Similarities Between Metropolis And Dystopiar Cities

Your world is not real. Kennedy was never assassinated, Michael jackson has actually always been white, and subway is certainly NOT always fresh. Stop thinking you are free, you’re not. Okay, I’m just kidding. But am I really? Because sometimes subway really just sucks. Questioning. With this, through his work ‘Nineteen Eighty Four’, George Orwell has brought to my attention that I should be occasionally thinking for myself rather than constantly abiding by what I’m told is right. More specifically, ‘Nineteen Eighty Four’ suggests the plentiful ways that people can be oppressed in a totalitarian society will result in the loss of humanity and failure to rebound from the government’s control. These forces inhibit and encourage individuals’ actions and is described in the novel by the abundant use of technology combined with psychological manipulation. Orwell also uses symbols and metaphor to explain consequences of totalitarianism on a deeper level.

The working class in this film are forced to endure agonising labour in extremely dangerous environments whilst the upper class, the ‘sons’ are free to live at their will. The dystopic setting of the ‘depths’ becomes evident through Lang’s use of symbolism when the dictator’s son, Freder, journeys to the depths and starts to see the workers being eaten up by the machines in the scene ‘Slaves of the Means of Production” (14.58-17.52). This symbolises the dystopic society in which workers do not have the right to be safe. This idea forms a contextual connection to the 1920’s Weimar Republic where there were two distinct classes, the conservative elite, who were free to live at their will, and the workers who were forced to endure labour with no guarantee for safety. Through the contextual connections of political reform and the shared perspectives of dystopian societies the quote “the object of power is power” is strongly supported by George Orwell’s ‘1984’ and Fritz Lang’s ‘Metropolis’.

The novels Utopia by Thomas More and 1984 by George Orwell and short story Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut explore the Utopic and Dystopic genre through the structure and regulations of their societies. In Utopia, More provides us with a contemporary understanding of society and human nature, with an indepth study of morals, values and beliefs in England around the Renaissance Era. 1984 was published while the Second World War was fresh in people’s minds, creating fears amongst society with Orwell emphasizing the possibility of such a dehumanised and controlled

Three basic themes present themselves in virtually all depictions of a dystopian future. The first is the complacency of the members of the dystopian society, the common man. Without influence from the protagonist or another external force, people are content with the state in which they are they living in. The second is an oppressive force, which controls major aspects of the individual's life, from restricting independent thought and freedom to dehumanizing aspects of the individual's life. The last is the ultimate outcome of the story's protagonist, whether they overcome the adversity they face or submit to it. These are key elements of dystopian portrayals and are all present in the three pieces being reviewed: 1984, Harrison Bergeron,

There is the concept of an ideal world, a future where humanity has reached its peak and the global society is at peace. Then we flip the coin to realise that a dystopic future too is possible, one where humanity is lost to the chains of oppression and control. George Orwell’s classic yet hauntingly prophetic work “ 1984” represents this dystopian human society, a frightening yet vivid description of what the world would be if human desire for power and control was given free reign. Although Orwell wrote this text in the context of the rise of Fascism in Europe, the rise of Nuclear Aggression and the Cold War rivalry, the text carries significance even today, as Government control over its citizens, surveillance over every aspect of private

The 1930’s ring of the days of the Great Depression, an era of famine, unemployment, and a healthy balance of economic turmoil. Among these grey signs of the times also rose the works of Authors such as George Orwell and Aldous Huxley, most famously known for their dystopian novels 1984 and Brave New World , which dive into completely opposite yet stunningly similar views of a utopia gone wrong. In each, citizens should strive for a certain “Identity”, one of patriotism and constant labour in 1984 and that of instant and constant gratification in Brave New World.

Political control has come a long way since 5,000 years ago when the first city-states appeared. Today with the advancement of technology and literature, political control has become more sophisticated and complex. Communication between the masses and their governments have been made easier with the use of television and political ideologies being published as books. The vast amount of sources available to the masses mean they can make more informed choices about politics. However, in ‘1984’ and ‘Fahrenheit 451’ the use of advanced technology and literature as political control is shown in a negative light. George Orwell and Ray Bradbury show the consequences of power being placed in the wrong hands. The dystopian governments presented by

Dystopian literature describes the appearance of a hypothetical society, working to cease the protagonist's desires and abilities to the benefit of the Party. Governing bodies aim to reveal the illusion of a perfect world to suppress desires of citizens, where anything that threatens the power of ‘controlling life at all levels' is eradicated. The protagonist plays an integral role, advocating the individual freedoms prohibited by the state and serves as a caution about the ramifications when governing principles subsumes the individual. During this seminar, it is the ideology of dystopian societies that are represented within the texts of 1984 and The Truman Show that depict such an environment, which will be examined today. The individual

Conflict is the ultimate cause of a loss of individualism. It is used as a weapon to promote power and retain control, whilst simultaneously suppressing individual thoughts and emotions out of fear of negative repercussions. The definitive expression of the above concepts in Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis and George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four enables the audience to experience two separate yet similar totalitarian societies, in which external and internal conflict is utilised to disbar individualism.

Today, in 2014, most people think about Superman when they hear the word Metropolis. This 1927 German film, however, is far from something as bright, colorful and all-American as Superman. America 's greatest hero represents ideals like hope, whereas Metropolis (1927) embodies the opposite and something far more sinister. By looking at the production elements and the cinematic tropes that Metropolis created and inspired, in relation to power dynamics, a scholar can see how the German people felt under the German Reich, that eventually led to the Nazi regime. How are political messages conveyed? What is the relationship between machinery and workers? How do the workers and the rich contrast each other? These questions and many more

Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, and 1984, by George Orwell, explore various possible future dystopian societies that maintain control through the limitation of freedom, regulation of behavior, and the implementation of rigid class systems. Both authors experienced traumatic wars, and recognized the danger of certain world powers. Their novels serve as extreme political commentary on their contemporary societies. Orwell saw the rise of fascism and communism, and as a result developed the ideas of “the party” in 1984. Huxley observed the after effects of WWI and the Depression in Britain.

Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four reflects the principles of Stalinism and Nazism that were evident at the time of the composer and his text of 1930’s to 1940’s Europe. When Winston Smith witnesses a co-worker’s outbreak of “Swine! Swine! Swine!” the repetition is used to demonstrate loss of personal conviction in creating a dangerous orthodox for oppressive tyranny. This loss through the social and personal oppression of the Party and the absence of values of hope, love, loyalty, and dignity highlights values of fear, hatred and pain that are stipulated through tyranny. This technique is used by the composer to indicate the inability for the individual to accomplish change against a tyrannous government. Whilst Orwell perceives this world of chaotic power, Fritz Lang’s medium of film emphasizes the political and social chaos in his society. “Without the machines, you’re finished!” This high modality quote is used by Lang to signify how man and machine have become one in Metropolis. The loss of machines starts the chaos, spiraling out of control. The oppression of the proles by the Party and the workers class in the Depths begins the spiral of chaos that consumes all values to spit out what is left to the composer’s pessimistic view of the unwinding of

The overwhelming presence of skyscrapers that fill the entire frame and the abstract montage of machinery establishes the dominance of the machine over man whilst engendering a sense of urgency and panic. Thus we gain an insight into the potential for dehumanization due to modern obsession with machinery and subsequent loss of a human face. A motif of mechanical incarceration resonates with an inhumane culture of mechanization and industry that characterizes 1920's Weimar Germany. Lang establishes this with his focus on the hierarchical nature of industrial capitalism through symbolism and juxtaposition in the opening scene. The bleak regimentation of the worker’s movement as they trudge wearily into their subterranean factories, accompanied by the leitmotif 'funeral march' and symbolically bound to the 10-hour shift clock, reflects the dehumanization and disenfranchisement of the working class.

Fritz Lang’s German expressionist film Metropolis and George Orwell’s Swiftian satire novel 1984 convey the impact on core human values jeopardised through the repressive authoritative systems of control. Lang’s portrayal of social corruption through the anxieties of Weimar Republic of Germany following World War 1 heightens the responders’ awareness of the dehumanising totalitarianism as well as rapid industrialisation. While Lang constructs underlying hope through the reconciliation between capitalists and workers, Orwell projects a political uncertainty such that hope for a better future is completely ruled out, a reflection of rising communism and Fascism in Europe. Through exploring the ways ideas are appropriated across juxtaposing contexts,

The silent film, Metropolis directed by Fritz Lang, released in 1927, reflects the social situation of the time in Germany during the Weimar Period, before the rise of Hitler power. At that time, there was a new political climate, which was in favor of an equity-oriented fascism rather than liberty-oriented capitalism. The film clearly gives viewers an idea that fascism way of the political system is the preferable ideology for the society by depicting the class struggles between capitalists and labours. Thus, the movie was often interpreted as a propaganda movie and being criticized.