Fahrenheit 451 Comparative Analysis
The novels Brave New World by Aldous Huxley and Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury are both dystopias, but they are both very different ones with the same ideology behind them. In Brave New World, the World State is run by ten educated world controllers (one of them being Mustapha Mond) and the citizens are all a part of a caste. The negative emotions and history are all eliminated from the world, and the citizens are constantly reminded that they are safe from any harm in order to keep them happy and distracted with activities that would usually be shamed in our society today. Similarly, In Fahrenheit 451, the government attempts to keep their citizens happy with jobs, constant T.V. watching and other entertainment. Books are not allowed in this
…show more content…
The Idea of showing citizens only certain news to assure them of the nation’s success is the trait of any controlling government. They don’t want any riots to rise because the system doesn’t work properly and that the government is doing a terrible job and controlling them. The Leaders have of these societies have to think with more individuality but still support the system of the government. This is critical so the society doesn’t fall apart but the leading figure understands why the system is made a certain way. Ever society isn’t ever perfect and it may not ever be, meaning there are many rebellious people out there in every type of a society, and these rebels also need a special place for themselves. This is also important in dystopias because dystopias revolve around the fact that the government will have flaws and people with flaws, so they also need a place where these people with flaws gather and meet. All of these dystopian elements are exhibited in Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451 very clearly, even though some of them may not seem similar at first. All of this leads up to the society’s goal of keeping people happy. This is still relevant today because it raises the questions of whether after world peace would there even be peace? Will the world always be at war? Will people always have some sort of oppression and whether that’s all just in human nature. So in the end it’s all up to a world with total control without any unhappiness but also no individuality or a world with individuality but constant disagreements and war within people and which one any individual
The Idea of showing citizens only certain news to assure them of the nation’s success is the trait of any controlling government. They don’t want any riots to rise because the system doesn’t work properly and that the government is doing a terrible job and controlling them. The Leaders have of these societies have to think with more individuality but still support the system of the government. This is critical so the society doesn’t fall apart but the leading figure understands why the system is made a certain way. Ever society isn’t ever perfect and it may not ever be, meaning there are many rebellious people out there in every type of a society, and these rebels also need a special place for themselves. This is also important in dystopias because dystopias revolve around the fact that the government will have flaws and people with flaws, so they also need a place where these people with flaws gather and meet. All of these dystopian elements are exhibited in Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451 very clearly, even though some of them may not seem similar at first. All of this leads up to the society’s goal of keeping people happy. This is still relevant today because it raises the questions of whether after world peace would there even be peace? Will the world always be at war? Will people always have some sort of oppression and whether that’s all just in human nature. So in the end it’s all up to a world with total control without any unhappiness but also no individuality or a world with individuality but constant disagreements and war within people and which one any individual