Talk:Fahrenheit 451/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Meaningful Names

I didn't read the book, but just by reading the summary, one point immedately sprang to my mind: the symbolism of names. Guy Montag is a name that could be pretty much anybody (guy meaning... well, simply guy, anybody; and Montag is German for Monday). Faber also relates to the idea of the Homo faber, a man changing his environment with machines/tools. I found that interesting, but maybe it's just wrong in the context of the novel... or irrelevant, I don't know... anybody here who wants to help?

The paperback edition everybody I know read for high-school lit class includes various afterword materials from Bradbury. In one of these essays, he notes that Faber is a pencil manufacturer and that Montag (if I recall correctly) is a company which builds furnaces. Apparently, Bradbury was unaware of these "meanings" while writing the book; he blames his overactive subconscious. Anville 03:40, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Montag was a brand of Paper. Ironic for a story of book burning, the two important characters named after paper and pencil?

[edit] Merger?

Wouldn't it make sense to merge the plot and summary section together as they both say the samething? Bancroftian 06:06, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Merged, saving as much of both as I could. Alf melmac 09:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Link saturation

I think this entry contains far too many links to other Wikipedia entries. Who, among those reading this entry, can seriously be expected to have to look up what a wife or a book is, for example? And if they actually had to, couldn't they search for it themselves? That slight inconvenience is nothing compared to the alternative -- including links to just about everything -- which is just as annoying to an incalculably greater number of people. Sure, this is a problem many articles have, but you have to start somewhere. The reasons I don't just remove these links myself is that I would like to hear if anyone has a decent argument for keeping them first. After all, removing something from an article should never be done in haste. Miai 12:32, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I tend to agree.

But should the crib ( + *BookRags Study Guide and Chapter Summary for "Fahrenheit 451" at BookRags.com; should be http://www.bookrags.com/notes/451/SUM.html ) apparently written by RB himself really have been removed?

The credit "by Ray Bradbury" refers to the novel, not to the plot summary on that web page. Walloon 07:45, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
I guess you're right (they also have a summary of Babbit but the arrangement there was clear, and for the various classics don't list the authors, so I was mistaken), but it sure looks otherwise.

[edit] Movie

The movie seems be incorporated here rather than having a separate entry, which it deserves.

I agree, I am going to make a separate entry for the movie, as it is a separate entitity from the book.Ionesco 21:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Law Enforcement Robots

Fsiler, let me make this clear to you, the reason why the robots are even mentioned at all in this article is intregal to the reason why there is section on futuristic predictions of the book. Moreover, the fact that you left the "military applications" part in tact implies one of three possible motivations for the edit on your part:

  • misguided understanding of the subject
  • a pathetic attempt to censor information (ironic)
  • simple vandalism for antagonistic purposes


Regardless of your reasons, I would advise you to more carefully consider the implications of your actions the next time time you intend to edit the page... or any other. Sweetfreek 19:39, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] German translated

The out-edited German material is translated below. Some-one else can do the comparison suggested. Kdammers 01:23, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

The German is a bit strange in places, beginning with the first word, if not letter. Anyway, here is a slapdash translation.

[edit] attacked by other countries

What other countries have attacked the US since Pearl Harbor? I removed the remark but the removal was reverted. Gerrit CUTEDH 09:04, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 21st century or 24th century?

In the beginning of the Plot section, it says, "The story takes place in the mid 21st century," yet under Accuracy as a vision of the future it starts, "Several aspects of the fictional 24th century future..."

Googling Fahrenheit 451 "21st century" and Fahrenheit 451 "24th century" give comparable results. Which is it? StradivariusTV 01:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I: have edited the article to leave it ambiguous. Kdammers 08:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Predictions

As it now stands, the Wiki article says that government endorsement of high-speed vehiclular traffic on highways has NOT come about. I think this should be removed. Here is a URl giving speed limits in the U.S.: http://www.iihs.org/laws/state_laws/speed_limit_laws.html. Kdammers 02:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] translations

I think it would appropriate to list the langs. into which its been translated - or at least given an indication of the number of languages. For starters: Spanish (ISBN 8401422825 ) Russian Czech (2001 by with Jarmila Emmerová & Josef Škvorecký) German 07:10, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Accuracy as a vision of the future:

Isn't there a part which mentions 24 hour automatic bank machines?

[edit] Setting

The novel is set in an unspecified city in America, not England. Evidence:

1. The firemen's rule book contains brief histories of the Firemen of America
2. "they say there's lots of old Harvard degrees on the tracks between here and Los Angeles"
3. Faber tells Montag that he is leaving on a bus for St. Louis
4. Montag used to live in Chicago, where he met Mildred.

— Walloon 06:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Accuracy as...

The section on the novel's accuracy at foretelling the future is pretty lame and should be removed unless someone has a burning need to justify the disappearence of front porches. Isopropyl 23:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Completely disagree. The section is entirely appropiate, especially given the genre and age of the original release of the book.

Agree. Bradbury never intended for Fahrenheit 451 to predict the future. That notion totally misses the message of the book. -- uberpenguin @ 2006-07-31 19:37Z

Regarding the porches: what is the basis for this? Is there any statistic showing that "front porches" are less common now than in the 50's? By the 50's, I mean the actual 1950's, not television's depiction of it. I'm taking it out. If someone can find support then they can put it back in.

I just took the whole section out. It was mostly unreferenced opinion, at best, and at worst original research that had no real connection to the book. Isopropyl 17:49, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] books

you have at the end that people put intire books to memory but that is only in the movie, at the end of the book granger says about how people have bits of books, and says that there is enven a town were every one is a part of the same book so that the town is the book Shinigami Josh 11:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)