Have a look at this editorial published in today's Baton Rouge Advocate. One of the most effective parts of the piece is found in its reminder that Bradbury's book posits a world where book burning has become the response to the public's overall flagging interest in reading. In other words, in Bradbury's book, people don't want to read, they'd rather watch "The Family" on their wall-screens. The firemen/book burners of Bradbury's novel are only a secondary response to this lack of interest. I thought their point coincided nicely with a discussion we had early in our reading of the novel.
Bradbury's jeremiad, we said, is only partially about reading. His overriding lament is the loss of critical thought. It's not the seashell headphones Mildred uses, the wall-screen tvs, or "The Family" television show that Bradbury objects to, but how they consume/watch/listen to these programs.
The question I had after reading the editorial was this: isn't it possible to read a book in the same way that Mildred watches television? That is, reading passively without ever really considering the work's major ideas, arguments, or themes. What if reading alone isn't a silver bullet for encouraging critical thought? Just reading may not be enough. Bradbury's novel suggests that it is how we read that is important.
No comments:
Post a Comment