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.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Thursday, October 16, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
