I believe that the woman with the books in her house refused to leave because she saw nothing in the world, the one outside her house of rich knowledge and books, but empty entertainment, induced pleasure, meaningless preoccupations, and no talking. Knowledge and the freedom it brought to her was her life; she'd rather die with them. She might have also wanted to show Montag just what knowledge could make one feel, and what attachments might result from it.
***
The woman could have been seen as "A captain who sinks with his ship". This is because she believed in those books even though they were illegal; and would rather be burned with them than live without them. She probably felt that if she took a stance and died with what she believed in, that it might make a difference.
***
The woman loved the books, and saw them to be apart of her. She felt she could not go on without the books. Like how a widow dies soon after her husband just out of missing them too much. Loosing those books is like loosing her husband or loosing her foot.
On a completely separate and unrelated note, WHY DIDN'T THEY DRAG THAT CHICK OUT THE HOUSE?
Ok, i guess it was still related.
***
The woman with books refused to leave the house with books because she wanted to die with something she knew she would get introble. She knew what happens to people after, she didnt want to go through that; it was better for her to die with something that was very important rather then be without it and live horroble life where you're not free to do something you love. Books were part of her and everything in books was part of her. She wanted to stand out and show people that maybe there's something in books that people don't know and that life is not how it looks like.
Beatty talks about how back in the day, the earth was "roomier" and could handle those opinions. But since the population grown, those opinions have grown. Back in the 50's - 70's the fear of over population was running ram pet. In fact you can watch some old movies like "Soylent Green" and see that most of the entertainment pushed the fact that if the earth's population grew anymore it will result into poverty, no food, and people eating people.
***
Beatty talks about how everything got to where it is right now. How firefighters become fireman. Beatty says that their only goal is to make everyone happy. Everyone needs to be happy, don't have time to think about things, everything has to be easy and everyone has to be happy in every way. The TV shows and movies are about nothing and dont have anything in them. People have to be alike; no one can be higher than someone else. Sometimes it feels like it can be our world in the future. Expecially when he's talking about technology. Technology progresses so fast over 10 years; it's crazy.
***
Montag and Beatty have an interesting conversation that explains much of why things are the the way they are. It is very interesting the Beatty talks about the technology becoming faster and faster because in this current time, technology has advanced a lot and has become quicker. It has made newspapers and mail almost completely obsolete. It is also interesting how the main explanation for the laws in the book is that peace and serenity come from not letting individuals have their own thoughts and opinions. The main motto is "to prevent offense we must prevent the thought in the first place." Very interesting.
***
"Now let's take up the minorities in our civilization, shall we? Bigger the population, the more minorities. Don't step on the toes of the dog lovers, the cat lovers, doctors, lawyers,... people from Oregon or Mexico. The people in this book, this play, this TV serial are not meant to represent any actual painters, cartographers, mechanics anywhere. The bigger your market, Montag, the less you handle controversy, remember that? All the minor, minor minorities with their navels to be kept clean. Authors, full of evil thoughts, lock up your typewriters" (Bradbury 57).
So in paraphrase, because everyone in Bradybury's world has a goal to be and remain happy, embracing a utopian culture and its societal ideals, we can't have any controversies, differing opinions, or conflicting viewpoints getting in the way of everyone living in that state of happiness. It reminds me of when I was talking in English class on Thursday about the upcoming persuasive essay, how I was scared to specifically bring the Bible and its principles into the discussion because I was scared of how people would react: would they get angry, offended, or even look at me weird? Was I scared of upsetting the even tranquility of the classroom, my status at school by bringing my beliefs and viewpoint into the discussion?
Maybe, I reflect after reading, I shouldn't be so scared and be more bold in expressing what I believe in. Besides, I have been offended nearly every day of my life by something, religious or not, and have gotten over or suffered with it quite well; why shouldn't others be able to do the same? Now that I am older and supposedly more mature, when I confront other viewpoints, I try to empathize and analyze their viewpoints, something I sometimes fail at doing efficiently, and I have found that I have gained from doing so, sometimes it strengthens my own arguments and refines my opinions. They say no pain, no gain. Maybe no unhappiness, no happiness....