Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/1984---Metropolis-Essay 👈

1. Ellie Anstee Year 12
1984 & Metropolis Essay
The composers of 1984 and Metropolis, draw on their respective contexts to imagine the
future, which reveals the similarities between the two texts, while also reinforcing their
distinctive qualities. Lang and Orwell draw on similar contexts such as the rising
uncertainty of technology prior to the 1950’s, the fear of dictatorships and totalitarian
regimes after WWI and II, and the objectification of women in Weimar culture and the
1940’s. Yet, within these contexts lies differences that reinforce both 1984 and Metropolis’s
distinctive qualities, including the purpose behind technology in both of the fictional
societies, as 1984 utilises technology to express control over Oceania, and Metropolis
utilises technology to express individual freedom. The extent to which their hierarchical
structures affect the individual, as Orwell presents his audience with a completely
dystopian view of the effects of a hierarchical society and Lang brings to light the
benefits of one in a growing city. And also the acceptance and denial of female sexuality,
as Lang accepts female sexuality, yet Orwell denies it. It is clear that the composers of
1984 and Metropolis draw on their respective contexts to imagine the future, both
revealing the texts similarities while also reinforcing their distinctive qualities.
Technological break throughs were largely frequent prior to the 1950’s and caused social
unrest among societies, as it’s future affect on the world was ambiguous. Both Fritz Lang
and George Orwell reflect this unrest of their context in Metropolis and 1984, sharing a
larger similarity that also reinforces their distinctive qualities. While both texts largely
outline that technology causes the destruction of society, the purpose of technology in
each text is portrayed individually. In 1984, Orwell positions his audience to view
technology as a form of oppression over the civilians of Oceania, manipulating them to
conform to the party and their ideologies. This oppression is clear through the motif of
the telescreens who’s main aim is based around censorship, which is clear when Orwell
writes ‘You had to live…in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard,
and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized’. It is clear that in 1984, Orwell
utilizes technology to express control over Oceania’s citizens, unlike the technology in
Metropolis, which is utilised by Lang to express freedom. This freedom is displayed
through Maria, the machine lady, who enforces individual expression. In the film this is
evident when Maria dances in front of the middle class men, and close up shots of their
lustful faces are presented, indicating that this expression strays from the norm. Hence,
Metropolis, unlike 1984 utilises technology as a form of individual freedom and
expression. Yet, despite these differences, both texts reveal a larger similarity, as Lang
and Orwell conclude that technology causes the destruction of societies, reflecting the
unrest of their respective contexts. For example, in 1984 Orwell positions his audience to
view technology as increasingly oppressive, leading to the destruction of Winston’s and
ultimately, the societies humanly characteristics, after the involvement of the Ministry of
Love. In Metropolis, Lang positions his audience to also view technology as destructive, as
Machine Maria causes rebellion amongst a once civilised, city. Both Lang and Orwell
imagined these futures due to the social unrest present in their contexts due to the
ambiguity of technology. Therefore, it is evident that Metropolis and 1984, share a larger
similarity that technology causes the destruction of society, yet specifically, the contrast
in the purpose of the technology reinforces their distinct qualities.
1984 and Metropolis both draw on their respective contexts of dictatorship and totalitarian
regimes, to imagine a hierarchical future, revealing the texts similarities. Yet, George
Orwell and Fritz Lang present these societies and the effect they have on their citizens to

2. Ellie Anstee Year 12
differing extents, reinforcing their distinctive qualities. While Orwell presents his
audience with a completely dystopian view of the effects of a hierarchical society, Lang
brings to light the benefits of one in a growing city and explores the importance of a
mediator in the process. More specifically, in 1984, Orwell positions his audience to view
Oceania as a totalitarian state that aims to gain total authority over its citizens. This view
is presented specifically through Winston, the protagonist, and the hardships he
experiences throughout the novel. The power that the hierarchical society of Oceania has
over Winston is most clear when he enters the Ministry of Love and is reduced to bare
bones. Orwell writes ‘A bowed, Grey colored, skeleton-like thing was coming towards
him. Its actual appearance was frightening, and not merely the fact that he knew it to be
himself’. It is clear that Orwell is positioning his audience to sympathise with Winston
and the dystopian nature of the society he lives in that clearly has the power to defeat the
individual. When considering Orwell’s respective context of WWII it is obvious that this
is what he imagines the future will hold. Similarly, Metropolis contains a hierarchical
future, due to Lang’s context of Imperial Germany, involving a complete dictatorship.
Yet, unlike Orwell, Lang positions his audience to consider the structure as beneficial to
the growth of the city. This is evident in the first scene of the film, where triumphant
music reveals a magnificent, bustling Metropolis. And again, unlike 1984, Lang presents
the audience with a solution to the dystopian nature of the hierarchical city, hence the
motif ‘The mediator between head and hands must be the heart’. It is clear that both
texts draw on their respective contexts to imagine a hierarchical future, yet present these
societies and the effect they have on their citizens to differing extents, reinforcing their
distinctive qualities.
Both 1984 and Metropolis largely objectify women, revealing the texts similarities. Yet,
considering Lang and Orwell’s respective contexts, their distinctive qualities are
reinforced. While women are objectified in both texts, Metropolis encourages the sexual
expression of women, while 1984 discourages it. In Metropolis, Lang draws from the
context of Weimar culture, where sexuality and gender roles challenged the status quo
and encouraged expressionism. This is evident through Machine Maria and the
acceptance the men display when she is performing on stage. Lang positions his audience
to view Maria as powerful and enticing, as we view a close-up of the middle class men’s
faces, filled with lust. It is obvious that Machine Maria’s expression of sexuality is
accepted and encouraged, yet it is clear that she is largely objectified, specifically
considering she is named ‘The Whore of Babylon’. This reveals the similarities between
Metropolis and 1984, as Orwell too positions his audience to view women as objects due
to his context of the 1940’s where women were only viewed in a sexual light to
reproduce. Specifically, in 1984, this is evident through Orwell’s description of the prole
woman doing her laundry; he writes, ‘The woman down there had no mind, she had only
strong arms, a warm heart and a fertile belly’. This provides evidence that Orwell largely
objectifies women and unlike Lang in Metropolis, does not accept the sexual expression of
women for any other reason except conception. This is further explored through the
concept of marriage and sex in Oceania on the basis of reproduction. It is clear that both
1984 and Metropolis objectify women, revealing the texts similarities, yet considering
Orwell and Lang’s respective contexts, it is clear that Metropolis encourages the expression
of sexuality in women, while 1984 discourages it, reinforcing their distinctive qualities.
It is clear that the composers of 1984 and Metropolis draw on their respective contexts to
imagine the future, which reveals the similarities between the two texts, while also
reinforcing their distinctive qualities. The similarities between both texts include the
rising uncertainty of technology prior to the 1950’s, the fear of dictatorships and

3. Ellie Anstee Year 12
totalitarian regimes after WWI and II, and the objectification of women. Yet, their
distinctive qualities are reinforced through these contexts, including the purpose behind
technology in both of the fictional societies, as 1984 utilises technology to express
control over Oceania, and Metropolis utilises technology to express individual freedom.
The extent to which their hierarchical structures affect the individual, as Orwell presents
his audience with a completely dystopian view of the effects of a hierarchical society and
Lang brings to light the benefits of one in a growing city. And also the acceptance and
denial of female sexuality, as Lang accepts female expression, yet Orwell denies it. It is
evident that both composers draw on their respective contexts to imagine their future,
revealing both the text’s similarities and their distinctive qualities.