Happiness In Chris Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, By Chris Krakauer

I believe that one of the ultimate questions that all members of the human species asks is ‘How can I find happiness?’ and reflected in this question is a desire to find a happy, fulfilling, quality life. Many people try to find such happiness through their careers, material possessions, and all manner of other pursuits. What a large portion of these people do not realize is that happiness and the elements necessary to achieve a quality life may not come from place, position, or possession but from attitude. In both Gilgamesh by Stephen Mitchell and Sunny Chernobyl by Andrew Blackwell, the reader can see these ideas explored in great detail.

As human beings we are naturally wired to seek happiness wherever we can find it. When we don’t, we may enter a stage of anger, anxiety, or distress. That’s why it is our personal goal to look for happiness and preserve it once we acquire it. Many have explored ways to find what triggers this feeling of “happiness” and what we can do to keep it; nonetheless, the evidence found is hardly sufficient to make a public statement on how to find happiness. For this reason, most of the time we speculate what might provoke this feeling of contentment. “Happiness is a glass half empty,” an essay written by Oliver Burkeman, highlights the importance of happiness and discloses how we can find delight through unorthodox methods. The prime objective of this piece of writing is to inform the audience about the effect of happiness on their lives and how their usual attempts of becoming happier can sabotage achieving this feeling. Furthermore, he wants to promote the benefits of pessimism and describe how it can help us in the long run. The author utilizes pronouns, logos, and pathos in order to prove his point and draw the audience into his essay, in an attempt of making them reconsider the way they live their lives and adopt this new pessimistic way that would greatly boost their level of happiness.

How does life make you feel...Are you depressed? Are you lonely? Are you happy? Are you stressed. Are you okay? Are you giving up? Are you living a life that you don’t love or are you proud about who you are? Montag thinks that he is happy, but he doesn't find out that he really isn't until Clarisse truly shows him. Honestly, he is just living a life that doesn’t show him what life is really all about. He is missing out on so many moments because he isn’t allowed to read or feel emotion. Ray Bradbury wants us to know that sometimes there is no such thing as a Utopia...in the world, or in society where we live. Everyone has hard times, but what if they just don’t stop, what if they continue until the day you die?

Being happy in life is an important feeling for everybody. Happiness is shown by somebody being satisfied, blissful and overall in a state of pleasure. In the novel Fahrenheit 451, Many characters such as Mildred, Montag and Faber all show different forms of happiness and freedom. Mildred, a cold, distant and dull character demonstrates without knowledge, freedom is impossible and real happiness is unreachable. She seems to be in great pain throughout her life, and her obsession and attachment to her “family” on the television is what causes her to not confront her own life problems. Montag who begins the book having a passion for his profession, burning books, changes quickly. After being faced

“But I don’t want comfort. I want God, I want poetry, I want real danger, I want freedom, I want goodness. I want sin.” “In fact,” said Mustapha Mond, “you’re claiming the right to be unhappy.” “All right then,” said the Savage defiantly, “I’m claiming the right to be unhappy,” This significant quote from Brave New World had moved innumerable readers’ heart, so do I. Exaggeration? No. It’s the satire to the false meaning of the universal happiness, and it’s this quote which made me had rethink what do I really want and the way of living I want to choose. Because the deep influence and rumination brought by the book, I would like to say

Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, is a prime example of social criticism. The story sets in the 24th century where people race jet cars; the author’s idea of the future. It shows a flawed social structure, controlled by the media and government with banning and burning of books, and suppressing society’s minds from history. Their logical thought was that it would keep society from thinking too much, which in turn would prevent bad thoughts, and to keep them “happy all the time”. The book tells a story of Guy Montag, the protagonist, and his life as a book burner. He was an “instrument” of the government, a firefighter that was used to suppress information from people by burning all books. The characters live in a world where the past is hidden from them. The government has brain washed society and they are forced to contemplate on what is true and what is not. Montag plays a round character that undergoes change throughout the story. He starts as a narrow-minded character that does what he is told, no questions asked. He has lived his life thinking he was happy. As a reader, you will begin to sense a character change in Montag as this paper will analyze certain events that occur in his life representing an individual fighting against conformity. It begins with control of the masses by censorship as society is censored from history by book burning and oppressive technology. The rise of Montag’s character development starts to socially rebel from societies norms causing him

Happiness in our society is harder to find than in the society of Fahrenheit 451, but once achieved, it is a true happiness, one which grows upon its seeds, and sprouts a great and fulfilling life for that person. The average citizen in our society believes themselves to be happy, but in reality, they too are replacing their true desires and childhood dreams with superficial entertainment and mindless activities, which resembles the society which is portrayed in Fahrenheit 451.

Would you rather be happy in your life and live in ignorance or would you rather live your life with more of a purpose? Even if that purpose means doing things that most people would frown upon. This is one of the conflicts the characters face in the book Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Fahrenheit 451 is a book about a fireman named Guy Montag. In his society fireman start fires rather than put them out. Most fires started by the firemen are fires in which they burn books. Most books are not allowed and the firemen have to be called to burn them. In this book Montag appears to be a by the book firemen early on but as the

J.D. Salinger’s world-renowned book The Catcher in the Rye and director Sean Penn’s dramatic feature film Into the Wild both give us a unique perspective of society through a collection of descriptive imagery and riveting plot development. Both materials present us with protagonists Holden Caulfield and Chris McCandless, whom are deeply encompassed by self-introspection and who seem to be on a quest to find true happiness and meaning to their bland, corrupt lives. A recurring theme in both works is the process of discovering one’s true identity, which can only be achieved through a journey of spiritual self-discovery.

    Dan Goldberg, a keynote speaker and coach, once wrote “Happiness is a state of considerable pleasure and cheer... Contentment is different. It is a feeling of peace with one's self and one's life, an ease of mind and satisfaction with one's state of being.” We see many examples of different variations of this in both the real world and in Ray Bradbury’s novel, Fahrenheit 451. We see characters who are happy but not content, characters who are content but definitely not happy and finally we see people that are fully bathed in both happiness and contentment.

People seem to mistake being happy from true happiness. Montag for example was the happiest he could ever be, but once Clarisse asked him this life changing question, “’ Are you happy’” (Bradbury, 10) he slowly comes to believe he was not happy. I think this demonstrates how little anyone was urged or permitted to be divergent and look beyond the required living status. In Fahrenheit 451 everyone is “dead” they are not happy nor living their life to the fullest, the people were thinking they were happy but they were not mistaking what is true happiness for the fake happiness of living with “the relatives”.

In Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, he has altered what it means to be happy and how this society sees their ways as being normal rather than an extreme way to tell the people this is how the future could turn out. Their happiness is based off of something that is not real so people like Mildred cannot understand the complexity of what it means to see the world in front of them and take in what people of today would find joy in. The world she is given is now all she and the people of this society can understand for they do not know what is means to be free, nor do they realize they do not need to be the perfect image they have created. Happiness itself is in the eye of the beholder, but the happiness of these people is masked by what they are

In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451, it seems that nobody is happy. The characters of the novel perceive themselves as happy, but in reality it is only their imagination. People in this society, such as Mildred Montag, fill their days with superficial activities and as a result they became depressed. Mildred keeps herself busy by watching television all day, and refers to the characters as her family.

The philosopher Aristotle once wrote, “Happiness is the meaning and the purpose of life, the whole aim and end of human existence.” This famous quote compels people to question the significance of their joy, and whether it truly represents purposeful lives they want to live. Ray Bradbury, a contemporary author, also tackles this question in his book, Fahrenheit 451, which deals heavily with society's view of happiness in the future. Through several main characters, Bradbury portrays the two branches of happiness: one as a lifeless path, heading nowhere, seeking no worry, while the other embraces pure human experience intertwined together to reveal truth and knowledge.

The terministic screen of objectivity that purifies observable reality in the enlightened realm of science (central to most, if not all, of “happiness studies”) cannot function in harmony alongside insistent sophistic clamoring of subjectivity. By acknowledging their fragmented voices, my bibliography (en)counters these philosophic voices that are either uncritical or unconvinced of the ideological weight tied to language that holds the power to (re)define happiness alongside socially constructed state and self-interested agendas.