Category: Dystopia

In The Handmaid’s Tale, Margaret Atwood depicts a feminist narrative revolving around a dystopian society where men hold dominion over women. In this society, called the Republic of Gilead, women are limited due to the extremist Christian government’s policies. The ideologies of this dystopian government are depicted through the flashbacks and first person narration of Offred, a Handmaid, whose role is to serve as a “breeder” for Gilead. Within Offred’s flashbacks, she portrays the society prior to the revolution and creation of Gilead, and after. The display of the society before and after is significant in demonstrating the way in which Offred highlights the cultural and political attitudes towards women through the power dynamic embedded in society after the revolution. Despite the lack of extremity, the cultural and political attitudes perceived in The Handmaid’s Tale can be identified in the current political climate and culture of America and should serve as a cautionary tale to prevent further development of gender inequality and patriarchal power structures in society today.

The correlation between language and masculinity is a prevalent notion within The Handmaid’s Tale. The women in the novel are forbidden to read or write so that they are incapable of expressing ideas deemed “unlawful”, or in other words, go against the views of Gilead. In Gilead, reading and writing are perceived as masculine and as a component of a patriarchal system. Or, in other words, writing holds power and only men are allowed to be powerful. Writing and reading are the keys to enlightenment, to freedom, “the pen between [Offred’s] fingers is sensuous, alive almost, [she] can feel the power of the words it contains. Pen is envy” (186). Offred having had the knowledge of reading and writing prior to the revolution causes her to be more conscious to the subjugation of the Republic. The laws the Republic enforce serve to subjugate the women to being not more than bearers of children. The idea of women being able to read and educate themselves scares the government of Gilead, because knowledge is a power that can’t be suppressed. Even the bible is not allowed to be read, instead it is presented through fabricated audio, in which Offred “knew they made that up, she knew it was wrong, and they left things out” (89). The relationship between writing and masculinity portrays writing almost as an artifact within Atwood’s universe. Writing being seen as an artifact signifies the politics of the language and the authority it holds. By acknowledging the power of writing, and the breadth it holds in being used to oppress groups, such as the women in Gilead, further depicts the politicization of writing and how it’s used to control the women’s ideas on society.

Outside of the fictional work, it can be argued that male writers have more representation in literary publications today, in fact, that they are over represented. In media and the narrative world, stories are illustrated to identify with male protagonists, contributing to the “male gaze,” which appeals to the male perspective. Society runs off of the depiction of women as sexual objects, industries thrive off of what appeals to the male viewer. Cognizance of the power structure men hold in conveying information through media that is actively consumed by society can allow for society to incorporate a more inclusive scope that benefits both men and women.

The Republic of Gilead functions off of the willingness of women to oppress other women. The commander’s wife, Serena Joy, serves as a symbol of the loss of power women have after the revolution and yet, while at a loss of power still manages to exploit women around her, such as Offred. Prior to the revolution, Serena publicly advocated for traditional values which supported the Gileadean state, “Time or Newsweek it was, it must have been… Her speeches were about the sanctity of the home, about how women should stay home” (55). The irony of Serena’s values is that she actively spoke out against women having an active role in society while she was doing the opposite. It was with her own free will that she managed to take her own power away, “She has become speechless. She stays in her home, but it doesn’t seem to agree with her. How furious she must be, now that she’s been taken at her word” (56). Serena’s unhappiness almost makes the audience sympathize with her, yet she lacks redeemable qualities. Her frustration with her own situation causes her to take out her anger on Offred instead, reflecting her lack of compassion by her willingness to exploit Offred’s loss of a child to gain her own. Serena perfectly exemplifies the cruelty in which Gileadean society thrives off of, oppressing women.

Examples of women exploiting other women or supporting an institution which takes rights away from them is evident in modern society and in fact, prevalent. Tomi Lahren, notorious for her radical right wing agenda and criticism of liberal politics, spoke out against the Alabama abortion ban, saying it is too restrictive. The irony of Tomi’s values is that the institution she firmly supports is contradictory to that opinion. In addition, Tomi’s support of an institution which goes against women having control over their reproductive health not only disadvantages her, but women as a collective whole. Serena and Tomi display similarities due to their support of a group which exploits them and the women around them. Thus, the willingness of women oppressing women in Gilead is not at all far off from modern day, in fact it’s happening.

The objectification of women appears on a grand scale within the Republic of Gilead, yet these transgressions are also evident in America today. The infatuation with childbearing is central to the functioning of the Republic of Gilead. The concept of being pious and submissive is engraved in the Gileadean women, the women are seen as vessels for childbirth and they don’t recognize the fault in that. To them and to the government, their bodies are not their own, their sole purpose in society is to conceive and it’s reminded to them every morning, “Give me children, or else I die. Am I in God’s stead, who hath withheld from thee the fruit of the womb? Behold my maid Bilhah. She shall bear fruit upon my knees, that I may also have children by her” (88). Mantras such as this, the longing for pregnancy, and the birthing ceremony are all instruments used by the Gileadean government to oppress women, to force them to submit to a patriarchy that owns them and their decisions. Women of Gilead are also conditioned into believing that any rape/sexual assault is a result of their own lack of modesty, “her fault, her fault“ (72) and as if the act itself wasn’t reckless enough, the women who experience assault, such as Janine, are cruely ostracized by their peers.

There’s a parallel between how women are degraded in this patriarchal dystopia and modern day society. Although the role women have in America today doesn’t restrict them to being baby making machines like in The Handmaid’s tale, there are still struggles that objectify them, ranging from the fight for reproductive freedom to societal expectations which pressure survivors of assault/rape into staying quiet or getting asked questions such as “What were you wearing?” or “How much did you have to drink?”, and even to the own president making vulgar comments about “grabbing women by the p—y.” To say the democracy of America is as limiting as the theonomy of Gilead might be far fetched, however, it can’t be denied that women’s reproductive rights are primarily dictated by the white, old, privileged men in the government. Although Gilead is a dystopia, all it takes is silence, an abuse of power and a lack of resistance to make a dystopia into a reality.

I have always been slightly jealous of those who I think are better than me. It makes me yearn for equality. But, since reading Harrison Bergeron and The Lottery, I think I changed my mind. Two short stories The Lottery was written by Shirley Jackson, and Harrison Bergeron was written by Kurt Vonnegut. Jackson’s story The Lottery, in which the residents of an unidentified American village participate in an annual rite of stoning to death a person chosen among them by drawing lots, became one of the best known and most frequently anthologized short stories in English. The village where the lottery takes place is described as a normal and enjoyable community. Children are looking forward to the summer and playing with each other. Adults are friendly ‘[The women] greeted one another and exchanged bits of gossip as they went to join their husbands’ (Jackson). People are aware of the actions or diseases of other people and usually provide support to others. As a result of the lottery, the ‘winner’ was stoned to death by townspeople. Otherwise, they seem normal, not killer, but this is exactly what they do from time to time. In the futuristic story of Kurt Vonnegut Jr. Harrison Bergeron the world finally corresponds to America’s first amendment that all people are created equal. In this society, gifted, strong and beautiful are required to wear headphones, respectively, heavy weights and disgusting masks, respectively. These limitations leave the world equal from brain to muscle and beauty. In a world constantly striving for equality between people, Vonnegut opens the world to which society diligently strives. Through this foreshadowing of the future, Vonnegut tries to use Diana Lunar Glampers and Harrison Bergeron as mechanisms to identify and prevent the dangers of two extremes — too equal or too unfair. Although The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron have interesting difference in characters, they have surprising similarities in the writing style and cruelty.

One difference between stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is difference in characters. The first difference between the stories is in the types of static and dynamic characters. Mr. Summers had static character because he doesn’t change throughout the story, because he still thinks the lottery is a good thing. “Although the villages had forgotten the ritual and lost the original black box, they still remembered to use stones” (Jackson). Harrison Bergeron is more of a dynamic character than a static character because he changes throughout the story. In the beginning of the story he is in jail, olive, ugly and unintelligent just like everyone else in the story. By the end of the story he broke out of jail, got killed, took off his headphones and rubber nose, so he could be intelligent and handsome. The second difference between the stories is in the types of flat and round characters. The villagers in The Lottery are flat characters who do not change during the story. The fact that we know next to nothing about them indicates that the focus is less about the individuals and more about their community’s societal values. Bill Hutchinson is a flat character because he didn’t show any emotion when Tessie was chosen. Tessie is not a round character because she lives in a society in which women have little space for any transformation. She is not flat, because she does not remain passive throughout history. There is a part of her that wants change. If Tessie were a flat character, she might not even be the main character. All good main characters are known for their struggle, their transformations and their actions; not for their inaction. Round character in Harrison Bergeron would be the Harrison’s parents, because we know what they think through the whole story, we also know their reaction when they saw their son on TV. Diana Moon Glampers is a flat character, she illustrates the evils of state control. She really has power over everyone. Her character in story is to show the inequality and corruption of the communist society. So while her character is flat, it’s important to the story.

One of the similarities between stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is the writing style. The firs type of similarity in writing styles between stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is irony. In The Lottery at the beginning of story, the atmosphere of an ordinary city, whose inhabitants are usually friendly and kind. But the setting is deeply ironic, because it emphasizes cruelty, hypocrisy, the inherent evil of human nature, or at least this village and nearby cities, even after centuries of supposed civilization. From the very beginning the reader has no idea what the lottery can actually lead to. Except for the murder of Mrs. Hutchinson, the atmosphere of the village seems idyllic. Thereby, the situation is ironic, because otherwise a normal town is a place of mindless murder. Even the title of the story is ironic. in particular, everyone usually associates a lottery with a winner who gains a positive experience or reward. In this case, however, the Jackson lottery does not lead to the winner, but to a certain loser who is stoned to death by the village. The character Tess Hutchinson also matters, she shows hypocrisy and human weakness. Mrs. Hutchinson first protests the lottery when her family is in danger. She ironically complains: ‘It wasn’t fair!’ (Jackson). Up to this point, Tess was an accomplice in allowing the lottery to continue, although she knows about the terrible result. She does not question the fairness of the lottery when she first arrives at the event. She has no problem with this until she and her family are in the spotlight. She then reverses her initial position and begins to denounce the lottery process as unfair simply because she and her family are in danger. Her statement about the fairness of the lottery is ironic, because until her family is selected, Tess does not seem to believe that the lottery is unfair. However, the lottery has always been unfair. In the story Harrison Bergeron we also note the presence of irony. The dramatic irony is in Harrison death. If Harrison was the strongest man and the smartest he should survive more after he run away from the prison, not die easily at the end of the story. If he was smart why didn’t he secured the place, he wasn’t smart to let the Diana kill him. There is a lot of irony about the entire central situation in the story. When Harrison was young his father and mother do nothing when the H-G men came to take Harrison. His parents just followed what they are told to do without objection, and if Hazel would reject their decision, she would directly forget where Harrison went because of she is not clever enough to follow up. Also, in major societies people who are handsome, powerful, smart are respected and they get a good lifestyle. In the story Harrison Bergeron a society makes people ugly, weak, and stupid so that they will follow the rules without rejection. It is ironic because the government made Harrison stronger with heavy weights, they made him more powerful than before, and in spite of, he dies easily at the end of the story, he should live more in those few minutes of revolution than any of the government H-G men. The second type of similarity in writing styles between stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is symbolism. There are a few significant symbols in The Lottery: the black box is at the heart of the ritual. Humans often keep their darkest thoughts locked away in their minds. The black box could be symbolizing the human psyche, and explain why the townspeople’s motive for continuing the ritual killings is incomprehensible to the reader. the black box is falling apart and needs to be replaced, but the villagers refuse to replace it—another symbol of their harmful stagnancy. The paper ballots represent the citizens of this village. Both the paper and the people initially seem harmless. The villagers themselves appear to be quite neighborly, and initially, they lottery seem to be as benevolent as they are. But in fact, the people are not nice at all. Their community designates one individual wo will be isolated and then commences to murder him or her. The switch from paper ballots to stones represent the community’s change from civility to brutality, as each person in the village becomes an unrepentant murderer. Parents turn on their children’s, husbands turn on their wives, and children’s turn on their parents. In the Harrison Bergeron the biggest symbolism are the handicaps, and how they literally limit society. The weight drags them down and they constantly interrupted thoughts allow room for deep thought. Harrison is a symbol himself, but his handicaps represent the handicaps on what society could be. when he removes his handicaps, he is removing them from society, and showing what society could be. Harrison Bergeron is the symbol of a new society; of the way it should be. He achieves impossible heights, when he is free from his handicaps, much like society as a whole would if its handicaps were removed. Harrison Bergeron is also very virile. He is seven feet tall and very strong and handsome. He is the perfect specimen almost superhuman. Harrison represents the potential of society, and that potential destroyed when he gets shot. Diana Moon Glampers is the Handicapper General who requires above-average people to be handicapped, but average is really low. She is a symbol because she is the representative of the laws and what is average. People believe in her because of her mediocrity. When she shoots Harrison, it reinforces the idea of average, and the citizen’s faith in their laws. The noise in George’s radio distracts him from his thoughts, and it is the real issue of society. While he can still think of them, he cannot dwell on them. Pertinent information and thought is lost in the noise of everyday life. Today we are distracted by news and bits and pieces of information flying at us, while in the story, real thought is distracted by a literal noise being blasted in one’s ear.

The second similarity in stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is cruelty. The first reason of cruelty in the stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is communal violence. The similarity is that both of these stories demonstrate how people force themselves to the tradition that they were told to follow, even if they have the opportunity to look for changes and explore the negative consequences of crowd rule. In both stories, people within the community cannot think for themselves and refuse to question their biased traditions and beliefs. The ritual that is described in The Lottery, based on old traditions, not only in the city, but also in other places, does not disguise the senseless evil of the act. “Miss Jackson’s story can be interpreted in half a dozen different ways. It’s just a fable.… She has chosen a nameless little village to show, in microcosm, how the forces of belligerence, persecution, and vindictiveness are, in mankind, endless and traditional and that their targets are chosen without reason.” (Ruth, F). A person who will be stoned to death is chosen at random. There is no rational reason or excuse to single out one person in a village to kill every year, although we do not know why people do it or they have any reason for this. The problem here is that in the village, random violence is not considered unfair. If someone needs to be stoned, perhaps a random choice is the fairest way to do something that can never be fair to a victim. Tradition and superstition, as it would be foolish to try to stop participating in the tradition, seem to make sense, even if people cannot explain why. Jackson demonstrates not only the power of conformity, given that none of the citizen’s protest and question the ritual, but also the human ability to senseless cruelty and evil. In the short story Harrison Bergeron, the American Government controls its citizens using cruel and sadistic methods like mental and physical handicaps, severe death penalties for disobeying the law, and using propaganda to make its citizens blindly follow their government to ensure everyone is equal. “Diana Moon Glampers loaded the gun again. She aimed it at the musicians and told them they had ten seconds to get their handicaps back on” (Vonnegut). It shows how much the citizens are controlled by the government. Diana Moon Glampers is willing to shoot everyone that doesn’t obey her. So basically if any citizens don’t want to wear the handicap ear piece, then the government will do anything to get rid of them. The American government power over the thoughts of citizens. They are afraid that if someone were to oppose the government, their country would descent into a state of chaos which would cause destruction. It also exhibits the Government’s control over their thoughts. The couple can’t even finish the conversation because the transmitter that George wears disrupts his thought process, and Hazel has an average intelligence which means she can only think about something in a small burst. The government have so much control over what its people can think and even believe. Nothing about these people’s lives is truly their own. The second reason of cruelty in the stories The Lottery and Harrison Bergeron is elements of horror. In The Lottery the inability of the villagers to abandon the outdated lottery tradition leads to the ritual murder of the most primitive stone age. The idea is that people must remain vigilant in their actions and beliefs to ensure that they do not simply adhere to outdated and harmful agreements. In this short story, the commitment of the townspeople to the outdated lottery creates the evil of murder. In a society that should be developed enough to reject the concept of ritual murder in the hope of a favorable harvest, this Vermont village decides to take up this practice. ‘Used to be a saying about ‘Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon” (Jackson). For villagers, annual stoning is a city institution, a cleansed victim; they can’t see the lottery for what it really is: senseless killing. Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. gives the world a look at the horrors of enforced equality through its simplified narrative. In Harrison Bergeron elements of horror is in the killing of Harrison which parents watched. Because of the shortcomings that George has, his reaction to the murder of his son is short, and because of Hazel’s “low” intelligence and short attention span, she is also not thrilled. Their son, Harrison, was absent for a long time, imprisoned by a Handicaps General. And when parents see it on TV, this happens for the first time in several months. You can imagine immediate recognition and joy when you see him, but George’s confession is thwarted by a loud sound in his head. After Harrison was shot, George went ‘to the kitchen for a can of beer.’ No reaction; death was probably quickly erased by a loud distraction in his ear; in a short time, these obstacles have already happened several times, and we understand that George can hardly think of anything directly. This includes his son. Hazel begins to cry. For a moment, she is deeply distressed by what happened, but because of her level of intelligence and memory, she quickly forgets what happened. Her husband sees tears and asks what is wrong, but she cannot remember. Closest of all, she recalls that ‘something very sad on television.’ “This is a far more chilling concept than the society of true equality, that a mother could watch her son die on television, and summarily forget about it.” (Perschon). In Bergeron’s society, people with disabilities claim that no one ever feels anything negative — sadness, sadness, suffering, jealousy, or low self-esteem. Thus, when Harrison is shot in front of them on TV, his own parents experience only brief pain before forgetting.

“Harrison Bergeron” and “The Lottery” both reveal that it is human nature to blindly want a better situation without considering all the possible outcomes. Not just in these stories, but also in reality, people want to attain an equal society, although many people do not consider how everyone will become equal, “Harrison Bergeron” answers this question. In this equal society, not everyone is born equal because this is a part of nature therefore in order to make everyone equal, everyone is manufactured to be equal. People in the society of “Harrison Bergeron” have handicaps to make them equal to people who have lesser ability or a less equal disposition. Similarly, the original purpose of “The Lottery” is hinted to have been a sacrificial ceremony for the gods, so that the crops will grow well. The people in “The Lottery” want to make the crops grow well, which seems like an advantageous idea, just as the idea of equality is in “Harrison Bergeron”. However, both societies are unable to see the consequences that could

Works Cited

1. Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., “Harrison Bergeron,” Welcome to the Monkey House (New York: Dell Publishing, 1968), pp. 7–14.
2. Jackson, Shirley. “The Lottery.” The Lottery and Other Stories. New York: Farrar, 1991. 291-302
3. Perschon, Mike. “2081: The World of Vonnegut’s Harrison Bergeron”, tor.com, accessed April 13, 2011
4. Ruth, Franklin. “The lottery” letters, The New Yorker, www.newyorker.com, accessed June 25, 2013

Has anyone ever thought about living in a world where everything political, economic, and social was designed to be perfect? Basically, that’s what an utopia is. An utopia is an idealised vision of a place or state in which everything runs perfect. Utopians or reformers are those who actually put their ideas into practice. This brings us to the other side of the coin, which are dystopias. Dystopias are an imagined society or state in which there is injustice, authoritarian and abusive political regimes, and great suffering. This essay will not support an utopian or dystopian system, but rather give reasons why Governments should find a balance between these two in order to get the most out of each one.

Humans are not perfect and people cannot pretend they are. This is why the belief that a ‘‘perfect society’’ can be implemented for an imperfect species automatically vanishes. This is exactly what we watched in the movie, when Casey asked David why they couldn’t bring humans to live in Tomorrowland if the Earth’s Apocalypsis was within 57 days, he replied ‘‘Humans are savage. If we told them about this place then that would happen here to us, so nothing would survive.’’

Utopias collapse the moment that any social or political theory rises and that it doesn´t match with our self desire for freedom, human rights and independence. We wouldn’t be living peacefully because nowadays there is to variation in how people want to live. There are so many things that makes us different from each other, besides abilities and tastes, the interest within a specific religious group would lead to a negative impact in the society. Causing riots, inadequate living and working conditions and many other factors that go againts utopian principles.

In the article ‘‘The Pursuit of Perfection’’ by Michael Schermer, he revealed: ‘‘Yet this is precisely what happened with the grand 20th-century experiments in utopian socialist ideologies as manifested in Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist Russia (1917-1989), Fascist Italy (1922-1943), and Nazi Germany (1933-1945), all large-scale attempts to achieve political, economic, social (and even racial) perfection, resulting in tens of millions of people murdered by their own states or killed in conflict with other states perceived to be blocking the road to paradise.’’ (Schermer, April 4, 2018)

This article doesn´t support a dystopian system either, but rather giving a third option. Protopia defines a state we’re not accepting perfection (Utopia), nor are we fighting for survival (Dystopia). Protopia system focuses on incremental progress, and promises a tomorrow that will be better than today although it may be just for a little. This state is much harder to idealise as it comes with many new benefits, it brings many new problems, too.

A fireman’s purpose is to preserve and protect, but in Montag’s society firemen destroy and dictate their society. They act as law enforcers, they censor their society from the knowledge withheld inside a book. In Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, Montag seeks the truth in his society. Montags skepticism of his life and how his society performs makes him questions if the one thing he’s meant to destroy has answers to the way they live. Bradbury uses juxtaposition and symbolism to portray how Montag’s society is formed through censorship.

To begin, the juxtaposition of a firemen’s ideal purpose to a firemen’s purpose in Montag’s society represents law enforcement and censorship in his society. Readers discover early in the text that Montag’s society is different than our own. In their society it has a different law enforcement that enforces censorship. In Montag’s society firemen “were given a [the] new job, as custodians of their [our] peace of mind, the focus of our understandable and rightful dread of being inferior; official censors, judges, and executors.” (Bradbury 56). This passage uses juxtaposition to contrast the ideal purpose of a fireman as a protector and preserver to a new purpose of being to a censor, judge, and executor. Explaining the dynamic of their society, if a law was to be broken the enforcer would be a fireman. Thus, explaining to the reader the high ranking role firemen play in forming their society. In addition, in Montag’s society a firemen’s purpose is to serve, “against the small tide of those who want everyone unhappy with conflicting theory and thought.” (Bradbury 59) This passage uses symbolism to show what firemen in Montag’s society represents. In their society they choose firemen for their use of getting rid of something by the use of fire. Firemen in Montag’s society were given the new job to ignite and burn books, an object that withholds knowledge and stories. They give people dreams, an escape from reality, make people feel emotions, make you think, and give opposing ideas. A books gives you all the things they don’t want the people in Montag’s society to have, to know, or feel. So they burn them to censor a society from hardships, dreams, controversy, emotions, and all the things that can be provided from the profusion of ideals a book carry. Bradbury uses symbolism to show what firemen in their society stands for, they stand as a barrier between controversy and happiness. It explains why firemen were chosen as high ranking official censors, judges, and executors in their society and how they use censorship to shape their society.

To continue, the juxtaposition of the purpose of school as an educator contrast to its purpose in Montag’s society as a mind hinder represents how schools in their society play a key role in censoring and forming Montag’s society. Clarisse tells Montag about the schools in their society and how they function: “ An hour of Tv lass, an hour of basketball or baseball or running, another hour of transcription history or painting pictures, and more sports, but do you know, we never ask questions, or at least most don’t; they just run the answers at you bing,bing, bing, and us sitting there for four more hours of film teacher. That’s not social to me at all. It’s a lot of tunnels and a lot of water poured down the spout and out the bottom, and them telling us its wine when its not. They run us so ragged by the end of the day we can’t do anything but go to bed or head for a Fun Park to bully people around, break window panes in the window smasher place or wreck cars in the car wrecker place with the big steel ball” (Bradbury 27). This passage uses juxtaposition to contradict the purpose of a school. In their society, they use the place of “education” as a tool to impede, control, manipulate, and manifest their minds negatively making them into selfish, anti-social, emotionless, and violent people. It explains how schools play a key role in forming their society using censorship by corrupting the people in their society’s minds by starting off with the young to develop their minds into emotionless, thoughtless people to get them to function the way they want them to. In addition, there are three things missing in Montag’s society that resulted in forming of the mindsets of their people, “ Number one, [as I said] quality of information. Number two: leisure to digest it. And number three: the right to carry out actions based on what they [we] learn from the interaction of the first two” (Bradbury 81). This passage uses symbolism to show how the difference in school education can impact an entire society. In Montag’s society school educators take those three missing components from their society to prevent people from thinking. Montag’s society revolves around happiness and when people think problems sprout and happiness isn’t found. So they cram them with non-combustible data, so they feel brilliant and believe their thinking. They stick them in activities so they don’t get the chance to digest information they receive, so they don’t think. They can’t carry out actions they learn of fear of punishment from firemen or from the violent tendencies of the people in their society for being indifferent. Montag’s society revolves around happiness so they keep everything simple so there wouldn’t be controversy, indifference, or emotions. In their society they teach them to not be indifferent, indifference brings unhappiness. They don’t give them problems to solve to avoid people from thinking and giving them a range of emotions. Schools use censorship by taking out those three components to develop kids minds not to think, when you think controversy happens, emotions grow, and problems start. Therefore, explaining the major impact schools have on forming their society and how they use school as a tool to censor and shape the people’s minds of their society to create a happy society.

In conclusion, Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451 society is formed through censorship. Bradbury uses symbolism and juxtaposition to show how firemen and school educators censors Montag’s society. Instead of being used for its original purposes Bradbury shows how two normal jobs in our society can be reformed for new purposes and make a different impact than it would as it original purposes as a preserver and educator. Through Bradbury use of literary devices readers learn, discover, and differentiate our own faults in our society.

This short story is called Harrison Bergeron wrote by Kurt Vonnegut. The overall atmosphere of this story is like The Giver, The Hunger Games, Divergent and other well-known dystopian stories that describes the hardships of a corrupt and down falling society in which who survives to be the fittest but a different kind of mind tricking. My opinion on this core reading is that it shows a good example on how the world is currently is in dealing with war, racism, proudness, greed and hate. In which the author thought when he wrote this story if what would happen if all people were all equal but soon, he realizes that it brought terrible consequences.

62 years into the future, these consequences came to the lives of George and Hazel. The U.S Constitution amend amendments that equality can be achieve with average intelligence and implanting radio headphones to every person to erase consciousness that is produce making an aching buzz on their head and wearing handicap weights to discourage the peoples abilities they can do. All of this is organized and track by the United States Handicapper General whose main job is to maintain so call peace of an average life. Like any other day George and Hazel were watching ballerinas dance on tv until Hazel tears were coming out and George asks are you crying. All of she said was that she can’t recollect what happened neither George knew. In which it ends up as darker plot twist that Harrison Bergeron parents are George and Hazel. What they couldn’t recollect was the killing of their son on tv on trying to make a cause to remove equality. If that ever happened to you and couldn’t remember, then what’s the meaning of life? The overall meaning of this core reading is that by doing hard work coming from different aspects of life on earning your achievements is way better then government giving everything you want without your will.

My overall response to this story seems realistic since it closely resembles to our present how the people are mind control but in a different process. I support this form of government not for personal use but to explain the authors message in his point of view. Since everyone want to be extra and be privilege dealing with racism in which the catalyst was Trump’s Administration and its supporters also other hardships we face in the US and the whole world. So, the author tries to taste their own medicine if they advocate to be equal such as talk the same, look the same and think the same. I alone won’t be like them so I can watch and be the awareness when they figure it out that something isn’t right.

Which makes this story intriguing on how the setting is describe and symbolism with it. It lets you envision as you were the character. When you think about the future the general thought would be technological advances, one government, expanding to other parts of the galaxy and living a happy life. But here in this story says on the contrary of the future. For instance, in the text it states that the month April made the people insane knowing spring hasn’t come assuming that weather was gloomy all year around even worst it could have been like for 62 years. Another aspect of symbolism is the earpiece that is behind every person’s ear. This apparatus is use by the U.S government to control the person’s will by inducing a high pitching noise follow by an electric shock in the head were the brain whenever the person becomes aware of an emotion to who they are talking with is completely wipe out of their and resume their daily lives like nothing ever happen.

It’s not just about the physical stuff but their inner self or the dialogue since their conversions sound like robots and constant hesitations. In this dystopian future the United States Handicapper General tends to control the population by spreading the idealism of equality stating that no one is better than anyone else not like communism but sometimes it tends to put a person in their place. For example, the announcer appears on tv but had trouble saying Ladies and Gentlemen and couldn’t say because he was so excited knowing that it wasn’t his spotlight so that’s when earpiece acts. He can’t stand the sharp pain in his head, so he gave the mic to the ballerina and said Ladies and Gentlemen with no problem since she had a beautiful voice. The people were upset that she uses her beautiful voice and try to make it worst after seeing the faces of the people. wore handicap weights so she couldn’t dance better like anyone else. Yes, it seems confusing making your mind trick itself but that’s the goal for being equal treated as cattle.

Also, another good example of dialogue come from Harrison. He stormed into the ballerina’s dance show, he took off his heavy handicaps weights and told the ballerina to do the same remove her mask. And told her “Should we show the people the meaning of dancing”. They dance till they were both killed by the General Handicapper, Diana Moon Clamper, in which it threatened her agenda because it demonstrated that people can be different like them since Harrison and the ballerina dance freely with joy. And wanted to feel that joyfulness they felt inside.

In conclusion, joyfulness can be achieved by being different no matter how long it takes because all that time spent shows lessons to be taught depending on the situation you are in. All the answers you earn from experiences is the meaning of life. Not some tyrant trying to give it to you involuntary with average mind like a wolf hiding in the skin of the sheep. All that Harrison did was trying to escape the madness from this undeveloped society, but his freedom was taken in the hands of General Handicapper. And his parents supposedly with a average mind couldn’t handle the killing of their son so the government made them forget the incident. But the question remains, what is something worst then wiping out their minds and how far can they go.

Harrison Bergeron, a short story by Kurt Vonnegut, displays many themes throughout the story. A main theme throughout the story is how a person in power feels threatened by those they control and how total equality is forced in society. While reading, the setting takes place in the United States of America in 2081 where the 211th, 212th, 213th amendment states that people with above average abilities have to wear handicaps so others can feel equal to them. Those who are more attractive, intelligent, and athletic are affected most by these amendments.”They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else”. Once a person starts reading, they soon realize that Vonnegut laced that these are a form of satire and irony. This is shown when there are over a hundred Amendments that make society ideal. “Later in the story, George and Hazel are sitting in the living room when George’s handicaps cause him pain and are such an inconvenience. Hazel recommends to George that he should break the law and remove the handicaps while at home since he isn’t in competition with anyone. In response, George claims that if he were to break the law others would do the same and they would be in the Dark Ages’ again. These examples show readers of how society isn’t perfect in anyway. Total equality (when it comes to looks, intelligence, and athletic build0), doesn’t make a perfect society. Competition is a key factor for having a successful economy. In every society there are people who succeed and those who don’t.

Not only that but, the society in the story correlates to communistic society. The main concept of ​​communism is to make sure those in the community have an equal amount of rights and privileges as those around them. ‘Harrison Bergeron’ society structure is different from a communist structure, but they both are similar in many ways. In Harrison Bergeron, the government was given a lot of power, and everyone was forced to be equal. Communism is also very different from the US government and acts in various ways. For instance, Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, is the one in charge of making sure those above averaged are handicapped and that they follow the laws of this society. Those who go against the law will be hunted down and will be shot and killed as a consequence of rebelling. This is shown in the story when the son of Hazel and George Bergeron, Harrison Bergeron, is put in prison because he possesses all the complex traits a person can have, disable his handicaps, and escapes from his cell. Diana then shoots Harrison and kills him on live television. People part of a communist society are meant to be equal towards each other while, people in Kurt Vonnegut society are forced to be equally terrible at everything. Harrison Bergeron was written in 1961 where everyone was afraid of the United states of becoming communist as well. People who rebel and disobey the law in a communist country can face extreme punishment, be jailed, and even be killed just like Harrison was. This also could be an example of how a person in power can be corrupt and how if the person feels threatened by those they rule then they do everything in their power to prevent a person from overpowering them.

Finally, Kurt Vonnegut shows a sense of dystopia throughout the story and even relates to Ray Bradbury’s “ Fahrenheit 451” when it comes to passing laws that restrict their citizens. An “example of similarity between the two stories would be how the government realized the desire for equality that people have and use that to keep society at below average intelligence levels along with both being in the future.” In Fahrenheit 451, Guy Montag, the protagonist, is a firefighter who burns books instead of putting out fires. This limits the people of knowledge just like those in Harrison Bergeron. Not to mention, that in Fahrenheit 451, a girl named Clarisse who was Montag’s neighbor was killed for reading a book essentially having her killed just like Harrison was killed for taking off his handicaps. These stories both show the strict and extreme laws that were made by someone in power to keep those below them at bay.

Furthermore, Kurt Vonnegut ,“Harrison Bergeron”, uses a form of satire throughout the story to show that the futuristic America wants to be equal but, in reality and irony of the situation is that those being handicapped and controlled are not really equal to those around them.

Works Cited

1. http://www.teenink.com/raw/Opinion/article/26978/Harrison-Bergeron-Theme/
2. https://www.sparknotes.com/short-stories/harrison-bergeron/section1/ (*)
3. http://www.tnellen.com/
4. https://www.cram.com/essay/Fahrenheit-451-By-Bradbury-And-Vonnegut/P36ZVPLGR445cybereng/harrison.html (*)
5. https://www.essaybot.com/sample/essays/detail?id=37754 (*)

What does it even mean to be human, why do we feel emotions, how does it benefit to think for myself and in the end how do we process it all. Imagine living in a world where you might not ever come to know yourself as an individual human being. I imagine not having the choices to set your life apart from the others around you. Set ablaze to your free thought and burn away the idea of individual self-identity, char your imagination and kill off all other means of living as a human being and what that means to you right now. In Ray Bradburys novel: Fahrenheit 451, there are three key characters whom each depict the struggles of dwelling in this deranged and disassociated dystopian society. Those three important characters are Guy Montag, his boss Captain Beatty, as well as an angelic acquaintance Clarrise McClellen. Individually each of these characters show vast differences from one another while simultaneously sharing the overlying struggle of what it means to simply be human. After all that is the question; what does it mean to be a human once you have had your individuality stripped away?

In Ray Bradbury’s Novel Fahrenheit 451, each key character symbolizes a different element of individuality and throughout the book they themselves struggle with said element. For Guy Montag, his element is a bit complex in the means of dissecting a character. The thing that makes Guy Montag’s character slightly more complex than the others is the depth at which his reaches. Montag tends to wind through a mixture of what the other two supporting characters seem to struggle within the idea of what it means to be human. Although when we look at the basics, we have a walking contradiction: a fireman whom doesn’t put fires out but rather he starts them. He also struggles with the idea of free thinking and it is Clarisse who points this out, Clarisse indirectly ignites the internal flame in Guy that drives his character to reevaluate his own human motifs. In addition, we may also relate Guy’s character traits with those of Chief Beatty’s character traits. Beatty illustrates a strong band of knowledge due to his age and life experiences, although he seems to bash the idea of expanding that knowledge and living to think freely due to the socio-political state in which he currently lives in. Guy relates to Beatty because they are both paradoxical characters in the sense that they both dwell with the curiosity of free thought yet live with morals in which strive to deconstruct that very idea. In retrospect to the comparison of Guy Montag’s characteristics to his fellow dystopian inhabitants, you can say that he embodies a little bit of everyone’s individual yet relatable struggle.

Clarisse Mclellan, a character whom entirely embodies the human component of free thought and individuality. She is the angelic wave of energy that sparks Guy Montag’s own internal contemplations on what it means to be an individual in this dystopian society. Clarisse see’s past the paradoxical façade that Montag portrays, she sees him to be a man with a wonder to wander, she sees a man aside from the flames. She tells him; “you’re not like others, I’ve seen a few; I know. When I talk you look at me. When I said something about the moon you looked at the moon last night the others would never do that.” Her stating that “the others would never do that” insights Montag to be an individual by comparison to the others in this society. When Clarisse interacts with Montag, she never comes in as a preaching entity. Instead Clarisse turns the cogs for Montag, she brings him to question things, she gives him a peak into a world where there isn’t a preestablished mentality for mankind. In some ways Clarisse’s character can symbolize a book all in herself, simply due to the idea that she promotes free thinking and individual expression. Although her purpose as a free thinker and individuality guru seem delightful in the moment, it turns out that this is actually her downfall. Then again with all that said, maybe Clarisse’s more definite purpose in the novel was simply to serve as a light of guidance for Montag. Once Montag became aware of the oppression of free thought, Clarisse dies. An author named Jack Zipes helps elaborate this idea in the article Mass Degradation of Humanity and Massive Contradictions in Bradbury’s Vision of America in Fahrenheit 451 “-Clarisse, who instructs him through her own insight and experience why and how the alleged antisocial and disturbed people may have a higher regard for society and be more sane than those who declare themselves normal…”. Zipes supports the thought that Clarisse symbolizes a light or beacon that guides Guy Montag through his journey. She holds a certain momentum that keeps the novel in motion, and without the spirit of Clarisse Mclellan and all she resembles, the novel would lack a certain sense of conflict. Afterall Clarisse is the entity that breaks away from the social norms that already exist once we begin reading the novel, she is the sub-culture that strives to better the dystopian culture, and she is the contrasting character that rewards the content of the novel with a sense of conflict.

Speaking of conflicting characters, we can look directly at Captain Beatty. A man of vast literary knowledge, obviously he is an intellect, but that intellect doesn’t reach further than the flames that he sprays across books. Captain Beatty seems to sit on an extensive rolodex of information about the past and holds onto it with a sense of nostalgia. Simultaneously contrasts that perception of himself with that of an enforcer, one whom seeks out to actually destroy literature and free thought dead in its tracks. In an essay posted by Arts Columbia they state Captain Beatty to be “more than just an ardent follower, however; his own embarkation upon an academic quest soured and embittered him on literature. He unleashes his own burning anger against books and eventually Guy Montag, an intellectually evolving fireman.” The closer Captain Beatty became more aware of Guy Montag’s mind slipping into “insanity” due to his access to books, Beatty consequently met his own demise. The element that differentiated Beatty from Montag is the simple fact that Beatty feared the pondering and lack of answers that came from expanding your thought through reading. Beatty didn’t like the internal conflict that books aroused inside of his mental, therefore he resulted to burning the very things that insight his mixed emotions. In a sense, Beatty is the poster child for a struggling humanity and whether or not to fit into society during this time of oppressed individuality. Captain Beatty, the man who against the odds still has an enticed human interest for intellect and self-satisfaction, yet that “human interest” is such a foreign concept to Beatty that he fears becoming more of what it means to be human all in itself. He depicts his final thoughts about the flames in this quote, “It’s perpetual motion; the thing man wanted to invent but never did. . . . It’s a mystery. . . . Its real beauty is that it destroys responsibility and consequences . . . clean, quick, sure; nothing to rot later. Antibiotic, aesthetic, practical” (109). Therefore, Beatty accepts the flames, he is infatuated with them and their quick and almost mindless energy in which they seek to smother life out.

“The original condition of man was one of naïve innocence – a state almost resembling that of the brute – in which he knew nothing of good or evil, and merely existed in unity with nature. That state, however natural for animals, was not natural for man and was therefore not ideal. Man was destined to separate himself from it and to become a self-conscious spirit.” (Berkhof 158) There you have it, man was meant to grow beyond that of one definite lifestyle, man is only man because he can do that. When you take the element of self-expression and freedom to think for yourself away, you burn away your chance at individuality, which then takes away your birth given right to be a human. As it is for the characters in Fahrenheit 451, smothered by the flames of their own dystopian upbringing, an upbringing of single sided thought, a life of oppression. Take it from Guy Montag and his life lead blind until having been awoken by sweet sent of free thought. Montag lacked happiness, he never would have found a purpose to be happy if it weren’t for his law-breaking discoveries. Then there is Clarisse, a young woman whom was full of wonder, she thought a lot and was too polite. Clarisse could not fall against her natural drive to be her own being, to set herself apart from the rest of society. For her it was a matter of being herself that became her downfall, Clarisse resembles the sad lack of life that comes from the oppression of free thought. When it came down to Captain Beatty and his struggle for a taste of individuality, it wasn’t the pursuit of it that lead to his downfall but rather the fear of where his individuality might take him. For Captain Beatty things felt safer when you didn’t have to question them and that is the epitome to this dystopian way. Like Berkof said, “Man was Destined..” and that destiny was a battle at best for those struggling in Fahrenheit 451. Stott has a rather profound yet similar belief but in relation to religion. Stott states that “We human beings have both a unique dignity as creatures made in God’s image and a unique depravity as sinners under his judgment . . . .We are able to think, choose, create, love, and worship, but also to refuse to think to choose evil, to destroy, to hate and to worship ourselves . . . This is man a strange, bewildering paradox, dust of the earth and breath of God, shame and glory.” (Stott 1999, 54). In retrospect, that seems to be the overall paradoxical catch: to be human means to be in constant questioning or not knowing of what it means to be an individual but to consistently question the validity of it all.

Fahrenheit 451 is a dystopian novel written by Ray Bradbury. The author proves it is a dystopian novel by using dystopian controls such as bureaucratic control, technological control, and philosophical/religious control. Bureaucratic Control talks about how the society is being controlled by its government. Technological Control talks about how the society is influenced by technology. Philosophical/Religious Control is the last dystopian control used in this novel; it is used by the governments influence on the beliefs of its society.

This novel has bureaucratic control because the society in Fahrenheit 451 is built by a government who believes books are bad and should be burned. “It’s fine work. Monday burn Millay. Wednesday Whitman, Friday Faulkner. Burn em’ to ashes then burn the ashes. That’s out official slogan.” (Bradbury 5). The firemen in the novel have lots of power and believe they are more superior “I am full of bits and pieces,” said Beatty. “Most fire captains have to be. Sometimes I surprise myself. Watch it, stone man!” (Bradbury 40). In Fahrenheit 451 the government bombed its own people so that they could maintain bureaucratic control. “Where the explosion rid itself of them in its own unreasonable way.” (160).

The novel shows technological control due to the governments creation of a mechanical hound used to track down and kill anyone who’s done something the government believes is un-honorable. “-nose so sensitive the mechanical hound can remember and identify ten thousand odor indexes on then thousand men without resting!” The firemen use this hound, but the beast doesn’t like anyone and growls while trying to bite them. In the novel Faber creates an earpiece that lets him communicate with Montag without leaving the house. “Montag placed the green bullet in his ear. The old man inserted a similar object in his own ear and moved his lips.” (90).

Fahrenheit 451 shows Philosophical/Religious Control because in the novel Faber suggests that even if you’re not religious you should always have a bible so that you know what life used to be like. “I care so much I’m sick” (88). In the novel the government has brain washed its society to believe that books are bad and should be burned. Montag also believes in stopping the firemen so that the society can go back to the way it was and is willing to do anything. “who can stop me? Im a fireman, I can burn you!… the book … Faber sank into the chair.” (84)

In conclusion Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451 is a dystopian novel showing 3 types of controls, bureaucratic control, technological control, and philosophical/religious control. The government, mechanical hound, and the bible are all examples of the 3 types of controls this novel shows. Ray Bradbury loved books and believed that society would end up like the one in Fahrenheit 451.

Works Cited

1. “Dystopias: Definitions and Characteristics” ReadWriteThink 2006. http://www.readwritethink.org/files/resources/lesson_images/lesson926/DefintionCharacteristcs.pdf Accessed: 2019-11-26 [Online]
2. Bradbury, Ray, Fahrenheit 451 Simon and Schuster Paperbacks, June 2013 https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_formatting_and_style_guide.html Accessed: 2019-11-27 [Online]

Although the community in The Giver may seem utopian, things are not always what they seem. Lois Lowry, author of many young adult novels, won two Newbery Medals for her books Number the Stars and The Giver. In 2014, The Giver became a film adaptation. The Giver has become a mandatory curriculum book in some schools. The community within the novel The Giver, is not a utopian society because no one had freedoms, they are all the same, and no one feels emotions.

In the community, no one has any freedom. People are told when they have done something wrong by the speakers, who are always watching and listening. People are singled out without their name or number being used. This limits their freedom to only what the committee of Elders wants them to do and how to act. An example is when Jonas took an apple from the snack station because it changed. The speaker later reminded everyone that hoarding was not allowed (pg.29). If anyone in the community commits a serious offence, they will be released. For example when the pilot flew over the city, and was released for making a mistake, (pg.1). Release is when the person is injected with a poisonous serum. There are also speakers on the wall so elders can always be listening, and they can make announcements. The Giver is the only one in the community who is capable of turning his speaker on and off. “The Giver rose from his chair, went to the speaker on the wall, and clicked the switch from OFF to ON”(pg.184). This demonstrates that everyone is under constant surveillance, so they only do as they are told. As if freedom was not enough to striped away from the community, emotions were also numbed and forgotten.

Emotions, an important part in our everyday life, were, in the community, dulled. In the community emotions no longer held the importance they do now. Every morning, family units share their dreams with each other and every evening they share their feelings. They do this to monitor when someone has stirrings. Jonas’s stirrings came when he had an awkward dream with fiona. Stirrings are treated with pills that supposedly remove the stirrings.the pills also play a role in the feelings and emotions being entirely erased. Having your emotions erased every day will eventually make you ignorant to even the smallest feelings. “Something within him, something that had grown there through the memories, told him to through away the pill”(pg.162). This demonstrates that jonas will have more feelings if he does not take his pill. Having no emotions plays a large role in sameness.

Sameness may seem alright, until it becomes extreme. In the community in The Giver, everyone has the same skin colour, the same clothes, and the same hair colour. This takes away a person’s right to be different and unique.Jonas feels this individuality when he gets a memory of a person’s birthday, (pg. 153) Everyone is equal until they are Twelve, then the Elders assign them their own jobs. They have no say in the matter. They are equal with their fellow workers when they get their jobs. Another restraining rule they have in the community is that you are not allowed to hoard food because everyone needs to get the same amount of everything in order for sameness to be efficient. “You Elevens have spent all your years till now learning to fit in, to standardize our behavior, to curb any impulses that might set you apart from the group” (pg. 65). This demonstrates that they were thought to be the same, to be like robots. Sameness ultimately stops a person from being an individual.

The community within the novel, The Giver, is not a utopian society, no freedom of choice dehumanizes people, no emotions make them like robots, and sameness strips away a person’s individuality. Keeping this in mind it is easy to see why Jonas and Gabe ran away from the community to find a better life.

Fahrenheit 451 is a novel that was written based on a dystopian society. It begins to explain how society copes with the government through conformity. Most of the characters in this story, for example: Mildred, Beatty, and the rest, start to conform to the government because it is the culture they had grown up in. Individuality is not something in this society because it adds unneeded conflict between the characters. The government tries to rid of the individuality it may have. Individuality was shown in the beginning quite well by using Clarisse McClellan and Montag. Clarisse McClellan shows her individuality quite clearly, more towards Montag. After Montag has been living off conformity, he decided to start questioning the world and ends up becoming his own person as well.

When individuality is brought into a society, they can choose their aspects which they feel are needed for life whether it be good or bad. Clarisse McClellan shows a great example of individuality in the novel. She “liked to smell things and look at things, and sometimes stay up all night, walking and watching the sun rise” (Bradbury 5). Clarisse’s question and curiosity showed how different she was than the others. She was a great thinker and Montag thought this made her strange. While she was talking to Montag, she tells him “You’re not like the others. I’ve seen a few; I know. When I talk, you look at me. When I said something about the moon, you looked at the moon, last night. The others would never do that. The others would walk off and leave me talking. Or threaten me”, she saw something in Montag that showed how he was willing to be like her, different (Bradbury 21).

Clarisse’s character is quite peaceful, She isn’t towards violence nor does she like TV as much as everyone else does. She’s not shy and is able to ask questions to Montag about his job, The way she acted towards him started to influence him to make a change in his life and start becoming different like her. Clarisse insists that she has to show him things she had talked about. She opens the door for him to discover what has been hidden in this new world they are now living in.

Beatty had said, “You must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can’t have our minorities upset and stirred”, notably saying that people are most likely better off conforming to the culture they are growing into so it doesn’t bring unhappiness (Bradbury 56). In Fahrenheit 451, everyone tries to evolve around conformity. Clarisse explains to Montag “People don’t talk about anything… they all say the same thing and nobody says anything different from anyone else”, bringing up the point that people aren’t too fond to ask questions and be the different person (Bradbury 28).

At the start of the novel, Clarisse asked Montag if he has ever read any of the books that he burned. Montag knows that if he answers, it will be illegal in the society they are in right now. Clarisse appears in the beginning of the book because she gets in the way of the government’s doing because she is an individualist.

Clarisse turned out to be a big influence in Montag’s life. His choice of becoming into an individual himself changes him into a completely different person. As the book gets closer to ending, Montag ends up meeting up with professor Faber. Professor Faber is one of the outcasts because of everything he knows. Montag asked him for help because he started to become interested in reading books. Montag explains to Faber “Nobody listens any more. I can’t talk to the walls because they’re yelling at me. I can’t talk to my wife; she listens to the walls”, Montag started to feel different from the others because society started to move him away from his old actions (Bradbury 78). Also in the beginning, Clarisse asks Montag about the smell of kerosine. This part started to foreshadow Montag as an individual and thinking for himself. Montag would be characterized as the protagonist of this novel. Clarisse’s way of thinking was the reason that mostly influenced Montag to change into an individualist. Her personality made him want to be like Clarisse.

As we get start to close in on identifying Montag’s individuality, he lets it all out when he talks to Beatty. Montag started to defend Clarisse from Beatty and said, “She saw everything. She didn’t do anything to anyone. She just let them alone” (Bradbury 108). This being said from Montag, it emphasizes that Clarisse was being herself, an individual who only wanted to see the world different without harm. Other people saw her as a threat only because they all thought she would rot other’s minds like Beatty had responded.

The government started to go after Montag because he had went against the society of conformity by using individuality. Individuality sets oneself apart from other people in a society, As he decided to make the big change from conformity, he was lead to a group of outcasts who have also decided to change like him. He then settles with them. People will soon understand that conformity does not cause any happiness like they had thought it would. They learned that conformity causes conflicts with each other. This leaves the readers with hope that there is still a way to get through society through individualism.

Individuality created conflict amongst others in the culture of the novel Fahrenheit 451. The only reason it did this is because the government was trying to demolish any person that tried to break the law. Individuality is not accepted in this novel because it gave the opportunity to question actions that were not sane or the right thing to do. For example, when Clarisse explains to Montag that people weren’t interesting with how they talked. With individuality, society is able to be what it wants to be. Fahrenheit 451 shows an idea of how individuality changes a society into viewing new things and how people are different from each other.