Intertextual perspectives of personal and political values are often distributed by composers, regardless of varieties and contexts, due to controversial periods of history causing the historical paradigms to resonate with audiences. Fritz Lang’s film Metropolis released in 1927 and George Orwell’s satiric novel ‘1984’ composed in 1948, addresses concerning concepts such as totalitarian power and dehumanisation through dystopian societies in which the catastrophic repercussions in the exploitations of power will be exemplified. In Metropolis, Lang conveys the hope of any disenfranchised culture reflecting his concerns because of the economic downturn of post-WW1 Germany. Contrastingly, ‘1984’ hyperbolically gives the absolute benefits of Nazi Germany and Stalinist The ussr through a satirical voice, disclosing the personal manipulation of Orwell’s context. Through the comparison study of both dystopian texts, the responder can easily attain a better understanding of the contextual influences due to the composers’ perspectives of power and control.
In conditions of totalitarian power and control, a character’s notion of contemporary society is often converted through the composer’s ideas mirrored in their textual content. In Town and ‘1984’, we experience the identical degradation of human values as the ramifications of post-war disputes and intégral power. In Metropolis, the establishing photos of machinery maintaining the town, in conjunction with the very long shot with the workers dehumanised through uniformed choreography, represent the workers since “machinery” maintaining the city too. Contextually, the financial tragedy of the Weimar Republic triggered mass joblessness, which the film represents throughout the dehumanisation of workers selling the result of a totalitarian state as Lang’s visual channel of film is a dreadful warning in the continued effects of politics upheaval. These types of enslaved staff are further physically juxtaposed by the flexibility of the upper class as provided in the serious long shots of the ‘sons’ preparing for a running celebration in the stadium, unrestricted of what they can and can’t do. Additionally , the varying positions with the two teams demonstrate their particular place in world, workers will be underground while the ‘sons’ happen to be above surface. This is showing the dichotomy of the upper and lower classes in 1920 Weimar Republic the place that the ‘conservative elite’ had the need to live readily while staff were limited to go through labour. The extended metaphor of dehumanisation, emphasised throughout the monochromatic mis-en-scene, stresses Lang’s key area of issue the vigor of oneness between the interpersonal classes to be able to develop a natural and functional society. This kind of notion is usually conveyed throughout the final picture of Grot shaking Fredersen’s hands. The long shot of the Art Deco church background reiterates Lang’s expect of concentration and his perspective that making a cohesive and functional contemporary society is imperative as portrayed throughout Lang’s film, specifically though the hands, head and heat motif. It is the in-text influences and Lang’s calcado form that represents complete power and control which has a heightened understanding of the unfavorable impacts of your world used by totalitarian rule.
Unlike Lang’s film depiction of a capitalist totalitarian government’s eventual succumbing to the idea of a communist and socialist society, Orwell’s novel tensions totalitarian regulation will finally stifle could be attempt to rebel. This idea can be demonstrated through Orwell’s depiction of O’Brien to convey the huge control that the totalitarian government has, because reflected in “a footwear stamping over a human face ” forever”. The attention grabbing imagery and violent verb “stomping”, represent the dictatorial governmental electric power over humankind through dread. Similarly, ‘1984”s paradoxical slogan of “War is peace. Freedom can be slavery. Lack of knowledge is durability. ” shows the government’s ability to psychologically manipulate the Oceanians in to an timeless life of propaganda-induced fear, unable to rebel to destruction the government and thus resulting in the totalitarian government’s enduring reign. Here, Orwell draws seite an seite allusions to Stalinism throughout the heavy propaganda used while the Oceanians kept quiet through physical violence and dread, and the Party ruled with the Central Committee. However , technology is also described as a highly advanced means of power to monitor the masses, “hovered for an instant like a bluebottle, and darted again” in which the simile and visual images of the attention grabbing and daunting Thought Law enforcement characterise the way in which they produce a powerful “sting”, like a jellyfish when triggered, presenting the responders together with the negative effects of such a governmental system. In spite of the varying calcado form and contextual impact on, Orwell’s book ‘1984’ continually provide a thorough understanding of the detrimental associated with a totalitarian rule.
It is certainly that both equally Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and George Orwell’s ‘1984’ represent thematic problems that eventually reveal the composers’ related perspectives inspite of diverging in contextual period and fiel form. Through the exploration of Town, we have the understanding and appreciation with the hope for unanimity between societal classes recently 1910 and early 1920 post-WW1 Philippines that was ironically juxtaposed by the future Nazi Germany lording it over. Similarly, ‘1984’ reveals the despair and hopelessness to get society following the rulings of Stalin and Hitler which has ultimately improved the way in which the responder experience the world. As a result, it is apparent that the in-text periods have significantly influenced intertextual views through the shared ideas of power and control.
