Essay: George Orwell’s 1984 / Fritz lang’s Metropolis

The themes of dystopia and the revolution and rebellion that it provokes, are highly prevalent throughout George Orwell’s literary masterpiece, Nineteen Eighty-Four (often stylised as 1984), as well as Fritz lang’s revolutionary silent film, Metropolis. To a reader who has a general historical knowledge of the eras with which each text was produced, it would seem plausible and indeed logical that each text is profoundly encapsulated by these themes as both were written throughout, or shortly after periods of social and political dispute and disturbance. With these themes come the notions of political oppression and conformity, two themes that are also remarkably prevalent in the novel.
In Orwell’s novel, the author depicts a harsh and scathing portrayal of the human condition and the cruelty of human beings, in particular the absolute control and manipulation of totalitarian dictators. This is shown in many parts of the book, but notably in the seventh chapter of Part I, in which the book’s protagonist, Winston Smith, uses the phrase “two plus two equals five” in an effort to contemplate the extent of which the State has control over the public. He uses this as an example of an evidently false dogma that somebody who falls under the control of the party may be forced to believe, a contrast to the often factual, yet politically inexpedient truth. He moves on to assess the notion that if something is believed universally, does that make it true or real? This part of the novel highlights the systematic oppression of the story’s totalitarian dictator, Big Brother, the figure ostensibly the leader of the Oceania.
In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the Oceania government pioneered a language called ‘Newspeak.’ This is a controlled angle designed to deliberately limit freedom of thought and eradicate ideologies that could potentially threaten the regime such as self-expression, individuality, peace and freedom. Any thought considered alternative to the the Oceania’s views was categorised as ‘thoughtcrime,’ one of the most heavily punishable crimes in the novel. This is yet another medium with which the population of Air Strip One (formerly England) is oppressed by their government.
Oppression from high government powers is also shown in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, wherein the master of Metropolis, Joh Fredersen, is a controlling and extremely powerful political figure, almost entirely responsible for the political hierarchy and class system that has been imposed in the city of Metropolis. A place known as the ‘City of the Workers’ (often referred to as the ‘Depths’) is where the poor, working class members of society work to power the city, allowing the wealthy to live exuberant and extravagant lifestyles overground with facilities such as stadiums, leisure centres, theatres and beautiful gardens, similar to those seen at the start of the film where Fredersen’s son, Freder is found idling his time away. This societal inequality and vastly differing standards of living as well as the unfair treatment of the poor, triggers a uprising of the workers, causing them to destroy the machines that they had been forced to work at and flood their underground city.
Nineteen Eighty-Four written with the intent of warning those in the western world of the dangers associated with falling under the control of a totalitarian government, a topic that has been highlighted by many countries around the world throughout recent history. This makes this novel still incredibly relevant today, with countries like North Korea and China still under a totalitarian dictatorship government.
Despite both texts having many similarities in regards to the themes mentioned above as well as character similarities, each story has a drastically different ending to the other. In the final chapter of Nineteen Eighty-Four, the protagonist Winston Smith ends up brainwashed by the Oceania government after being subjected to electroshock for his thoughtcrimes as a “cure” to his “insanity.” By the end of the book, Smith feels that he has finally ended his “stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast” of Big Brother as he gazes up at an enormous portrait of the Oceania’s ostensible leader.
This is quite the contrast to the conclusion of Lang’s Metropolis, wherein Freder, somewhat of a mediator between the working and ruling classes, ends the film with the linking of his father, Joh Fredersen’s hands with those of Grot, a foreman, in a sign of solidarity and equality between the two contrasting social classes. As Metropolis has what some would consider to be a ‘happy ending,’ it seems to be almost directly opposite to that of the conclusion to Orwell’s 1984, despite the similarities in most aspects of both texts.