Effect of Social Capital on Democracy

Effect of Social Capital on Democracy Critically assess the concept of social capital? What advantages, if any, does it offer the study of democracy? Introduction Since the 2001 general election much academic debate has centred on voter apathy as the lowest turnout, especially among the young, led many to posit a ‘crises in democracy’ (Russell, 2005: 555). Various theories have attempted to explain the problem as either the result of a ‘life-cycle’ argument, whereby ‘the youngest sections of society are always less likely to vote [†¦] but as they age [†¦] own houses and mortgages, and pay taxes they become more concerned with politics and more likely to vote’ (Denver in Russell, 2005: 556) or a ‘generational effect’ whereby there is an overall decline in active citizenship (Park in Russell, 2005: 556). Against this background the work of Robert Putnam appeared to strike a chord. In his influential Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community (2000)[1], and associated articles, Robert Putnam transferred the concept of social capital from sociology into the realm of p olitics, arguing that increasing individualism had resulted in the decline of community ties and political participation (Russell, 2005: 557), undermining good governance. In the first section I provide an outline of social capital as it was originally formulated by the French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, in the second I detail the concepts move from sociology to political science in the work of Putnam. My contention is that in the process of adapting ‘social capital’, Putnam changes the meaning of the term and thus undermines its usefulness to the study of democracy; that whereas for Bourdieu it was a property held by individuals, in Putnam’s account it is held by collectives. Also, that although Bourdieu believed that social capital was exchangeable with economic capital but not reducible to it, Putnam relies on a distinctly economic understanding of the term. Finally, that Putnam’s use of the term is essentially neo-liberal, whereas for Bourdieu social capital is ultimately about power relations. In the conclusion assess the usefulness of the term to political science and the study of democracy in light of this conceptual drift. Pierre Bourdieu and the Forms of Capital Pierre Bourdieu (1930-2002) originally developed his theory of cultural capital as part of an attempt to explain class-based differentials in educational achievement. His theory has five main features, the different forms of capital; cultural, social and economic, and the concepts of the field and habitus. For Bourdieu capital is best defined as accumulated labour and has the potential to reproduce (Bourdieu, 1986: 241): it is this ability of capital to reproduce that leads Bourdieu to conclude that it is part of the structure of society that shapes individual life chances: it is ‘the set of constraints, inscribed in the very reality of that world [†¦] determining the chances of success for practices’ (Bourdieu, 1986: 242). Social Capital, for Bourdieu, refers to the network of ‘connections’ that an individual enjoys which ‘produce and reproduce lasting, useful relationships that can secure material or symbolic profits’ (Bourdieu, 1986: 249 ): the amount of social capital that an individual can draw upon is thus dependant on the number of people in their social network and the amount of capital cultural, economic or social possessed by those so included. Both cultural and social capitals are therefore rooted in, without being determined by, the possession of economic capital: all three interact to hide the way that social hierarchies are reproduced. Finally, the three forms of capital combine to produce a persons habitus, or set of predispositions whilst the field refers to the arena in which a specific habitus is realised. Thus we can see that for Bourdieu not only was the concept of social capital embedded in relations of power (Burkett, 2004: 236), it was also part of a complex theory that sought to explain the social reproduction of inequality. Bourdieus’ theory has been criticized as being essentialist and deterministic; for John Frow (1995) it is essentialist in that Bourdieu posits ‘a single class â€Å"experience† common to the sociologically quite distinct groups [he] includes in the dominant class’ (Frow, 1995: 62): that an individuals’ class position makes them what they are, he ‘reads off’ both working and middle class culture from their class position, resulting in an essentialist reading of the aesthetic (Frow, 1995: 63). Bourdieus’ theory can also be viewed as deterministic, as individuals’ predispositions are posited as being the direct result of their class position, entailing a denial of individual agency. Further, such a class-based analysis can lead one to minimize the effects of other forms of differentiation, such as gender, ethnicity and age. However, Bourdieu’s use of the term ‘capital’ is both metaphoric and materialistic a nd can be viewed as similar to power: although convertible with economic capital, social capital is not reducible to it (Bourdieu, 1986: 243). Also, Bourdieu argued that the social capital possessed by an individual is a result of their ‘investment strategies’ via ‘a continuing series of exchanges in which recognition is endlessly affirmed and reaffirmed’ (Bourdieu, 1986: 250). Finally, Bourdieu argues that social inequalities become part of the very bodies and predispositions of the individual through his concept of habitus (McNay, 1999: 99), not as a ‘principle of determination’ but as a ‘generative structure’ (McNay, 1999: 100): returning autonomy to the individual his theory is able to transcend determinism; it is an open system which allows for social change (McNay, 1999:101). In summary, for Bourdieu social capital is ultimately about the way that power works through society, and is concerned with the life chances of individu als. Further, the wider theory, especially the concept of the habitus, is useful for theorists who seek to explain patterns of behaviour, including community participation and levels of voting. Robert Putnam: Social Capital and Democracy Robert Putnams’ argument may be summarised as being that the decrease in participation in voluntary organisations has undermined the effectiveness of good governance; ‘that successful and healthy democracies and economies are those possessing dense webs of community participation’ (Walters, 2002: 377). In so arguing, Putnam transferred the concept of social capital from sociology into the realm of political science, arguing that increasing individualism, the anonymity of urban living (Russell, 2002: 557), and the negative effects of television (Putnam, 1995: 75; Walters, 2002: 380), have resulted in the decline of community ties and political participation (Russell, 2002: 557) and thus a decline in social capital. Similar debates were found within the British context, as were calls for a revival of participation and stakeholder values (Walters, 2002: 377). Arguing that a range of issues including ‘drugs, crime, unemployment, development, education and politi cal performance’ (Walters, 2002: 379), and the effectiveness of democracy itself (Putnam, 1995: 66) would benefit from a resurgence of voluntary associations, Putnam therefore calls for a reinvigoration of community participation (Walters, 2002: 377) as ‘members of associations are much more likely than non-members to participate in politics, to spend time with neighbours, to express social trust’ (Putnam, 1995: 73). Defining social capital as ‘features of social organisation such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit (Putnam, 1995: 67), Putnam argued that not only has the post-war period witnessed a decline in participation in voluntary associations, but that such membership is now increasingly ‘tertiary’: that ‘the only act of membership consists in writing a check for dues or perhaps occasionally reading a newsletter’ (Ibid. p. 71). Putnam argues that this declining membership, and the increasingly tertiary nature of remaining membership, represents a significant erosion of American social capital (Ibid. p. 73) and, as such, undermines democracy. However, Putnams’ use of the term is markedly different from that of Bourdieu; whereas in Bourdieus’ conception social capital was held by the individual (Walters, 2002: 387), for Putnam social capital is held by collectives (Ibid. p. 379), further, it is difficult to see how there can be a reduction in social capital, rather than a qualitative change in its composition. William Walters (2002) argues that Putnam’s use of the concept differs from Bourdieu’s in another key respect; whereas for Bourdieu social capital, although transferable with economic capital, is not reducible to it (Bourdieu, 1986: 243), Putnam assumes ‘a self-maximising individual for whom associative activity can, under certain circumstances, be an investment’ (Walters, 2002: 379, my emphasis). Rather that discussing the social capital of individuals embedded within relations of power, for Putnam social capital ‘implies a learning mechanism that is more economic that socio-psychological’ (Ibid. p. 387), and as such represents an extension of the economic metaphor in order to convince us that society is ‘self-governing’ (Ibid. p. 391): by using social capital in this way, individuals are made responsible for good governance – now conceived as a ‘horizontal space of multiple communities’ (Ibid. p. 388) – adding the discourse of the ‘civic and uncivic’ to the list of divisions by which normative judgements are naturalised (Ibid. p. 392). Thus for Putnam ‘social capital is simultaneously cause and effect’ (Ibid. p. 380). Further, rather than situating the individual within a web of power relations, Putnam relies on the atomised individual of neo-liberalism (Burkett, 2004: 236). Finally, whilst this author agrees that society benefits when individuals participate in voluntary organisations, Putnam assumes a link between such involvement and an improved performance for democracy, yet this link remains to be clearly, empirically, demonstrated (Freitag, 2006: 124). Such an argument also undermines the role of government in shaping civil society (Walters, 2002: 380) and in shaping social capital (Freitag, 2006:128), and as such can only provide a skewed picture of the link between community participation and the functioning of democracy. In Conclusion In conclusion, we can see that in the process of adapting ‘social capital’ to the realm of political science, Putnam changes the meaning of the term; that whereas for Bourdieu it was a property held by individuals, in Putnam’s account it is held by collectives. Also, that although Bourdieu believed that social capital was exchangeable with economic capital he believed it was not reducible to it, whilst Putnam relies on a distinctly neo-liberal, economic understanding of the term: that whereas for Bourdieu the individual and therefore their social capital resources are ultimately concerned with relations of power, Putnam utilises an atomistic and self-maximising conception of the individual (Walter, 2002: 386) involved in building networks of self-governance (Walters, 2002: 388) and one wonders if such an argument may, in part, justify the ‘rolling back’ of the state. Finally, that the use of the term in political science rests on the assumption of a l ink between membership of voluntary organisations and political participation, but this link remains to be empirically proven. Indeed, Markus Frietag argues that it is political institutions that ‘matter’, that there are in fact three ‘political prerequisites’ for collective social capital: institutional provision for direct democracy, respect for minorities and outsiders as part of consensus building, and a degree of local autonomy (Frietag, 2006: 145). Ben Fine argues that academia has become subject to a ‘social capital fetish’ (in Burkett, 2004: 234); that it’s now weak conceptualisation ‘means that social capital can be virtually anything’ (Burkett, 2004: 238). He is also concerned that, too often, social capital is in fact ‘primarily participation from below imposed from above’ (in Burkett, 2004: 243): perhaps we should be wary that calls for increased social capital are not simply calls for a withdrawal o f state responsibility. Bibliography Bourdieu, Pierre (1986) ‘The forms of Capital’ in Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, London: Greenwood Press, pp. 241-258. Burkett, Paul (2004) ‘Book Review: Social Capital versus Social Theory: Political Economy and Social Science at the Turn of the Millennium’ by Fine, Ben (London: Routledge) in Historical Materialism, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 233-246. Freitag, Markus (2006) ‘Bowling the State Back In: Political Institutions and the Creation of Social Capital’ in European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 45, pp. 123-152. Frow, John (1995) ‘Accounting for Tastes: Some Problems in Bourdieus’ Sociology of Culture’ in Cultural Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 59-73. McNay, L (1999) ‘Gender, habitus and the Field: Pierre Bourdieu and the Limits of Reflexivity’ in Theory, Culture Society, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 95-117. Putnam, Robert (1995) ‘Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital, An Interview with Robert Putnam’ in Journal of Democracy, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 65-78. Russell, Andrew (2005) ‘Political Parties as Vehicles of Political Engagement’, Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 555-569. Walters, William (2002) ‘Social Capital and Political Sociology: Re-imagining Politics?’ Sociology, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 377-397. 1 Footnotes [1] New York, N.Y.: Simon Schuster.

Ap Euro Review Packet

Ap Packet page 6 D. English Civil War 1. Political- One of the causes was Charles’s I unsuccessful attempt to arrest five members of Parliament, known as the Grand Remonstrance, on January 4, 1642. Another cause was who should have the power in the country and inflation forced up prices in all parts of Europe. An effect would be that England became a Commonwealth and a Protectorate. Parliamentary supremacy was another effect. 2. Religious-One of the causes was that the Puritans, sought to do away with bishops and revise the Prayer book; Charles fought against them. The main cause was over religion in which the puritans accused Charles and Laud of leaning towards Roman Catholicism. Effects are the protestant church established and religious toleration. E. Glorious Revolution 1. Social- The Glorious Revolution changed England socially because Mary and William allow the people to have a say in politics and religious toleration with the Toleration Act. 2. Political- It changed England by having William and Mary sign the Bill of Rights. This made England a Constitutional Monarchy. A constitutional monarchy acknowledges the monarch as the official head of state but the real power is in the hands of the parliament. F. 1. Stuarts The House of Stuart is a European royal house. It was founded by Robert II of Scotland, and the Stewarts first became monarchs of the Kingdom of Scotland during the late 14th century, and subsequently held the position of the Kings of Great Britain and Ireland. Their patrilineal ancestors had held the title High Steward of Scotland since the 12th century, after arriving by way of Norman England. The dynasty inherited further territory by the 17th century which covered the entire British Isles, including the Kingdom of England and Kingdom of Ireland, also upholding a claim to the Kingdom of France. The significance of the Stuarts is that they were the first kings of the United Kingdom and that they brought disaster to England. 2. Whigs The Whigs were a party in the Parliament of England, Parliament of Great Britain, and Parliament of the United Kingdom, who contested power with the rival Tories from the 1680s to the 1850s. The Whigs' origin lay in constitutional monarchism and opposition to absolute rule. Both parties began as loose groupings or tendencies, but became quite formal by 1784, with the ascension of Charles James Fox as the leader of a reconstituted â€Å"Whig† party ranged against the governing party of the new â€Å"Tories† under William Pitt the Younger. Both parties were founded on rich politicians, more than on popular votes; there were elections to the House of Commons, but a small number of men controlled most of the voters. The significance of the Whigs is that the Whigs political program came to encompass not only the supremacy of parliament over the monarch and support for free trade, but Catholic emancipation, the abolition of slavery and expansion of the franchise. 3. Tories In the 17th century it had become a term applied to monarchists in the House of Commons. By the 18th century the Tories were politicians who favored royal authority, the established church and who sought to preserve the traditional political structure and opposed parliamentary reform. After 1834 this political group in the House of Commons preferred to use the term Conservative. The significance of the Tories was that they emerged to uphold the legitimist rights of James, Duke of York to succeed his brother Charles II to the British throne. G. 1. Politique is a term that was used during the sixteenth and seventeenth century Wars of Religion, to describe moderates of both religious faiths (Huguenots and Catholics) who held that only the restoration of a strong monarchy could save France from total collapse. It frequently included a pejorative connotation of moral or religious indifference. The term gained great currency after 1568 with the appearance of radical Catholic Leagues calling for the eradication of Protestantism in France, and by 1588 the politique were seen by detractors as an organized group, and treated as worse than heretics. 2. Henry IV was King of France from 1589 to 1610 and King of Navarre from 1572 to 1610. He was the first monarch of the Bourbon branch of the Capetian dynasty in France. As a Huguenot, Henry was involved in the Wars of Religion before ascending the throne in 1589. Before his coronation as King of France at Chartres, he changed his faith from Calvinism to Catholicism and, in 1598, he enacted the Edict of Nantes, which guaranteed religious liberties to the Protestants, thereby effectively ending the civil war. One of the most popular French kings, both during and after his reign, Henry showed great care for the welfare of his subjects and displayed an unusual religious tolerance for the time. By him granting religious liberties to the Protestants he was helping establishing a modern state in France. 3. Cardinal Richelieu was consecrated as a bishop in 1608, he later entered politics, becoming a Secretary of State in 1616. Richelieu soon rose in both the Catholic Church and the French government, becoming a Cardinal in 1622, and King Louis XIII's chief minister in 1624. The Cardinal de Richelieu was often known by the title of the King's â€Å"Chief Minister† or â€Å"First Minister†. As a result, he is considered to be the world's first Prime Minister, in the modern sense of the term. He sought to consolidate royal power and crush domestic factions. By restraining the power of the nobility, he transformed France into a strong, centralized state. His chief foreign policy objective was to check the power of the Austro-Spanish Habsburg dynasty, and to ensure French dominance in the Thirty Years' War that engulfed Europe. Although he was a cardinal, he did not hesitate to make alliances with Protestant rulers in attempting to achieve his goals. By doing all of this he was helping establish a modern state. 4. Cardinal Mazarin was a French-Italian cardinal, diplomat, and politician, who served as the chief minister of France from 1642 until his death. Mazarin succeeded his mentor, Cardinal Richelieu. He was a noted collector of art and jewels, particularly diamonds, and he bequeathed the â€Å"Mazarin diamonds† to Louis XIV in 1661, some of which remain in the collection of the Louvre museum in Paris. His personal library was the origin of the Bibliotheque Mazarine in Paris. He helps establish the basis for a modern state in France by following in Richelieu policies. . The Fronde was a civil war in France, occurring in the midst of the Franco-Spanish War, which had begun in 1635. The Fronde was divided into two campaigns, the Fronde of the parliaments and the Fronde of the nobles. The timing of the outbreak of the Fronde des parliaments, directly after the Peace of Westphalia (1648) that ended the Thirty Years War, was significant. The nuclei of armed bands under aristocratic leader s that terrorized parts of France had been hardened in a generation of war in Germany where troops still tended to operate autonomously. Louis XIV, impressed as a young ruler with the experience of the Fronde, came to reorganize French fighting forces under a stricter hierarchy whose leaders ultimately could be made or unmade by the King. Thus the Fronde finally resulted in the disempowerment of the territorial aristocracy and the emergence of absolute monarchy. They help establish the basis for a modern state in France by strength the crown since it made people realized that it was better to be ruled by a strong king then to be dominated by competing and contentious noblemen. . Louis XIV was a Bourbon monarch who ruled as King of France and Navarre. He ruled France as an absolute monarch by declaring that â€Å"I am the state†. The experience of the Fronde taught him to distrust the nobles. He believed in the divine right of king provided the justification for absolute monarchy. He was smart enough to create Versailles in order to keep a track of the nobles. He help establish the basis for a modern state by pr oviding a method on how to keep the nobles content and thus make them not revolt against the king. 7. Jean-Baptiste Colbert was a French politician who served as the Minister of Finances of France from 1665 to 1683 under the rule of King Louis XIV. His relentless hard work and thrift made him an esteemed minister. He achieved a reputation for his work of improving the state of French manufacturing and bringing the economy back from the brink of bankruptcy. Historians note that, despite Colbert's efforts, France actually became increasingly impoverished because of the King's excessive spending on wars. Colbert worked to create a favorable balance of trade and increase France's colonial holdings. Colbert's plan was to build a general academy. Colbert's market reforms included the foundation of the Manufacture royale de glaces de miroirs in 1665 to supplant the importation of Venetian glass and to encourage the technical expertise of Flemish cloth manufacturing in France. He also founded royal tapestry works at Gobelins and supported those at Beauvais. Colbert worked to develop the domestic economy by raising tariffs and by encouraging major public works projects. Colbert also worked to ensure that the French East India Company had access to foreign markets, so that they could always obtain coffee, cotton, dyewoods, fur, pepper, and sugar. In addition, Colbert founded the French merchant marine. Colbert issued more than 150 edicts to regulate the guilds. One such law had the intention of improving the quality of cloth. The edict declared that if the authorities found a merchant's cloth unsatisfactory on three separate occasions, they were to tie him to a post with the cloth attached to him. He establishes the basis for a way to improve economy so that the people can get jobs thus helping reducing the unemployment rate in France.

Argumentative Essay on Good and Bad News

Bad News is Easy to Sell Every day we receive tons of information from different sources. The ones we trust most come from mass media of course. Reading morning paper while eating breakfast or watching TV during the dinner is a common thing. So, what is the main news our eye catches? Here is a report on plane crash victims. What else? A serial killer hasn’t been found yet. And for the tenth time we read some horrifying details on how the whole town was swept away with a hurricane. It seems like there is nothing much to read about. Even the yellow papers give us the most nasty and definitely unnecessary details on celebrities’ personal dramas. Well, if you take a closer look, there are a lot of positive things worth finding out. Still, for some reason they are not so interesting and do not excite people’s imagination so much. Thus, the balance between good and bad news we consume is far from being even. The demand determines supply, and mass media do not work for free. On the contrary, some of them are the biggest market players. It is not hard to come to the conclusion that what they let us know is actually what we want to pay for. Media is a very clear mirror for each community’s state of mind. So, before complaining on how frightening every other newspaper issue is, let us ask ourselves, why do we want to buy them? Not everybody can say it out loud, but I’m sure each one has his own reason. Psychologists say that hearing about other people’s fails makes us feel better deep inside, because we realize that it all could have happened with us, but didn’t. I think the reasons for such great amount of bad news have very similar origin human mentality. Until we have that planted on the ground of market relations, bad news will be easy to sell.

Analysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 451 Essay

The analysis of Ray Bradbury s dystopian novel, Fahrenheit 451, shows that literature as books, education and alike is abused and criminalized in the hero’s reality, who is Guy Montag. The novel’s setting is when new things seem to have totally replaced literature, fire fighters set flames instead of putting them out, the ownership of books is deserving of the law and to restrict the standard is to court demise. The oppression of literature through innovation and technology can be analyzed through various research from others, which can be connected to Fahrenheit 451, a novel that foretells an extremely exhibit struggle in our advanced society, and in addition recognize the presence of the conflict in the year when the book was published, 1951. Four diverse basic theories identify with the contention in Bradbury s dystopian society. The first is ‘Knowledge versus Ignorance’, another is ‘Technology versus Reading by MIT innovation Review - A perspecti ve from Mara E. Vats., next is the Sorts of Conflict in Literature by Katherine Docimo and the last is ‘technology supplanting books in education. These four hypotheses precisely mediate with each other yet vary to stress the conflict between Technology and Literature. Dystopian literature has been described as fiction that shows a negative perspective without the limits of society and mankind. Utopian works ordinarily sketch a future in which innovation enhances the regular life of people and advances humanShow MoreRelatedAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4511743 Words   |  7 PagesIn Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, the protagonist, Guy Montag, suddenly realizes his overwhelming discontent with life when he meets Clarisse McClean, a seventeen year old girl who introduces him to beauty of the world and the notion of questioning ones surroundings. This novel, having been released shortly after the Second Read Scare, a time when fear of communism lead to the baseless accusation of political figures by Senator McCarthy, was received with mixed reviews. However, today more so thanRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4511722 Words   |  7 Pagesthem†. Morrison’s claim can be interpreted as meaning that heroes, whoever th ey may be, are people who have the courage to revolt against injustices that are viewed by most as fixed or unchangeable parts of their societies. In Ray Bradbury’s acclaimed 1953 novel Fahrenheit 451, the protagonist Guy Montag certainly qualifies as a hero as he rebels against the dystopian society he lives in, which has completely eschewed critical thinking and reading books. Montag begins to realize that this society isRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4511633 Words   |  7 PagesBradbury’s Fahrenheit 451: Dissecting the Hero’s Journey to Dystopic World Each person has a perception of the world. People are capable of judging the place they live in, human beings often find it either satisfactory or not. Creative writers have displayed similar, albeit different worlds in their works. They are similar in the way they portray societies with varied amounts of good and evil which may be reflective of how we view our own. On the other hand, they can also be different, as creativeRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4511193 Words   |  5 Pagestrue today? In Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, ideas such as dystopian society, the dulling of emotions, personal freedom, and government censorship are utilized to illustrate how technology, the advancement of society, and government control has blindfolded the population from the creativity, knowledge, and truth of the past. Bradbury employs each of these ideas frequently throughout the novel to further enhance the deeper meaning behind his masterpiece. When one looks at Fahrenheit 451 like a workRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4511241 Words   |  5 Pagesof the people who do not do anything about it† (Albert Einstein). In Ray Bradbury’s novel Fahrenheit 451, the novel explores censorships role as a hindrance on individuality, and the severe toll it takes on society’s self-awareness. Academia has widely argued the reason behind Bradbury’s dystopian themed work of art. Most interpretations of the novel suggest the work resembles anti-censorship propaganda. On the other hand, Bradbury himself stated: â€Å"I wasn’t worried about censorship-I was worried aboutRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 451 1486 Words   |  6 Pagesthe story. The novel Fahrenheit 451 concludes with a corrupt censored society in which hundreds of oppressed individuals are killed by an atomic bomb leaving Guy Montag and a few others to rebuild humanity. Many will propose that the ending was not app ropriate because there were too many questions left unanswered. For example, â€Å"What happened to Professor Faber?† or â€Å"How will a couple of homeless men survive post from a nuclear war?† The conclusion of Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 leaves the readerRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 451 Essay1311 Words   |  6 PagesAuthored by Ray Bradbury in 1953, Fahrenheit 451, a descriptively written science fiction, presents its readers with his bitterly satirical view of the foreboding future and the consequences that may come with it. The novel depicts a dystopian society in which freedom of expression and thought is limited and books are outlawed. Written after WWII, when book burning and the blacklisting or censorship of films was a common threat. Technological advances were beginning to spread and therefore, influencingRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 451 1815 Words   |  8 PagesRay Bradbury was a well-known author who happe ned to write several novels, books, and short stories. He was very famous and I have never read anything that he wrote, until I read this book. I wasn’t sure what to expect because I had no idea what it was about and what kind of story it told. Fahrenheit 451 told a breathtaking adventure, was relatable, and it was almost as if I was submerged in this dystopian society, who was forced to live without imagination, books and a sense of wonder. Mr. BradburyRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 4512341 Words   |  10 Pagesrecognizable and typical patterns of behavior with certain probable outcomes†. While in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, water is used to represent death and rebirth, showing that our experiences can change us, and we can be re-birthed as a totally new person, while in Homer’s Odyssey, water is used to show that life is full of vast trials and adventures to overcome. The archetype of fire is also used in both novels. In Fahrenheit 451, it is used to show that even through destruction can emerge good; while inRead MoreAnalysis Of Ray Bradbury s Fahrenheit 451 875 Words   |  4 PagesGiridhar Batra Ross-1 Aug 29. 2014 Fahrenheit 451 Essay The Role of Technology as a Theme in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 The average person in our society spends 7-8 hours a day(The Washington Post) using technology; that is stuff like television, video games, surfing the web, etc. Let that set in; that’s a long time. Our society procrastinates also is constantly distracted by technology like no other. We are practically glued to technology; before we become slaves of technology we must change