Social Attitudes Of Freedom And Control By George Orwell And Fritz Lang

George Orwell’s 1984 is more than just a novel, it is a warning to a potential dystopian society of the future. Written in 1949, Orwell envisioned a totalitarian government under the figurehead Big Brother. In this totalitarian society, every thought and action is carefully examined for any sign of rebellion against the ruling party. Emotion has been abolished and love is nonexistent; an entire new language is being drafted to reduce human thought to the bare minimum. In a society such as the one portrayed in 1984, one is hardly human. In George Orwell’s 1984, the party uses fear, oppression, and propaganda to strip the people of their humanity.

George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four is the ultimate negative utopia. Written in 1949 as an apocalyptic vision of the future, it shows the cruelty and pure horror of living in an utterly totalitarian world where all traces of individualism are being abolished. This novel was composed to denounce Hitler?s Germany and Stalin?s Russia and to create a warning to the rest of the world. It takes the reader through a year in the life of Winston Smith as he transforms from a rebel to a fanatic of totalitarianism.

t has been sixty-six years since the first printing of George Orwell’s acclaimed book, Nineteen Eighty-Four. Almost seven decades have passed and many still wonders, was Orwell right? Has our society become a totalitarian wasteland? Nineteen Eighty-Four is a dystopian novel, taking place in what Orwell calls Airstrip One, or what is known today as England. When one closely observes the happenings in today’s world, one can see evidence of the Orwellian predictions that are established in the book. With those events, there are many parallels between Nineteen Eighty-Four and our society today with the usage of government surveillance, the decadence of language, and the annihilation of culture.

First published in 1949, Orwell certainly believed that the novel would have some higher purpose in the political sphere, and it did. But perhaps it wasn’t the purpose that was truly intended? Nearly seventy years after its first appearance, 1984 can be found on many high school, college and political group reading lists. Coining terms such as “Big Brother,” or “thoughtcrime,” the novel created an entirely new type of dystopian society defined by many as “Orwellian.” But with close reading one can see that George Orwell wrote 1984 for a very specific purpose. In 1984 Orwell writes about the dangers of deviating from a true socialist society.

The characters presented in Fritz Lang’s film Metropolis and George Orwell’s novel 1984 are unique in terms of their personalities however share similar values of freedom, purity and honesty. As a result, the comparative representation of characters in these texts has substantially informed my understanding that composers affirm values like individuality, freedom and equality in order to respond to contextual concerns and warn of a future where these values would not exist.

Orwell’s novel has played a significant role throughout history. At the time of its authorship in 1949 some countries were exhibiting horrific

Context plays a large role in the portrayal of values as it influences the composer’s thoughts about society. It is evident that the respective context of Fritz Lang has greatly influenced the portrayal of significant values in his film, Metropolis; similarly these values have also been shaped in George Orwell’s novel, 1984. The values portrayed in both these texts include the political values of authority and control, which is influenced by the totalitarian societies in which Lang and Orwell live, and the value of individual identity, shaped by individuals becoming slaves to technology, which is influenced by the composer’s context of the machine age. Fritz Lang’s context has greatly influenced the way in which the political values of authority

The utilization of technology in an autocratic regime is evident throughout both history and within dystopic fiction. Through the comparative study of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984), the extent of which technology impacts and aids a dictatorial regime is examined through the intertextual perspectives offered by each text. The incorporation of the political philosophy of collectivism, and by extension the absence of individual liberty and thought, reflects both the social and cultural influences surrounding the composer upon the creation of the text.

Between and after the World Wars, literary and art movements were influenced by world events; this is true for both the Allies and the Germans, as each interpreted historic events in different ways due to their different ideas and values. Metropolis, a silent film by Fritz Lang, and the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four by the British author George Orwell explore similar notions of absolute power and lack of individuality in their respective societies, conveying their viewpoints on social issues of their time. Written some twenty years apart, the texts each question the fundamentals of life itself, as their respective protagonists seek to know more about their worlds.

Sean: Our session will focus on the way a comparison of the time and place within Fritz Lang’s “Metropolis” and George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” reflects the wonder and fear of the 1920s and 1940s. Specifically focusing on the ideas of “Power and control, and Mind Manipulation, the eradication of the individual.

Texts often reflect upon problems faced by a society, it the time of the texts creation. Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell and Metropolis by Fritz Lang take the social context of their time to deliver a warning to society. Through their deliverance of their messages, they explore the impact of oppression and rebellion and how that has an impact on society, as well as, introspectively.

1984 is one of the most spellbinding books in the world. It was written in 1948 by George Orwell and it criticizes the totalitarian regimes of the 30’s and 40’s. Orwell creates an intriguing and imaginary society that we will leave us thoughtful about nowadays life. The action takes place in a divided world after a big war (just like after the Second World War).

Lang and Orwell’s seminal texts both express their concerns of the imbalance of power in totalitarian regimes where supreme power is concentrated and a small fraction of society possesses total control. In Fritz Lang’s German expressionist film Metropolis (1927) the totalitarian control is from the industry. Whereas, the novel 1984 (1948) by George Orwell focuses on the extremes of political power. The dystopian worlds Lang and Orwell create through a range of literary and film techniques though, differ in response to their respective contexts.

Nineteen Eighty-Four is a dystopian novel written by George Orwell in the late 40’s. At the time when Orwell started writing Nineteen Eighty-Four, WWII was just coming to an end. The late 40’s was also the start of the Cold War. The Cold war brought along much fear of communist governments, such as the Soviet Union, becoming a world power. Orwell was one of the people who feared a dictatorship coming to power. He wanted to warn the population of what could happen if a totalitarian government became a world power. In order to do such a thing, Orwell decided to write a book. The book he wrote was Nineteen Eighty-Four, it is based on what Orwell felt the world would become if the world were ruled by a totalitarian government. The writing of Nineteen Eighty-Four was influenced by dictatorships in the 1940’s.

The exploitation of power obtained through social manipulation can have detrimental effects on both individuals and society, often leading to rebellion. This notion is explored in Fritz Lang's film 'Metropolis' (1927) in which the period of industrialisation in post WWI Germany is reflected, highlighting his fear of a socially repressive society that parallels with George Orwell's 1949 novel ‘1984’. Whilst they share similar concerns regarding the machine age capitalist society, Orwell constructs a distinct ideological framework that functions on intellectual suppression through characteristics of both