give the parents the option to have their child opt out of a certain book. That is the right of any parent. Censorship would be when Parent A tries to stop the children of Parents B, C, D, etc. from reading the book.

I think that's a good clarification.

good point imskipper.

Yea so i am in 10th grade and i am reading F451 (IT IS AMAZING)

but i have to do a research paper on it and

my english teacher helped me right a thesis statement and i was woundering
does this sound weird to any one else?

In the futuristic world of F451 Guy Montag is societies moral center.

please tell me if thAt is ok

Hey Sun----shine:

I hope that your grammar and spelling improve before you write that paper, or you may not receive the grade you deserve.

It would seem that with these contributions and/posts, that the contributors should still write in a legible and clear manner, rather than using short cuts, misspellings, etc. I don't feel that it is a proper reflection on the contributor/poster.

I am hoping that Frank and the others who are teachers might back me up on this.

[This message has been edited by biplane1 (edited 03-02-2005).]

Beyond the typos in Sunshine's message, I wonder if the thesis is really one that can be supported with adequate references and interpretations from F451. Does Mr. Bradury really paint Montag to be the moral center of society at the conclusion of the novel? He is on the run, and then he sees the world he has known blown up (literally and figuratively), leaving him quite empty actually.

If I were to focus a paper on Montag, it would be based more on his representation of humanity's final virtue when all else seems lost, Hope!

Consider this Fireman at the beginning of the story: "It was a pleasure to burn. It was a special pleasure to see things eaten, to see things blackened and changed."

Then at the book's end, as he leads the Book People into the city, the Biblical reference: "And the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations."

Within the story, Montag is as confused as he is heroic. He is as guilty of crimes as he is of taking a stand for what is right. He is as humbled as he seems to be brave. I am not sure I can find much about this moral center for society. What exactly does this mean in relationship to the plot and Montag overcoming his page by page conflicts - (Clarisse, Mildred, Beatty, the Hound, his peers at the station, his wife's friends, Faber's influences, the burning of the woman, his own identity as a grown man in a dystopian society, his role within the community of the B.P., etc.).

I think in the end, the theme is one of hope against the greatest of odds from social and regulatory pressures. The allusions to Job can not be lost in the understanding of the book. If that is the case, was Job intended to be seen as the moral center for his society? As I recall, Job was not all that patient and accepting each step of his way either! Maybe others here see it differently!

I must concur, one's written expressions do leave a first impression. I am sure your English teacher would be more pleased with your final edition of an essay versus the first draft which so often is done quickly and with less thought for technical accuracy.

So, having read the novel, what do you think of the thesis you have formulated, SunShine?

Did you see my little rant on incoherent contributions?

I think I would definitely see Montag as the moral center. While he is flawed, he maintains a sense of integrity in the sense of finding out who he is and what life means. While he starts as a fireman, he is certainly susceptible to Clarisse's overtures (not sexual, but in terms of a life of joy and happiness and fulfillment). When she puts a spark in him, it is because he has already had a kind of readiness for it. The shallow life of Mildred is never satisfactory to him and he has always had a yearning for more happiness and more meaning. When that is sparked, he is passionate (certainly, he made mistakes)in pursuing the truth as he understands it.

I always feel when reading F451, that Montag's true awareness of who he is does not have a centered purpose until after he has been floated across the river. Even as he arrives on the "other side," his place seems nightmarish. I recall he contemplates all of his conflicts have merely delivered him back to an unseen, waiting Hound.

When he touches the railroad tracks, he finally realizes he has a tangible direction to follow. I agree, this is his "moral road" to take. He has been choosing the good rather than the evil since meeting Clarisse (one of the most powerful secondary characters in literature) but often as an angry and confused protagonist.

However, from my view of the characters, it is a thinner thesis to defend. Plausible? Yes. But for the 10th grader who posed the topic, and one who is probably long gone to an internet download, it may have been a monumental task! The fact that GM does not give up, and he finds something in the books that he is reading, is my premise for hope when all seems lost.

Good debate though, Mr. D!


[This message has been edited by fjpalumbo (edited 03-03-2005).]