An Analysis Of Hitchcock's ' The Caged Birds Versus The Free Birds '
1991 WordsOct 10, 20148 Pages
Psychologists have suggested the idea that correlation does not imply causation. In The Birds, viewers find themselves unable to identify the purpose or the cause for the birds’ attacks. Hitchcock does not want us to know the answers either, since Hitchcock marvels at his ability to make viewers question his films and struggle at truly enjoying without fully understanding them. Although this essay cannot find a cause for the attacks in the town or to the characters that seem to be innocent like the children and the old man in the farm, it should shed some light on the correlation between the timing of the attacks near the Brenner family and Melanie and their internal struggle. The symbolism of the caged birds versus the free birds, the Jocasta complex Lydia struggles with, and the imagery of the light versus darkness when the birds attack represent the journey Mitch and Melanie face in trying to be together. First we must make the distinction between caged and free birds. The caged birds signify a well mannered, tamed, and socially acceptable human being while the free birds, or rather the birds that attack, have the liberty to act in opposition to the caged ones. In the beginning scene, after Melanie’s attempt to impress Mitch, Mitch salvages the bird she mistakenly let escape and as he puts it back in its cage says, “Back in your gilded cage Melanie Daniels”. This metaphorical cage Melanie resides in is one made up of riches where she is spoiled and superficial, but she