Fahrenheit 451 and 1984

The frightening thing about George Orwell's 1984 is how extreme it is, but the frightening thing about Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 is how possible it is!

In 1984, the party forcefully took control of the population and forcefully kept it. Orwell apparently had Russia in mind when he wrote the book, but today, North Korea is the only example of such a dystopia. The rest have moved away from communist totalitarianism and I don't know how much longer North Korea will last.
  
In contrast, the people of 451 were not forced into dystopia. The did it to themselves. Over time they gave up literature, critical thinking, and everything else that might cause complicated or unhappy thoughts. To mindlessly occupy themselves they turned towards mass culture, spectator sports, superficial dramas, and thrill seeking. Once they gave up thinking for themselves they allowed themselves to be manipulated by their government. Schools began teaching kids at successively earlier ages to fall in line with everybody else, filling their heads with useless facts to occupy their brains, and promoting sports and thrill seeking to keep them too busy and too tired for original thinking. Anyone who was different was quickly ostracized--killed if necessary. People's minds became so shallow that life as we know it became meaningless, and it was only in rare, undistracted moments, that someone might notice how empty their lives were.

The first time I read 451 it was just an adventure story with some scattered boring parts. It was about a guy trying to escape a corrupt system. It could have been Harrison Ford in The Fugitive or Will Smith in Enemy of the State or any number of Hollywood escape/action/adventure stories.

The second time I read it, however, I noticed the "boring" parts actually contained some interesting commentary, very relevant to today, which was rather prophetic of Ray Bradbury, who wrote it back in 1950.

By the 3rd time I read it, I finally realized I had it all backwards. The "boring" parts were the meaningful and cerebral parts of the real story, and they were occasionally interrupted by action sequences!

In Fahrenheit 451, Ray Bradbury predicted political correctness, a dominating sports culture, our obsession with TV dramas and so-called reality shows, and constantly listening to music through ear-buds. He predicted these things will occupy our minds with superficial thoughts and move us, as a population, away from reading and critical thinking. These are very realistic things that are happening today! We're not all the way there yet, but we do seem to be going in that direction. Let's add to these our recent trends of federalizing education, promoting test scores over substance, and so-called social media, viral videos, and video games, which are all done in isolation without real interpersonal contact.

The book also includes an interesting interview at the end where Bradbury says he believes we're not really headed into dystopia ourselves, which is reassuring--but only as long as our schools continue to teach reading and writing at an early age. As long as people can read and write, they can think for themselves, and we're safe from Fahrenheit 451.

But what if some day we do let this happen? We'll enter a new Dark Age, and some day, maybe 2 or 3 centuries later, we'll come out of it. And that won't be the first time, will it?

References
Ray Bradbury. Fahrenheit 451. 50th Anniversary Edition. 1953,1979,1981,1982. Del Rey.
George Orwell. 1984: a novel. Signet. 1949,1990.

Did Dracula Save Jonathan Harker?

In Bram Stoker's Dracula (1897), it seems to me that Dracula treated Jonathan Harker special... He did not victimize him, he protected him from harm, and then let him get away. In the end, of course, it was Harker that destroyed him.

Obviously Dracula clung to his undeadness (is there a better word for that?), but as he was destroyed, he showed an expression of relief as his soul was finally freed from the vampire's curse. (Only Mina noticed it) It's kind of like death in general. If the afterlife is so wonderful, why do we cling to the present life?

I doubt Dracula planned ahead so that Harker could be the one to free him. Dracula was a selfish exploiter. While undead he needed Harker to help him buy property in London and learn how to fit in with the English population. Dracula obviously intended to fit in unnoticed and exploit victims from the unsuspecting population.

But why did he let Harker go when he was finished with him? Was he in a hurry to get to London? Was he so selfish that he didn't care to provide for the 3 sister vampires (or brides or whoever they were--the book wasn't clear on that)?

The short story Dracula's Guest was supposedly the deleted first chapter of the book. In it Dracula protects Harker from wolves and other evils after he gets lost in the woods on his way to the castle. Obviously Dracula needed Harker to arrive and bring the deed and teach him about life in England, but again, why did he let Harker get away? Especially after he hit him with a shovel?

I guess Dracula was just in a hurry to get to England and assumed Harker would just die in the wilderness. (Villians always assume that of the heroes, don't they?) But Harker got away, joined Van Helsing, and eventually destroyed Dracula.


Reference:
Bram Stoker. Dracula [Kindle Edition]. 1897.

This Side of Paradise (1920)

This Side of Paradise (1920) was Fitzgerald's first novel. He took the title from "Tiare Tahiti", a romantic poem by Rupert Brooke. I had never heard of him before, but apparently he was an influential poet at the time. He's mentioned several times throughout the book and apparently helped pave the way towards the sexual liberation of the Roaring Twenties.

Note: "Tiare Tahiti" is about a romantic encounter Brooke had with a native girl in Tahiti. He later left her but found fame writing about sexual liberation. As a father of 2 daughters, it seems to me sexual liberation excites women more than men but also leaves them with more of the consequences!

Anyway, This Side of Paradise concerns the initiation of a young Amory Blaine into adulthood. The first 8 chapters cover his growth from a teenager through college. His background is so much like Fitzgerald's that it's obvious the novel is mostly autobiographical--which makes it very real. The things that Amory goes through are much the same as Fitzgerald went through and very much the same as every young man--and many young women, too, I'm sure--go though in their lives. Most people keep those things private, but Fitzgerald found the courage to share them with the world. And that brought him his first commercial success.

So what did Amory go through? Well compared to Fitzgerald's other novels and short stories, This Side of Paradise, except for some of the romantic parts, seems a bit abstract and tends to ramble. Towards the end, you realize this is very lifelike, because all those abstract and rambling sections are what's going on in Amory's mind. He's trying to figure out his status relative to his peers, which groups or clubs to join, who to be seen with, who he can use, etc. Friends, acquaintances, and lovers come and go. Some people turn out to be the opposite he expected. For a while he joins sports just to get the hero worship he sees athletes enjoying.

Amory eventually reaches a conclusion about himself. The final chapter begins with the climax, ironically at the lowest point in his life. He's on a bank of the Hudson River, friendless, moneyless, godless, and wondering what he's doing with his life, when suddenly he starts walking across New Jersey! During that walk he has flashbacks, meets an old friend's father, gathers his thoughts and emotions, and finally realizes he knows himself.

This story is so much like the stories from the 70's, my teen years, where people set off to find themselves. They're basically the same story.

I have to admit, though, as a literal-minded type, I never quite understood what they meant by finding themselves. Thinking about it now, I suppose it's finding a purpose in life, finding a role or a niche wherein one feels they can do something meaningful and constructive. Amory didn't know he was looking for himself in the first 8 chapters, but that's what he found at the end.

This Side of Paradise comes to an abrupt but hopeful end. Frankly that was a relief since so many stories end tragically, but this is an initiation story. They're supposed to end hopeful, right?

References:
F. Scott Fitzgerald. This Side of Paradise. Scribner's. 1920.
Rupert Brooke. "Tiare Tahiti". 1914. "Tiare Tahiti by Rupert Brooke". About.com European History. web 2012.
"Rupert Brooke". Wikipedia. web 2012.