Skip to content

Review: Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury

October 12, 2013

Fahrenheit 451Fahrenheit 451 is the story of a fireman named Guy Montag. Guy lives in a future, dystopian United States where firemen don’t put out fires, they start them. In this future, mass media is used to control the hearts and minds of the populace. Anything which is perceived to threaten mass media’s control, such as books must be destroyed. As a fireman, Guy responds to a person’s reported possession of books by showing up at their house and burning the books. However, Guy knows there is something missing in his life. Unable to put his finger on the problem, he seeks for answers outside of the normal mass media outlets, and he begins to develop a fatal attraction to the very books he is burning.

I’m not sure how I managed to avoid reading this book in high school, but I did, making this my first read through of the classic work. I found Bradbury’s description of his imagined future technology, such as ear-bud like wireless headphones and flat screen TVs, prescient. Guy Montag and Clarissa were interesting characters, but I thought several of the other characters, like Guy’s wife Millie, were rather throw-away. The story is more of a character drama, and we follow Guy through his internal struggle to rationalize the world around him.

The dystopia in Fahrenheit 451 differs from those established in 1984 and Brave New World in a couple of ways. First, the setting is in the United States instead of London. Second, while the exact nature of the government is never discussed, it does not appear to resemble communism in any appreciable way. The state does seem to be a far reaching entity, but it is never exactly clear how far reaching. I think the ambiguity of the dystopia both helps and hurts the story. Having an undefined government structure makes the book easier to interpret and identify with, even sixty years after the book was published. Unlike earlier dystopian novels with a clear-cut totalitarian state, Fahrenheit 451 requires the reader to supplement some of the details about the government from their own mind. There is enough suggestion in the book to guide our vision of the future, but not enough to color it completely. This has helped the story stay relevant as modern readers supply their own details and interpretation of events, and even though these interpretations might be different from what the author intended, they’re still valid. For me, the ambiguity hurt the story at times. There were occasions where I would have liked to know more concrete details, and they were never supplied.

Another enjoyable classic which has aged well, Fahrenheit 451 is worth a read. In some ways it represents a major departure from other dystopian novels written before it. It lacks the “big reveal” moment found in 1984 and Brave New World, but I don’t think that hurts this story. Focusing more on character and less on the dystopian setting, Fahrenheit 451 reads a lot more like a story than a cautionary tale, a clear sign of the change in the dystopian genre over time.

  1. “For me, the ambiguity hurt the story at times” — I disagree — Bradbury is a short story writer at heart. Works like this are longer than most of what he writes — he’s obsessed with short mood pieces, not inundating the reading with very modern-esque pages of minute detail. Also, due to the fact that SF is NOT really meant to be predictave at all, but rather tell a good story in an imagined future or comment on the present he in no way needs to describe the exact specifics of his future government. Thus, the simplistic nature of the telling and the implied details of the world play perfectly into the allegorical sense of the work.

    • Well I agree with that to some extent, I found the ending of Fahrenheit 451 to be somewhat unsupported by the rest of the story. I was suprised by the last 15 or so pages of the book, not because it was a major twist or anything, but because I didn’t realize that was where the story was leading based on the details (or lack of details) provided in the rest of the narrative. I do think the ambiguity helps the book overall and makes it more timeless, but I also think it lends itself to plot holes. I’m not saying Bradbury needs to provide an exhaustive list of exact specifics about the government and world affairs, merely enough details to support the conclusion of the story (which in my eyes, he did not.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The World SF Blog

Speculative Fiction from Around the World

Drunken Dragon Reviews

A Fantasy Blog Gone Horribly Wrong.

Auxiliary Memory

Things I want to remember - James Wallace Harris

The CBDE Book Club

Book Reviews. Book Blogs. Book Art. Books.

my little heart melodies

music | books | art | food | life

The Geek Anthropologist

An anthropological approach to all things geek

%d bloggers like this: