A Tale of Two Cities

Analysis: Literary Device; foreshadowing

Dickens writing is thick with literary devices. One imparticular was used quite well in the beginning of the novel A Tale of Two Cities. Through his metaphorical writing, he foreshadows the French Revolution early on in his book. Many other literary devices were used through this foreshadowing, such as the use of metaphor, descriptive language, and repetition of the word hunger.

The scene where the peasants are lapping up the muddy wine from the streets shows great poverty and desperate measures. The impoverished people are drinking the muddy wine from the streets, almost like animals. This shows how bad things have gotten in France and that the standard of living is so so low that the people have to start acting like animals in order to survive. This scene is then followed by a paragraph with the repetitious word of "Hunger." This paragraph produces even more of an idea of the poverty that is going on, but mainly portrays the people's hunger for wanting more than what they had. They were not yet satisfied with their standard of living and hints to an overthrow.

The author also metaphorically uses red wine and mud to represent the blood that will be shed in this revolution. The red wine is not only trying to satisfy their physical hunger, but also their political hunger for change. The blood stains the streets as well as the peoples hands and faces. This represents the people who are marked to die during this bloody revolution that will occur. Blood will be poured in the streets, and the people will use that actual blood to satisfy their hunger for political change, rather than the muddy wine to satsify their physical hunger.

Passage Analysis: Book One, Chapter 3

"A wonderful fact to reflect upon, that every human creature is constituted to be that profound secret and mystery to every other. A solemn consideration, when I enter a great city by night, that every one of those darkly clustered houses encloses its own secret; that every room in every one of them encloses its own secret; that every eating heart in the hundreds of thousand of breasts there, is, in some of its imaginings, a secret to the heart nearest it!"

This passage contains such a wonderful thought: that everyone has their own secrets. It is again bringing forth a bit of humanity that gets lost when talking about large numbers of people such as a town. The author immediately pulls you into one house, one beating heart, and the secrets that may never surface out of it. But at the same time, he takes us to absolutely every house in that town.

He hits upon an important issue: how some peoples secrets may never surface to the public. They never are fully understandable by outside minds. Everyone's secrets are unique to themselves and cannot be interpreted 100% accurately to an outside mind. This is evident in Manette who begins to have physical problems as a result of his private secrets (almost like a Dimmesdale character.)

Opinion:

This book was alright. I feel like I can appreciate how the author wrote and why he wrote like he did. I do believe I could have enjoyed this book further if I was not so pressed to read. My new understanding is that Dickens is something that one must stumble upon sometime in their life, but must have it happen at their own pace. Using my new understanding, this may not have been the right time in my life to read Dickens, but the reading was still slightly rewarding.

The Importance of Being Earnest

Analysis: Food Fight

In the third act, Gwendolen and Cecily have a very heated fight, all using food and verbal formalities as their choice weapon. Cecily asks if Gwendolen would rather have cake or bread and butter and if she would like sugar in her tea. When Gwendolen suggests she would like no sugar and bread and butter, Cecil responds with absolute evil! She gives Gwendolen a slice of cake and lumps of sugar in her tea!

This absolutely shows the values these women have. Instead of getting angry and expressing that, they still want to maintain the their "proper" and "polite" behavior. The ladies believe they are engaged to the same guy!! It seems that throughout this entire book, things that should be important and skipped over lightly, and things that should not matter at all are held with the highest regard (such as both Jack and Algy wanting to be Earnest.) The food fight clearly demonstrates to the reader just how far formalities and etiquette extend into the lives of these shallow characters. Even in a moment of embarrassment, anger, and frustration (such as realizing you are engaged to the same guy as someone,) both Cecily and Gwendolen put appearances and formalities before the expression of true emotion.




Passage Analysis:
"
Lady Bracknell: ...Now to minor matters. Are your parents living?
Jack: I have lost both my parents.
Lady Bracknell: To lose one parent, Mr. Worthing, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness...
"

The absurdity of this statement does what it is exactly intended to do; make the reader sincerely question the I.Q and mental health of the character Lady Bracknell. She does not have an emotional bone in her body and instead the only values that guide her are the shallow ones of looks and materialism which she holds so dear to her heart. Etiquette guides her rather than morals.

Lady Bracknell makes a comment about something that is supposed to be a tragedy and turns it around to look like Jack's carelessness. This question is part of a series of questions that she uses to evaluate Jack to make her opinion on weather Jack would be a good fit for Gwendolen. She also starts off the inquiry about Jack's parents by saying "now on to more minor matters." This shows how she would not even care if Jack's parents did did not approve of their marriage, and that her opinion is the only true standing one. She also does not even think about the mental toll that may have been placed upon Jack for having no parents. Instead of thinking about if Jack is okay, she merely scolds him instead saying he was "careless." She scolds him because she is obsessed with how things look from the outside, and for Jack not to have any parents is no longer an inquiry, but a value judgment and social judgment that will be put on him in society. Lady Bracknell does not want the best for her daughter, but instead wants to live in the physical picture of how she thinks Gwendolen's world should look like. Her motivation is far from caring about ones character, and more about their pocketbook and famous (family) name of some sort.

Opinion:

I rather liked this play. It was light-hearted and funny which always makes for a great read. It is actually funny and re-enforces my point that I found it light-hearted, when every issue in the book was actually incredibly important to the characters. It all the more characterized their ridiculousness because the reader is not going to go around and tell someone when the proper time to eat muffins is and when it is not appropriate. It was very funny and the author did a fine job developing (or underdeveloping) these shallow and snobby characters.

Some Music For Your Enjoyment: Bullet and a Target by Citizen Cope

Cat's Cradle

Analysis: Hundred Martyrs to Democracy and Science

The Hundred Martyrs to Democracy in the novel Cat's Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut stands for the stupidity of war, and how fragile human life is. Science vs. Religion is a dominant theme in this novel, but the Hundred Martyrs to Democracy is just a reminder to the reader that no matter how much technology advances and aids in the war effort, war and the killing of people will not become anymore humane. An atomic bomb can be dropped and the pilot just has to turn the plane around and not see the lives he destroyed, but it won't be any different than battles fought with foot soldiers in reality.


Human stupidity also plays a big role in this novel. The Hundred Martyrs to Democracy strengthens this theme. Here are one hundred men, sent to fight in a war and before they even get there and make an impact on anything, they died by a German submarine. Another ironic thing about this is that San Lorenzo is a dictatorship and sent a hundred men to fight in the name of "democracy." Even if these men were to have made it to the United States, they were fighting for a cause not of their own and it would not have made an impact in their life at San Lorenzo. Also, San Lorenzo said they declared war on Germany after Pearl Harbor. But San Lorenzo is a comparatively small island who declared war with a huge European power, Germany, and sending one hundred men to fight with the United States would probably have made little to no impact in the war effort even if these men did make their journey to the States. How stupid would these men be to fight for democracy when they are living in a dictatorship that does not even support their cause?


The Hundred Martyrs to Democracy shows the reader very clearly and almost humorously the stupidity of war and the stupidity of mankind. The reader can extend this idea to the modern world, commenting on how war does not solve all problems and how many people die in vain because of it. To the public, it is not an individual being killed in a war but rather a collective group of soldiers. This makes it much less personal. No one in the United States has even heard about this "great sacrifice" and Minton lies to "Papa" when he said every school child grew up knowing the great story of the Hundred Martyrs to Democracy.

The Hundred Martyrs to Democracy is Vonnegut's social commentary of war. He finds it ridiculous that human beings must die all for an ideal "cause." These causes that men and women die and fight for are intangible such as "liberty" and "democracy." What do those things mean anyway? They mean so many things to so many people. By the author over exaggerating the ridiculousness of war by using the Hundred Martyrs to Democracy coming from a dictatorship and fighting for democracy, he helps break down the complexity of war into simple and bias terms for the reader.

Passage Analysis: pg 170 Chapter 114

" 'And I propose to you that if we are to pay our sincere respects to the hundred lost children of San Lorenzo, that we might spend the day despising what killed them; which is to say, the stupidity and viciousness of all mankind.' "

This is a great excerpt from the speech Minton made in chapter 114. His speech was given as part of the ceremony for the Hundred Martyrs of Democracy

The way Minton refers to these great Martyrs as "children" helps bring his anti-war idea off quite well. Calling the soldiers children reestablishes to the public that these great martyrs were still human. When the people of San Lorenzo call these soldiers Martyrs, the seem to establish an underlying idea that these men were great heroes and died so honorably for a great cause, and that no one could wish to be honored so extravagantly as these men. Minton's speech brings everyone back to the facts, that these were really people who had their lives stolen from them in war. Calling them "children" makes the reader really be able to feel the innocence that every person contains, whether they are about to go off to war or not. It also adds a sense of background to the people who have died. They are no longer a statistic of one hundred men, but now they are someones child, someones father, someones husband or brother. Minton shows the humanity behind every depressing statistic when he uses the reference of "children,"

Also, when he suggests that they should all spend the day despising what killed these men, he is defining what the true problem is. The problem was not that democracy was in danger or that other countries disagree, the real problem that may be the only problem "worth fighting for (so to speak)" is war itself. Minton is asking them not to hate the reason why the Martyrs died, but to hate the fact that they had to die. This is also a nice compliment to the other themes in the book, one of which is that science and technology has developed incredibly fast and most of it for warfare. If all these new inventions are being created for warfare, why must men even have to go out and fight and die? What technology will take place of the soldier?

In this excerpt of Minton's speech, the words used were chosen very carefully for the sole reason of leaving an impression and feeling upon the reader.


Opinion:
Personally, I really loved this book. Vonnegut made great commentary's on the dangers of being overly committed to science and the dangers of being overly committed to religion. He did this in a humorous and light-hearted way that made the reading fun, but also gave the reader something to think about long after they put the book down. The plot was so bizarre and kept me wondering what was going to happen next. I love how he basically invented his own ridiculous religion which pokes mild fun at many other religions and starts off with "Don't believe a word I tell you, it is all lies." I also like how he ridiculed war and his presentation of it in the book. I think Vonnegut accomplished great writing by first entertaining his reader, and secondly educating them. And who knows? We may not be that far away from inventing ice nine.

A Handmaid's Tale

Analysis: The color red

The color red is very prevalent in Margaret Atwood's novel A Handmaid's Tale. Red is the color that all the Handmaid's must wear. Red is a color that means many things. First of all, it stand for fertility. By wearing the red gown that all Handmaids must wear, they are publicly advertising their job; they cannot get away from it. Their job is to produce children not for themselves, but for their society (more specifically for the Wife they are assigned too.) As well as advertising their job, it also advertises their sin. Gilead is ran with a huge religion factor. They believe it is religious to have the Handmaids, but the Handmaids are technically committing adultery with the Commanders. It is a constant reminder of the sanctioned sin that the government is saying it is okay. In Gilead, people no longer live by the Bible but instead the twisted version that the government feeds them.

Red also stands for sex and sexual pleasure. This is slightly ironic because although the Handmaid's are forced to have sex with the Commanders, there is absolutely no pleasure between anyone at the Ceremony, whether it is the Commander, Offred, or the Wife. Women are no longer free to choose who their sexual partners may be. By wearing a symbol of something that is supposed to bring pleasure and is often tied with love and affection, Offred is only reminded of the dreaded night of the Ceremony that occurs every month.

Offred notices red throughout the book. There are red tulips when she is in Serena Joy's garden. She picked out how the tulip to her looks like a womb. Serena Joy cannot have children so instead she raises and nurtures red tulips, a reminder of her infertility and how there is really no other way that she can contribute to this society, except by standing pretty on her husbands arm.

Although we know that Offred is called Offred because she is "of Fred", I do believe there is a deeper meaning to that name. I believe Atwood choose that name because it can be read many different ways. Personally, I read it as "off-red." This meant that Offred was not fully bought into this cheap society. She had many many thoughts that she never spoke out loud. On the outside, she wore her red and did what she was supposed to do. She was a believer on the outside. But on the inside she hid her true thoughts and opinions on the society, too scared to express them because she knew what the government could do to her. She was not part of the organized resistance, but she definitely did not commit herself to this limiting society and their propaganda.

Passage Analysis: Pg96-97

"I rub the butter over my face, work it into the skin of my hands. There's no longer any hand lotion or face cream, not for us. Such things are considered vanities. We are containers, it's only the insides of our bodies that are important. The outside can become hard and wrinkled, for all they care, like the shell of a nut. This was a decree of the Wives, this absence of hand lotion. They don't want us to look attractive. For them, things are bad enough as it is.

....As long as we do this, butter our skin to keep it soft, we can believe that we will some day get out, that we will be touched again, in love or desire. We have ceremonies of our own, private ones.

The butter is greasy and it will go rancid and I will smell like an old cheese; but at least it's organic, as they used to say.

To such devices have we descended."

This quote tells a lot about the society norms in Gilead. Offred's role in her society is one of shame and disgust to many people around her. The Wives hate the Handmaid's so much that they deprive them of every simple pleasantry such as hand lotion. Being a Handmaid means that you are not supposed to look pleasing to other people, because then things could easily extend far past the unemotional relationship the Commanders are supposed to have with the Handmaids. The Handmaids are not meant for pleasure, and to be pleasing to the Commander during the Ceremony would then make it a sin. it is work only.

Not being allowed to use hand lotion also reinforces the fact that the Handmaids are in Gilead for one reason and one reason only: for their womb. It is another degrading gesture to the Handmaids. Their outsides can bee shrivled, so long as the Handmaid's internal organs (specifically her uterus) is intact. Taking care of your looks and being aesthetically pleasing to other people can fill someone up with joy and confidence. But because the Handmaid's really cannot keep up their outside look, it mentally takes them down another level, thinking that they are not as good as the Wives and other women.

Not taking care of their appearance also has another motive in Gilead. This way, the Handmaids cannot be alluring to other men. Women no longer can have any control or power over men, and making sure their appearances are not kept up makes it easier for men to "resist" and to stay in power. This can be seen in the beginning of the book when Offred walks pass the guard and moves her hips a little more dramatically. It pleases her knowing that maybe that made the guard attracted to her a little. Because everything pleasing about women has basically been stripped away and the Handmaids cannot exert their femininity in public (because they are required to wear such long gowns and bonnets) it makes it easier for the men to stay in power and control the women even more since the womens' self confidence and influence has decreased.


Offred wants to keep her skin soft and smooth so she can hope for a life outside of this one, so she can still keep a bit of her old self and pray that life can go back to normal. Such unimportant things like soft skin is the only bit of hope Offred can hang on to. Mentioning the use of something so domestic as "butter" shows the desperation this situation has come to. Using butter on her skin is a meaningless attempt to break the rules of Gilead and hopefully one day make society normal again.

Opinion:

I really liked this book. It was hard to get through the heavy and lengthy writing at some times, but I realize that it was that writing that made novel become so much more real and believable. The narrator described every single little event that happened to her and every thought that popped into her head. This makes Offred's character even more real, showing how much time she had on her hands and driving home the fact that she was only important and needed once a month, when the Ceremony occurred. I really did like the book. The author did a great job making this society believable. I usually have a hard time believing these made-up societies, but Gilead is now a solid place in my mind and I know the frightening and horrible tales of Offred will stay with me.

This book also brought up great and controversial issues. It made you stop and think how far you would let the government go and take over your personal rights before others around you would step up and fight back. The way people were taken over so quickly is a frightening thought, and the twisted nature of religion that the government used was down right disgusting. Although it may be more difficult for a government like that to take over the United States, it could still happen or is happening in many other parts of the world.

Anthem

Symbol Analysis: Underground vs. Above ground

In the novella, Anthem, by Ayn Rand, there is a deep contrast between Equality when he is above the ground and going through the motions of his society versus when Equality goes underground in the tunnel he found with International. Above ground, Equality is just another shapeless human form. He is not allowed to be unique or have emotions anything greater than apathetic. Above ground he outwardly conforms to society, even though he has doubt and questions that he dares not speak to others. The most productive he is above ground is when he is sweeping the streets of the town.

Underground the true nature of Equality's personality is exploited. His ideas blossom when he goes underground at night, and he breaks many many rules in this process. He goes underground alone which is the first step he takes towards listening to his questions and breaking out of the conformity that lies above the surface. He also begins to write and organize his thinking which undoubtedly brings more and more questions to him. Underground, Equality can be the scientist he always wanted to be, and escape from the degrading life as a street sweeper. (Although it is not supposed to be degrading as everyone is supposed to be equal in their society. It obviously does not work, but the citizens of this town just pretend it does because they are too scared to admit they are breaking the law.) The true potential of Equality explodes underground. He becomes very literate and thoughtful. He also invents the light bulb (which revolutionized our world). The underground represents escape from conformity and the inner human conscience which wants to be expressed. The true human self can be explored and expressed when it is removed from outside influences and society norms. It is only underground when there is no telling Equality what is right and what is wrong that he forgets the restrictions that are held on him above ground. It is here where artificial influences are shed, and Equality starts evolving into an individual. He realizes the freedom and power of the individual underground.

Passage Analysis:

"Your eyes are as a flame, but our brothers have neither hope nor fire. Your mouth is cut of granite, but our brothers are soft and humble. your head is high, but our brothers cringes. You walk, but our brothers crawl. We wish to be damned with you, rather than blessed with all our brothers. Do as you please with us, but do not send us away from you." (82-3)

This passage means many things. First, it tells us how Equality has changed while he was becoming himself in the tunnel. There is something physically different about him that The Golden One cannot yet put her finger on, but she must see the spark in his eyes while all the other men in society are still not yet willing to think for themselves and go out beyond the limitations of "right." It also shows us how The Golden One is searching for her own individualism. She inwardly questioned society so much that when she found out Equality left, she ran out of the city to find him. For her, being with Equality is like being underground. She can discover who she is around him and test the boundary's of right and wrong. Her thirst for individualism is so important to her that she rather be damned and shunned from the city, than to be "blessed" in being only a part in a huge group. She is ready and willing to be cursed in order to explore the power of self.

Opinion:

I really enjoyed this book. The setting of a "Utopian society" always intrigues me. The theme of the preservation of the individual was a very interesting concept to consider. What if the power of "I" was taken away from us? I never gave much thought to it before I read Anthem. The book is a reminder to us that not everyone has the luxury's and freedoms that we do. In some communist society's people actually do have to sacrifice their individuality in order to appease the group. I really liked how the writing gave a commentary on an issue that concerns parts of the world today.

But the thing I liked most about the book was definitely the language used. Each word has to be so carefully chosen to bring the reader into this society. For example, all the characters say "we" or "they" when they are only talking about "I" or "she/he". I find that very clever, adding to the sense that they are still physically attached to this larger group. It also gave way to a very climatic part of the book when Equality discovers the word "I". It is a word that most people don't even think twice about saying, especially living in America. When I was reading the book I also felt the darkness and dampness of the city, and the brightness of the forest. She did a great job adding such specific elements to each place the reader visited.

I really enjoyed this book and would recommend it to many people to read.

Fahrenheit 451

Symbol: Vampirism in Fahrenheit 451

I think Montag was a vampire to many people, and at the same time still a victim of it. There were many people that contributed to Montag's "awakening." Clarisse is one example. In the book they said she got hit by a car, but to me that seems too random. With all the dramatic government conspiracy going on in this book I took it like one of the government people took her out and made it look like an accident. Beatty said himself that they had their eye on her and knew she was up to trouble. In a way, her conversing with Montag everyday may have led to her death if the government was watching and listening to her, but at the same time it was the first thing that started to get Montag to think about the world around him and ask why.(Far-fetched about the government killing Clarisse? Yes, well so was the chase at the end of the book and the government killing a random man off the streets for the pure midnight entertainment of the city. Hey, it could happen.)In another way I think Montag was a victim to vampirism. Mildred seemed to suck the life out of Montag (no pun intended ;)) In the beginning scene when they are pumping her stomach after the sleeping pills, the author describes the whole scene. I just pictured Montag starring blankly at the scene before him. I did not feel like he could express and maybe even feel any real emotion. It was not sad nor happy, but if feelings could be heard his was very monotone. She always seemed to bring him down too. The world revolved around her. A part that made me really angry at her was in the beginning when Montag comes home from work and she complains about not having a fourth "wall." It was like half his pay to buy the other walls and it is not like she goes to work everyday to help pay for them. Montag just bought a third one for her and she didn't even appreciate it. I am sure anyone like Mildred would suck your happiness out of you. Montag continually tries to please her but he is just helplessly trying to fill a bottomless pit. The Montag and Milderd relationship was an obvious example of a dysfunctional relationship. They were not helping each other at all and it seemed like they didn't even like each other. I mean, no one could remember where they first met! Montag finally remembers at the end of the book, but that is only when he sees the city blow up and realizes she is dead. It is like at that moment her negative grip on Montag that she has had throughout the whole book releases and he is able to remember.And I am sure Montag was also a victim to Beatty. He kept trying to brainwash him and convince him what he was doing as a fireman was right. It drove Montag so mad that he finally turned the flame thrower on him.


Passage Analysis:

"Do you know why books such as this are so important? Because they have quality. And what does the word quality mean? To me it means texture. This book has pores. It has features. This book can go under the microscope. You'd find life under the glass, streaming past in infinite profusion. The more pores, the more truthfully recorded details of life per square inch you can get on a sheet of paper, the more 'literary' you are. That's my definition, anyway. Telling details. Fresh detail. 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." (pg 83)

This is a beautiful passage spoken by Faber on page 83. He is talking about the human qualities that books contain. When he speaks of the books having "pores" he adds life-like qualities to the books, almost like a leaf breathing in and breathing out literature. These life like qualities extend way past the actual physicality of pages, cover, binding, etc. Books and literature hold living ideas that usually are timeless and can relate to every generation. The author may be long dead, but his ideas can still live on, they can still breathe through the writing and and ideas presented in the book and pass on through every generation. And like Faber says, good writing is about life and living, the one thing that every human being no matter what era or age they are found in will be faced with.


This passage is vital to the meaning of the work as a whole because the society that Montag is now living in basically discourages true living. True living involves thinking, emotions, and action. Now that books have been removed from his society, the people are no longer concerned with politic affairs, their own rights to freedom, and other important matters. Their standard of living has greatly dropped, as all they need to be happy and content is food, air, and their beloved "walls". When Faber speaks in this passage, he is commenting not only on his love of books, but his love of living and thinking and feeling. He is pointing out to Montag what is wrong with the society they are living in. It has become a society not only without books, but without knowledge, without mental stimulation, without concern for the bigger picture.




Opinion:

Well, I truly enjoyed the topic and overall theme of the book. It was a great idea to invent a world where books were illegal and society believed they should be burned. It reminded me of many events throughout history where the burning of books occurred such as World War II with the Nazi's and countless other times with Egyptian, Christian, Roman, Chinese, and many other texts. (In fact, it seems like almost every culture and/or religion has had a major burning of their texts at one point in time.) From an eleventh grade student's point of view, I really cannot believe how much ancient knowledge we have lost by the burning of texts. (and I say ancient because more modern texts have been copied many times over or are stored on a back-up hard drive of some sort.) You cannot help but wonder what secrets were recorded down and lost for the rest of time. (I mean, if the Egyptian architects could build massive pyramids, what else could they do and how much about the world did they know about in their time?) The idea of censorship and burning books was a great idea, and I loved the modern spin Ray Bradbury put on it. They were not only burning religious or controversial texts, but they were burning everything! Shakespeare, Emerson, Dickinson, Poe! Everything! Fiction, Nonfiction, Poetry, Documentary, Essay! Everything was fed to the flames!
Now having said how much I loved the theme and topic, I must say, it was very hard for me to jump into this novel. I did not like the reason why they burned books. Because it made people feel stupid? Come on, for such a great idea I feel like the author fell short on explanation. Because books made people feel stupid and inferior did not satisfy my question of why. People will feel stupid and inferior without the aid of books. What about the people who built the skyscrapers in the city? Or the airplane jets that fly overhead? Wouldn't the average citizen feel stupid and inferior to the architects and engineers and mechanics that built the world around them? Even if they didn't learn their trade from a book, they had knowledge that would put them a step above the average citizen. And the other reason: books gave people too much to think about and worry about. I don't know, it didn't fly too well over me. I think it was a stupid reason for such a high crime.
And thats the other thing I didn't like about it. Having books was such a high crime. I mean put it into perspective in our day: Speeding is a crime but if someone sees you going seven over I doubt they are going to call the local police force on you. Or if your car is over-due for inspection, no SWAT team is going to raid your car. Or if you don't have your seatbelt on, you might get a ticket and pulled over by a cop, but they are not going to blow up your car because your seatbelt wasn't on. But whoa, have one book under your bed and your whole house goes up in flames! Why did they burn the whole house instead of just taking the books out and burning them elsewhere? And won't the firemen be out of jobs once all the books in the world are gone? It is not like books are getting reprinted in mass amounts of copies because they are so illegal. How could you even have a job if 97% of society hates books or is afraid of them and you only have that 3% that you are relying on for your salary to have books so you can go and burn their house down. The way the government brainwashes its citizens it is a wonder that people are not just turning their books in (and I am sure that is what happened when they first but their ban on books.)
I mean overall, it was an alright book. The theme was interesting and I liked that, but the plot itself I felt like it was too far fetched and I was not satisfied with the reasoning the author offered.