Translator,

Wait a minute, I thought I WAS answering these posts with a twisty, confusing, incomrehensible post.

And keeping silent as an option? Dang, why didn't I think of that? Could've saved myself a whole lotta heartache.

Best,

Pete

P.S.

Haven't heard from you on these boards in a few days. Hope all is well.

Hey Pete,
sorry about the lack of the reply to your last email. I promise you, I'll do it soon(maybe even tonight).
You're right about your responses - and here I thought I came up with an intersting way of dealing with the topic. You're faster,as usual.
Cheers to that,
Translator

What is this, round two!?

Hey, maybe we can just agree with them! Just say, "Oh, yes it's true. Ray is a big jerk, we all agree, now let's talk about other stuff." Then they'll just get bored and go away.

Look, what's with all this slamming Ray Bradbury? Especially you, Pierke.

Well, I agree.

I did some research and I found out about the hissy fit Ray's throwing about Michael Moore using "his" word. How can somebody come up with a title and claim they own the word "Fahrenheit?!" Personally, I think Ray should be glad because now his book, Fahrenheit 451 is getting a lot more attention from the audiences of "9/11"

So why's Bradbury so ticked?!?!

--scaryneighbor

Fahrenheit 451: the "temperature at which paper burns.

Fahrenheit 9/11: the "temperature at which freedom burns.

If you don't see a parallel, then you are definitely the kind of audience Michael moore is targeting with his "documentaries."

Focusing simply the on the word "Fahrenheit" and ignoring the obvioulsy lifted context is exactly the kind of manipulation techniques Moore is famous for in his movies.

scary actually has a good point.

The initial titles of "Fahrenheit 451" and "Fahrenheit 9/11" are similar, and Moore decided to rip off Bradbury's title to use it for his slandering of President Bush.

But I think I can see why Bradbury's so mad.

His book, "451," was used to emphasize the importance of books, family values, and literature, but also to warn the world of the potential dangers of technology. Moore used "9/11" to tear down our president, who's reaction, I'll admit, wasn't what some people expected.

But Bradbury's book was a warning; Moore's movie was attacking our leader.

Do you see where I'm going?

The free publicity benefits both parties. I am now reading Farenheight 451 in its entirety for the first time because of all this hype. To date, my knowledge of the book has been mainly in the form of the game which I enjoyed playing years ago on the Amiga computer. While I can respect his reasoning,flawed as it may be, I was surprised to hear Ray Bradbury's public demand of Micheal Moore. If by writing the book he wished to warn the world of the potential dangers of technology, He should be supportive of Moore's work, as this administration attempts to use technology against its own citizens through the Patriot Act, to moniter what we do and where we go on the internet, what books we take out of our local library, tap our phones without the need of court order, etc.
This administration is the epitomy of misuse of technology, for its own personal gain, under the guise of protecting us.

True Patriot

''Fahrenheit 451'' doesn't need free publicity. It's required reading in many high schools thruout the country, especially in the last several years.

True Patriot:

Well, that's one view of the Patriot Act. Have you actually read it, or are you listening to others' claims? I have only read excerpts, myself, so I'm honestly curious about what your fears are based on. It may be that I underestimate the threat imposed by the Patriot Act. My own understanding of it is that NOTHING is done without a prior judicial review. (Similar to a search warrant, but with some lowering of standards.)

The primary tool of the Patriot Act is to enhance and open communicatiosn between law enforcement and intelligence agencies so that fractured pieces of information could be pieced together to allow us to act on threats BEFORE they occured, rather than chase people down after they've committed these horrendous crimes.

What specific abuses of the Patriot Act are you referring to?

Nard Kordell:

you said -
--------------------------------------------
"''Fahrenheit 451'' doesn't need free publicity. It's required reading in many high schools thruout the country, especially in the last several years."
--------------------------------------------
Thank you for proving my point.. What other catalyst could there be to this renewed intererst IN THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS?

True Patriot:

Fahrenheit 451 has been a big seller for years. If you think politcal changes in the last few years has created a bigger reading interest in Fahrenheit 451, it may be. But it always has been a marketable book.

And as previous discussions here and elsewhere about book burnings...
...books have been burned long before Ben Franklin. And I wouldn't doubt that Ben Franklin burned a few himself, being a printer, and the inventor of the pot-belly stove. Burning extra printed books, or portions thereof, may have been one way to keep warm on those long cold Philadelphia nights.

Mr. Dark

The Patriot Act can be found at http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/terrorism/hr3162.pdf It builds and expands on existing laws, so to fully understand its impact you would also have to read and understand the laws it amends. I have read parts of it, but a legal scholar I am not. I, and I suspect most of us need to rely on its interpretation by those more fluent in legaleeze. One provision of the act relating to internet service providers allowed the government to bypass judicial review. This has recently been ruled unconstitutional by a federal judge pending appeal. http://news.com.com/Judge+disarms+Patriot+Act+proviso/2...4.html?tag=nefd.lede
Other provisions do require a court order, or warrant, as you said with some lowering of standards. actually severe lowering of standards, (A judge MUST rubber stamp it if certain conditions are met)http://www.usatoday.com/news/sept11/2002/06/25/fbi-libraries.htm

I do beleive our privacy is being invaded by it http://yahoo.pcworld.com/yahoo/article/0,aid,68769,00.asp and the proposed Safe Act http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/PATRI...afe_act_analysis.php would rectify some of my concerns, while still providing us with the tools neccessary to track down terrorists. Unfortunately under the current law instances of specific abuses are hard to find because the cases are gagged, and rareley is the public made aware even of their existance. http://coloradovoter.net/bcv-archive/msg01092.html

Nard:

I was talking about the relationship between farenheight 911 and and farenheight 451 and how F-911 peaked my interest enough to go out and buy the book. how publicity wise it was to the benefit of both parties

Anyway I enjoyed Fahrenheit 451 so much I finished reading it in one day.

Thanks Ray, and thank you Mike for renewing my interest in Rays work!

True Patriot,

Thanks for the links. Quite informative. But none link to examples of excess as you described. (One article reports the part of the Act that was struck down but that was the result of a lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of an ISP provider; there's no indication anyone abused the the power of the Patriot Act. The government's appeal is still pending. Another link was a speculative opinion piece in PC magazine in 2002 that seemed inconclusive to me. The other was the website for a group that claims its version of the act will do as you claim: protect our privacy and still fight terrorists. It claims to have bi-partisan support but, personally, I'm wary of those kinds of claims. Still, it might be true. And the fact the group is based in San Francisco likely doesn't skew it's political leanings. Finally, the last link was another article on yet another suit filed by the ACLU. The ACLU was gagged from talking about its suit because of National Security but there's no indication the ACLU was the victim of Patriot Act excesses.) I'm with Mr. Dark: could you please provide specific examples of how the Bush administration is abusing the power it was granted by the Patriot Act, an Act passed by Congress. (The Patriot Act isn't the first legislation that authorizes a law enforcement agency to issue administrative summonses or subpoenas without judicial authority; the IRS possesses this power and has done so for decades.) I've no doubt the battle of the Patriot Act has just begun and the Administration may lose some of those battles; law enforcement rarely wins all of the battles it fights. But until I have proof otherwise, I'll believe the Administration's motive in using the Patriot Act is to fight terrorism, not keep track of what you or I read or which websites we visit.

As for your statement about F-451 benefitting from the recent hoo-haw kicked up by Moore's movie, that seems to be adequately addressed by Nard. I'm not quite sure how any uptick in sales over the last few years can be related to F-911 when the movie only came out this year.

I am quite pleased, however, that you were inspired to read F-451. However, I disagree with your assertion that Bradbury, by writing this book, wished to warn the world about the dangers of technology. I believe his themes have more to do with a society's willingness to give up its reliance on the written word and the ideas they stand for. As Bradbury has been often quoted, there are many ways to burn a book.

Best,

Pete