[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.22 MB, 500x360, 1365605722326.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7263810 No.7263810 [Reply] [Original]

>Fahrenheit 451 is not about state censorship! It's about television!

How do you best argue with people like these? You know the type: They've never read a book in their life, but they read an article about it somewhere and think they're equipped to debate its meaning.

>> No.7263820

step 1: reflect on your shitty tendency to see discussions as arguments that you must win
step 2: acquire social skills

>> No.7263831

>>7263810
Step 1: Stop speaking to people who upset you
Step 2: Internalize your anger
Step 3: Cut yourself off from people
Step 4: Have an emotional catharsis
Step 5: Use that feeling to write a novel
Step 6: Review that novel, fix errors and revise that novel
Step 7: Laugh from your fancy writing chair at the stupid people that made you well off
Step 8: There is no step 8, you've achieved bliss

>> No.7263839

>>7263831
>writing novels
>well off
I have bad news for you, Anon...

>> No.7263907

>>7263839
Novel, book, story centered around teenagers that gets turned into a 12 parts film series that rakes in 2 billion worldwide. Same thing really.

>> No.7263937

>>7263810
Fuck off OP, all of us know this already.

>> No.7263945

>Dude 1984 is happening like right now
Anyone who genuinely believes this should be put into labor camps

>> No.7264054

>>7263810

Stop discussing children's books.

>> No.7264068
File: 49 KB, 612x623, 1444922198950.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7264068

>>7263810

>> No.7264079

Fahrenheit 451 is actually about shamelessly pandering to its audience so they can pat themselves on the back for reading a book instead of watching that ghastly telly welly, whilst also shamelessly ripping off superior dystopian novels without having anything actually meaningful to say or even anything imaginative to describe.

>> No.7264151

>>7263810
Bradbury really is an idiot, and such a shit novelist that he couldn't even transmit a basic message without it getting muddled and confused with something else.

>> No.7264162

>>7263945

We already have a surveillance state, in America and Great Shitain.

Police state is the next step

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/the-nypd-is-using-mobile-x-rays-to-spy-on-unknown-targets/411181/

>> No.7264169

>>7264162
Quick, your tinfoil hat is falling off!

>> No.7264245

Fuck you OP. I remember all the shit, the fireman reading a book, the wall to wall TVs, the resistance dudes who memorise books, the stupid fucking robot dog. It still isn't about TV sucking no matter how much Bradbury cries.

>> No.7264307

>>7264169

>I have no argument

thanks for playing m8

>> No.7264317

>>7264307
You are aware there are systems in place to stop abuses like that? And no sane leader of a democracy would start spying on it's own population, because when they step down suddenly all their private emails become fair game. That doesn't make even selfish sense, does it?

But thanks for playing. m8

>> No.7264332

>>7264162
I just finished 1984. Anyone who thinks it's happening hasn't read it.

That book is a true nightmare, worse than any horror story you could ever read. O'Briens powerrant almost made me insane.

>> No.7264349

>>7264317
>when they step down
>when
Grab a tinfoil hat, they're by the door

>> No.7264351

>>7264317

Are you literally retarded m7? Like, have you ever been tested?

Systems in place? Apart from the constitution (which Britain does not have) I know of no such system or article. The American and British government has been spying on its citizens for years. Did you completely miss the Snowden leak?

Private emails? You mean like what Hilliary Clinton is getting busted for right now? You mean what Lois Learner should have gotten sent to jail for destroying after the IRS targeting scandal?

Can anyone really be this fucking naive? Go read the drone papers. They've already assassinated American and British citizens overseas. It's only a matter of time before they start doing it domestically. The FAA just put out emergency regulations on civilian use of drones to keep the skies clear for government and law enforcement agencies to fly their own drones.

>> No.7264353

>>7264349
So, Tony Blair is still the Prime Minister, is he? George Bush jr is still president of the US is he?

You are a special kind of retard, aren't you?

>> No.7264364

>>7264351
Yeah - just keep thinking the government really cares about what you are cooking for tea tonight. You really are that important - and politicians don't themselves care about their own privacy because ... APPLES!

>> No.7264369

>>7264353
>implying they're not all the same person wearing masks of skin ripped from the corpses of the people who tried to make a change
>implying

>> No.7264371

>>7263907
I was going to mock the notion that even very succesful writers are THAT rich but apparently J.K Rowling is a literal billionaire.

However, Harry Potter is a huge fucking franchise and besides that most money probably comes from the movies rather than the books, you also have to account for merchandise, the theme park, the websites, and her non-Harry Potter work. Plus any additional business ventures she may have, which she probably has since she's a billionaire and as such probably has an accountant forcing her to invest her money.

Realistically, if you became a superfamous writer with a movie series based in your work you'd be looking at something like Stephenie Meyer who has a net worth of "only" 125 million dollares.

>> No.7264374

>>7264369
kek

>> No.7264381

>>7264162
1984 wasn't a prediction of the future, it was a mildly exaggerated satire of the Soviet Union. America is more Farenheit 451 with a pinch of Brave New World.

>> No.7264388

>>7264381
>mildly exaggerated
Come on, the USSR wasn't 20% as bad as 1984

>> No.7264393

>>7264351
>He actually believes Alex Jones' bullshit.
Jesus Christ.

>> No.7264394

>>7263831
>tfw step 4 here

>> No.7264405

>>7264388
Actual people who grew up in the Soviet Union tend to testify it's very similar. The Soviets just weren't as competent or cartoonishly evil as Oceania seemingly is.

>> No.7264409

>>7264381
This, I chuckle internally every time an American politician or pundit brings up 1984 in order to complain about some aspect of the government and sensationalize it, forgetting that the book was an attack on Stalinism and supported Trotskyism.

>> No.7264411

>>7264393

Show me the part that's factually incorrect m8

>>7264388

tell that to all the people who were sent to the gulag

>> No.7264412

It's obviously about more than one of those things, you fucking mongoloid.

>> No.7264414

>>7264409
What happens to Winston after the book ends? Does he get shot in the head?

>> No.7264415

>>7264409
They don't forget that, they don't understand that.

>> No.7264416

>>7264409

statism is statism. paranoia is paranoia. socialism is socialism. any society that trends in that direction is bound to resemble the USSR sooner or later

>> No.7264428

>>7264411
>tell that to all the people who were sent to the gulag
Yes but was every person being watched by a webcam, was a single thought a reason to be killed, was having sex punished? It just isn't the same. In the end 1984 highlights the difference, the Soviets at least thought they were doing good for the people and that the means justified the ends. IngSoc purely wanted power and knew that was all it wanted with no concern for the people.

>> No.7264439

>>7264388
Fuck off retard
You're one of those idiots that vehemently defends the left as being the correct ideological trend in other threads too, aren't you?
Go back to your containment board and keep your politics off of the art board.

>> No.7264453

>>7264428
>was a single thought a reason to be killed
Yes, did you actually buy into all the Soviet propaganda just because they seemed to share your ideology?
>the Soviets at least thought they were doing good for the people
Good lord

>> No.7264457

>>7264411
>Show me the part that's factually incorrect m8

Article 8 ECHR. Also - if you think David Cameron wants the British government to look into his kiddie porn collection after he stops being Prime Minister you are a retard.

>> No.7264464

>>7264428
>Yes but was every person being watched by a webcam
No, but for instance North Korea issues radios which blast propaganda all day and which are illegal to turn off. This comes from Soviet influences.
>was a single thought a reason to be killed
Not quite, but a single phrase in the face of the wrong person definitely was.

>> No.7264468

>>7264428

The only reason people weren't being watched by webcams and the like back then is because they didn't exist.

Was a single though reason to be killed? You fucking bet. How long do you think people that openly criticized Stalin or the agricultural policies pursued after 1930 lived?

>> No.7264478

>>7264468
Even discreetly, just look at how close Shostakovich came to being executed.
I want /leftypol/ to go and stay go

>> No.7264479

>>7264457

>European convention

you mean that thing that has no enforcement agency?

and I'm pretty sure Britain has been agitating to leave the Eurozone for years

like any other British politician, Cameron can expect full immunity from prosecution on CP charges

>> No.7264487

>>7264371
The only hard part is getting people to adapt it to film and keep the message of the book

>> No.7264492

>>7264479
So you think Cameron is above the law.
Tell me, haven't a load of old Tory politicians just been arrested for/questioned about possessing CP.

>> No.7264493

>>7264439
You have no idea who i am nor have you read 1984 if you think the Soviets were that bad. Nice emotional outburst though.
>>7264453
>These accusations
What ideology do I have? I don't buy any soviet propaganda, i just know it wasn't as bad as a novel designed to be about as evil a tyranny as possible.
>Good lord
The people who came up with it thought it was best for humanity, they may have been wrong but their original intentions were to do good.
>>7264468
Open criticism of course but they cared about your acts and words, if you thought bad but went along and did as expected, they wouldn't know and you would be unlikely to be killed, unlike 1984.

People are getting the wrong end of the stick here. In no way am i saying the USSR was not bad or didn't do massive human rights violations, I am simply stating that they weren't as bad as Oceania.

>> No.7264502

>>7264492

arrest and questioned is a far cry from prosecuted and sentenced

>> No.7264509

>>7264502
Do you know how British courts work?

>> No.7264537

>>7264493
>What ideology do I have?
None
>I am simply stating that they weren't as bad as Oceania.
Well no shit, 1984 satirizes the USSR, but it was much closer than just "20%"

>> No.7264549

>>7264537
>None
The way it should be. Ideologies are for suckers.

>> No.7264559

>>7264509

you commit a crime, plead not-guilty, and get a slap on the wrist?

unless it's a 'hate crime', in which case you do 20 years in the clink

>> No.7264561

>>7264478
>I want /leftypol/ to go and stay go
hilarious

>> No.7264565

>>7264559
Thought not.

>> No.7264588

>>7264565

explain it then Mr. Expert, because last I heard Rolf Harris only got 5 years, Peter Hayman was never charged and they've yet to convict anyone who was involved with the Elm Guest House

>> No.7264597
File: 18 KB, 1451x263, rotherham.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7264597

>>7264565

>this is considered 'justice' in great shitstain

>> No.7264604

>>7264588
Well, the first thing you need to know is about something called 'evidence'. And then that punishments serve to fit the crime in the eyes of the individual judges that preside over the cases. There isn't this omnipotent 'Law' that decides everything like a corrupted computer program.

By the way, you don't need to be an expert to know that. It's not even a state secret.

>> No.7264606

>>7264597
huh

>> No.7264621
File: 54 KB, 240x320, 1437060319876.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7264621

>>7264597

Jay's initial report published on 26 August 2014 revealed that the number of children sexually exploited in Rotherham between 1997 and 2013 was, by "conservative estimate", at least 1,400.[2] According to the report, children as young as eleven were "raped by multiple perpetrators, abducted, trafficked to other cities in England, beaten and intimidated." Three previous inquiries—in 2002, 2003 and 2006[28]—had presented similar findings but, according to the report, had been "effectively suppressed" because officials "did not believe the data".[4] Dr Angie Heal, a strategic drugs analyst who had prepared the 2003 report, had noted three years after its publication—according to Professor Jay—that "the appeal of organised sexual exploitation for Asian gangs had changed. In the past, it had been for their personal gratification, whereas now it offered 'career and financial opportunities to young Asian men who got involved'."[7]

Abuses described by the report included abduction, rape and sex trafficking of children.

The inquiry team found examples of "children who had been doused in petrol and threatened with being set alight, threatened with guns, made to witness brutally violent rapes and threatened they would be next if they told anyone".[4] The report revealed that "one child who was being prepared to give evidence received a text saying the perpetrator had her younger sister and the choice of what happened next was up to her. She withdrew her statements. At least two other families were terrorised by groups of perpetrators, sitting in cars outside the family home, smashing windows, making abusive and threatening phone calls. On some occasions child victims went back to perpetrators in the belief that this was the only way their parents and other children in the family would be safe. In the most extreme cases, no one in the family believed that the authorities could protect them."[2] The report highlighted the role of taxi drivers in the town in facilitating the abuse.

Because the majority of perpetrators were Asian or of Pakistani heritage, several council staff described themselves as being nervous about identifying the ethnic origins of perpetrators for fear of being thought racist; others, the report noted, "remembered clear direction from their managers" not to make such identification.[30] One Home Office researcher, attempting to raise concerns with senior police officers in 2002 about the level of abuse, was told not to do so again, and was subsequently suspended and sidelined. The researcher told BBC Panorama that:


... she had been accused of being insensitive when she told one official that most of the perpetrators were from Rotherham's Pakistani community. A female colleague talked to her about the incident. "She said you must never refer to that again – you must never refer to Asian men. "And her other response was to book me on a two-day ethnicity and diversity course to raise my awareness of ethnic issues."

>> No.7264655

>>7264597

meanwhile in a civilized country:

>Sexual Assault (Generally): Sexual assault is any form of unwanted sexual contact obtained without consent and/or obtained through the use of force, threat of force, intimidation, or coercion.

>Felony. Between five (5) years and life imprisonment depending on circumstances.

>Additional penalties apply to someone who rapes a child younger than 13 years old, and, may include a 25 year (to life) mandatory minimum prison sentence, depending on the severity of the circumstances of the crime.