Fahrenheit 451 – Ray Bradbury – Introduction by Neil gaiman
“Fire is bright and fire is clean”
Captain Beatty

Hello all. I want you to know that I took a long time to decide if I would review this book. Not because I didn’t know how I felt about it, but because I would have to tread carefully if I yelled my opinion out there for everyone to read. Even with my currently small audience. But hey. This is my blog. If there’s a place where I should be able to say what I think, it’s here.
It’s not controversial, it’s not hating on anything, it’s just a really relevant topic in today’s polarizing media.
For those who have NOT read Fahrenheit 451 or have not seen the movie, it is set in a dystopian future where it is illegal to read books. Instead of putting fires out, firemen are a squad of people who, when books are discovered in someone’s otherwise fireproof house, SET fires to get rid of the illegal material. As the story progresses, our protagonist expresses his solidifying dissent with the order of things. He makes a choice and receives consequences for this action. How’s that for talking about the book without giving any spoilers?
First, I want to comment that during the climax of the story, there is a very blatant social commentary about feeding people a conclusion that feels nice, and that they would expect to see rather than the truth of the situation.
** LOOKS AT SOCIETY ** DOES that sound familiar!?
Second, I want to comment on the REASON why books became illegal. This is the part where I know I need to be careful. So, in that vein, I am stating the reasons, according to Captain Beatty.
“Don’t step on the toes of the dog-lovers, the cat-lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from Oregon or Mexico. The people in this book, this play, this TV serial are not meant to represent any actual painters, cartographers, mechanics anywhere. The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that! All the minor minor minorities with their navels to be kept clean. Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock up your typewriters.”
Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451, Page 55, Captain Beatty
“Coloured people don’t like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don’t feel good about Uncle Tom’s Cabin. Burn it. Someone’s written a book on tobacco and cancer of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Burn the book.”
Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451, Page 57, Captain Beatty
** LOOKs at society harder** how about now!?
We are supposed to be able to identify when something is bad. Bad things exist. Do we WANT them to exist? No. Bad things, by definition, are bad. But like I said in my post previously, if you only ever get one sociopolitical, socioracial, or socioeconomic viewpoint, how is reading supposed to broaden your horizons? If all of our books are neat, and perfect, and comfortable, how will we know how to deal with things that are uncomfortable when they inevitably happen in real life?
If you have some suggestions on the above, I’m all ears. Except for “Ignore all bad things forever and strive for societal perfection by destroying everything in our past that was bad and uncomfortable.” This advice will be yeeted so far out the window you may not even see it.
You have no power here. I’m from Canada. Know what Canadians did to the indigenous population? Do you know anything about residential schools? If not, please know that Canada has TRIED the ‘lets pretend it never happened and we are good people’ angle. Know what it caused? Broken homes. Trauma. Abuse. Neglect.
Spoiler?
Pretending that everything is fine and nice and we’ve never done anything wrong in our life? Doesn’t work.
We need to understand our societal development and be comfortable enough in our own progression to read something from the past, or something that might be controversial, and say ‘Hey. Here is a viewpoint. Let’s discuss it.’
So why then, did this book only get four stars if I identified so strongly with the message? Even though it was published in the 1950’s and I’m saying it applies to us even SEVENTY YEARS LATER?
I felt the ending had a bit of a ‘rocks fall and everyone dies’ ending.
Yes, shh, it’s symbolic of the progression of society and Montag’s journey forward and transitions into new worldviews and perspectives. We still dropped a bomb on the town and killed everyone. Rocks fall. Everyone died. I didn’t like it. I thought it was abrupt. 4 stars.
If you’ve read this book, I’d love to know what you thought about it, and if you identified with it as strongly as I did. Alternately, I have NOT seen the movie, so I would be interested in learning what the tone was!
If someone tells you what a story is about, they are probably right. If they tell you that is all a story is about, they are very definitely wrong.
Neil Gaiman