What does Veeky Forums think of Fahrenheit 451? I think it’s ok, but We and 1984 were definitely better

That's pretty much why I don't like 1984. It's not a bad book, but it's not exactly a dystopian novel. The guy was very much writing about the present. Every normie out there reads it thinking it prophecises the near future.

Most dystopias operate on the assumption that if a current trend in society continues (or if it is brought to an extreme) that it will end up ruining society itself. 1984 is no different.
People misinterpreting the book isn't really grounds for disliking it in my opinion, but I can see how it would be frustrating when they discuss it like a gospel/doomsday clock.

>normie reads 1984
>lol this isn't supposed to be an instruction manual
>normie reads BNW
>...

>normie reads BNW
>LOL SOMA its tv and beer I'm just like them!
>normie watches Brazil
>...

On its own it’s pretty good but 1984 and Brave New Workd are more worth your time

I have that exact book. It was interesting to read, and fun, but I don't think it did anything amazing. Neither did 1984 for that matter, but it is better than Fahrenheit 451.
Shouldn't Utopia be in here?

Does dystopian fiction feel out of fashion to you as well? We are seeing quality takes on it on other medias (Black Mirror, Blade Runner 2049) but they're all quite reductionist like said or been done

(Haven't yet read We) F451 felt more real to me. 1984 was more interesting because if how it explored the logical extremes of totalitarianism, but it was almost too interesting, because I often got more engrossed in the way oceania worked than what was actually happening to Winston, and while that made it more enjoyable to read, it also made less of an impact. Not to say that I was completely emotionless through the whole thing, many parts were gripping, but sometimes I almost sympathized with the Party because of how cleverly it seemed they had molded the world, and sometmes I just got lost in exploring how the world worked.

F451 scared me, unsettled me more than 1984 because it felt like something that could actually happen. Even though the things Guy goes through are better and easier than what happens to winston, they still felt worse to me reading it.

If you think a good dystopia should make the reader feel uncomfortable and afraid, then f451 is better. If you think a good dystopia should create the worst world possible and then reasonably explain how such world works, 1984 is better. Both are great.

I would say that dystopia relies on a certain sense of sensationalism or 'shock value'. It used to be rejected and scoffed at, but is now part of modern day cultural story telling which in turn gives it a more pop culture feel (many dystopias are now young adult/teen novels).
I would say it's mostly become formulatic ie: big evil company/government figurehead, secret police, mind control, the masses are seen as a giant clump of mindless drones with a singular common sense protagonist with very little characterization.
There's not much left to say about dystopias anymore.

>If you think a good dystopia should make the reader feel uncomfortable and afraid, then f451 is better. If you think a good dystopia should create the worst world possible and then reasonably explain how such world works, 1984 is better. Both are great.

Good insight.

It's poorly written and bad in general.

>ending of Fahrenheit 451
cringe

It was okay at best. I'd rank it below We, 1984, BNW, in that order.

1984 in some capacity dealt with Winston's ethical dilemma of participating in the system, but I think a more novel take of it could be the ethical dilemma of the prole who is building that system fully well aware of the fate he is resigning himself to in doing so, like the Jews being forced to dig their own graves for lack of a more apt comparison. Although if something like this is already done, lay it on me. There seems a lot of trash under the umbrella of dystopic society that I don't much delve into it.

You are suggesting a dystopia that instead of a figurehead as an antagonist focuses on the compliance of the everyday man/the masses as the true enemy? Sounds like a fresh take.

>sympathized with the Party

Read We. It's (the first) take on distopia and by that the most personal, the not so politically overloaded of the four other books, christian even perspective on the "love for thy neighbor".
451 and 1984 and BNW are also great works of art but the one before them, "we" captupers the essence of what it means to exist in such a drastic shift from traditional ethics.
It is by far the best and the unsurpassed.

We is important but not very good

We is the best not only philosophically speaking but because of its distinct and elegant style of writing.
Fahrenheit 451 is a dark fairy tale with a strong moral at the end. A surreal Grimm's fairy tale (much like the other works of Bradbury); the robotic dog with its fiery breath and empty eyes chasing down on us, symbolising technology and its dangers turning us into mindless robots.This book has genius insights about modern life, social media and the internet and is extremely well written... Even if it is a bit childish (and surreal) all the features and details that form its bleak vision of the future are there...

1984 is a grave warning how close around the corner totalitarianism can be unless we stand by our freedoms and our privacy. How the real world, who's already seen two great wars in succession and several changing ideologies, only hangs by a very quickly fleeting natural common sense, which can easily be removed given the political will to do so.
The pendulum of constant war must swing as many times needed (as in the epilogue of the book) before it can be put into a permanent stop wiping away history and turning every sine human into a slave. 1984 is how human potential is nothing wiout privacy.

Brave new world on the other hand is the science-fiction prediction that we will one day be masters not only of our social constructs but of our nature as well. We will be able to modify our bodies and our mind in pursuit of our understanding of happiness and most importantly: Will this ability make us forget what it is to human?
Basically every one of those books poses this question about what is our nature and what it will be to change it but only
"We" shows a true utopia of heaven for everyone ....

To be cont.

Invitation to a Beheading by Nabokov

This has actually been on my list for a long time (3 years probably) but they don't have it at my local library so I've never gotten around to it

Bumping for the continuation

It shows a utopia for the masses at the expense of completely destroying the individual.
It shows a perfect world where society is no longer bothered by the weights of happiness or personal fulfillment.

I'm torn on F451. It's science fiction in a world without books, but the fact that everyone interprets it as censorship and not against how hedonism will ultimately lead to destruction (or something). If it was truly censorship then there would be books allowed that fit the governments views (I mean, even the Nazis didn't burn EVERY book)

I didn't like it so much and I regret that it kept me from reading more Bradbury for so long. I mean it's alright but it's no Dandelion Wine.

Book burnings are mostly myth. Read /pol/.

I like it. I was surprised by how conservative leaning it seemed. Particularly the part about the woman who had the abortions or whatever it was

I have read a lot of Ray Bradbury's work and I don't find him appealing at all.

I liked Fahrenheit 451 better than 1984. Even though the world of 1984 was better developed, the themes of Fahrenheit 451 resound more with society today. A disinterest with fine arts, mass consumption of mindless entertainment, intellectuals being looked upon as elitist, etc. Sure you can argue that big brother kind of came true with surveillance, but society willingly accepted it and there's too much data for the government to analyse every citizen.

It predicted the snowflake era. Books are banned because they triggered the right and the left and a Universal PC is created.

Anyone have any opinions on The Iron Heel? It's interesting to see how an oligarchy was the feared antagonist, as opposed to a dictator/fascist government you typically see.

1984 has an essay in it called The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, it talks about the the upper, middle, and lower classes and the cyclical power struggle of the upper trying to maintain power, the middle trying to ascend into the upper through which they use the lower class to uprise and overthrow the upper class, finally ending with a new upper class (the former middle) which repeats the cycle. It also talks about if the upper class wishes to maintain their seat of power, what steps need to be taken to ensure that another uprising is not only impossible, but literally inconceivable by it's populus.
I have never read The Iron Heel, but it's an interesting subject

As long as we're talking about dystopian books, why is Brave New World so popular? The idea of oppression through pleasure is pretty interesting, but reading it felt like a chore. Maybe I'm just in the minority here.

100% agree, I liked its ideas but I thought it was just badly written. Didn’t finish it in the end

That's just Huxley's style. He was an academic through and through and it shows in his writing.

we is so oddly written that i almost only could comprehend the main story
am i just a brainlet or is it written like shit?

He conceives of his novels as existing between novels and essays, that is why is writing is so bad.

I N F I N I T E J E S T
although it's not a dystopia per se, more about a grim vision of nearby future

It's the same thing with The Doors of Perception-it's an essay, but it reads like a trippy run on sentence that you can barely make sense of.

I remember reading Fahrenheit 451. This book made an impact on me for sure. Just FYI, the book is self-aware of how fictionalized it is, and Bradbury does a great job of driving his point home. It is a little bland for this very reason, but well written.

A book for book nerds, to be sure.

Was it grim? I always thought it was supposed to be absurdist.