This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Fahrenheit 451 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2 |
Fahrenheit 451 was nominated as a Language and literature good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (December 9, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Clarisse is "almost 17" at the beginning of the novel. So, she is "16" or "almost 17", not "17". -
SummerPhD (
talk)
04:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
While she does say that, later in the novel she says that she'll be seventeen in a month, I think. I remember her saying she isn't seventeen yet, just not what page it is on. Umbreon00 ( talk) 17:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
In my edition, she says she is "17 and crazy" on page 21, but corrects herself to say that she is 17 "next month" on page 23. 71.193.22.55 ( talk) 05:14, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
The anon is correct. I shall quote it: "Yes." He thought about it. "Yes, I have. God knows why. You're peculiar, you're aggravating, yet you're so easy to forgive. You say you're seventeen?"
"Well--Next month."
"How odd. How strange. And my wife is thirty and yet you seem so much older at times I can't get over it."
Page 23, lines 7, 8, and 9. Umbreon00 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
I can independently confirm that she is 16. An anonymous user changed it back even after this discussion. After concluding my post here, I will see what clarifications I can make in the article to be accurate. I have the book on a Kindle and as authority and validity for my case, I will be uploading pictures. First, I have searched the book for "sixteen". I found one entry. It is unrelated. I am unsure how to upload the image, if somebody would like it, they could help me. I then searched the book for "seventeen". This yielded three results. One of these is here saying she is a month shy of seventeen. This is later in the story. I also have the image for this one. I will most likely edit the page to accomodate a chronologically natural understanding of the book. This will be the most accurate and practical solution. It will also prevent this from becoming an issue in the future as it provides clarifying information. Michael Harrington 03:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DefensorOfApollo ( talk • contribs)
Why is the first line linking the firemen in this book to real life firemen. They serve different purposes and are not equivocal, I don't think they should be linked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DefensorOfApollo ( talk • contribs) 03:21, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
The subject of Fahrenheit 451 is controversial. On one hand, it is a discussion of government control and censorship. On the other hand, it is a social critique, a warning of what might happen if people are apathetic and don't protect their rights. For anyone interested in what I have to say, you should read pages 53-62 in the book. While Bradbury discusses both censorship and natural social pressures as explanations for the emergence of a dystopian society in the book, my personal opinion is that he focused much more on social pressures, not censorship. It was "technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure" that "carried the trick", not the government. Yes, Wikipedia articles should be impartial, so my personal opinions and interpretations are not to be taken too seriously. However, I think the edits on March 1 by Thiesen should be examined carefully and then largely undone. They have removed meaningful content from the article and skewed the interpretation of the text. These edits certainly are not impartial. They have almost entirely removed discussion of an important interpretation of the text which has been supported in several peer reviewed scholarly articles (see "What 'Carried the Trick'? Mass Exploitation and the Decline of Thought in Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451." by Rafeeq McGiveron in Extrapolation 37.3) and by the author himself. 71.227.252.76 ( talk) 01:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Recent edits have put the social themes of the book back to the fore-front. I think it helps resolve your valid concerns. Jason Quinn ( talk) 03:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Changed an instance of "burned down" to "burned out." Houses in Fahrenheit 451 are fireproof, and the firemen only burn the contents of the house - books, furniture... people.
Look, I've read the book, and I'm pretty sure that it's not about government censorship. It's just another of those 'TV makes you stupid' stories. You saw a lot of them on the twilight zone too, oddly. Honestly it felt like a complaint about a society that was addicted to TV and unimportant factoids, not a complaint about a government that removed dissenting ideas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.152.102.134 ( talk) 19:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see that this article has 230 watchers. I don't know how many of those are active editors though. This article is in pretty poor shape. The writing is sub-par and the text often doesn't even match up to the outline structure. It will largely have to be re-written. It's pretty unfortunate that after almost 4000 edits by 2000 distinct users, we still have such a shoddy article. Sort of shows that piece-meal development doesn't always work.
I am having trouble finding peer-reviewed scholarly articles that analyze Fahrenheit 451. Google searches largely turn up stuff just related to Bradbury himself or essays written by college students. I am not familiar with many English Lit journals. Heck, I don't even know what the best way to search for Eng Lit articles is. Perhaps we can leverage the knowledge of the page watchers to at least develop a list of articles directly related to the novel that would be good to perhaps use as references? Please add any below that you can find or are aware of?
If you really have an interest in the novel, now would be a good time to reinvigorate it. Cheers, Jason Quinn ( talk) 15:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
This article is currently listed in Category:24th century in fiction. I do not recall the time frame of the novel ever being pinned down. My copy says that "we've won two atomic wars since 1990", so it must be set after 1990. Other than that, it mentioned several times that about half a century has elapsed since books were banned. It's possible that pieces of information are given that can narrow down the century to the 24th but I do not see them. This category will have to be removed without a convincing argument to sustain it, perhaps replaced with the more ambiguous Category:Works about the future. Jason Quinn ( talk) 20:01, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I am "unresolving" this topic because new evidence has come to light. First, here are some links to archived discussions that touch on this: 21st century or 24th century?, time?, Notes on setting and other issues. The last discussion is rather interesting because it points out a quote from the novel that supports the 24th century figure. Captain Beaty during his monologue says, "Out of the nursery into the college and back to the nursery; there's your intellectual pattern for the past five centuries or more." It's unclear when he is anchoring the beginning of this pattern. I would agree based on the text that the most likely explaination is the pattern is presumed to start in the 20th century. Yet Beatty may also be using the Civil War or the 19th century or the Fireman's "rule-book" official timeline (mentioned by Beatty but undetailed in the novel). Also Beatty says "five centuries or more", which is not precise enough to pin it down to the 24th century. I think the best idea is to leave the article text saying set in an unspecified future with a footnote giving Beatty's "five century or more" quote. Jason Quinn ( talk) 02:25, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
One of the sections I'm least happy about in the article is the section on themes, which seems largely based on just p.59 of Reid's Ray Bradbury: A Critical Companion. I'm not quite sure how it should be written but I think gathering different themes suggested by various writers is a good start. You may suggest or add potential themes to the list I've started below. Jason Quinn ( talk) 00:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Agree and there is an appearance of bias in the writing.
It notes that he wrote it in the "McCarthy Era" and concludes as fact "he was concerned about censorship"
The next paragraph showing an opposing opinion it states, "Instead he usually claimed that the real messages..." using the word "claimed" appears to intentionally suggest that Bradbury's interpretation of his book are incorrect or that he is not being honest. This does not appear to be unbiased. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
50.156.188.216 (
talk)
05:42, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
"claims" merely gives his claim versus what others have taken from it. An author's claims on what a book is "about" may differ from what the generality of readers may gather, without the author being dishonest or incorrect about what is in the end an opinion, not an objective fact. 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:4CA:813C:8550:16FE ( talk) 19:32, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
in this interview in LA Weekly from 2007 Bradbury discusses "Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship. Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy"
and "Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature."
a previous poster noted an earlier interview to suggest that Bradbury may be in error or changed his mind later. Since this is posted, it must be noted this fact from the article, "As early as 1951, Bradbury presaged his fears about TV, in a letter about the dangers of radio, written to fantasy and science-fiction writer Richard Matheson." you can read the quote in the link
The Author states that Bradbury is clear on his point, "But one of L.A.’s best-known residents wants it understood that when he wrote it he was far more concerned with the dulling effects of TV on people than he was on the silencing effect of a heavy-handed government."
Should these facts and this reference be added to the topic? The documented opinions of the author on his own work may be quite relevant.
http://www.laweekly.com/2007-05-31/news/ray-bradbury-fahrenheit-451-misinterpreted/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.156.188.216 ( talk) 05:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC) 50.156.188.216 ( talk) 06:07, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
References
The impression I have is that the censorship angle was somewhat ginned up by his publisher when the book came out as a means of providing topical appeal and thereby increasing sales (ironically enough.) Also think his censorship concerns predated the McCarthyism era (strictly, from Feb. 1950) The Hollywood Ten were right in his bailiwick, afetr all. Bradbury spoke and wrote against McCarthy by name in 1952-53. 68.178.50.46 ( talk) 20:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
According to the Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album article, one of the audiobooks for Fahrenheit 451 was nominated for a Grammy. The article gives no source and I haven't been able to confirm this. I have confirmed (using the Grammy website) that the Grammy winner is correct but I haven't seen a listing of its competition that years. (There's also some disparity in how the Grammy website and Wikipedia are calling the Awards of that year. The Grammy website is listing those Awards as for 1976, while the Wikipedia article is calling them 1977.) Jason Quinn ( talk) 18:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying to verify the year of the computer game. The current article says 1986, which I think is wrong. I have easily found many websites that suggest the game was released in 1984 and also the reviews given in the Fahrenheit 451 (video game) article were published in 1985, which makes 1986 sort of absurd. Still, I haven't found any reviews in sources I think easily pass WP:RS. Jason Quinn ( talk) 05:16, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
The date is just a minor point, a more important addition that needs to be put in is that the game does say Fahrenheit 451, but it is loosely based on Fahrenheit 451, being placed after the events of the book. (BTW It is more based on the book than the film as those cybernetic dogs make an appearance in the game. I can't remember much more about the game, as it has been quite a while since I played it. The game is now probably considered as Abandonware. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.8.148.46 ( talk) 23:37, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
One missing section so far is an analysis section where the writing style itself is elaborated. The summary at Spark Notes gives an outline of what such a section might look like. Things to include would be the narration style (third-person limited omniscinet), identification of the protagonist (Montag) and antagonist (Captain Beatty and society), the climax, the falling action, tense, foreshadowing, symbolism, and so forth. The general kind of stuff covered by high school teachers. Jason Quinn ( talk) 17:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
A new issue has come to my attention regarding the time setting of the novel. Those "cubbyhole editors" appear to have been tweaking the year mentioned for the two atomic years from its original value of 1960. Various versions have subsequently also used 1990 and 2022. This link to the Ray Bradbury Message Board gives a fairly complete listing of the values used by the various publications. I don't yet know if these changes were made with Bradbury's approval or not. It seems that another footnote may be required over the time setting. Jason Quinn ( talk) 20:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Cirt ( talk · contribs) 04:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
I will review this article. — Cirt ( talk) 04:45, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Prose is indeed clear and concise, the lede is a tad bit skimpy and per WP:LEAD could be expanded a bit more, but it's good enough for GA and that could be something to address in a subsequent peer review afterwards. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | See above about lead section, and also words to watch. I did some copyediting but words like "though", "also", "althought", "but", "therefore", and "however", would be something to watch out for during copyediting and remove if at all possible. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | See below about citation-needed-tags. | |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | I've added a bunch of cites-needed-tags. These will need to be addressed before the review can move on. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | See above about cite-needed tags. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Okay here, covers major aspects appropriately. I'd recommend going forwards expanding more about Censorship and Adaptation sects. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Yes, but see above about actually expanding subsects, particularly the part about history of Censorship please. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No problems here, NPOV presentation throughout. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | If we exclude simple vandalism by IPs, stable history, just keep an eye on this in the future. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | File:Hollywood10.jpg = missing fair use rationale for use on this article page. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | See above about image usage missing fair-use rationale for this page. Also, what about an image of author Ray Bradbury? | |
7. Overall assessment. | GA on Hold for now. Please address above issues and post, below, with an update. — Cirt ( talk) 18:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC) |
GA on Hold for now. Please address above issues and post, below, with an update. — Cirt ( talk) 18:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Just dropping in ... I see a few other issues :
In return, I'll see if I can cite some of the citation neededs, but I can't promise anything. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:39, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Okay, totally fine, no problems. Keep us posted here, — Cirt ( talk) 02:41, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Been over a month since GA Hold, so closing this one for now. Feel free to let me know if you want to renominate for a 2nd GA Review at a later point in time, and if I've got a chance I'll take another look. Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 20:26, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
As it stands, the article says that the novel won a Gold Award from the California Commonwealth Club, but the Club's list on their website says it won Silver. The California Book Awards Winners 1931 - 2012 128.61.81.23 ( talk) 06:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Our records from The Commonwealth of California’s 23rd Annual California Book Awards, show Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, as the 1953 Gold Medal winner. We have in hand the actual book submitted, with the original Gold Medal sticker still on it, and it is also recorded on our official listings kept through the years. Our 1953 Silver Medal went to The High and the Mighty by Ernest K. Gann.
This is just a minor thing -- in the sentence "Montag leaves the river in the countryside, where he meets the exiled drifters, lead by a man named Granger" "lead" should be spelled "led." Kimdulina ( talk) 21:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
I've never done this before, so I'm quite sure I'm doing it wrong, but there's a minor grammatical error in the fourth sentence under "The Sieve and the Sand." It should read " Montag laments Mildred's suicide attempt, the woman who burned herself, and the constant din of bombers flying over their house taking part in a looming war NEITHER he, nor anybody else, knows much about." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.34.67.232 ( talk • contribs) 07:14, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add link to Wikipedia page for "Te Pedestrian" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pedestrian 2.236.243.39 ( talk) 22:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Bradbury's anecdote about encountering a dazed woman with a "cigarette-package-sized radio" and "a dainty cone plugged into her right ear" dates not from "the late 1950s" but from the May 2,1953 issue of The Nation. This is what happens when you extrapolate back from a secondary source for your quote after deciding in advance the sequence of events that best fits your thesis. It should also be noted that since transistor radios did not come on the market until almost two years later it is most likely that what, if anything, Bradbury witnessed on that occassion was a woman using an early transistor hearing aid (on the market by 1952) and meanwhile being assisted by a doting husband. 68.178.50.46 ( talk) 00:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
The article Bradbury wrote for The Nation was not a story but a nonfiction piece setting forth his views on the importance of science fiction. It was a very interesting moment when writers such as Bradbury, Vonnegut and Heinlein were breaking into the mainstream market, placing SF stories into slick publications such as The Saturday Evening Post and even having their stories adapted for radio. They were perceived as politically liberal and pioneers of a new "literary" science fiction, with Bradbury as their "dean". Bradbury had written an open letter to Republicans in the same publication (late November 1952, also as an ad in Variety ) after they took back the White House after 20 years, warning them not to continue McCarthyite smearing and red-baiting of Democrats in general. Of course, the red-baiting not only became institutionalised but the spread of television brought unprecedented changes to the political system and destroyed the short story market altogether within a decade or so. A couple of additional points of interest about the 1953 article: 1.It includes a box where Heinlein, Vonnegut and some editors in the field recommend titles (Heinlein plugs Vonnegut's novel, which tanked anyway, and Vonnegut plugs Heinlein and Bradbury. Hilarious.) 2.Legendary art critic Bernard Berenson reads it and initiates an unlikely friendship with Bradbury that lasts until his death in 1959. Now here's the problem with the argument in "Themes": Bradbury did not tend "to dismiss censorship as a chief motivating factor for writing the story" "as time went by". The anecdote about the lady in Beverly Hills supposedly hynotized by a hand-sized radio must refer to a date at least a month prior to May 1953 and therefore predates the 1956 interview in which he gives the "threat of book burning" as the chief motivating factor. The quote from Amis (1960) as given is clearly a modified version of the anecdote published in the then well-known 1953 article. Bradbury may indeed have been initially motivated by a perceived threat of bookburning but the sources provided do not support that interpretation once the earlier published version of the anecdote is taken into account. And if you want to insist on using secondary sources only, you'll have to quote Amis saying Bradbury said it after 1956 (which in fact he may have-the excerpt as printed differs from the 1953 version in such details as whether he "foretold" the " cigarette-package-sized radio" in Fahrenheit 451 orThe Fireman and whether the incident occurred a month or several weeks earlier). If someone has access to the Amis book they can check to see if the quote is sourced, otherwise what is presented on the F451 page is probably a paraphrase, a story that Bradbury recounted in various forms beginning in 1953 or earlier, or both. The published record we have so far suggests that he expressed concern about mass media first and "as time went by" about bookburning.
In fact, both themes appear The Fireman in Feb.1951. Both themes were clearly on Bradbury's mind for several years and both demonstrate a concern with threats to the habit of reading, which was not just our priceless cultural heritage but, not incidentally, the source of Bradbury's livelihood.
As to my perceived hostility and unpleasantness, I can only assure you that I am quite the pleasant entity. I am always willing to help a panhandler with a good story and haven't a shred of hostility towards those who can express themselves coherently in writing. As for Bradbury, he wrote well sometimes but I'm afraid he was a victim of his own success, his own sentimentality, and his own rather limited sense of what technology can do for instead of to us. Really wanted to stay a child in Illinois dreaming of rocket ships and never learning how to drive.
And the dear editors? I wish them all the best as they toil away bringing the sum of human knowledge to all of mankind (and any girls who happen to be interested.) My hat is off to 'em. Of course they're doing their best. Of course they're human. Of course they're fallible. And that's exactly why I'm here. 68.178.50.46 ( talk) 04:37, 23 March 2015 (UTC) Took the time to consultNew Maps of Hell(1960). There is absolutely nothing in the text that dates the "quotation" to "the late 1950s". This is wholly the conclusion of the Wikipedia editor. It can only be dated to sometime in the period 1953-1960. The Bradbury "quote" appears on p.112 in an unnumbered footnote. As I pointed out above, the most economical explanation of this footnote is that it is a paraphrase of a part of the 1953 article in "The Nation" but with "Fahrenheit 451" substituted for "The Fireman" and several minor alterations and compressions. I can supply the 1953 version of the anecdote in full if anyone is interested. 68.178.50.46 ( talk) 20:07, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't think "rewording" the subsection would help all that much. One problem is that Bradbury made conflicting statements about his motivation for writing these stories over the decades. This is not unusual. One approach might be to make note of this fact and note a couple of his statements, sourced, without going into a lot of detail then quote secondary sources to indicate that both themes are present, and that they are related...... You could probably make a good argument that the primary theme is indeed the effects of mass media but then the question arises of why he titled and marketed them as being about bookburning...I hope you found that guy in Indiana who's doing academic work on Bradbury. Honestly, I don't see that these stories have either the inherent complexity or literary standing to merit a lot of critical analysis (as opposed to their importance as cultural documents.) I don't even know if F451 has the structure of a novel.. Compare Nabokov's output during Bradbury's working life and the level and sheer volume of critical attention each currently receives and perhaps you'll see why I'm sceptical. Or of course you can just make personal remarks about my being "unpleasant" and "hostile" and simply dismiss what I have to say instead of engaging with it. 68.178.50.46 ( talk) 04:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
In my opinion I believe that the theatrical film Equilibrium should be listed as a partial adaptation to Fahrenheit 451, the movie follows exactly the same theme with the exception that all extracurricular materials are burned rather than just books. The film (to me) is a modernized version of the exact same story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:245:CD01:51FA:D1E6:507F:7A96:556B ( talk) 17:19, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
http://geektimes.ru/post/252682/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.132.181.213 ( talk) 10:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Paragraph three opens ... In 1954, Dandelion Wine won the
Should open with ... In 1954, Fahrenheit 451 won the TobiasBray ( talk) 12:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
Not sure where to put this, so I request someone else make mention of it. The book is seen from a first-person perspective by a soldier with a helmet cam. He sees a student in a classroom with the book and confiscates it just before the soldier and other soldiers arrest a teacher with brutal tactics because she was suspected of unknown and undisclosed activities. This takes place in the new TV series "Colony" on USA channel in season 1 episode 4 during the opening scene. The series is about a near-future alien occupation that uses the government to oppress the people...it's kind of a dystopian story and the book placement in this scene is probably an homage to the story in Fahrenheit 451 (I've not read it, but I was curious about it) which I think may have influenced the creativity behind Colony. 74.4.178.28 ( talk) 21:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Imperial measurements are outmoded, so it is prob. high time that this classic was converted to Celsius. It would thus keep up with the times, and Fahrenheit 541 (sic) would be converted to kindling. Myles325a ( talk) 02:17, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
One edition of the book was titled 233 Celsius, against bradbury's wishes. He wanted it to be fahrenheit. An Inhumane person ( talk) 19:28, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Does it matter how one says the number when referring to the book? It could be said as "four hundred fifty-one" or "four-fifty-one" or "four-five-one." Is there a consensus? How did Bradbury say the number when talking about the book? Did he or anyone else care how it was said, or is it irrelevant? Richard K. Carson ( talk) 06:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
in most editions the book has 158 pages, please change page cout 24.37.33.74 ( talk) 15:15, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Worked at Kingsport Press 34 years. Page count between different editions will depend on pointsize and font of the text; plus the problem of the Bal-Hi edition cleaned up for school libraries. -- Naaman Brown ( talk) 19:44, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
I don't know that the see also section is relevant in this article. Other than the names of the other articles having some relation to the title of the book, they don't seem related to the book itself. ÞórrÓðinnTýr Eh? 15:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add reference to 2010 audiobook edition from Amazon https://www.amazon.com/Fahrenheit-451/dp/B00412NH3K/ref=sr_1_1_twi_audd_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1468424045&sr=8-1&keywords=fahrenheit+451
and the new one narrated by Tim Robbins edit by Audible (also an Amazon company) http://www.audible.com/pd/Classics/Fahrenheit-451-Audiobook/B00M4PXF6K/ref=a_search_c4_1_2_srImg?qid=1468424132&sr=1-2
89.154.253.185 ( talk) 15:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Below is a write-up of a "Production" section for a potential film article since the page history that has this, Fahrenheit 451 (2009 film), will be deleted. Erik ( talk | contrib) ( ping me) 14:24, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
In July 1994, a new film adaptation of Ray Bradbury's novel Fahrenheit 451 began development with the studio Warner Bros. and actor Mel Gibson, who planned to star in the lead role. Scripts were written by Bradbury, Tony Puryear, and Terry Hayes. [1] With the project estimated to be expensive and Gibson believing himself too old to portray the film's protagonist Guy Montag, [2] the actor decided in 1997 to instead direct the film. By 1999, he had planned to begin filming with actor Brad Pitt in the lead role, but Gibson was forced to postpone due to Pitt's inavailability. [1] Actor Tom Cruise was also approached for the lead role, but a deal was never made. [2] According to Gibson, there was difficulty in finding a script that would be appropriate for the film, and that with the advent of computers, the concept of book-burning in a futuristic period may no longer work. [1]
In February 2001, the project was revived as director Frank Darabont entered negotiations with Warner Bros. to rewrite Terry Hayes's script and direct the film. [2] Gibson was confirmed to be involved only as a producer, and Darabont planned to complete the script by the end of 2002. [3] In July 2004, Darabont said that he had completed the script and hoped to begin filming Fahrenheit 451 after completing a script for Mission: Impossible III. [4] Darabont did not begin Fahrenheit 451 immediately, instead going on to direct The Mist. The director said in November 2006 that he would do long-term preparation work for Fahrenheit 451 while filming The Mist and hoped that he would begin filming after The Mist was completed. [5]
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
Ok, so does anyone have a source for that, or any idea of what it is? Because if they don't it should probably be deleted as it seems to be an assumption. Also, I quite heavily doubt it is necessary in the opener, maybe give it its own section? 13:29, 28 October 2016 (UTC) Civlover ( talk)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I suggest removing the "he stated his reason for writing the book in more general terms" as it has no citation, doesn't state the reason, and is not very appropriate for the opener.
Civlover (
talk)
13:32, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, much better Civlover ( talk) 13:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Fahrenheit 451. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:51, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
"They [Marguerite Susan McClure and Ray Bradbury] were married in September of 1947, just a month before Ray's first book, Dark Carnival, was released by Arkham House. On the evening prior to his wedding day, Bradbury stacked up thousands of pages of manuscript, totalling some two million words, and made a giant bonfire of them. ("It was all bad writing, stuff that needed burning, and I've never regretted destroying it.")" -- William F. Nolan, "BRADBURY: Prose Poet in the Age of Space", The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, May 1963, p. 17.
-- Naaman Brown ( talk) 19:51, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Does somebody know when will this be out of copyright? 2001:14BA:8300:0:0:0:0:661A ( talk) 16:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
My (very light) google searching only shows it's mention in this and various audio books. An Inhumane person ( talk) 01:00, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
Article https://time.com/5272968/fahrenheit-451-book-burning-history/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:8109:B00:4776:A06E:7CA6:1C71:7C49 ( talk) 20:45, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
The article currently states that the Montag stole the Bible and the Bible was burned. If I recall, it is never directly stated the book is the Bible. It's only very indirectly implied. Can anyone provide evidence otherwise? Jason Quinn ( talk) 02:30, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
I think I cleared up my own confusion. And I think the article is fine. I will close this issue. For my own reference, there's the most important parts: There's a conversation between Montag and Mildred that goes:
Montag showed her a book. "This is the Old and New Testament, and-"
"Don't start that again!"
"It might be the last copy in this part of the world."
"You've got to hand it back tonight, don't you know? Captain Beatty knows you've got it, doesn't he?"
"I don't think he knows which book I stole. But how do I choose a substitute? Do I turn in Mr. Jefferson? Mr. Thoreau? Which is least valuable? If I pick a substitute and Beatty does know which book I stole, he'll guess we've an entire library here!"
Mildred's mouth twitched. "See what you're doing? You'll ruin us! Who's more important, me or that Bible?" She was beginning to shriek now, sitting there like a wax doll melting in its own heat.
Immediately after this passage comes this paragraph in which Montag imagines a conversation between himself and Captain Beatty:
He could hear Beatty's voice. "Sit down, Montag. Watch. Delicately, like the petals of a flower. Light the first page, light the second page. Each becomes a black butterfly. Beautiful, eh? Light the third page from the second and so on, chainsmoking, chapter by chapter, all the silly things the words mean, all the false promises, all the secondhand notions and time-worn philosophies." There sat Beatty, perspiring gently, the floor littered with swarms of black moths that had died in a single storm Mildred stopped screaming as quickly as she started. Montag was not listening. "There's only one thing to do," he said. "Some time before tonight when I give the book to Beatty, I've got to have a duplicate made."
So, yes, the book depicts the (imagined) burning of the Bible (as a terrible act). But the Bible was never burned. (These things were what the passage of time had twisted in my mind to cause some confusion.)
Then there's an extended discussion between Montag and Faber. In it there's this
Montag's hands picked up the Bible. He saw what his hands had done and he looked surprised.
"Would you like to own this?"
Faber said, "I'd give my right arm."
Montag stood there and waited for the next thing to happen. His hands, by themselves, like two men working together, began to rip the pages from the book. The hands tore the flyleaf and then the first and then the second page.
"Idiot, what're you doing!" Faber sprang up, as if he had been struck. He fell, against Montag. Montag warded him off and let his hands continue. Six more pages fell to the floor. He picked them up and wadded the paper under Faber's gaze.
So the Bible is torn. From later in the same dialogue between Montag and Faber, it appears he left the book with Faber and then says to Faber before he leaves:
"We all do what we do," said Montag. He put the Bible in the old man's hands. "Here. I'll chance turning in a substitute. Tomorrow--"
which suggests he didn't actually give the Bible to Captain Beatty. Then he has several books when he is reading to Mrs. Bowles and Mrs. Phelps. And went he finally goes to Captain Beatty, it ends with
He put his hand to one side, palm up, for a gift. Montag put the book in it. Without even glancing at the title, Beatty tossed the book into the trash-basket and lit a cigarette.
so presumably it was not the Bible that was given to Beatty. (Although since Mildred ratted him out, he probably knew Montag had a Bible. Jason Quinn ( talk) 12:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
There should be some mention of Tod Rundgren ‘s Song “ Fahrenheit 451” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.165.84 ( talk) 20:08, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Celsius 232.78 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 16#Celsius 232.78 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Quick Quokka [talk] 08:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Celsius 233 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 16#Celsius 233 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 19:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 233°C and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 16#233°C until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC 678 19:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
What is "personified" doing in the intro: where books have been personified and outlawed? Chuunen Baka ( talk • contribs) 14:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)