I am not good at reading. I've mentioned this before. It really shouldn't take discipline; my nephew reads with great regularity. But it does, and I can't place why. I said last June (come on, it's only been 9 months; barely long enough to, um...crap, people can fully gestate in that time frame, can't they?) that I would read Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 as my next book and blog subject. The guy had just died, after all. Plus, it was one of the next few in my queue anyway. Also, I had recently read Orwell's 1984 with which 451 (as I will so cleverly call it 'cause I'm hip like that) has been compared. It only seemed natural. But it never happened. Well, at least not until a couple weeks ago when I finally felt guilty enough to dive back into the whole reading thing like some sort of smug intellectual. (Aside: In truth, I consider reading to be neither smug, nor inherently intellectual; I use those words to justify my laze-induced hiatus.)
So, here I am on the verge of the first anniversary of this hallowed blog (hallowed?) and I've only six posts to my name. But, having just finished a book, I'm about to make it seven. 12 months, 7 posts, 5 books. Mask your awe, please. I'm but a simple man of humble literacy who finally read Fahrenheit 451. Hold on, though. I didn't just read it; I enjoyed it. (Editor's note: Do I overuse the semicolon when I write? I do I just speak in a manner that warrants its use? It's gotta be hard to follow me when I speak. I'm amazed more people don't shout, "For Pete's sake, quick talking!" when I blather on. I may not be good at reading, but I'm as verbose as anyone. I digress...) 451 was everything I wanted 1984 to be, only better. Yes, it was dystopic, and yes, I could imagine both authors reading their manuscripts with a little too much self-satisfaction, but Bradbury is a much more engaging author. Possibly, I just relate to his style, but I considered 451 to be both more vividly described and more accessible to the reader. Not that I live in a time where censorship is a legitimate fear. It certainly happens, and I'm not too young to remember the PMRC, but I can't honestly say I've ever experienced anything even resembling McCarthyism. But I'm also not so blind that I can't recognize the obvious political influence on both authors. Which is interesting, because my copy of 451 was a 50th Anniversary Edition and included an interview with Mr. Bradbury where he acknowledged the similarity between the two novels. But his assertion was that, while Orwell was influenced by Communism, he himself was only interested in the social ramifications of censorship. Which is a bunch of bull-oney. In this way, Bradbury is like Oasis denying the influence of the Beatles (sorry, terrible and trite analogy, I know). Both may be correct in that a) the stated influence is overblown, and b) you may not have anything direct to point to in order to reinforce the argument, but both are also denying the pervasiveness of the former's impact on contemporary culture.
The political statement, however, wasn't the only aspect that drew me in. Bradbury's writing style would lend itself very well to a script. For instance, I found myself wishing I was a theatre student again just so I could use Montag's first meeting with Faber as material. There are some great monologues (not diatribes) withing 451 as well as some excellent pieces for scene work. I was surprised to learn that, while it was made into a movie, it wasn't more often staged as a play. While reading, I could imagine how I'd design the set, what devices I'd use for scene transitions, or even how I'd cast the roles. I mean, come on, the thing is basically written in 3 acts. It's begging to be adapted. I hadn't missed acting/directing/designing this much in quite sometime. So, I was delighted to come to the Afterword, where I read Mr. Bradbury speak about his opportunity to rediscover his characters when the Studio Theatre Playhouse in Los Angeles actually assembled a production. But in reading his words, as well as a transcript of the aforementioned interview, I realized he would be a terrible person to adapt his own book. In the interview, for instance, he criticized modern films, particularly a favorite of mine, Moulin Rouge, for accommodating too short an attention span. Now I'm no Baz Luhrmann apologist, but, as a recovering art major fascinated with Post-Impressionism and turn-of-the-century Montmarte, I think he failed to understand how a movie can capture the sensory zeitgeist of a time and place in a way that a book can't quite suffice. I guess what I'm getting at is that reading this was one more piece of evidence that authors and playwrights practice two different crafts. They're like climatologists and meteorologists. Sure, to the layperson, they seem basically the same. But it's in the nuance where we find the two shouldn't try to speak for each other's domain.
By now, if you've read anything else I've posted, you'll notice I try to distinguish between books and movies/plays. I feel like they are two different media and any comparison of the two is bound to fail. I've also expressed my disdain for "readers" (does that sound pejorative?) who judge a movie with a flip "the book was better" dismissal. So, I've decided my next dalliance with reading will be an actual script, not just a book eventually adapted into a movie. A few years back, I happened across a copy of the original screenplay for a movie by Minnesota's own Joel and Ethan Coen. While I'm a casual fan, I've never seen their directorial debut, 1984's (ooh, coincidence? yes, actually) Blood Simple. I haven't read a script since college, and I can only remember one that I read eagerly. So, while it should be a quick activity, I don't think I'll finish it in one sitting. I noticed it was on TV the other day and I was tempted to watch it, but I decided I should read the script first. Luckily, it's also on Netflix so I've added it to my queue. I fully expect to be obnoxious the next time you hear from me. Feel free to punch me when I inevitably say with my nose held snootily high... "Meh, not as good as the screenplay."
No comments:
Post a Comment