First off, this book was really scary in the sense that it is simalair to are world today..

Im doing a dialectical journal and have got all the quotes for all the thematic topics except censorship..I would think censorship would be the easiest but I can't even locate one quote when I need three. If you can help me out, I would be grateful.

Hi ViL, and welcome to the board.

You didn't say which book you are talking about! Is it Fahrenheit 451?

Oh, haha. Sorry about that. Yes it is Fahrenheit 451.

That's because it isn't really about censorship - it's about apathy.

I would have to agree but I still need to find 3 quotes on the thematic topic of censorship due to the project guidelines.

I have only recently read this book and have looked around google everywere for quotes on censorship and did not find anything.

Still need some help on this..thanks for the replies.

Who's making you come up with these topics, your instructor?

If so, you can put them in their place by telling them that the novel has nothing to do with censorship - it's impossible to find if it's not there!

Ray Bradbury has recently spoken on this matter, and has said so:

This from LA Weekly:

Ray Bradbury: Fahrenheit 451 Misinterpreted - L.A.'s august Pulitzer honoree says it was never about censorship.

Bradbury still has a lot to say, especially about how people do not understand his most literary work, Fahrenheit 451, published in 1953. It is widely taught in junior high and high schools and is for many students the first time they learn the names Aristotle, Dickens and Tolstoy. Now, Bradbury has decided to make news about the writing of his iconographic work and what he really meant. Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship. Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose investigations had already instilled fear and stifled the creativity of thousands. Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.

So you're telling me theres no quotes in Fahrenheit 451 with the thematic topic of Censorship? I understand that the book is not about censorship but some quotes must have that topic.

My Language Arts teacher gave me this project. Its a summer assignment for HS. Going into 9th grade.

No, I'm sure you can probably find three, but I'm just saying it won't be as easy as finding three on, say, apathy for example.

Your teacher is labouring under the delusion that the book is about something other than what it is about. In fairness however, most teachers do.

Perhaps there are some here who can help put you onto something - it sounds as though you have done your homework, so to speak, and have read the work, so others will probably post some thoughts soon. The weekends are slow around here.

"If you don't want a man unhappy politically, don't give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none."

That could, I suppose, imply censorship. But Doug hit the nail on the head- apathy is a better word for what the book warns of.

The first minute and a half or so of this video may
help a little on the issue of censorship in Fahrenheit 451.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fFMaM-IvMY


________________________________________________________

It's been a few years so I may need to re-reread it, but, but...

Are you absolutely *sure* it's not about censorship?

The way to keep people from thinking for themselves, or questioning the status quo, or caring about it (apathy)is to keep information from ever reaching them.

Ways to do this? Don't talk about something. Pretend it doesn't exist. Anything! Make a "food law" that threatens fine or imprisonment for discussing Alar on apples or hormones in milk. Ignore an inborn, innate value system in a human. Look at a newborn baby and believe that it is born evil, when nothing evil can be found about it. Never call out a person's false front; do not point out that that "nice" or "catty" woman has hatred and jealousy, or that that guy is denigrating your words because he is insecure. Don't talk about overpopulation and its effect on global problems. Keep internet search information from reaching an entire country. Married people and parents never discuss the negative side of marriage or children with single or childfree people. Have restrictions on the press, leading to "The Top Underreported Stories for 2008" - if the law doesn't stop you from reporting those. Have a sci-fi message-board automatic screening so severe that you cannot tell someone about C.M. Kornbluth's story "The Marching Morons" because that is an offensive word that must not be posted. Never mind that the word is in the title!

Which brings us to another way: banning books. With or without fire.

SO...... apathy becomes a symptom.

If the censorship is severe enough, and prevails (a good word) long enough, you could throw information at people and they might never shake off the apathy. Read C.S. Lewis (I do not have to share his premise beliefs to love his point) in "The Screwtape Letters", about the dictator showing another dictator's page how to keep people under control. He snicked off all stalks that rose above the average level. Use this concept on people; allow no preeminence among them. Do this thoroughly enough,and eventually the people will do it for you. The people themselves will do the equivalent of biting off the "tall stalks" among themselves. They will not only police other people, they will police themselves. They will bite their own heads in order to Be Like Normal Stalks.

If you ever notice any valuation of mediocrity, remember Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" and Lewis' Dictator. Not to mention Kornbluth's "Marching Morons" and our beloved Fahrenheit 451.

I posit this thesis because I believe that you can do all this with censorship, and because posit is a good word.

Simalair is almost a good word. Eet eez from Inspectair Clouseau in ze Peenk Panthair, no?

F451 (indeed, any text) can be "about" anything we care to construct an argument for. The author of the text has no special control over its meaning, although what the author says he meant should give us an insight into his conscious intent.

Over the years, Bradbury has given many different statements of what HE considers F451 to be about. The fact that he recently said it was about television is simply a statement of how HE feels about it now. Other readers may differ.

Beware of the "intentional fallacy"!

quote:

Originally posted by dragonfly:

Which brings us to another way: banning books. With or without fire.

But it was not the government that wanted censorship; it was not the first cause in this instance, the populace was.

Therefore the people were not censored, the people censored themselves! And willful ignorance is quite apathetic.

Haha, I see you guys are really intrested in Ray Bradbury and his books. Fahrenheit 451 was a very diffrent book that all the other I have read in my lifetime (14 yrs old). It was a great book. A hard one but great.

quote:

Originally posted by Nico:
"If you don't want a man unhappy politically, don't give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none."

That could, I suppose, imply censorship. But Doug hit the nail on the head- apathy is a better word for what the book warns of.

I had that as knowledge versus ignorance however that could imply Censorship. I am going to keep it though as knowledge versus ignorance because I believe that that is the best topic.

“You can’t build a house without nails and wood. If you don’t want a house built, hide the nails and wood. If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one. Better yet, give him none”

That currently is my only censorship quote..I need two more.