In the two short stories," Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut and "The Veldt" by Ray Bradbury, it can be determined that people should be allowed to have freedom instead of being completely restricted. Throughout both of these stories, there are a few similarities that prove this argument; however, at the same time, the concept of having limited freedom is expressed differently through varying plot elements. First of all, a major similarity between the two stories is how people defy the rules that are forced upon them in order to attain freedom. For example, in "Harrison Bergeron", Harrison was imprisoned at a young age due to his vastly superior powers and intellect compared to the rest of society, which was designed to be average. Harrison …show more content…
Despite the fact that he already had many other privileges, he still believed that his intentions to seek freedom in the nursery were justified, since he states: "What's wrong with Africa, father?" (Bradbury 300) It is proven from these instances that people will never believe that their methods of obtaining freedom are wrong, while other people will differ in their perspectives and reactions to these actions. In "Harrison Bergeron", this argument is proven when Harrison fought for his freedom by escaping from jail, which the government responded by killing him. However, Peter fought for the rights of the nursery in "The Veldt" by being disobedient, thus causing the parents to revoke his rights completely instead of outright silencing him. To conclude, freedom is invaluable to the lives of humans, thus, people would be willing to do anything just to be able to possess and secure it. While society can still set rules in place, they should do so in a method that still allows people to possess social freedoms, while still living in an orderly and safe