فهرنهايت 451 .. الرواية الكابوس


عالم اليوم :


انظر .. انظر حولك .. هل ما نعيشه حقيقي ؟!! عالم مبني على الخيال، تعبيرات مصطنعة على شكل حبوب، حرب نفسية على شكل إعلانات، كيمياويات لتبديل و تبديد العقل على شكل طعام، ندوات لغسيل المخ على شكل وسائل الإعلام، فقاعات منعزلة بإحكام في شكل وسائل التواصل الإجتماعي، بطولة زائفة في شكل أبطال زائفين، دين جديد في شكل عبادة المال، حرب استنزاف واسعة في شكل تبعية كل ما هو جديد هل ما نعيشه حقيقي ؟ .. لقد أغلقنا الواقع و خلعنا رداء الإنسانية و ألقينا ما تبقى منّا في مقلب قمامة متوسع من الحالة البشرية، العالم الآن مجرد خدعة كبيرة .. أغرقنا بعضنا البعض .. واستنزف التزييف طاقتنا، و اجهدنا التنكر .. نريد أن نكون مخدرين، لأنه من المؤلم ألا نتظاهر .. لأننا جبناء .


n  n  
nhebergement image





.. و لأنّ الغد هو امتداد طبيعي لليوم، نتيجة شبه حتمية فقد ابدع راي برادوري في وصفه


عالم الغد :



حضارة ما بعد الكتاب .. عالم بدون معرفة .. بدون إحساس .. بدون مشاعر .. بدون دين .. عالم بدون روح !! عالم للأجساد فقط


n  n  
nTélécharger des photos




“يذكرون في الغالب ماركات الكثير من السيارات أو الملابس أو أسماء المسابح ويقولون ما أروعها! لكنهم يقولون جميعاً الأمور نفسها ولا يقول أحد أمراً مختلفاً عما يقوله أي شخص آخر، وفي معظم الأحيان تكون صناديق النكات في المقاهي مفتوحة وتكرر ذاتها في الغالب. وفي المتاحف كل شيء تجريدي.”


“ذلك القطيع الثرثار من قرود الأشجار التي لا تقول شيئاً، لا تقول شيئاً، وتقول ذلك بصوت عالٍ، عالٍ، عالٍ.”



تخيلوا !! زمنا يعد فيه امتلاك كتاب ما جريمة شنعاء، زمنا أغلقت المدارس و الجامعات لأنّ نسبة المنظمين إليها هي صفر بالمئة، زمنا يضحك فيه الناس على المعرفة، زمنا فيه مجموعة كبيرة جدا من الأجوبة و لكن لا يوجد هنالك أسئلة !! زمنا أصبحت فيه علاقة الأم بإبنها أشبه بعلاقتها بآلة الغسيل، زمنا طلب فيه الموت أكثر من الحياة لا لشيئ سوى أنه تجربة جسدية جديدة، هذا هو زمن هذه الرواية الكابوسية، زمن إحراق الكتب .

n  n  
nhébergeur d images gratuit



-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-


لن أطيل الحديث أكثر .. فالرواية غريبة رائعة .. رغم أن النسخة العربية مشوهة .. و ترجمتها سيئة جدا، تستحق القراءة .

In a not too distant future, owning books is against the law. Firemen burn property instead of protect it and everyone is dialed in to their televisions, subsisting on a steady stream of sensational media stories and vapid entertainment to numb their quickly congealing brains. The nation is always at war, but you would never guess it from the populace's empty conversations and emptier dreams. Guy Montag longs for something different, but what exactly, he can't even say, until he meets a girl who wanders outside for fun and sees faces in the moon. He becomes convinced that what society has labeled as wrong and anti-social is more real than anything he's experienced in a long time. However, these are dangerous thoughts. And, being a fireman, Guy knows, more than anyone, the price that is demanded of people who dare to think, read, and entertain original thoughts.

Fahrenheit 451 was shocking to me. Ray Bradbury predicted internet/social media addiction long before such things existed. He also called society's horrifically shortened attention spans. Where once, we would have read through a novel or a long article, now we spend less than thirty seconds absorbing information before scrolling onwards to the next thing, then the next, and the next. (Goodreads friends excepted from the majority, of course.)

I listened to the audiobook version where Tim Robbins performed the narration. It was brilliant. He is a natural fit for this material and I highly recommend it.

The only annoying thing about listening to the audiobook is Bradbury's use of repetition to build the tension and pound his ideas home. You'll particularly notice it when the war planes fly overhead or when Guy gets into a big fight with his wife and she won't turn off the television. It's headache inducing but Bradbury certainly knows how to make a point.

This is one of those classics that I never got the chance to read in school, but I wish I had. I would have enjoyed this much more than Hard Times, which I managed to yawn my way through. Recommended for those who are disturbed by the shallowness of modern life and long for real connections with the people and world around them. The lessons that Bradbury teaches are still very applicable today and, as I said, shocking in their implications.

It was a pleasure to read.

I was somewhat blown away by this novel. Perhaps it is simply my personal taste. I seem to enjoy novels about the future and in particular ones with a dystopian element. (see my reviews of Brave New World and 1984 for example)

I have read a handful of articles about how in analysing this novel most people miss the target. They claim it is a novel about book censorship whereas Bradbury claims it is more a novel focusing on talking about whether other forms of media would destroy our stories. However this is not a didactic text with only one main message (and there are a handful of those which I believe exist). This like all books is one which can be interpreted in various ways without missing the fact that at its heart this is a novel written for entertainment.

Bradbury in his after-word mentions that no one would print a book that featured book censorship at the time he intended to publish it. And book censorship is certainly one clear theme although not necessarily intended to be the main theme. It just so happened that Fahrenheit 451 was published at a time when such a topic was controversial. I doubt however that we can necessarily read a historical or political motivation as such into the novel more that it so happened to be released at that time.

Curiously also in the after-word Bradbury mentioned that his inspiration came through five other stories he had written. Each of them also focusing on books and encounters with the law. He also mentioned that he was inspired by the burnt library books at Alexandria and the Salem witch trials. Curiously the Salem witch trials were the focus of another personal favourite - the play The Crucible - which was written at a similar time and used the witch trials to challenge McCarthyism.

Personally what I saw in the novels were various themes and issues being discussed. I saw a tale about scapegoats and about totalitarian control through the media. I felt that Bradbury's story reveals a lesson about humanity. That we seek to throw blame about human evils upon tools like guns and books but in the end they are just tools. I don't perceive any book as possessing inherent evil although I do believe that there may be ideas contained within them which could perhaps be perceived as such or are at their heart morally flawed. In Fahrenheit 451 the society attempted to destroy the tools to remove such perceived ideas and yet ultimately they replaced the ideas in books with flawed thoughts of their own. For instance they justified killing a man walking on the street or burning a woman alive.

I highly recommend this novel. Bradbury's prose is beautiful and poignantly lyrical. It's sparse and he uses very few elaborate phrases but he has a way of cobbling phrases and metaphors together to beautiful effect. There are times when the writing appears to be in the manner of stream of consciousness but Bradbury writes it well. In fact while his story is a harrowing and on the whole haunting (and somewhat bleak) portrayal he writes it with care, devotion and artistry.

The tale of how firemen become book burners and how one fireman decides to read the forbidden material will not be easily forgotten by me. And I feel that this is a novel which has well stood the test of time and deserves to be called a classic and read and studied by future generations.

Alienation and the corrosive impact of all day entertainment and short attention spans. Most hopeful of the classic dystopian novels in a sense, but lacking the unflinching quality of 1984 for me
Don't ask for guarantees. And don't look to be saved in any one thing, person, machine, or library. Do your own bit of saving, and if you drown, at least die knowing you were heading for shore.

Ignorance is bliss is taken to a literal extreme in this classic, for Guy Montag and his psychological turmoil when paradigms start to shift after meeting an overly inquisitive neighbor. Guy is a fireman, tasked with destroying books by fire, with mechanical hounds aiding him. The society he lives in is an America full of TV screens and people (including his wife) being on drugs to deal with existential emptiness and the threat of nuclear holocaust.
Egalitarian tendencies and, interestingly enough forming a precursor to fears of “woke”, censorship by minorities being offended are mentioned by Ray Bradbury as a reason for media dumbing down the general populace.

The system is a bit lightly painted in Fahrenheit 451, but then again how well can anyone in our current society paint the intricate working of capitalism and democracy?
I did however wonder, if this existential doubt which happens to Guy Montag, who is relatively well off in the system, and which is something quite often experienced based on his manager speeches, how can the system of firemen then endure?

The ending of the book is a bit sudden for me (and the incompetence of the system, who has robotized dogs and surveillance to its disposal, feels like a letdown compared to the ruthlessness and efficiency I was expecting from for instance 1984). Also the moral side of murder is rather easily ignored.
In the end there is a hopeful conclusion (although just as much channeling The Road as something else), with Columbia and Harvard professors to the rescue, however meagre their chances of turning the societal tide without external pressure.

This TED movie captures the tones of the book well: https://youtu.be/YMZcp0EQO2s
I enjoyed reading the book but found it less nightmarish and claustrophobic than George Orwell his classic.

Quotes:
If you hide your ignorance, no one will hit you and you'll never learn.

Books were only one type or receptacle where we stored a lot of things we were afraid we might forget. There is nothing magical in them at all. The magic is only in what books say, how they stitched the patches of the universe together into one garment for us.

Nobody listens anymore. I can't talk to the walls because they're yelling at me, I can't talk to my wife; she listens to the walls.

We have everything we need to be happy but we aren't happy.

She didn't want to know how a thing was done, but why.

Vraag geregeld “Waarom” en je wordt inderdaad erg ongelukkig, als je niet op tijd stopt.

That’s right, I finally showed up at the party! I somehow have gone through life as a book geek and a science-fiction nerd without reading this book. It was always on my to-do-list but over the years, I just didn't get around to reading it. Thank you Justin for kicking my ass in gear to read this masterpiece!

So you ask, what happened when I finally read Fahrenheit 451?

I read it in one day!!!! I absorbed the pages while ignoring the world around me. I laughed and gasped at amazing quotes in the book. I shook my head with the similarities of a book wrote in 1953 and the current world and events today.
Burning books is such an effective tool to leave society less intelligent and reinforce their ignorance. We're overstimulated with TV, media, walking around mindlessly with headphones in our ears, not questioning politics or world events, etc.
I could go on, you get it. Ray Bradbury wrote about this in 1953 and it's so accurate today. I think he might have been psychic. ha!

“Don't ask for guarantees. And don't look to be saved in any one thing, person, machine, or library. Do your own bit of saving, and if you drown, at least die knowing you were heading for shore.”

And another quote Bradbury described perfectly in this book.

“The good writers touch life often. The mediocre ones run a quick hand over her. The bad ones rape her and leave her for the flies."

Bradbury wrote a classic that will stay with me forever and I wish I could give this more stars. I am so glad to read this book at my age because it resonates more at age 39 instead of age 17 and being forced to read this in English Lit.

Bravo Bradbury, bravo!!

“Do you notice how people hurt each other nowadays?”
-tRay Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

Who is one of my favorite authors? Neil Gaiman.

When I opened Fahrenheit 451, who should write the introduction but none other than Neil Gaiman. So how can I not like this book?

Just to give some historical context, Fahrenheit 451 is a fantasy book written in 1953. This was before cell phones, color television, and of course the internet. The story is premised on what if firemen started fires instead of putting them out. What if firemen burned books?

Fahrenheit 451 is about censorship, but it is much more than that. Bradbury was writing about the future which is now our present. It is almost eerie to see how closely he predicted the future. The book even mentions 2022!

There are also a lot of great quotes in Fahrenheit 451, and this book is especially chilling in the modern era of book banning.

“And if you look”—she nodded at the sky—“there’s a man in the moon.” He hadn’t looked for a long time.

When was the last time that you looked at the moon?

2025 Reading Schedule
JantA Town Like Alice
FebtBirdsong
MartCaptain Corelli's Mandolin - Louis De Berniere
AprtWar and Peace
MaytThe Woman in White
JuntAtonement
JultThe Shadow of the Wind
AugtJude the Obscure
SeptUlysses
OcttVanity Fair
NovtA Fine Balance
DectGerminal

Connect With Me!
Blog Twitter BookTube Insta My Bookstore at Pango

Много хубава и запомняща се антиутопична книга... Несъмнено Оруел е създал най-великите творби в този жанр, но и „451 градуса по Фаренхайт“ на Бредбъри намира своето достойно място в него, разпалвайки силна любов към четенето!



„Мразя римляните с тяхното status quo —
казваше той. — Напълни очите си с чудеса, живей като че ли ще умреш след десет секунди. Опознай света. Той е по-фантастичен, отколкото всяка изфабрикувана мечта, за която си даваш парите. Не искай гаранции, не искай сигурност — такива неща светът не познава. И ако ги имаше, те биха приличали на големия ленивец, който ден след ден виси надолу с главата от клона на някое дърво и проспива живота си. По дяволите! — казваше той. — Раздрусай дървото и нека ленивецът се строполи на земята.“

Thermal utilization is an all time burner

It´s more about the language than the plot
Bradbury has such a unique writing style, everything comes so smoothly and elaborately, full of metaphors and lively language. This, his most famous one, is a softer alternative to Orwell and Huxley, a more philosophical approach to the topic of censorship. Certainly one of the great works of the 20th century, if not of all time, reducing the story to some essential elements that

Can be seen in Brave new world and 1984 too
A love story, an awakening antagonist, mass dumbing down by passive media consumption, substance abuse, propaganda, and a little grain of hope for a better tomorrow. It´s closer to Brave new world than to 1984 because the mind penetration aspect of brainwashing is bigger than pure death squad brutality. It´s also simply Bradburys style to avoid big action scenes and focus on character development, deeper meaning, and the language itself to create a picture of, well, freaking reality in very many places.

That´s by far not his top performance
I understand why his other, as good and even better, works aren´t as appreciated as this short one. Bradbury is at his best when he is writing short story collections under a main theme, be it The Martian chronicles
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7...
or The Illustrated Man
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2...
One could go and start searching for all the interconnections between the stories and how perfectly they fit together, but the problem of having to begin again and again and getting out of reading flow is one of the main reasons why short stories aren´t selling so great. Maybe it was popular those days, I don´t know, but in the case of The Martian Chronicles, one of the first space opera novels could have been possible, the same with The Illustrated Man. It´s sadly one of the worst cases of unused serial production potential.

He was such a great writer and I don´t get why he didn´t rewrite all the material he had with those short stories into one or more longer novels. It somehow feels to me as if he had a tendency to avoid longer novels, but just imagine how it would have been if he had written them or even a series instead of all of those unique short stories. Boy, he would have owned them all. I mean, Stephen King names him and Lovecraft as main inspirations and the more often I read something from one of these titans, the more I have to agree on how my beloved master of horror came to his writing style.

Tropes show how literature is conceptualized and created and which mixture of elements makes works and genres unique:
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...

Obligado, obligado, obligado. Y no le pongo las 5 estrellas porque leído hoy le falla el estilo. Pero su mensaje es eterno.

Eso sí, decepciona casi seguro porque las expectativas sobre este libro son siempre inmensas.

Ray Bradbury sets up a totalitarian society where people are not allowed to keep books, no one reads, and firefighters are tasked with finding and burning books.

This is a very simple anti - intellectual society setting, and it's not particularly surprising. But to observe whether a world setting is powerful, it's not just about looking at the trope, but also about the details. In other words, how are the logic and rules of this world reflected in specific details of daily life?

In Bradbury’s setting, people are driven to live, always busy. Vehicles must travel at speeds over 150 kilometers per hour; people sleep with earplugs to listen to various sounds; there are 3 television walls in every home, with various relatives constantly talking to you; if you commit suicide by taking medication, there is a blood - cleaning device that can replace your entire body, allowing you to live again and forget why you took the medication.

These are specific lifestyles. But why is this?

Because they believe that keeping people from thinking and simply providing them with happiness is the best thing. The "pressure of the minority" is the reason. The larger the population, the more complex the types of minorities. Don't step on the toes of dog lovers, and there are also cat lovers, doctors, lawyers, businessmen, all kinds of officials, Mormons, Baptists, monotheists, second - generation Chinese immigrants, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites... The bigger the market, the harder it is to deal with disputes. This seems to be the dilemma faced by Bradbury in 1940s America. Because conflicts are so difficult to deal with, create a world without conflict? Is this the reason for the formation of an anti-intellectual society? Is this reason sufficient to lead to an anti-intellectual society?

Well, maybe I'm being too demanding. Worldbuilding is always arbitrary.

In the middle, there's a thought-provoking passage. When the fire captain is brainwashing Montag to make him believe that a world without books is better, he gives a long and eloquent speech. He uses contradictory quotes from various philosophers to attack each other. What's the use of books? Books only bring contradictions and chaos, and books contradict and confuse each other.

So I waited for Bradbury, through Montag, to refute this directly. But he simply escapes. In this frontal battle, why escape? Why is the need for books, for these chaotic and contradictory ideas, a self - evident truth?

I was quite disappointed when I read about the escape. This is a difficult question to debate. Abstractly speaking, why do we need contradictions, chaos, and diversity? If science fiction wants to discuss this axiom, then this axiom should be discussed seriously. Because in an anti - intellectual setting, it is precisely something that needs to be discussed, and if it is self - evident, it would not lead to this result.

Of course, maybe Bradbury’s strength is not in reasoning. His strength lies in scenes and lyricism. He wants to use the details of dandelion seeds sticking to the chin, real conversations between people, lying on a pile of dead leaves by the railroad tracks, asking his wife what love is, etc., to evoke people's innate nature - respect for people's own senses and thinking - to indirectly illustrate the self - evident nature of this axiom.

I can't say it's ineffective, I can only say that it left me disappointed in the expectations of a frontal battle. These scenes are gentle and sentimental, like eyelashes blinking on your cheek. Yes, it's good, but it's still not enough, not powerful enough for this world setting, and this debate should be difficult and powerful.

So in my opinion, Bradbury strengths shine brightly in The Martian Chronicles. But in this book, he's struggling.

Finally, I'll set aside my evaluation and quote a paragraph I personally like: ”Everyone leaves something behind when they die, my grandfather used to say. A child, a book, a painting, a house, a wall you built yourself, a pair of shoes you made yourself, or a garden full of flowers. In some way, you've touched something with your hands, so when you die, your soul has somewhere to go; people look at the flowers and trees you've planted, and there you are. It doesn't matter what you do, he said, as long as you can change it, it was one way before you touched it, and after you took your hand away, it became something like you. The difference between a man who only mows the lawn and a real gardener is in their touch, he said. The man who mows the lawn seems to have never been there; while a gardener will be there all his life."

3.4 / 5 stars

Believe me, I'm not the kind of guy who gushes over classics simply by virtue of the fact that they are classics, but this one was worth all the legend that it carries with it. I'm glad I never had to read this book in highschool. First of all, we would have ruined this truly awesome story by overanalyzing every mundane literary aspect, detail and device. Second, the story is SO much more profound in the year 2008 at the age of 30 than it could have been at 17 in 1995.

I always thought this was a book about the evils of government and how the folks in charge will try to restrict thought. After all, as the title of the book indicates, this is that story about "burning books." But Bradbury goes way deeper than some mere indictment of fascism. Taking place in the future, people of society have withdrawn from each other, focusing all their attention on mindless entertainment in the form of giant TV rooms and earphones. Books in this society are banned and "firemen" are put to work burning down the houses of anyone caught in possession of them. But as one character points out, government doesn't do anything that the people aren't already calling for and this assault on books is really just the natural byproduct of a society full of self-absorbed people who are pulling away more and more from any kind of thought deeper than what their television asks of them.

Reading this book in a year where reality TV, a thousand different video game consoles and half a billion mindless internet sites provide a good chunk of our mental stimulation, and where people routinely drown the world and everyone in it out via their iPod headphones, it's eerie just how prophetic this story is... considering it was released in the 1950's.

But this book isn't merely some kind of morality play. The story itself follows the transition of Guy Montag, from a book-leery, burn-happy "fireman" into a man who is on the run for not only possessing books, but killing a fellow fireman to protect them. There's action. There's intrigue. Ther's violence. There's character development. There's a story that you can actually follow and stay interested in. There's one particularly vivid and chilling description of a woman's final moment of life before a nuclear bomb goes off over her head. And yes, woven seamlessly into the exciting narrative are plenty of ideas to ponder regarding our direction as a society and the danger of never pursuing knowledge deeper than who got booted off 'Big Brother'.

I heard that this was a great book, and I really wanted to like it. The title and the quips on the back cover caught my interest. Guy Montag is a fireman, but the job is flipped. Instead of putting out fires, he is creating them, and he likes it a lot. The first sentence, "It was a pleasure to burn", and the following description after, had me convinced that I would enjoy the book. Not only that, New York Times professes that the book is "frightening in its implications". With all that buildup and such a dramatic summary on the back, I was hoping that the book would make me think. Perhaps it would be a dark book, morbid, even offensive. It didn't deliver any of that, but that's not the problem; I don't judge a book based on whether or not it follows my preconceptions. It could have been a perfectly good book without any of that.

Maybe the writing style just didn't suit me. I was hoping that the book would be vivid, and one would expect that a book with so many descriptions and metaphors would be vivid. Nope, not for me. Everything is blurry. The people feel one dimensional, with the exception of Montag himself. The intended message feels flat. So, book censorship is bad, tv is bad. What am I supposed to think about it?

My real problem is that I don't feel anything when I was reading Fahrenheit 451, except maybe frustration. Things like a woman burning with her books should make me feel something like horror or sadness. The book doesn't have any effect on me because the metaphors and flowery descriptions are so distracting. Half the time I feel that they don't contribute anything, and my mind automatically skips over them along with some potentially important material. Then I'll try to read it again, but nothing is retained except for bits of flowery fluff. The writing in the entire book is disjointed and strange, and that should have been fine, because such a style has potential for creating a disturbing, off feeling; that would fit a dystopian book. Instead, I feel uncomfortably distanced.