Father Pens Spot-On Response to Son's Permission Slip to Read Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 has long been hailed as one of the most divisive and important books of the 20th century. Its dystopian setting and social commentary regarding government censorship spoke to a world dealing with the ramifications of Nazi Germany, the rule of Joseph Stalin, and the overreach of McCarthyism. Not only was the book controversial when it was released in 1953, apparently it's still causing a stir.

When The Daily Show writer Daniel Radosh's son Milo came home with a permission slip to be able to read Fahrenheit 451 in his school's book club, the comedy veteran knew the irony was a bit too good to pass up. Not only did he sign the slip, he also wrote a letter with his thoughts on the matter to school officials. Here is just part of his response:

"I love this letter! What a wonderful way to introduce students to the theme of Fahrenheit 451 that books are so dangerous that the institutions of society—schools and parents—might be willing to team up against children to prevent them from reading one. It's easy enough to read the book and say, 'This is crazy. It could never really happen,' but pretending to present students at the start with what seems like a totally reasonable 'first step' is a really immersive way to teach them how insidious censorship can be. I'm sure that when the book club is over and the students realize the true intent of this letter they'll be shocked at how many of them accepted it as an actual permission slip. In addition, Milo's concern that allowing me to add this note will make him stand out as a troublemaker really brings home why most of the characters find it easier to accept the world they live in rather than challenge it. I assured him that his teacher would have his back."

Obviously this response is just dripping with sarcasm, but what else would you expect from someone working on The Daily Show? Apparently the book's (mildly) profane language and Bible burnings caused the school to implement the permission slip, but it does make you wonder if they see the irony here. Maybe Milo can tell them all about it after he reads the book.

[h/t The Daily Dot]

6 Fast Facts About Nelly Sachs

Central Press/Getty Images
Central Press/Getty Images

Today, on the 127th anniversary of her birth, a Google Doodle has been created in memory of writer Nelly Sachs, who died of colon cancer in 1970 at the age of 78. The German-Swedish poet and playwright wrote movingly about the horrors of the Holocaust, which she narrowly escaped by fleeing her home and starting a new life in a foreign land. Here are six things to know about Sachs.

1. She was born in Germany.

Sachs was born in Berlin on December 10, 1891. As the daughter of a wealthy manufacturer, she grew up in the city's affluent Tiergarten section. She studied dance and literature as a child, and also started writing romantic poems at age 17.

2. She almost ended up in a concentration camp.

Sachs's father died in 1930, but she and her mother Margarete stayed in Berlin. In 1940, the Gestapo interrogated the two women and tore apart their apartment. They were told they had a week to report to a concentration camp, so they decided to flee the country. Swedish novelist Selma Lagerlöf, with whom Nelly had corresponded for years, saved their lives by convincing the Swedish royal family to help the two women escape to Sweden.

3. She worked as a translator.

Once Nelly and her mother reached Stockholm, Sachs began learning Swedish and ultimately took up work as a translator. She translated poetry from Swedish to German and vice versa.

4. She was nearly 60 when she published her first book of poetry.

Sachs’s first volume of poetry, In den Wohnungen des Todes (In the Habitations of Death), was published in 1947. In this anthology as well as later poems, she used religious imagery to evoke the suffering of her time and the Jewish people.

5. She won the German Book Trade's Peace Prize.

In 1965, Sachs won the Peace Prize from the German Book Trade. She shared a message of forgiveness when she accepted the award from her compatriots. “In spite of all the horrors of the past, I believe in you,” she said.

6. She won the Nobel Prize for Literature on her 75th birthday.

Sachs and Israeli writer Shmuel Yosef Agnon were jointly awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1966. According to The Nobel Prize’s website, Sachs was recognized "for her outstanding lyrical and dramatic writing, which interprets Israel's destiny with touching strength.”

The One Harry Potter Character JK Rowling Regrets Killing Off

Angela Weiss, AFP/Getty Images
Angela Weiss, AFP/Getty Images

Spoiler alert for anyone who hasn't read or watched the Harry Potter series: Many beloved characters die. From Dobby to Snape to Dumbledore (and the list goes on), Potterheads have reason to shed a tear during nearly every book and/or film. It was surely upsetting for JK Rowling to write these deaths, but she has spoken out about the one character she actually regrets killing off.

According to IGN, Rowling once wrote on Pottermore about how she regretted killing Florean Fortescue. If you don't remember him, you're probably not alone; he's the owner of an ice cream parlor in Diagon Alley, and a minor character. So why, out of the multiple heartbreaking deaths she concocted, does the acclaimed author feel so strongly about killing off Florean?

"I originally planned Florean to be the conduit for clues that I needed to give Harry during his quest for the Hallows, which is why I established an acquaintance fairly early on," Rowling explained. "The problem was that when I came to write the key parts of Deathly Hallows, I decided that Phineas Nigellus Black was a much more satisfactory means of conveying clues. I seemed to have him kidnapped and killed for no good reason. He is not the first wizard whom Voldemort murdered because he knew too much (or too little), but he is the only one I feel guilty about, because it was all my fault."

So basically, Florean was created as a plot device that ultimately was not needed in the end. As he faces death "for no good reason" according to Rowling, it seems his character's demise was just the result of a little narrative reorganization. As Rowling of all people should know, there could have been worse ways to go.

SECTIONS

arrow
LIVE SMARTER