Okay, I'll admit this thread has been created in response to katharina's assertion that Fahrenheit 451 "fails as literature."
I've always been fascinated by the split view of Bradbury among readers. One crowd seems to speak of him with doe-eyed admiration, as if he were the greatest prose writer of all time. The other speaks of him nearly as poorly as one would speak of telephone "customer service" people.
I admit to being part of the doe-eyed crowd. Bradbury's metaphor speaks to me so clearly that I find it hard to read his book-length works, not because they're bad, but because they leave me so emotionally drained. It's like he's reached from the page directly into my chest and played with my heart, with my soul, and when I step away I need time to recover.
So part of me thinks that's the reason for the split--either his metaphor speaks to you or it doesn't. If it doesn't, I can see how his work would come across as hollow.
Another part of me thinks he suffers from the same affliction as many writers who are foistered on high-schoolers--teenagers are bound and determined not to like anything they're forced to read, or do, or see, or participate in. So people grow up remembering not liking Bradbury for no more reason than they read him under circumstances that made them feel obligated to hate him.
But I think this is too simplistic, because lots of people I consider more thoughful than that find him overrated and empty as well.
So what's the real deal? Which camp do you fall in? Why do people dissagree with you? Why are you, in the end, right?
Posted by StallingCow (Member # 6401) on :
The characters weren't the deepest in the world, but no flatter than any of Asimov's.
Farenheit 451 resonates with me because we seem to be living in that fictional world more and more by the day.
I keep waiting for the interactive soap opera to hit Fox, with scripts printed in Soap Opera Digest. ::Shudder::
And with all the movie adaptations, you really don't need to read much anymore. Just give it a year or two, and it'll be on video... plus, with the advent of eBooks, print media will soon fall out of mainstream - as did casettes and records with the advent of the CD.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
Ray Bradbury RAWKS! OMG!
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Ray, is, was and always will be the poet laureate of the science fiction crowd. The man's words are magic.
Posted by PaladinVirtue (Member # 6144) on :
Admittedly, I have not read anything by Mr. Bradbury other than 451. And although I was forced to read it in high school, I liked it so much that I purchased it and reread it last year. It was still good! One of my favorites.
edited to add: I have never encountered anyone who said that they didn't like the book. Even friends of mine who hated to read, liked that one. So I am at a loss to comment on why some feel it "fails as literature".
[ April 23, 2004, 08:22 AM: Message edited by: PaladinVirtue ]
Posted by Kabederlin (Member # 6304) on :
I don't think printed literature will really ever decline. Ebooks have been around for a few years now and I hardly hear anything about them. They aren't catching on very well.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
I read a lot of Bradbury many years a go. I'm honestly not sure why as he struck me as someone who tried to hard. His similes and metaphors were strained and his prose was flowery to the point of getting in teh way of the story, but YMMV, of course. Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
The facts and situations in Ray Bradbury's works, particularly the early ones, do not hold up well as the years go by. His characterizations of people, and his observations of human behavior, hold up just fine. If you read his work purely for the science fiction part, you are likely to wonder what all the shouting is about.
RE: ebook popularity. I've got plenty of thoughts on this, but I don't want to derail the thread so I'll start a new one.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Fahrenheit 451 is, IMO, one of the weakest of Bradbury's books; he's generally at his worst when he does social commentary.
That said, books like Dandelion Wine (which can't be called a sci-fi book at all) and Something Wicked This Way Comes are absolutely magical; he's one of my favorite authors, mainly due to his masterful turns of phrase.
Posted by Beca (Member # 4340) on :
I very much enjoy Bradbury's writing, but I make a point of reading it only when I'm in the mood. It's an acquired taste, I think. I especially like Dandelion Wine - the book (writing, content, imagery, etc.) bottles the essence of another time, just like the dandelion wine in the book does. His writing is not my favorite, and some things strike me as not-quite-"right", but I still consider myself a fan.
Then again, I was introduced to Bradbury long before I ever would have had to read him in school. (And I've met him! He's a wonderful speaker, and very warm to talk to in person - and I was an extremely shy 13-year-old at the time, so that's saying something! He arrived in a chauffered vintage car - he never learned how to drive!)
My relationship with literature is a lot like my relationship with movies - there are some works that are just brilliant overall, some I won't waste my time with, and some that fail to meet certain standards of their genre (or some other key component upon which I base my judgment), but are redeemed by some other outstanding quality. East of Eden was long, I already hated Steinbeck, and my classmates made fun of me for taking it everywhere, but I kept coming across key scenes that really spoke to me. "The Wind and the Lion" stars Sean Connery (Scottish accent and all) playing a Raisuli (sp?) leading a political-religious uprising in northern Africa, and is rather Hollywood-ized to boot, but there are some wonderful lines in it, well-delivered. Plus, when I saw it for the first time I was very much affected by the Romance (non-sexual) of the story. I love monster movies and sci-fi movies from the 50's and 60's, in spite of their cheesiness.
I blame my father for all of it. He was pretty much wholly responsible for supplying me with book after book and movie after movie that I would never have picked on my own, and then discussing them with me. "This book's narrative flow comes to a screeching halt because the author is trying too hard to make a point about the justification for war, but look at how wonderfully he handles this character!" " 'Gwangi' has fatal plot issues, and the characters are totally flat and uninteresting, but Ray Harryhausen's animation is awe-inspiring! Know how he did that? Let's go get the bendy-toys and I'll show you....."
(I started writing this before I saw TomDavidson's post - I love Something Wicked This Way Comes too!)
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
Ray Bradbury is one of my favorite authors of all time.
The Martian Chronicles is one of my favorites. I happen to also like Fahrenheit 451, though it was not one of my favorites.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I read The Martian Chronicles in high school, and was transported. The Martian Chronicles and Childhood's End (yes, I know - Clarke) are largely responsible for my love of science fiction. Ray Bradbury is a master of short stories, and Dandelion Wine is beautiful. What's the other one? The one with the tattooed man.
But Farenheit 451 is a too-long novel with flat characters acting out an agenda. It's a great message that I agree with, but not great as a book.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Bradbury writes of individuals very well - the inner drama, the loneliness, and the deeply-felt reactions to a hostile world.
But he can't write of relationships or politics, and considering that was the opening scene of Fahrenheit 451, it stumbled out of the gate.
doc, thanks for this thread. I do love Ray Bradbury. I think that's why Farenheit bothered me so greatly - it was the wrong story for his strengths.
In only a little segue, are there some stories that certain simply should not tell because they are not suited for it? I can't believe that, and there's no way to grow unless you do things that you aren't used to. On the other hand, F451 bothers me.
[ April 23, 2004, 11:05 AM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I was almost inspired to go read some Bradbury by this thread. Almost.
I still plan to, but I was already inspired yesterday by the other thread to finally read Moby Dick.
So many books, so little time. *sigh*
Posted by Zalmoxis (Member # 2327) on :
The Illustrated Man is a great, haunting collection of short stories.
And Something Wicked This Way Comes is one of the best works ever about small-town America. The prose blows me away.
I've never read Faranheit 451. I never quite saw the point. I mean once you know the premise -- isn't that all you really need to know? Just tuck that scary scenario away and let it pop out every once in awhile.
I still don't know what to do with The Martian Chronicles. They trouble me. Discomfit my be the most apt word.
Posted by Annie (Member # 295) on :
Short story is really his genre. His novels. though popular, are not his real work.
His best story ever, imho, is "The Fire Baloons," which is in The Illustrated Man - it's about a group of missionaries going to Mars. Fascniating on so many levels.
Posted by UofUlawguy (Member # 5492) on :
I liked I Sing the Body Electric (made into a really good film, The Electric Grandmother)
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I agree with kat's assessment -- Bradbury's shorts are AMAZING! My favorite is "All Summer In a Day", but there are many others -- like the one UofU mentioned -- that I love almost as much.
And I like The Martian Chronicles, and a couple other of his novels. But most emphatically NOT Fahrenheit 451 or Something Wicked This Way Comes! They were too long, too flat, and simply tedious at too many points.
Posted by Ela (Member # 1365) on :
I loved Something Wicked This Way Comes.
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
His short fiction is brilliant. A Sound of Thunder has to be one of the most influential science fiction short stories ever written.
Posted by Amanecer (Member # 4068) on :
While, I agree that his novel-length books come nowhere near the emotional power of his short stories, I still enjoy them.
As for his short stories, I definately fall in to the doe-eyed crowd. Last year I was at half priced books and found one of his short story books that I hadn't read. My heart started beating so loud I was afraid that people would hear it. The level of emotional fervor that I felt was almost religious. And after reading the stories, I was not disappointed. Docmagik, your description of the words directly reaching out to your heart and soul rings so true to me. His words touch me in a very unique and powerful way. I love Bradbury and urge all who haven't read his short stories to give them a try.
Posted by Yank (Member # 2514) on :
I thought that Fahrenheit 451 was an absolutely uncanny novel in its prescience, but Bradbury's style annoys me in general. I guess there's no accounting for taste- I found Dandelion Wine to be one of the most tedious things I've ever read. It's not that I found it to be bad in some objective sense, I just didn't like it, the same way I can't stand yams or flan.
Posted by AvidReader (Member # 6007) on :
What can I say? I love Montag. I love the way we see him first as he wants to be seen. Look at me, I'm happy, I'm normal. One conversation with one little girl is all it takes for him to see he isn't. One night of crisis is enough for him to see that not only is he not happy, he had never even seen happiness before.
The rest of the book is just the search for happiness. It's nice enough in its way, but the beginning is the best part.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I love his short works, and they (to me) are possibly the best short stories I have ever read.
Something Wicked This Way Comes shows how weak a writer King is, even though I enjoyed Needful Things. I found the themes in both to be engaging, but Bradbury executed it much better, and in fewer words.
I love the Illustrated Man, and I need to get a new copy. I forgot I and picked up two copies of 451 l at two garage sales last summer. I had heard about the story, but never read it until a few years ago, and I found it really touched me. It's purpose is to disturb, I think, so I found myself disliking it but rereading it.
[ April 24, 2004, 02:44 AM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
quote: shows how weak a writer King is
Read The Stand and The Dark Tower and then try saying that again with a straight face.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
What makes you think I haven't.
The Stand is a great book, and since I love fantasy I like the Dark Tower books as well, but he kinda lost me with The Drawing of the Three. I don't really care enough to read the rest, and since I read a lot....well, you get the point.
King has some of the best concepts in the world, but he writes at an eighth grade reading level. I find his writing style to be overly simplistic, and he muddles the waters by trying to be too clever.
I still read a lot of his writing, but to me they are fluff. The Stand is the exception, not the rule, IMO. I like a lot of his books, but he bores me easily. His dialog often is weak, and I see him repeating himself a lot.
I did like the following books he wrote, but I liked them DESPITE his writing style, not because of it:
The Stand The Dark Tower It Pet Semetary The Bachman Books (Apt Pupil rocked)
I found his short stories to be great, but his books for the most part to be bland. I have to like the concept of his book to want to read it; it's not enough for it to be by him frome to read it.
On Writing was great, though.
Kwea
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I finshed rereading The Martian Chronicles today, and I, uh, reaffirm my opinion. There Will Come Soft Rains is simply incredible, and the reason The Martian Chronicles works is because it's a collection of short stories with only the loosest of connections between chapters.
And there's not a relationship in sight.
Ray Bradbury can write of loneliness without angst or pity better than anyone I have ever read. Every character in this entire book is the only man or woman (usually man) alive on the planet. Every marriage is dead at the core. The only happy family lives are those among robots. All in all, I remember how much I treasure this book, but I'm now a little worried about Bradbury himself.
[ April 24, 2004, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"he kinda lost me with The Drawing of the Three."
I find that bizarre. DotT was the first Dark Tower book that GOT me. Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I didn't really care for either of the main characters. At all. The whole situation was too weird, and I had a hard time finishing it. Once I was done with it, I felt disatisfied with the whole thing.
Perhaps I should re-read it now that I am older. I didn't like The Talisman the first few times I tried to read it; as a matter of fact, it was one of the few books that ever "beat" me, in that I didn't finish it...not once, but twice. However, I re-read it a few years later and liked it a lot. My tastes had changed, or perhaps I was a bit more patient later in life, as it DID take a lot of setup to get going.
What was it that appealed to you so much about it, Tom?
Kwea Kwea
Posted by fallow (Member # 6268) on :
I've never met a reader who didn't like Bradbury for one reason or another. He wrote the fantastical truth.
fallow
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"What was it that appealed to you so much about it, Tom?"
I thoroughly liked both the main characters -- unlike The Gunslinger, where I didn't see enough weakness from Roland to have any patience with him and liked Jake too much for the way he was treated. In Drawing of the Three, we got atonement for Jake AND genuinely likeable personalities.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I plan on rereading it, but it's not high on my list of books to bother with. In all, I find King to be a fair writer with a lot of imagination, but I really don't care for his style.
i feel like he is trying to spoon-feed me his concepts, and I don't like it. It's a shame, really...I love his concepts. I just don't like his writing style. For as many great concepts as he comes up with, I feel he loses me somewhere along the way because I end up not caring very much.
I started reading Dreamcatcher , but I never finished it because half way through I realized that I didn't really care, at all, about what happened next. That is a very weird experience for me, but it is not unique when I am reading King. I felt that way about The Tommynockers but I forced my way through it. That would have made a great short story, but it felt like he was trying to stretch it out to novel length. The Same for Needful Things ; and even It wandered around quite a bit.
I love the concepts expressed in those stories, but the writing itself bored me to tears. At least I was interested in what he had to say in On Writing, his book on getting published. He has the right to write anything he wants, but most of his stories would be better as short fiction; but there isn't any money in short fiction, so he stretches them out.
At least that is how it seems to me....
Kwea
[ April 26, 2004, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
Posted by Taalcon (Member # 839) on :
quote:most of his stories would be better as short fiction; but there isn't any money in short fiction, so he stretches them out.
At least that is how it seems to me....
You know, I really don't think King really cares all that much about getting more money at this point. He seems actually fascinated with form, and has tried to branch out and try some risky ventures - some that succeeded, some that didn't.
And he still does write and sell short fiction.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Most of the stories I read were earlier in his career, and if you don't think the money was a factor, then re-read On Writing ; he was pretty clear on why he was writing at that point. When they handed him the advance check for Carrie he almost fainted, and then he admits that he realized he would never have to work again, as long as he kept writing.
I think some of his best works are short stories, that's all. His plot lines almost always interest me, but his characterizations don't, usually. In short stories he doesn't have to worry about "filler" material.
I don't think he is horrible, just not my cup of tea, that's all.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)