[PDF] Fahrenheit 451 This thesis studies Ray Bradbury'

View - Download Fahrenheit 451

Previous PDF

Next PDF

Student

Ht 2019

Engelska

A Discourse study of

Fahrenheit 451

Hegemony, Otherness and Class struggle

Abstract

This thesis studies Ray Bradburys novel Fahrenheit 451 using Critical Discourse Analysis as the primary

tool. It argues that the narrative develops through the supporting characters actions, and the different

societal discourses of hegemony, otherness and class struggle they represent. Basing the analysis on

Althusserian and Gramscian ideas and discussing citizens transformation from subjects to individuals,

this study concludes that although a subject may be power-less and wary, it is by learning to act through

being given information through discourse that personal development occurs. Keywords: Discourse, CDA, hegemony, otherness, interpellation, Ray Bradbury,

Fahrenheit 451

Table of contents

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................. 5

2. Discourse Analysis and societal power structures .................................................. 7

3. Althusser, state, ideology, and subject .................................................................. 10

4. Hegemony, the ideologue, mass-man and the other ............................................. 12

5. Characters ............................................................................................................. 14

5.1. Captain Beatty ................................................................................................... 14

5.2. Clarisse .............................................................................................................. 14

5.3. Faber .................................................................................................................. 15

5.4. Granger .............................................................................................................. 15

6. Analysis - Mapping characters and discourses ..................................................... 16

6.1. Orders of discourse ............................................................................................ 16

6.2. Hegemony .......................................................................................................... 17

6.3. Otherness ........................................................................................................... 22

6.4. Class-struggle .................................................................................................... 26

7. Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 28

8. Works Cited .................................................................................................................... 31

5

1. Introduction

This study explores how secondary ch

l Fahrenheit 451. -Dickinson 79), where happiness stems from consumption rather than thought. Family homes are dark or dimly lit at night. Interpersonal social gatherings consist mostly of watching television together, on wall- sized screens on 3 or 4 walls of the parlors. In bars and cafés, jokeboxes play the same jokes repeatedly. Roadside adverts are several hundred feet long, to allow viewing from cars rushing by. The populace live life at break-neck speed without much quiet-time to reflect, to smell old leaves or to taste the rain. Even in bed small earbud-like speakers provide entertainment, while sleeping pills enable falling asleep quickly, without time to think. Citizens must not keep books, and much less read them, lest they want to be unhappy. If a citizen finds out that another keeps books, the government must be informed of the transgression. When the alarm is raised, the fire brigade is sent out to torch the offender State ideology proclaims that knowledge equals unhappiness, and competing ideas are repressed, controlled, and hunted. Dissidents are not allowed. Nuclear wars have raged, and new wars are on the horizon. The State provides censored and simplified information to its subjects. The narrative revolves around fireman Montag, whose job it is to burn books instead of putting out fires, in order to keep the subjects of the state from becoming unhappy by reading literature. Throughout the novel, the reader follows Montag in his meetings with secondary characters who, on the one hand, wish to keep him from changing, and on the other, to help him on his journey from good subject to enlightened individual. 6 Other than Henriette Wiens 2012 Masters thesis Claiming mastery of the word, on Fahrenheit 451 and 1984, few published works have focused on the power of discourse, but no research has dealt with the discursive function of the secondary characters. This essay will, therefore, be able to provide insight into facets that have received little previous attention. The study will argue that it is through the different discourses of hegemony, otherness and class struggle, as represented by secondary characters in the form of teachers and catalysts that the narrative develops. The theoretical framework is based on Althusserian and Gramscian ideas of ideology, interpellation and hegemony. Apparatuses and Interpellation in Fahrenheit 451 and Jo Myers-Dickinsons 1999 doctoral thesis Fashionable Straitjackets and Wooden Men which both discuss the States and its representatives actions will be expanded upon in the analysis. The analysis focuses on the following central questions: How is discourse used to convince subjects in a totalitarian state of their function as subjects? How does questioning hegemonic principles and discourses lead to free thought? How are subordinate individuals able to rebel against the dominant ideology through being situated in different discourses? How are the roles of teachers and catalysts functioning as primary driving-forces of change? T Analysis and in part on Teun van Dijks Critical Discourse Studies with a focus on discourse and power relations. Conclusions will be drawn using close reading, studying both linguistic features and their place in the sociocultural discourses present in the narrative. The structure of the essay is separated into several distinct sections. Following the introduction, there is a section covering the method and critical perspective. Thereafter the reader finds theoretical background on the concepts used as basis for the analysis of the primary text. Following is a short descriptive section on the secondary characters, which serves to give context to the analysis. 7

2. Discourse Analysis and societal power structures

A common definition of discourse is the action or process of communicating thought by means of the spoken words (OED 2013). The act of discourse if thusly intrinsically linked to human society. The choice of words and the manner of which these words are uttered decide what content the sender in a communicative event delivers to the recipient. Discourse is, of course, not only one side of these events, as it also matters how the recipient receives and interprets the information. Furthermore, it is for this study important not to limit ones understanding of discourse simply as a noun which describes the act of communicating, as it, as a concept encompasses much more. This study employs as its method of analysis ideas found in 1995 book Critical Discourse Analysis, and aspects of power-structures through discourse laid out by Teun van Dijk in his 2008 book Discourse and Power. Although both authors have differing views on what to name their methods, the abbreviation CDA has been chosen to represent their concepts in this study. Common for both Faircloughs and van Dijks approaches is that discourse is not only a communicative action, but that it also implies a social practice and interactions within social, cultural or historical situations. Ideology and over-arching societal principles are, too, forms of discourse. It is, therefore, rarely a good idea to define discourse too narrowly since all communicative actions (or texts) function through several aspects simultaneously as they both constitutes the world and are shaped by the world around them. In order to grasp and understand discourse (here, understood as communicative event) on an interpersonal level, discourse understood as ideology or genres must also be considered in the analysis. Fairclough says that all participants in communicative events, the producers and the interpreters draw upon the socially available resources to them (10). He calls these resources orders of discourse and defines them as the discoursal facets of the social order which governs what can be expressed and how it can be expressed. Orders of discourse limit what may be uttered. If the interpersonal communicative event takes place, for instance, among doctors, certain discursive practices govern how and what is uttered. 8 In a hospital environment, we would talk of medicine discourse. The same applies in all other situations, be them in a specific institution, or in society as a whole. Discourse is, according to Fairclough, in part the communicative event, in part the action of communicating, and in part a system that governs what and how communication is achieved. van Dijk, meanwhile, explains how discourse is also an instrument of power. Through societal discourse peoples minds can be controlled, and those groups with greater influence in society have greater access to public discourse, and subsequently greater access to power. A purpose of CDA, says he, is to explain how by those in a position of power (65). The critical component of CDA, which is discussed at length by both Fairclough and van Dijk, means to uncover domination, to stand on the side of the dominated. Research based on CDA should strive for change by providing evidence for illegitimate use of discursive actions by the dominant groups. Building on Cultural Marxist theories developed by Gramsci and Althusser, but rejecting concepts of passive subjects and seeing ideology not through a Marxist lens, van Dijk and Fairclough both argue that their socially committed perspectives provide insights into communication that other research might not find. To analyze discursive events and the dimensions of power in Fahrenheit 451, the selected analytical tools are based on videas of sociolinguistic analysis and Faircl ee-dimensionality. The former entails beginning with paying close attention to word choices and how it varies dependi ever, as van Dijk points to, it is necessary to combine this linguistic approach with aspects of social science to reach a complete analysis of the entire situation as an analysis of the words themselves is not enough to reach a complete understanding of the communicative event. 9 This view is shared by Fairclough, as his critical approach includes the notion that all communication includes three aspects at work simultaneoui) a language text, spoken or written, (ii) discourse practice (text production and text interpretation), (iii) sociocultural pra ). It is therefore imperative, when employing include in the analysis: Linguistic description of the language text, interpretation of the relationship between the (productive and interpretative) discursive processes and the text, and explanation of the relationship between the discursive processes and the social processes. (Fairclough 97) The communicative event is understood as a function of the discursive practices that are used in its interpretation, and it shapes those same practices, depending on the sociocultural genres the discourse is part of. The event, the setting, and the broader cultural sphere are all thus linked and cannot be separated in the analysis. 10

3. Althusser, state, ideology, and subject

In the 1971 article Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses, French philosopher

Louis Althusser expands on Marxist theory c

and class-struggle. He states that the classical Marxist understanding of there being

State poweand that the latter should be

divided into the Repressive and the Ideological State Apparatus. Where RSA contains government institutions such as the police and the courts, ISA is a plurality of entities such as the educational ISA, communications ISA, and cultural ISA. What separates the two State apparatuses, Althusser says, is that while RSA functions primarily through violence, ISAs fupredominantly by ideolog (208). Together, the two State apparatuses form the basis of the dominating ideology, allowing the ruling class to exercise power over the citizens. The RSAs punish those who misbehave, and the ISAs create the ruling ideology which should be lived by all in a particular society. Althusser claims they are inseparable, that the one cannot function without the other (209). Furthermore, RSAs are always unified under a centralized command, be that the government or a representative thereof, but ISAs are instead sually in contradictory forms208) since their very form is one of theory and thought, rather than a formalized institution. The fact that ISAs are diverse institutions of ideology, not concrete government functions, leads, according to Althusser, to ISAs being a site of class-struggle: ause the resistance of the exploited classes is able to fund means and occasions to express itself there, either by the utilization of their contradictions, or by conquering combat positions in them in struggle (Althusser 209) It is much easier for those not in power to challenge the ruling set of ideas in those State apparatuses that are not unified and controlled by the rulers. It is, therefore, vital for the ruling ideology to be applied to the ISAs. Through such act he ruling class can control how the ISAs function. 11 The inverse is also of crucial importance. Althusser makes clear that the ruling ideology does not become that by itself. State power, and thus the very function of the RSA, must come from the realization of ideology. When it supersedes what formerly was, those old notions are pushed aside, and the new ideology becomes the ruling set of ideas. ISAs, therefore, enables the RSAs, while RSAs enable the upholding of the ruling ideology in ISAs.

Through the I16). A

subject is someone who is accepted by the ideology as more than an individual. The good subjects live according to th right by themselves,e rituals of the llated subjects also includes the notion that in submits to a higher authority, and is therefore stripped of all 219).
12

4. Hegemony, the ideologue, mass-man and the other

While traditionally, the concert or

352), Antonio understanding takes it further. The Italian

philosopher active in the early 20th century reconstructed Marxist ideas on economics and transformed it, Bates says, to hegemony being a political form of leadership based on consent from those who are led. The ruling class secures their right t diffusion and popularizat352). This cultural leadership is obtained and ingrained in the citizens of the state through what can best be described as an alternative understanding of Althuss apparatuses. Gra

353), where the former rect the latter is a

(353). While there exist competing ideas in civil society, it is through the power of those thinkers who belong to the ruling class that the consent of the people is secured. The two societies are interdependent, as hegemony cannot be achieved by the one on its own. Any society, and especially a totalitarian, needs both the force of the political society and the civil society to convince the masses through propaganda. If, however, the prevailing ideology is successfully employed through the cultural sphere, lative tranquility, in which hegemony rather than dictatorship is the prevailing form of r355). in the state to be achieved, there must first exist a stable state that teaches the masses about the ruling ideology. Humans do not become independent (or subordinate to the ruling ideology for that matter) by themselves. There is a need for intellectuals to lead the struggle. 13

These intellectuals, which Myers-Dickinson

deolre the ones ultimately responsible for the creation and maintenance of the totalitarian state. She says that for the masses to heed the calling of the ideologue, there first must be a period of unease and displeasure of the previous regime.

Therefore, dystopian societ

(25). The masses will follow new leaders when they have been sufficiently convinced of ht way forward, away from the old. Through the actions of charismatic and unshakably confident (27) ideologues who can proclaim a new world order and convince the populace of, not only the advantages of the new system but also of the wrongs of the previous, a new society develops. People, Myers-Dickinson says, are by themselves often in need of guidance from those with greater knowledge. If this indoctrination is successful, the people wil loyal to the mandated ideology of their 25), to the point of seeing liberty as less but submission of the self to the collectiv (26 It is a citizen, terminology, a subject. It is someone who is so integrated into the hegemonic ideology that individual freedom is cast aside, and t (38) who loses free thought. Those who do not follow along with the ideas put forth by the ruling class, those who subscrib353) risk being cast out, becoming t yers-Dickinson subject. While the true believer, the mass man is a part of society, and thus a citizen or a good subject, the Other is someone whom the ruling class must rid the (ideological) world of. power to teach the good subjects that what the Other is doing is terrible, and how to act to stay functional. Finally, society may also create networks of spies to watch over and report on erroneous behavior, to maintain mass conformity (71). 14

5. Characters

Having now devoted quite a bit of space to method and background, which to the reader might appear as part of a sociology-paper, what follows below is an introduction to the booksecondary characters. These four are deemed the most important to the narrativepment, as they all function as catalysts rather than bystanders.

5.1. Captain Beatty

Cief, is undeniably the main antagonist of the

naiplinary force that restores waywar (Pundir 176). He sees that Montag is starting to question the hegemonic discourses set forth by the state, and he uses his extensive knowledge of both the historical and the contemporary society to bring Montag back into the fold. By quoting literature and explaial perspective his goal is to sterilize the -ir 177) fireman. Michael LaBrie goes further in stating that

Captain Beatty the spoiled, superficial 26). He

possesses a wealth of knowledge, which makes him an ideologue at work for the State ideology.

5.2. Clarisse

Clarisse McClellan is the first catalyst; whose free-thinking personality makes Montag question the world he lives in. She is, according to herself, (Bradbury 5). She is forced to see a psychiat As her name suggests, her effect on Montag is illuminating for sure (Koç 123). Her family is equally misfit. Clarisse tells Montag about how her uncle has been arrested multiple times for doing things such as driving at moderate speed on family spends its evenings having meaningful conversations, and Clarisse tells Montag how she likes to study people, sometimes riding the subway all day, listening to other people talk. Her conclusion, which Montag at first has a difficult time accele dot 15 From their first encounter, Clarisse starts Montag off on his journey of self-discovery by asking questions. Rafeeq analysis states that Montag sees Clarisse as a mirror that reflects his insecurities and inexperience at him, but that, in actuality, it is Montag himself wh away the poorly fitting mask after Clarisse shows [he truth undKoç elaborates by saying that it is because of Clarisse providing a reflection that Montag realizes his subjection to the ruling discourses.

5.3. Faber

Faber, meanwhile, a college professor who does not believe the book as an entity is what is essentialhes of the universe

79) into something that can be understood. Faber says he does not

Montag comes to Fa

because he needs someone who will listen to him. Faber is a teacher who lets Montag know that he can, and does, think for himself. LaBrie exp in a cleverly placed juxtaposition in which Montag is displayed as a changing agent in a to Montag, as Beatty does but instead allowing Montag to live, to feel what it is to think freely and to act per wish, he teaches the fireman about freedom.

5.4. Granger

Granger is the final teacher helping Montag transform into a person with real individual thought. He, too, is an academic who hides in the woods outside the city with his contingent of out-of-work college professors who all lost their employment when the liberal arts institutions were closed due to insufficient applicants. This group of avid readers has taken it upon themselves to preserve the contents of literature in their minds, having developed a method of photographically remembering texts. The people in Grangers network are agents of counter-power (van Dijk) working to slowly overthrow the present ruling-class, in order to recreate a society that once was. 16

6. Analysis - Mapping characters and discourses

6.1. Orders of discourse

This essay aims to study how discourses inside the novel, rather than those in the real world in the 1950s, affect the protagonist, it is thus of essence to establish which discourses are to be analyzed. It is, according to Fairclough, up to the researcher to carefully choose which discourses to study, and to do so consistently to make sure the results are viable. Marianne Jørgensen & Louise Phillips, on the other hand, explain how it is wise to see discourses as an analytical tool which is used rather than something concrete which exists in reality (143). They say it is mereway of representing the world (143). As the goal is to explore the impact discourses have on subjects of a totalitarian state, it is beneficial first to touch upon the underlying orders of discourse which are central, but perhaps not overtly discussed in the analyses of those discourses represented by the secondary characters. All analyses will, however, need to have a base in these underlying ideas. Fahrenheit 451 is a dystopian novel; therefore, the critical underlying discourses must be those of dystopian literature and the totalitarian state. For an authoritarian state, eliminating the will of the populace and the thought of the individual is of the utmost importance. This then creates dystopia, where free will and individual thought are not merely frowned upon, but outright banned. History is erased and replaced with a version that validates the leader(s). The dystopian state demands total allegiance of the citizens, and those who wil nual flow of banalities designed to numb the mind and, thus, remove the threat of independenMyers-

Dickinson 20).

17 With the underlying orders of discourse, i.e dystopia and totalitarianism, it is possible to pick out which over-arching themes will be analyzed and discussed. As has been established earlier in the essay, Fairclough calls these themes orders of discourse. Since space (and time) is limited, the analysis will be restricted to Hegemony, Otherness, and Class-struggle. Within these orders of discourse, effort will be made to show how the four secondary characters employ different aspects of these discourses and corresponding social processes to teach the protagonist and help (or hinder) him on his journey.

6.2. Hegemony

Hegemony, according to Gramscirs and those

who are governed. In Althusseris a question of power emanating from the State, controlling the subjects. In the world of Fahrenheit 451, Hegemony can be considered to be both. On the one hand, as Captain Beatty so eloquently puts it, the State was not responsible for a world where thinking was frowned upon. He says that tum, no declaration, no censorship, to start withpublic wanted less thinking and more easily digested entertainment. They did not want to worry, and the cultural ISAs obliged. On the other hand, hegemony as State power is shown when Montag friends are discussing politics, and a recent election. Here, the conversation does not concern actual policy or ideology, but rather the candidates Because of the publicaversion to processing difficult topics, the State has arranged it so that whoever wins the election is the one who is deemed the most good-looking.

Montagexclaims just don

tall man (93), as, apparently, a shorter candidate does not exude as much trust as someone who is taller. This communicative event does awaken the question of whether the State practices hegemony partly through sham-elections meant to fool the populace into believing there is some form of democracy left. 18 Furthermore, the protagonist is positioned as a spectator in the novels opening paragraph. The firehose is a great python spitting its venomous kerosene upon the world (1), thus acting as the agent. When everything around him is burning, Montag grinned the fierce grin (2), showing he has learnt to take pleasure in seeing books being destroyed. According to Koç, this proves that Montag is a passive subject constructed by the dominant ideology (122) instead of a free-thinking individual. Montag, says Koç, is an interpellated subject (122), who takes pride in his occupation, and he feels closely connected to all other firefighters. Thus, by understanding that interpellation is finished and successful in the case of Montag, the reader is then allowed to follow along on his journey. Yet another view of hegemony in the novel is through Beas interactions with Montag. The first time the Captain appears is when they discuss a job where an older man was found in possession of many books. Montag asks what happened to the man and says that he was not insane. To this Beatty re nsanity is not only in reading literature but also in attempting to break the law. The man was therefore brought to an asylum. The State eliminates all dissidents in its midst to keep control. The same becomes apparent when an older woman refuses to leave her home, which is soon to be burnt under the law. Beatt that books are bad, and that the government only wants what is best for its citizens. When Montag later becomes unwell and stays at home, Beatty visits him and lectures him on why the coun includes relating facts instead of the state- rulebooks. as on hegemony as cooperation between those in power and those without not to use State-mandated information. To ensure that the recipient, Montag, receives a real un job, he must learn the truth. Beatty feels that delivering the ideas of the ruling ideology would only worsen the situation. 19 responsibility to lead his subordinates back from wayward thinking, and he cannot do that with pushing more propaganda yet. He must serve Montag some truth in order to keep him living in the larger lie. es explanations of how it was through wanting to please everybody, combined with rapid technological development, that literature became irrelevant. Speed up the film, Montag, quick. Click? Pic? Look, Eye, Now, Flick, Here, There, Swift, Pace, Up, Down, In Out, Why, How, Who, What, Where, Eh? Uh! Bang! Smack! Wallop, Bing, Bong, Boom! Digest-digests, digest-digest-digests. Politics? One column, two sentences, a headline! Then, in mid-air, all vanish pumping hands of publishers, exploiters, broadcasters, that the centrifuge flings off all unnecessary, time-wasting thought! (Bradbury 52) The hegemonic discourse includes here not only the State-sanctio nts. Blame is put on ISAs such as the media industry, not of short words and repetitions show a sense of s pace compared to literature. Adding to this a social science analysis, the reader learns that citizens are turned into Myers- - ssive subjects are created through the ruling cl, in the process of interpellation. Beatty continues by explaining how the culture industry removed everything that could be considered offensive by any minority n, the morequotesdbs_dbs35.pdfusesText_40

[PDF] stage fin d'étude ingénieur

[PDF] stage de fin d'étude définition

[PDF] stage de fin d'étude ou d'études

[PDF] fêtes de fin d'années

[PDF] kant critique de la raison pratique pdf

[PDF] ray bradbury fahrenheit 451 résumé court

[PDF] argumentation indirecte définition wikipedia

[PDF] fmpc

[PDF] encg

[PDF] fmdc

[PDF] que reproche rousseau a la fontaine

[PDF] ens rabat

[PDF] candide argumentation directe ou indirecte

[PDF] resultats bac 2017

[PDF] raymond dextreit wikipedia