I haven’t gotten to reading 451… 𝘺𝘦𝘵. But just the other day I did more research into its plot line, characters and ideas, and now I’m very interested in it. I am already hooked on Bradbury and his writing style and I think I have my 10th grade English teacher to blame for that one, because one of the most memorable stories we read in class for me was “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘝𝘦𝘭𝘥𝘵 “ from his Illustrated Man collection of short fiction (since we didn’t read 451 I suppose). That story really stuck with me.

But it wasn’t that story that caught my eye nowadays, it’s actually “𝘒𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘪𝘥𝘰𝘴𝘤𝘰𝘱𝘦 “ that really resonated with me coming back to it. It actually made me get emotional first time around, even just some small exposition between characters in dire circumstance felt so intimate and personal, as if it were your own resentful thoughts desperately attempting their final battle cries. Bradbury definitely knows how to write something visceral and poetically lush at the same time. Turning something dramatic into something serene. And his descriptions, beautiful albeit terrifying; 𝘍𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦. 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮 𝘸𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨, 𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘥𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘳𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦.

Concerning his more introspective and literary styles, including things like you mentioned repeating narratives to imply the character reasoning with themselves; I can see how people would dislike it. And I have seen it, in fact I saw that clip from The Simpsons where Martin lists off the ‘ABC of Sci-fi’… “What about Bradbury? - I’m 𝘢𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘦 of his work.” Haha! I actually kinda understood him after dipping my toes in. Even though I personally love it, I see why others wouldn’t. But I don’t think they should downplay it at all because of this— in fact my favourite author is Peter Watts, whom is considered to be on the hard𝘦𝘳 side of sci-fi, but despite the crazily-extensive ‘science’ in 𝘉𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘴𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 (Firefall) and 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘧𝘪𝘴𝘩 (Rifters), they are still in essence a traumatic character study just doused in science-goodness and speculative economic collapse. And he uses some similar inward aspects of writing (like the repeating phrases, racing thoughts, etc.) to make it feel very close to the character. I mean c’mon, you didn’t just think 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘧𝘪𝘴𝘩 was a literal title… It still has immense literary value. And not only at an individual scale, but a global scale as well. The Rifters world is realistically scary. Watts’ ability to focus intimately on an individual so well while simultaneously building a believable and in-depth catastrophic world around that affects them is really fascinating.

And if this is what I’m looking to find in 𝘍𝘢𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘵 451, then I am quite excited for my first step into his larger work! I also found it funny, considering the theme and even damn 𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘭𝘦 of the novel (for those who know what the title actually means) got censorship problems after publishing. Nothing made me happier than reading Bradbury’s response to that happening— 𝘕𝘖𝘗𝘌! As a writer as well, I hope it fills me with as much inspiration it did you. Bradbury along with Watts have been contenders to stand out to me with how they articulate their writing and concepts. Knowing what I know, I can’t wait to dig into it. The world seems vivid and destructive, it showcases the cause and effects of one person alive in the chaos, with that underlying meaning peeking over the horizon not only in the characters experience, but the world itself.

𝘐𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘰 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘥𝘥. 𝘚𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘴𝘦 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘷𝘪𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵. 𝘕𝘰 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘰 𝘸𝘢𝘷𝘦𝘴 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘯 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘮𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.

“𝘈𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘳𝘺, 𝘏𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘴?”