Hello.
I think that other than the sections of this book that contain Clarisse, this was my favorite part. One of the reasons I really like it is because the metaphors return and you lose the rushed feeling that Bradbury’s writing takes on while Montag is on the run. I really didn’t like the last section for this reason. It’s not just Montag and his emotions that become rushed, but the actual style of writing.
In this one I knew that he had returned to his old (and better) writing style from page 140, where Bradbury puts in this wonderful speech about burning. It goes like this, “He saw the moon low in the sky now. The moon there , and the light of the moon caused by what? By the sun, of course. And what lights the sun? It’s own fire. And the sun goes on, day after day, burning and burning. The sun and time. The sun and time burning. Burning….The sun and every clock on the earth. It all came together and became a single thing in his mind….He knew why he must never burn again in his life.
“The sun burnt every day. It burnt Time. The world rushed in a circle and turned on it’s axis and time was busy burning the years and people anyway, without any help from him. So if he burnt things with the firemen and the sun burnt Time, that meant everything was burnt.
“One of them had to stop burning. The sun wouldn’t, certainly. So it looked as though it had to be Montag and the people he’d worked with until a few short hours ago.”
I really love this quote because it seems as though Montag realizes something so important and so fundamental in one moment. Exactly like an epiphany. I also like this image of the sun burning Time (with a capital T, note). I just think that it is beautiful.
I think that part of this transformation in Montag is illustrated by the transfer from a cityscape to nature (as Mr. Janna said on his “blog”). As he is allowed to float along this river in a sort of “down time while on the run, he thinks about a farm he visited as a child and what it would be like to stay at a farm he passes. As the landscape becomes less…aggressive, in a way, so do Montag’s thoughts.
I’m not saying that Montag suddenly is remade by the shift from city to country, I’m just saying that as he changes, so does the landscape. I think that this is a tool that writers use all the time. I have noticed that in most books, rain and gloom accompany the characters bad moods, however, when they are having a picnic, or frolicking in the park, it’s all sun and happiness. Sometimes, you don’t even realize it.
The last interesting thing that I would like to bring up is how the old men reintroduce themselves after Montag has discovered that they carry books around in their heads. For example, the leader says that he is Plato’s “Republic”. I just thought that was interesting, did anyone else catch that?
So long my fair friends.
I shall add this as a sort of postscript. Mr. Janna left a very interesting comment on my “blog”, a copy of it follows, in response to my post saying that this book has all the answers. Here is what he said:
“If this book holds all the answers, then what are the questions? Does literature give us answers to questions? What does literature "do" anyway?
In response, this is what I have to say. Mr. Janna,
Do there have to be questions to be answers? Can you not simply find out more about the human race by reading?
I think that literature holds all the answers. No matter what your question, you can find it's answer in a book. I think that this is something that most people in this era have forgotten. Internet has a lot of the answers. If I need to know, quickly, who it was who used the silk road, or why boats float, I too will turn to the interent. But there are things that you simply cant find there. In no single medium is human nature convayed as well as in books.
So what are the questions? There are no questions. Only answers for those willing to seek them out.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Aaaahhh... For once, it seems I am here for a purpose other than that debate. A somewhat nice change of pace, although I hope it does not last ;)
In response to that little postscript there, I think that literature holds most of the answers, but not all. For all the answers, there is no better place than the real world.
Books are not but an emulation of the world they are written in, or in the case of your beloved fantasy books and my... ah... let us call it "reality parallels," for an EXTREME lack of a better word... they are emulations of a world that does not exist. I mean this in the least religious way, but books are written invariably by two types of people: Non-fiction is written by those who observe God, and fiction by those wishing to play God.
Why read the observations of another man (One you have never even met before, at that,) when you can make your own?
Books are not fact. They are words on paper. If you truly wish to find the answer to something, seek it out with your own eyes. Not through the glasses of another.
Allow me to run upstairs rather quick and grab the source of all my best quotes.
Aaaahhh... here we are. Michael Crichton's "The Lost World." Now, I know it is rather hypocritical to say that books are not fact and then read a passage from one, but I never quote anything unless I have confirmed it to be true through my own observations.
On the very last page here...
"'Human beings are so destructive,' Malcolm said. "I sometimes think we are a kind of plague, that will scrub the earth clean. We destroy things so well that I sometimes think, maybe that's our function. Maybe every few eons, some animal comes along that kills off the rest of the world, clears the decks, and lets evolution proceed to it's next phase.'
Kelly shook her head. She turned away from Malcolm, and moved up the boat, to sit alongside Thorne.
'Are you listening to all that?' Thorne said. 'I wouldn't take any of it too seriously. It's just theories. Human beings can't help making them, but the fact is that theories are just fantasies. And they change. When America was a new country, people believed in something called a phlogiston. You know what that is? No? Well, it doesn't matter, because it wasn't real anyway. They also believed that four humores controlled behavior. And they believed the earth was only a few thousand years old. Now we believe the earth is four billion years old, and we believe in photons and electrons, and we think human behavior is controlled by things like ego and self-esteem. We think those beliefs are more scientific and better.'
'Aren't they?'
Thorne shrugged. 'They're still just fantasies. They're not real. Have you ever seen a self-esteem? Can you bring me one on a plate? How about a photon? Can you bring me one of those?'
Kelly shook her head. 'No, but...'
'And you never will, because those things don't exist. No matter how seriously people take them,' Thorne said. 'A hundred years from now, people will look back at us and laugh. They'll say, 'You know what people used to believe? They believed in photons and electrons. Can you imagine anything so silly?' They'll have a good laugh, because by then there will be newer and better fantasies.' Thorne shook his head. 'And meanwhile, you feel the way the boat moves? That's the sea. That's real. You smell the salt in the air? You feel the sunlight on your skin? That's all real. You see all of us together? That's real. Life is wonderful. It's a gift to be alive, to see the sun and breathe the air. And there isn't really anything else.'"
Emphasis, of course, on the bolded text.
The only thing I really disagree with in this passage is that I think the moon is a far better reason for why life is wonderful than the sun is ;) But I digress. Instead of going out to the park to sit under a tree and read, try going out to the park and sitting under a tree to observe the children on the playground, and how they act, in comparison to the skater punk teens at the skate park and how they act, and that in comparison to your fellow literature lovers under the other trees and how they act, and that in comparison to the adults with busy lives that don't really want to waste their time at this silly park, and how they act. With a keen enough eye, you will learn much in little time.
Books are good for when you are already in solitude, but there is no greater story than the one already going on around us all.
Except, of course, what comes after you, I, and the rest of this generation.
Mundus Mea Ostrea Est,
-Justin
I'm glad to see so much exhange between the two of you and hope that you keep it up.
Mr. J
Here we go again, now. Since I've already commented on this entry, I hope you'll excuse me if I deviate from my recently acquired norm, and skip straight to responding to your comment.
Also, let me warn you that I am in a rather light mood at the moment, and may start joking around in excess. I also find it that half the time that happens, I end up sounding like a jerk. So, on the off chance that happens, I apologize in advance.
Now then... where to begin...
On the matter of your response to my last comment, I have nothing to say but this: There is absolutely nothing to NOT love about Jurassic Park. Except for the third movie. EEk.
On the matter of the debate...
First off, about published books vs. free stuff online: I am not completely sure if this is a good example or not, but it is not unlike the way Pandora.com functions. Since you claim to hate technology so, allow me to first explain what Pandora is. It is a music service where you enter in a song or artist you like, and it finds songs similar, and plays them in random order. For free. The reason I use this as an example is that it does not play the whole song. It plays just enough of the song where you want to hear more, but not so little as to consider it merely a "preview." The reason I am unsure this is a good example, however, is because once a song is played, you must either buy it to hear it again, or wait for it to randomly reappear. With these e-books, however, you can revisit them any time you wish. As for it still being somewhat piracy since the author is not gaining money, let me use this example: Does that make the Salvation Army thieves, then, since you are giving them money without anything in return? No, it is charity. It is good will.
On the subject of loose manners vs. lost manners: I disagree. Just because you CAN be rude, doesn't mean people are. I mean, I have yet to resort to cussing you out, correct? The same with the vast majority of bloggers and forum posters and the like. The only exception is digg.com. I do not know why. For some reason, the adults do not wish to follow the same rules the teens do. Digg is still awesome in my eyes, however ;)
On the subject of webcams and "What will happen to our society when all human interaction is cut off?": Have you ever watched Terminator? THAT is what shall happen. "GET DAOWN!" *brappapapapapapapapapappp* *BANG!!!!!*
No, no, I jest. Ahnold shall be and old coot by the time that happens, anyway ;) In all seriousness, though, I still do not see what is so impersonal about the webcam that is not present in letters and the phone. Of course it is no exception to meeting in person, but if you are someone like me who lives miles away from any of his friends, most of the time it is your only option. (I still say the lot of you should come down here. We have hot air balloons, and wine, and in a few more months, we will have a Best Buy! YAAAY! OH! And Alex Albrecht is supposedly coming down here in the near future! What an opportunity it shall be to meet him! Ah, but I digress...)
On the subject of shortening words: Let us put it this way, chat speak is not unlike slang. You use it amongst your friends, but you would never go up to, say, your teacher and say "Yo yo yo my homie G dawg, what is crack-a-lacking, yo?" (Unless, of course, you are Christopher Connell ;) And yes, the above phrase is hideously stereotyped, but I assure you it is no exaggeration). The internet is a place to relax and have fun, for the most part. We can sound like idiots if we wish, as long as said lack of intelligence does not carry on to the real world. Or end up in an email to a teacher.
Now, your next point, let me divide it into two sections first, then respond.
"I just think that it is sort of odd that people post their problems in a public place where anyone can read them and comment on their lives. My life is not an open book. There are such things as secrets in my life."
Nobody DEMANDS you spill your heart and soul out for all to see. But problems are never helped if they remained bottled up, either. If you wish to keep something a secret, nobody will ever know. If you wish to share your woes and/or something that brings you joy, nobody will mock you. Your view of teenagers online is almost as stereotyped as my view of teens in the real world. You sound like you believe we are an unruly mob who sit on first person shooters all day and call each other "F**king n***ers," regardless of each other's race. I assure you, even on the first person shooters, we are more kind than that. It does not matter if we have never met the guy in real life, or even if he is on our buddy list or not. If a man shares his problems out in the open, he has proven himself rather brave, and deserves to be comforted. And in the case someone does taunt him, not only will that man be hideously mobbed by the troubled one's supporters (I jest, I jest), but he will most likely become a social outcast for being such a jerkwad.
Now, for the second half: "I just object to “blogs” because I object to technology in general and I hate this loss of real writing. People on the “blogs” are only writing the bare minimum and we have lost all of the hard copies. I just hate stuff like that. I think that I should have, perhaps, been born in 1850, as I just seem to hate change in general."
Aaaaahhhh... I cannot remember which book this came from, but the following quote is from one of the "Dinotopia" books. 'Tis one of the ones about the Troodon Knights, I believe.
"One cannot make footprints in the sands of time by standing still."
What exactly is it with dinosaurs and philosophy? XD But I digress. As I have mentioned a thousand times over, the Edge of Chaos theory dictates that extinction is caused by both too much change and too little. Times are changing, Kit. I may have been left behind by the most recent of generations, as well (The proof being in the recordings Cameron Parvini has in his documents of me singing both "Beyond the Sea" and "You've Lost that Loving Feeling," as opposed to the third sound file of me trying to sing Guns and Roses. Ah, good times. good times.), but at least I try to adapt. As for blogs only being filled with the bare minimum, once again I hope that is not based upon these blogs Mr. Jana had us set up. I find it that all the deviantART journals as well as the blogs on Nonsenseical (A site ran by Connell and his friends) have more than a few gems in there. For example, this wonderful obligatory New Years post by Mr. Brad Jensen: http://nonsenseical.com/bb/weblog_entry.php?e=189
"I think that we basically agree that the Internet is a great tool that is used for all the wrong things. Instead of promoting individuality, it is taking it away, telling people what to think and making it easier for everyone to just be the same. I think that it is only as we have entered this age of the Internet that the general public has rejected people who try to be different."
You had me going, until that last part there. I find it that there has been more acceptance of people since the days of the internet. I mean, do you not find it strange that, both online and off, nowadays the word "Insane" is a compliment, a medal of pride amongst teens? Even more so when the adjective "Mentally" is added in the front? Certainly, the world has not always been that way? With the media turning everyone into clones, the need to be different is in high demand. The only problem is, everyone is trying to be different in the same way. They utter nonsensical phrases, they wear ludicrously colorful but unlatching pairs of socks to school, the men wear pink and the women wear men's pants. Everyone wants to be a rebel so much that The Man himself puts on a charade, acting as if he is one of them, and tells the youth to rebel against noone else but- you guessed it: The Man!
'Tis foolish, 'tis hypocritical, 'tis stupid.
Mundus Mea Ostrea Est! (Which, I might add, is Latin for "The World is my Oyster!")
-Justin
SPELLING ERROR DETECTED! DANGER, WILL ROBINSON! DANGER! DANGER!
At the end there, I meant to say "unmatching." Not "Unlatching." Ooops!
Post a Comment