Welcome to our first formal fishbowl discussion! This discussion will cover topics in Fahrenheit 451 up through page 63.
Outer circle: Remember that you're aiming to make about five quality comments; be thorough in your responses, and bring in textual passsages when you can. Enjoy!
80 comments:
I think teenagers kill each other because 1.) they can. There are no responsibilities or consequences.
2.) They are kind of brought up with a vilent mind set. (the window smasher and such).
in fahrenheit 451 the geverment controls way to much, at first i thought that this society was comunist but i realized it is so much beyond that the goverment is very currupt and shelters the citizens.
I agree with Nowlan that in this society that they are more violent because of how the government doesnt really let them think for themselves.
absolutely not this is not the future of our society there is no way in hell the government will ever burn books and encourage people not to think
I agree with Meghan.
Our society isn't afraid of questions, but more so not having the answers.
So, I don't think it will happen.
But could it? Quite possibly.
I think people kill each other because they feel like everyone needs to be equal. Plus, teenagers don't know what is the right thing to do sometimes.
They aren't educated and are encouraged to have fun all the time. It said in the book that they have "fun parks" were they can go wreck things and this makes the kids that they can be destructive.
Toward the end of pages 30-63 i began to find that maybe teenagers are killed because they are different. Clarisse died and when Montag was talking to Beatty, Beatty explained how it was maybe better for her well being to be dead. She was different and being different is not accepted in this society. Also Clarisse talks about how six of her friends died last year alone! Because she was different i can only beleive her friends were also different and maybe them being killed was all planned in order to maintain this "perfect" society.
I think that teenagers are much more violent because they can't make any decisions for themselves, and that is why Clarisse is different. Also, they are bored and they do not know what's right and wrong. It's another example of an opposite society, like firemen putting out fires vs. starting them, and teenagers being friends and having real fun vs. killing each other and going to wierd places for 'fun'
I agree with Meghan. The teenagers don't want anyone to be better than they are. Now I see why we read "Harrison Bergeron" because in that reading, the government handicaps people so no one's better than one another.
our society thrives on knolege
this book seems opposite of the way we live
The teenagers in this society are really destructive. They go around beating eachother up and they would race thier cars and destroy things like windows and cars. What they do for fun is destroy things. Also Clarisse's uncle told her that teenagers used to not kill eachother. Since the teenagers are violent and destructive they end up killing eachother. Plus the policemen let them get away with most of the things they do as long as they have insurance.
I think the kids are more violent because they dont really have calm activities to take up their time. They can't read, everyone thinks it's odd if you go on a walk or do things like that.
This isn't something I can see being the future of our society. There is no way that present-day firemen would change their ways to burn down houses instead of save houses and lives, and I doubt we will have the technology that is used in this book in 50 years. For example, the fire-proof houses may be possible but I doubt we will be able to see peoples' souls.
people kill themselves because in this society they don't feel like they have ever acomplished anything and in the book they really haven't they just live life going through the motions
I also agree with what nicole just said about how they are violent because yhey can be but i also think that they do it because they have never really learned better
It seems like this town is just full of depression, then with all this depression and noting really happy it just seems it would lead them to act the way they do by killing and destroying things/people.
I agree with Cassie that the government almost seems comunist. But if the government has so much control, as many are saying, how come the teens seem so out of control? Why isn't the government controling the teens?
The characters is books in a sense are real. When authors write they almost always put a little bit of themselves in those characters.
Not to mention in non-fiction those people actually lived and did those things.
I do not think this is the futur. I think that our futur will be alot more smarter, and in this "story" they are stupid. Example: fire man start fires in the book,and in real life they put it out. I have lways thought of the futur more complex then today, more inventions ect. In this book it seems like it is boring and dull. I belive this book was made out of fear, because of everthing was happing at the time it was published.
I also agree with Nicole, because I remember reading about how there are car smasher places and window smashing places. I think that the firemen burning up books is also violent which makes the teenagers go crazy.
I think that the reson Beatty tells Montag that characters in books are not real is because he has been controlled by the government and he has been told waht to say, even if he doesn't believe that. Also, it seems like he would know better since he explains what happens when firemen read books and he says he knows what it used to be like.
jason- i think when the men were working on Mildred and Bradbury mentioned they could "see her soul" im almost certain that was a metaphore
Jenic- I think the government is ok with the teens behavior becuase it has become a part of the society and as long as they are not going outside of what is expected of the community it is fine.
This society is in total conflict. and the ways that they are handleing it is just creating more conflict
I think that teenagers are so violent in this future society because the government lets them act on what they think without punishment and even encourages them to hurt kids who won't conform. Kids in todays society always have someone they dislike, but they would never think of hurting them because of the rules we have in place protecting peoples' rights and their own consciences. But if the government encouraged people to act in negative ways against people they didn't like or people that were non-conformist, then teenagers would start hurting and even killing each other in every area of the country.
I agree with Jasson, i don't think our society could become this bad. Fireman starting fires instead of putting them out? I don't think that that would happpen. Plus why would the government make reading books illegal.
Since this book was written a long time ago, Ray Bradbury didn't know what 2000 would be like because it was way different then than it is now. So I think that our working people will start to get paid more reather than paid less.
I agree with Jason i dont think we have the resources or finance to start trying to create fireproof houses. For the most part house fires do not seem to be a huge concern and i dont think that research for fireproof houses really seems like a necessary expense.Also as Jason mentioned in class how can the prices of essential and non-essential goods aswell as wages lower in our economy? As seen currently in our economy prices of goods are going nowhere but up, and i highly doubt this will change in the future.
i think that the people kill eachother because all the morals people have now were compleetly destroyed, by all the people following their goverment without questions. everyone seems to blend together besides clarisse i havent seen charecters with alotof personality
The government burns all the books because they either give people "imagination" promote "knowledge" and there are many hidden messages in them.
Not to mention, that would take too much time to sort through whichi ones are good and bad. Also if they had a team to do that then those people would have that knowledge and those ideas. They could very possibly spread them.
I also think that Beatty knows that some books may have real characters but doesn't tell Montag that because it could cause problems with the firemen and the laws they agree with.
Annie has a good point! We are living the future in which Bradbury was trying to predict in this book. Firemen still put out fires, we are still alowed to read books, and we do not have fireproof houses!
What doesn't make sense is that in Tortilla Curtain, this girl is raped multiple times. Yet we're still aloud to read it.
Why? It doesn't make sense to ban one thing and leave something else that says the exact same thing.
Plus, bad stuff happens in life. It's bad but it happens. We can't just ignore it.
I agree with Ellen. I think that Beatty told Montag about fireman and taking books because he probably knows what happened. I think that he knows that Montag took the book and he was trying to warn him to burn the book himself before the fire departement has too.
thats stupid that they can ban a book to that extent i think that we can all make our own decisions on what we read the district cant tell us what we can and can not read
i agree with everythin megan is saying about it
I agree with Emma and Jason, I think that our society could not get this bad. It makes you think about how awful the world would be if it was really that way.
You could say that our society is somewhat similar to a degree because we try to avoid conflict at all costs and we try to make everyone happy. I agree with Meghan that preparing for things vs. avoiding all conflict/being uncomfortable is important. Like lockdown drills, fire drills, etc.
I think they burn ALL the books because if they alow some, then people would get a greater imagination, and that would let their minds grow. They dont want that because they know there way of living is weird, and they dont want people to know this, so if they alow books, they are allowing own ideas, ect.
I think people should face conflict. Conflict has shaped our world today. Man vs. Man Man vs. self ect. Conflict builds character, and strength.
The government in this book has insane rules and treats their society very strange. If their younger members of society see the government acting so abruptly, how will their future be? When the kids of this society grow up and become the new "leaders" of society, how will they act? Will they treat their society even more unfairly then how they currently are treated?
That is a good question Jake. I think they want to books from the people because they dont want to people to gain knowledge of the outside world. The government is afraid that they people will start realizing what they are missing out on.
I don't think that any books should be banned for any reason. Some books may be disturbing or vulgar but some people not likeing the book doesn't give school districts grounds to take it off the shelves. If you don't like what your reading then put it down.
I definitely agree with Annies comment. When she said that since this book was made 50 years ago, Bradbury thought that this is what our society would be like. But in my opinion our societly isn't like this.
In my opinion i dont think the people are happy, i think the society has pushed them so much to be what they want, that people feel like they are trapped. Maybe they kill eachother to prove a point.
I agree with Allie that in high school, we are preparing for college and the real world and we should not be trying to keep everyone happy, we can make our own dicisions. If she chose to read the book and got a parent signature, she could then decide to stop reading it or see a counselor if she was really disturbed. I think it was unneccesary for the district to ban the book just to avoid conflict with the girl and her mother.
im actually going to change my mind on my last comment. the only books that should be banned from schools are religious books like the bible and the torah.
Jamie- That is a really interesting point. I never thought of that. It makes sense. People naturally want to break out of the box, even if it seems pointless.
I think that people these days are getting too offended too easily. Things happen. It would probably be disturbing to read about someone being raped, but it shouldn't be to the point where the book is banned throughout the entire district. I also agree with Meghan when she says that when you're in high school, you know about things like rape. You know that it happens each and every day. I also agree with Alli when she says that there are only four years of high school, so you're close to college. College is the real world so people need to read about things that happen in the world every day.
i dont think that any book should be banned because if you choose to read it then thats your choice. i dont think that they should be required book but i think they should be there if you want to read them.
I don't think that any books should be banned. If something offends someone, they shouldn't read or associate with it anymore. They don't need to complain that their feelings are hurt and make the book be taken off the shelf. Maybe librarians could have warnings on books about content but taking them off the shelf is taking away from other peoples' learning. If people want to read about children being abused or getting raped, then that is their choice to do so. You can't protect people from everything, and books are just books after all.
Megan made a very good point. I think it's not nesessary for elementary and middle school kids to read books about rape or like graphic viloence or whatever. One, because it's not right for kids to be reading about that yet. Plus, elemetary school kids probably won't understand it.
Why doesnt she just put the book back on the shelf? If you hate something so much... why would you put your time of day into it?
If you want to know about the subject it might be a good source to someone, so why take it of ALL the shelfs
PYE
- why should religus books be banned they are a part of our everyday lives i understand not teaching them but isne banning them a little extreme?
I beleive everyone has sense enough to choose the books they read. This girl chose to read a book about a girl being raped, it was HER DECISION. I understand that is a rough topic however why choose the book if you dont think you can handle it.
I understand she didnt like the book and was too immature to handle it, however im sure there are other people who maybe like the book or are curious about its content i cant understand how a school district can ban a book because one girl was disturbed by it. Just doesnt seem right.
I think that there should be no books banned from highschools because if the government is trying to shelter us from knowing what some of the horrible things going on in the world how are we supposed to learn when we get into the real world. What if something happens,you won't know how to handle it. If you are sheltered all your life from things like rape and violence and other things like that you might not know how to handle it when you finally learn about it. We need to learn about things that go on in the world.
YES! People need to be bothered.
In a "perfect world" everyone is so unhappy and bored and such.
People need things to be stirred up, and get a reality check. Being bothered in a way is like a mental slap in the face.
I think that life would be too easy if nothing ever happened to you. Things that happen to you is what gives you a back bone and builds you up to the person you are today. Being bothered is hard, but it's worth it when you look back to where you were and in a bad place, to where and what you become when you're in a better place.
I think people need to be bothered every now and then because hey should know what that feels like. If you didnt know what it felt like to be bothered and uncomfortable when a moment comes in which you are bothered you could be devastated.
does the "Banned Book List" still exist in America? are there still banned books or did they make a law about that?
I agree with Allie when she read the quote about being bothered form the book, because 'bothered' could mean that there are conflicts going on or you read something you don't like... anything really. If you can deal with having conflict or reading something disturbing and get over it, then I think you have a pretty good handle on things. You can still have a good life even if everyone is not equal and not 100% happy. Society can still thrive and people can still build really good lives.
I think Nowlan made a good comment when he said that when you try to get rid of conflict you are just creating more. and nothing can really be completely equal.
My independent reading book is "The Color Purple". This book involves a girl who's pretty much sexually abused by her husband. Yes parts of it are kind of disturbing because they are graphic, but I don't think it deserves to be banned for it. The inner group was talking about the book that was banned because of graphic scenes. The girl who read it, I believe, was certainly old enough to handel it, I'm sure she'd heard of these sort of things happening to young girls before.
Pye- Yes there is still a banned book list. But we have "Banned Book Week" where you can read those books and kind of celebrate those authors who spoke their mind.
i dont know about other people but when someone tells me i cant do somthing it makes me want to do it more
Conflict makes life....life. If everything went exactly as planeed you can never learn what to do if it doesnt!
I think that it was ok to ban that book however, banning books doesnt prevent the students from reading it outside of school. I think some of the people in the fisch bowl are contradicting themselves. First they say that they need to learn about the real world and that the book shouldn't have been banned and then the same person will say that high schoolers shouldn't have to read that in high school because they will learn it later in life. She needs to chose an opinion.
I also agree with Megan that elementary schools shouldn't have those knind of books. First of all they are to young to understand rape and violence. Second of all they are to young to be able to handle the concept of that. But I think that we do need to learn about these things at some point like in highschool.
I think that maybe the woman was trying to have justice served because she was sick of the governement trying to take everyone's intelligence away. Maybe the government wants to burn books and keep people not as smart because they want to seem superior, and smarter than everybody else.
I love reading and I agree with Mrs. Leclaire. Books are very much alive. We react to these books so strongly as if we are experiencing the same thing.
We do see that "piece of ourselves" and to see that hard work and that connection from so many people be taken away... it's just awful.
It is a murder in itself.
In this story, people don't really learn. So when you have people like that woman or Clarisse, who actually learn and are curious about the real world seem really different. Eventually, after living with a society that doesn't learn or read, they can feel like they don't have anyting left and want to die with what they loved.
I doubt that anyone would be truly happy if there was a world with no conflict. I would like to point out a few of the things we theorize about that most people feel would help make people feel better: perfect societies, equality, no pain or suffering, enough food for everyone. There is always a factor you can change in a society to make it better on paper, but when you try to implement it, it's impossible. There will never be no racism, no conflict, no wars, no hate, no criticism, no sadness. Life has its struggles and life has its successes, and the conflict and sadness is what makes happiness and success that much better.
Cassie: i agree when someone tells me i can't do something, no matter who it is, i only want to do it. Like when someone says don't look, most people will probably look.
I dont think this book is so much about "Burnig books" than making a point about communist Russia. It points out how people in a communistic society have dull lives much like the lives in this book. This book is mostly just encouraging people to think and rebel against the boring, monotonous, thoughtless lives. as Americans if we want to get ahead in life we have to re-train our brains and get educated. As bruce Springsteen said "Bling faith in your leaders, or in anything, will get you killed."
I think that the government sees montag as a threat and because of that they got rid of Clarisse. Clarisse added to Montags different way of thinking and that could be bad.
The girl who got that book banned, seems almost spoiled to me. Her mom got the book banned for her. What's going to happen to that girl when she grows up has to face real situations like this? Her mom won't be able to ban people in real life from doing things. She should have just put the book down and told her teacher it made her uncomfortable. Ms. Leclaire even told people in this class that if their banned book bothered them, that they could change books.
I believe that Clarisse really is dead and she died for a reason and the reason Montag keeps remembering their conversations is because of the profound way some of her questions affected Montag. She made him realize some of the flaws the society he lives in has and she also made him question the rules of the non-mentioned "government" if there is one, and take a break and look around at the world.
I thought it was really weird that all of a sudden Clarisse was dead and got hit by a car. I think that maybe the govenment took her away because she wasn't "normal". I think that it would be really weird for her to be out of the story alread because she seemed like she was supposed to be an important charicter.
Pye- I don't think that only religous books should be banned. I don't think any book should be banned. And if anything the religous books are some of the most important. And the torah is the first 5 books of the Bible.
i agree with the comment that cassie made about how when someone tells you you can't do something, it only makes you want to do it even more. Like banning books, as ridiculous as it is, it just makes us wonder what they are about more and want to read them. Banning books is pointless and in a sense hold us back from reality and learning. Going back to the book i agree that the government is controling WAY to much, but i think that there lifestyles are way different to us and equality may have a much different meaning to them. In chapter one there is a quote, "We must all be alike. Not everyone born free and equal, as the constitution says, but everyone made equal." This quote proves that the government won't let anyone step out of the lines that they have made for everyone, but sooner of later curiosity is going to take control and the people are going to become smarter and that is going to spread, and there will be nothing the government can do about it.
I agree with conor when he said that maybe it was better that clarisse is dead. I don't say that to sound harsh but in this society it sounds like very bad things happen to people when they are a little different because in a perfect society everyone has to be like everyone and these people break that mold and a punished for no reason for it. When Clarisse says that 6 of her friends have died in the last year it kindof implys that she is different that her friends would be also and they all have ended up dead so it doesn't say very much about being different in this society.
Post a Comment