The entire book of Fahrenheit 451 was based upon the idea that knowledge is better than ignorance. Or, from Beatty's standpoint, is ignorance better than knowledge? Throughout the entire book Montag was searching for the unknown. When he stole the books from the house, and the bible from the firehouse, he did not know exactly what he was looking for, but he did know that he was looking for something. When he shared the books with his wife, he was trying share with her, trying to reach out to the only person that he as even think of reaching out to in such a cold society. And when she let him down he tried to find some more answers by reaching out to Faber. The ironic part about the book is while Montag was doing all of this searching, Beatty was suffering.

Beatty knew what it was like to have such knowledge. But being trapped in a world that he couldn't have anyone to share this knowledge with, he became angry and overpowering. His anger for not being able to share his knowledge about books drove his irritateing comments towards Montag, which he knew would drive Montag to the extreme. Beatty was a man of knowledge, he knew how to push peoples buttons. The ironic part about the story as a whole was each character, Montag and Beatty, seemed to have something that the other wanted. Beatty would have been happier if he were less ignorant, and Montag was just yearning for some knowledge. So was it better to have knowledge, or be ignorant in the society that Bradbury had set up in the book Fahrenheit 451?

C.) When I first read Fahrenheit 451 I thought it was a good book. However comparing it to other books we have read, my opinion has changed. Montag was a weak character, who not until the last few chapters knew what he was going against. There was a specific goal he wanted to obtain, and most of the time when he would do something against his society, he could and would not take responsibility for it. For example, when Montag killed Beatty towards the end of the book, he did not blame himself for his actions he blamed his hands. Comparing this book to The Anthem makes the overall character of Montag look lazy and his whole "cause" meaningless. The main character in The Anthem has a purpose. Although he did much of his knowledge gathering in secret, he did eventually present what he had found to the council. That was him taking responsibility for his actions. Any character, and also any person that is willing to take responsibility for their actions is admirable. Since Montag was not one of these characters, I found the book Fahrenheit 451 rather irritating.

This song by itself without being compared to The Handmaids tail, the song begins by saying that we all have choices. The writer of the song is saying people in our world have the ability to dream, “And you can dreamSo dream out loud”, so people should not let what other people have to say bring them down. However “In dreams begin responsibilities”, so if one is going to dream they have to take into account all of the responsibilities that some with that dream. Although I have not finished the book, I can imagine Luke saying what this song is saying to the main character in the book. He loved his wife. She was his free sprit that he saw. She had dreams of being with him and whether they were right or wrong he did not care because they were hers to have.

It was interesting that U2 brought religion into this song. “Yeah I'd break bread and wine, If there was a church I could receive in” People whom are affiliated with a church usually know exactly what they from it. They understand why there are there and what the are doing. This quote is excellent to put into the song because the person writing the song seems to be trying to find something to believe in but they cant. They cant find anything to be affiliated with, which is a big part of the song.

This song by U2 was written much like the chapter in the Handmaids tail about the ceremony. The chapter beings just like any chapter and all of a sudden there is a paragraph with a lot of unexpected profanity. The profanity is needed in this paragraph to really hit some what Atwood was trying to get across. It is the same in this song, the song goes without any harshness, no signs of taking a turn and then the song writer put a very strong harsh word the last sentence of the chorus. Why? Because U2 wanted to catch the listeners attention, make sure they understood what they were trying to say. U2 is not the type of band to put swear words in every song just because they can. So when one sees a swear word in their song it is there for a reason.