Going back to the criticism on the gramatical mistakes in sunshine's post...

ur luck-e dat we yungins aint not talkin like dis, dawg! Don u be hatin! das ignerint...lol.

Keep in mind that this IS the internet. As long as the point gets across, and it doesn't look like the above, who cares? Spelling might get kind of annoying, but gramatical mistakes in informal conversation like this...it doesn't matter...think of it as talking to someone; it's not like you go out of your way to keep things gramatically correct. I'm not saying it's BAD to write carefully on a message board, in fact, I often do, it's just not something to get upset or angry about. Not to offend anyone, I'm not really attacking any individual.


Anyway...now that I'm done with that off-topic rant...

I allways felt like Montag wouldn't really be a leader because we find out at the end that there are many more like him. Still, it is an interesting idea that he would be the "moral centre". It could happen...


going back to the very first post...

I agree with lmskipper. However, I don't see what there is in 451 that would be of objection. I can sort of see why this might be thought necessary for 1984, but I read that book in seventh grade on my own, and I wasn't scarred for life. It's not as if people who aren't full adults are stupid; we know what sex is. We are not naive and reading a part of a book with (non-explicit) sex isn't going to hurt us. I have a vivid memory of my librarian last year (eighth grade) telling me that I should not reas Atlas Shrugged because it was too difficult to understand and might not be appropriate. I don't see why we should be scolded for wanting to read classic literature.

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