"Future Almost Lost"

This essay analyses the effects of technological and scientific developments. Dystopian films tend to portray technology as taking over social practices and issues such as materialism, military, science, and industrial based politics. Technology is beginning to reach into each of these areas and it is the prediction of dystopian fiction writers, that technology will be in control and dictate these subjects rather than allow the power to remain with the people. The essay poses the question, are these dystopias critical of technology? by offering criticism on current social, economic, and political practices. Or on the other hand, do these science fiction dystopian films offer solutions to the inevitable? In some ways, I believe that both can be true depending on the film: the technological take over is inevitable because of the current practices upheld by our society.

The Hunger Games

Fear is paralyzing; therefore, totalitarian governments such as that in Panem capitalize on fear in order to maintain control. I think that the best example to prove this is when Katniss steps into the tube that will bring her up to the arena. When she turns around and looks at Cinna, all sound goes away except for a piercing silence. The audience can see the panic in her face as she is elevated to her potential death. Paralyzed by fear of what is to come, Katniss does not regain control of herself until just before the starting bomb goes off. The audience experiences this fear through the director's use of sound. At first all is silent, then there is a piercing pitch, and then there is the muffled countdown. As Katniss looks around and assesses her situation, the countdown becomes left muffled and everything becomes clear. This representation of fear is used to show the dangers of the Hunger Games but also to show the dangers of living in Panem. The people in the districts are paralyzed by fear and forced to stay immobile by ruthless peacekeepers and strict borders.

Hope, on the other hand, is mobilizing. The salute the people give Katniss is a sign of respect and hope. It is a peace but defiant act that tells the government that society agrees with the unprecedented actions of Katniss. After Rue dies, Katniss, who is aware of the vast audience, shows this sign of hope to tell people that no matter what the circumstance or how brutal the Hunger Games are, she will not be changed. The people from Rue's district who are watching in the square, all salute back to the screen. This single act of kindness and humanity sparks the rebellion. After saluting, people begin to fight the peacekeepers and anarchy ensues.

I believe the most influential statement made in this movie is by President Snow when he explains the following to Seneca Crane: "Hope. It is the only thing stronger than fear. A little hope is effective. A lot of hope is dangerous. Spark is fine, as long as it's contained". Presdient Snow is aware of the fragility of his power; therefore, he has created a system to ensures the regulation of fear and hope in order to maintain the obedience of the people.

Katniss disrupts this regulation because she is stubborn and will not give into the Captiol's demands. I think it is interesting how Haymitch always says that Katniss has issues getting along with others. The fact is, she does not get along with the people in the Captiol because she can see through their lies and recognize the corruption. Ironically, Haymitch and Katniss get along really well in the most important times because they all understand the gravity of the situations. The people, on the other hand, love Katniss because she is fearless. She maintains her morality even in the face of barbarism. She gives people the strength to do the same in their own districts and fight for what is right.

The Road

As the Earth crumbles so does human nature. The planet is no longer sustainable for both human life and human nature. The grayness and deterioration of the natural world, as represented by the falling tress, reflects the deterioration of mankind and the morals by which people live. Viggo Mortensen's character only assumes the worst in people because for the most part, that is all that is left. He does not have the luxury of giving people chances because he has his son to protect. In contrast, his son (played by Kodi Smit-McPhee) chooses to assume the best in people until proven otherwise. In a way Viggo Mortensen's character had the potential of being just as corrupt as the rest of mankind, but his son forces him to reevaluate and reflect. For example, when the man steals everything from Kodi Smit-McPhee's character when he is sleeping, Viggo Mortensen's response is barbaric and inhumane. Sadly, the man complies even though he knows he will die because what other choice does he have in this world. There is so much uncertainty in the post-apocalyptic future. I think that this is reflected in some of the plot when the characters do something but you never see the outcome. In the same situation with the thief, the boy forces his father to return the clothing. When they get back, however, the man is gone so the boy leaves the clothes along with some food. The audience never sees what happens to the man or his clothes. Does he pick them up? Did he die already? Does somebody else find it?

This film reminded me a lot of Children of Men in regards to the lack of children. When Viggo Mortensen's character and his son come across the old man, the old man is delighted to hear a young voice again. He never thought he would ever hear the sound of innocence and the sound of promise again. After watching The Road and Children of Men,  I realize that children are vital to the stability
of society because they represent the promise of a future. In such conditions shown in The Road, children give people hope that there is a chance that the future may be brighter and better. Like I said earlier, I believe Viggo Mortensen's character could have become just as barbaric as some others in this society. Due to his responsibility to his son, however, he teaches him how to be good and ethical. His son keeps him grounded just has children keep society grounded. There is an inherent responsibility to pass on the best of people in order to create a better future. People need to pass on "the fire": the inner capacity to be good in everything you do even despite the trying environment. At the end of the film, the audience is left relieved at the fact that the boy found another family. For all we know, they could be cannibals, but for some reason, the fact that they have children makes them trustworthy; of all people, they would best understand the importance of maintaining "the fire".

"Skepticism Squared"

Sometimes it is difficult, as an audience, to recognize dystopian themes and statements when watching a film because often times people are more focused on the entertainment being offered rather than on the messaging. This article begins by emphasizing that the purpose of dystopian films is not only to offer criticism on our current social, political, and economic practices but also to question whether or not we are able to accurately depict and predict the outcome of our current practices. Films have become so complex in plot, special effects, and purpose, that it is difficult for the audience to distinguish what details are meaningful and what details are "cool". One way to distinguish the difference between science fiction and dystopian films is to detect whether or not the film is aware that it is a film. Fight Club is an extreme case, however the characters are aware that they are a part of a social commentary. I believe that dystopian films have a subtle way of announcing to the reader exactly what the purpose is for creating such a film.

The Truman Show

The Truman Show shows us just how influential and powerful the media network may come to be. Not only is Truman at the center of a dystopian society, but those viewing his show are glued to the television, addicted to its constant stimulation. It seems that now in both "The Truman Show" and the actual film itself, media is taking over the role of God. It has started to 'orchestrate' the lives of its subjects. The media dictates how people act, think, dress, eat, buy, etc. We are beginning to lose control of the independence that makes us autonomous individuals. With the spread and discovery of scientific knowledge, it is thought that we are able to act more independently and face decisions more knowledgeably. What is not taken into account, however, is the counter influence of media which may help to spread knowledge but is also able to influence people's perceptions. Slowly, our entire community may lose individual autonomy and just be the subjects and products of a supreme power (which would be the private corporation(s) running our television industry).

In a way, however, this may seem like the perfect world. Even though you never make your own decisions, in a situation like Truman's, the world revolves around you. I believe this film is commenting on the selfishness of our society and our obsession with 'things' and personal gain. Everything in Truman's life goes smoothly and perfectly, he need not make any difficult decisions, and he never gets hurt. At what cost though? Truman has absolutely no control over his life and when he is forced to question reality, he is not equipped with any questioning and reasoning skills that everyone else is able to develop over the course of their lives in the "real world".

What I think is most interesting is the fact that at the end of the movie, everyone is happy for Truman when he escapes the television set. This seems hypocritical because here we have an entire population watching Truman and using his life as entertainment, but at the end of the day, they don't agree with how he has been treated this whole time. This is a reflection of our society which is so consumed with our own personal entertainment, that we do not even consider the means it takes to obtain and produce this entertainment.

It is only when Truman starts to uncover the truth (or lie) about his life that the actors begin to show remorse. While none break character around Truman, the audience (both us and those watching "The Truman Show") can recognize and detect genuine concern and feelings for Truman. There is a significant difference between how Truman and Hannah interact and how Truman and Sylvia interact. It is the same as how you can tell the difference between good and bad acting, but it does make the audience question what is real and what is not in the same way Truman must decide which "reality" is the right one.

Gattaca

When I began watching Gattaca, I thought it was going to involve more action in the form of space exploration. I was pleasantly surprised to find that it was more of a suspenseful and thought provoking film than it was an action flick. This dystopian film provides us with a commentary on the possible effects of genetic engineering on our current society. If people continue to tamper with genetics and biology, the only thing left to strive for is perfection. The desire to create the "perfect human" has surfaced in fiction throughout history; Mary Shelley's  Frankenstein and any of Stan Lee's Marvel creations are classic examples of literature that reflects the hope of the existence of "super" humans. You can never have a perfect human, however, because otherwise we would cease to be human. While humans are defined by their DNA and genetics, I also think they are defined by their nature. It is human nature to have flaws, recognize them, yet persevere. If everyone was perfect, we would lose that human nature and the human flaws that are fundamental to our existence.
 
I think it is interesting that Vincent has an obsession with space. Space is the "final frontier" that holds the promise of discovery and the thrill of the unknown. In our society, once the race to space died out, people found a new frontier and to do so, they looked inside themselves. There was a huge push for medical research and discovery starting in WWII but especially after the Cold War. Medical technology and knowledge increased exponentially thus leading towards genetic engineering. The dystopain society displayed in this film has exercised the medical frontier and is continuing onto the universal frontier. Vincent, while "lacking" genetically, has an infatuation with space starting at a young age. It is as if since his medical frontier was not pursued, he was destined to desire the exploration of the space frontier. While these "frontier" parallels may just be the result of coincidence, it seems that the idea of space and knowledge is very significant in this film; the writers could have chosen any field of study for Vincent to pursue, but I think space has a figurative significance that can only be discovered through film analysis.

I believe that Vincent's passion for space is also significant because the study of space requires extensive knowledge and capacity for both abstract and mathematical thinking. Vincent is one of the best and yet he was born naturally. This proves that genetic engineering only improves people physically; their mental capacities, while many times improved, are not necessarily better than those born naturally. I think that this acts as another commentary on the shallow and materialistic nature of our current society. We are so obsessed with our appearance, we want to "be" perfect. It is ironic that Jerome, who actually has everything anyone could ever want, became handicap after attempting to commit suicide. This brings to light the question of self worth and purpose: you can have everything and nothing at the same time. Jerome had the genetics and the IQ, but yet he lacked purpose, dreams, and goals; therefore, he committed suicide at the end of the film.

"A World at Risk"

Ulrich Beck states that after the Cold War, we were emerging "from a world of enemies to one of dangers and risks." Through the dramatization of media, we could no longer put a name and face to our enemy because it was portrayed as being all around us. There is no where that is safe from the new "inner demons" that have infiltrated society and the hearts of its citizens. Dystopian films are not denying that these inner demons exist; however, they are showing how the media can turn the public's view of these demons in order to either make people think they don't exist, or that there is one institution or person that is responsible. For example, if V for Vendetta, it is not V that is the enemy, but rather the government; however, the media (which is controlled by government) portrays V as the enemy because he ideals conflict with the corrupt and controlling ideals of the state. This film as well as many others is trying to show the dangers of allowing media to control a society. It is also trying to show, however, that media is currently gaining supremacy in our current society and if we do not recognize this, we can end up in situations similar to the dystopian films.

Children of Men

I have noticed that there are two different dystopian societies that are represented in film: one where citizens are unaware or unscathed by the society they live in and one where citizens recognize the corruption in their societies however are unable to change it. In Children of Men, everyone knows that the state they live in is twisted and corrupt however they do not have any power to change it and have lost the inner drive to attempt to change it. I believe that this film has offered the audience an interesting perspective on dystopian societies. Instead of social corruption arising out of corrupt thinking or behavior, it arises out of biological corruption. People's bodies are failing them and will not allow for the continuation of the human race. Like The Handmaid's Tale, women's inability to have children is what throws traditional social and political structure; however, it is how people react to this situation that turns these societies into dystopias. In The Handmaid's Tale, the solution was to impose strict social and biological roles. In Children of Men, there was no solution which then nearly led to complete anarchy. Instead of trying to address the problem of women's infertility, the world resorts to chaos. As people started to realize that there was not going to be a future for the human race, resistance faltered. Jasper pointed out that resistance is based on faith and as people began to lose their faith, resistance fell. What gives people faith is the promise of tomorrow. Children represent the possibilities of tomorrow because they are the ones who can change the future. At one point, Mariam says, "As the sound of the playgrounds faded, the despair set in. Very odd, what happens in a world without children's voices". Children reminded people that innocence and the capacity to change still exist; without it, people lose the will to resist corruption because what's the point?

I believe that the most powerful moment in this film is when Theo and Kee are walking through the war-torn building at the end of the film. Everyone stops at the sound of the crying baby because for the first time in eighteen years, there was hope. There was a promise of a future where people could achieve social harmony and life would continue with the promise that things could get better. There finally was a reason to value life; however, it did not seem to change anything because after Theo and Kee are clear of the building, the fighting starts up again.Why is this? Why after pausing to appreciate the beauty of new life do people continue on with the unnecessary destruction of human life? I believe that the answer is that in order to correct the shortcomings of the current dystopian society, life and society needs to start over. That is the purpose of the Human Project. I believe that while the Human Project's purpose is to study and treat infertility, it is also working towards the collaboration of humans to prepare for a prosperous future. It is attempting to restart society and hopefully eradicate the corruption and lack of faith seen in this dystopian setting.

Minority Report

This film shows the negative outcomes that result when humans try to usurp the power of God. Whether or not you are religious or believe in God is irrelevant. Whether you call it fate, destiny, or God, I am referencing the usurpation of power that is greater than man. Humans can never achieve the "perfect system" because humans are not bound by universal and absolute powers thus allowing for deviance and flaws. When John Anderton is insisting that the Pre-Crime Division is a perfect , Danny replies, "...there's a flaw. It's human." Pre-crime will fail because there will always be a flaw or at least the potential for flaw. In order for such a system to be sanctioned, there must not be any amount of doubt because of the fragile sense of reality this system relies on. What exactly is real? Can someone be accused of murder if they never actually killed anyone? With only the suspicion of murder presented by the pre-cogs, technically "innocent" people are arrested and punished.

Our current criminal law system rests upon the presence (or lack of) reasonable doubt. Juries must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is guilty. The minority report acts as reasonable doubt in the pre-crime premonitions. If there is even the slight suggestion that a perpetrator may not commit the crime, then that provides enough reasonable doubt to prevent their arrest and conviction. The problem with the system, however, is that it was set up to discard the minority reports or the reasonable doubt so as to make every crime and capture absolute. The desire to create a perfect system overshadowed ethics and thus brought down this "perfect system".

Agatha is constantly asking John if he can see. At first this question is confusing for both John and the audience. However, as the flaws in pre-crime begin to be uncovered, the audience understands that Agatha is asking if John sees the flaw in the system that was caused by the human corruption of the division's leader. I think that the emphasis on "seeing" is physically shown through the presence of eye transplants. John gets a new set of eyes which physically represents his ability to look at his situation with a new perspective. With the new eyes, society and authority is blind to his presence thus allowing him to reach deeper into the situation to find the truth. I believe that in a way this mirrors the idea of the blind prophet in Greek mythology which presents that idea that those who are physically blind are the only ones that can see the truth.


What I found most interesting about this film is that there appeared to be two separate plots: the personal triumph and deeper understanding of John Anderton and the corruption and flaws of pre-crime's foundation. If the latter was not included, I do not think this film could be considered the portrayal of a dystopia due to the lack of commentary. This film not only shows the personal triumph of a central character, but it also shows the triumph of ethics over corruption.

"Totalitarian Technocracies"

Science fiction uses imagination to explore the unknown while utopian and dystopian literature uses what is known to create a setting that is distant from the present but comparable. “Speculative fiction” is based on current social, economic, political, technological, and environmental trends that have been extended and exaggerated by the author and may include elements of science fiction; however, the implementation of science fiction is only necessary to enhance the purpose of the story, it is not the main focus. Dystopian fiction changes as society and technology evolves; therefore, with increased scientific discovery, comes an increase in dystopian fiction addressing concerns of technology. H.G. Wells was one of the first writers to address the rise of science and technology; however, the dystopian take on science was not prevalent until after WWII where the dangerous effects of technology were clearly displayed. It is important to note that many of these dystopian works address not the dangers of science but rather the dangers of those who abuse scientific discovery. These authors force the readers to consider how with the rise of technology, they can protect society from scientific corruption and failure. With the evolution of science and technology came the evolution of literature. My question is what is the next evolution in dystopian fiction? What is the next big issue that writers will address? How will this affect the audiences of these works?

Fight Club

I never thought of Fight Club as a dystopian society until I watched it again for this class. I believed that the movie was just a commentary on the issues of consumerism in our present day society; however, after watching it again, I realize that it is a clear dystopia of which relies on the materialism and consumerism of its people. This society eventually undergoes a revolution called Project Mayhem in order to restore the ideas of self-worth rather than material-worth. People who have encountered near-death experiences, such as those at the support groups, are aware of their "self's" and are able to distance themselves from materialism. The reason the narrator is addicted to the support groups is that he is attracted to the pain which allows people to find themselves.

I find it extremely interesting that the narrator is never given a name. I have thought a lot about this and I believe that the narrator has no name because he isn't truly a "person". Yes, he is living, he participates in society, and he has an individual mind of his own; however, the difference is that he has no purpose outside of consuming the mass produced products which define a person's worth in this society. He is just another interchangeable cog in the materialism machine. Unknowingly stuck in this position, Ed Norton's character believes that he has autonomy and control over his life. It is true that he can pick what he buys, but at the end of the day, he must consume to survive. Knowing this, Tyler Durden erases his life from the face of the Earth and shows the narrator that, "It's only after we've lost everything that we are free to do anything".

I do not agree that you can say that there was no Tyler Durden because he is clearly an autonomous and self-rationalizing being. Tyler Durden represents consciousness in a world filled with insomniacs unable to be fully alert. He is literally the embodiment of the narrators "awakening" and realization that the world is too attached to things. In order to make the narrator realize the issues in this dystopia, Tyler implements the philosophy of self-destruction. He explains that one only finds themselves and their reason to live when they self-destruct. That is the purpose of Project Mayhem: to destroy what defines a person in this society (their credit cards and their material possessions), to inspire chaos, and hopefully to encourage self-awareness.
What I found most interesting about this film is that it was self-aware. The characters were aware that they were a part of a film which allowed for the audience to achieve greater insight into the purpose of the film. Several times throughout the film, the characters would speak directly to the audience like in Shakespearean plays where characters would use an aside to communicate with the audience. This afforded the director the opportunity to make it clear to the audience that this film was a reflection of current issues of materialism. This dystopian society is based on the continuation of current trends in our society which makes it far more relatable and concerning.

The Handmaid's Tale

The Handmaid's Tale focuses on the perversion of the roles of women in a dystopian society. Women are mere possessions with different distinct purposes. I think the greatest contributor to providing these distinctions is the uniformity of each class of women. All of the women, including the rich elite who are supposedly in power, wear the same exact outfits as those in the same social status. This has the effect of showing how women come in sets: the blue wife, the red handmaid, the gray and white housemaids, and the white daughter. A man in this society looks to collect a set without any emotional attachment or pursuits.

In order to get these women to comply with the roles they have been given, there is extensive energy placed on brainwashing them. It was sickening seeing the women chant over and over that rape was caused by the provocative nature of women.
This scene is a commentary on the conservative view in our present day society which has lead even politicians such as Todd Akin to announce that women have control over rape. I believe this dystopian society is supposed to show the effects of denying women the right to control and protect their own bodies and addressing issues such as rape with ignorance and prejudice. At the school, the women are brainwashed until they can no longer think. Many times throughout the film, handmaids have said "I do not know" not due to a lack of knowledge but rather to a lack of individual thought. This is what the viewer is supposed to think until the film develops further to reveal that many of these women are acting their parts in order to survive and form resistance. Just because they act in the way in which society dictates, does not necessarily mean that they agree with it. In fact many do not believe in the treatment of women. Even those who appear to be fully integrated the way society wants, such as Ofglen who only reveals her issues with society towards the end of the film when she abruptly tells Kate she must kill The Commander.

The only women who are truly free are those who entertain at the "forbidden" club that The Commander attends with Kate. This is almost like a reversal of our society, where women who participate in such "forbidden" acts are usually looked down upon and seen as trapped by the socioeconomic hand they have been dealt. I found the irony of situation interesting when it was stated that these women used to be the most respected in their fields (doctors, lawyers, politicians, scientists, etc.). Technically, these women are still considered to be at the top because out of all of the women trapped in this society, they have to most freedom. In this film, these women are idealized by Kate because of their freedom to act and think. Only later does Kate find that they are not completely free, due to the burns on their hands, however, they carry a sense of liberation that the other women in this society do not posses.

"They Got Me a Long Time Ago"

As outsiders, we have an omniscient view of the situation present in these dystopian societies; therefore, we have the capabilities to assess and analyze the issues and controversies posed by dystopian authors and directors. Similarly, authoritarian characters such as O'Brien from Nineteen Eighty Four, also known as a sympathetic villain, are able to reflect on and recognize the corrupted utopias in which they live usually without feeling the effects of ignorance or brainwashing. These sympathetic villains are highly relatable due to their characterizations which are designed to inspire admiration and sympathy. Why then, do these characters continue to integrate themselves seamlessly into society if they have the knowledge to revolt and change? They suffer from a conflict of consciousness where they have undesirable thoughts and beliefs but yet block them out almost instinctively in order to survive. This is what Rafeeq O. McGiveron calls regretful irony; these characters understand the corruption of their institutions yet regretfully continue with its practices. I believe this irony contributes to the hopeless felt in these dystopian works because even though it is possible for man to recognize his mistakes, he may not always have the power to change it.

Nineteen Eighty Four

Nineteen Eighty Four focuses on the importance of maintaining your humanity even in the face of oblivion. In other words, one must hold onto personal integrity in order to prevent the takeover of an oppressive group. Once people begin to lose personal integrity and the will to think as individuals, society and  humanity will spiral into a decrepit state filled with oppression. People's lives in Oceania are directed by the Inner Party and the Big Brother (whose actual existence is questionable) all because people are afraid and lack the inner drive to challenge their authority.

At first I was disappointed in Winston for giving in to his fears at the end of the film. I was hoping for a dramatic triumph over oppression similar to that found in V for Vendetta where Evey Hammond would rather face death than betray the man she loved and the idea she believed in. After giving thought to the comparison of these two films, however, I realized that Winston could not follow the same path as Evey because the purpose of Nineteen Eighty Four is extremely different from V for Vendetta. The latter focuses on the power of an idea to inspire revolution in the strong hearts of citizens while the former is a commentary on the disintegration of humanity and the loss of will among men. Winston could not hold on to his integrity as an individual because he no longer had what it takes to be human: will. The entire society had been broken by The Party in order to allow for complete obedience. Any who challenged the laws set forth by the high power were either killed or tortured until they lost their will to act and think as an individual. Winston's situation tests his will to stay true to his feelings and beliefs. Even though he knows it is illegal and dangerous, he still chooses to see Julia showing that he would rather act on his own personal desires than on those of the state. As the film progresses, however, he begins to falter and as his punishments become more painful and dire, Winston begins to betray his personal integrity in order to stay alive.

I have offered a comparison between the final torture scene in Nineteen Eighty Four and the letter monologue from V for Vendetta.

After watching both clips, I realized that the "inch" Valerie refers to is lacking in Winston's world. In Nineteen Eighty Four, people don't even have an inch; therefore, there is no hope for humanity ergo the lack of hope at the end of the film.

In the first scene of Nineteen Eighty Four, the camera focused on both young and enthusiastic citizens and older non-excited citizens. My initial thought was that since they were older, the non-enthused citizens remembered a time when there was no oppression or war. However, O'Brien made it seem as if the war and the mind-control had been going on for an extended number of years. It was only at the very end of the film when Winston was playing chess alone in the cafe that I realized that those "elderly" men at the first rally could have possibly just experienced the same torture and loss of will as Winston. Both Julia and Winston exhibited behaviors similar to the older generation, meaning that almost everyone must at some point challenge the intentions of The Party, face punishment, and be reintegrated into society after they lose their will to fight. It is an endless cycle that George Orwell believes can never be broken.

THX 1138

What I found most fascinating about THX 1138 is that there does not appear to be any central power or authority. There are the religious monk-like people who walk in formation, but their differences and heightened status are not emphasized. Even though technology and automation are very prevalent in this society, it does not seem to suggest that life is run by a supercomputer because everything still needs to be operated by humans. If this is the case, then who or what operates society, dictates goals and purposes, and maintains order?
Everything we understand to contain power and influence is completely automated in this dystopian society. One of the most powerful and influential institutions in our society is religion; however, in THX 1138, religion is automated and seeming to lack the understanding of human nature which is fundamental to the purpose of religion. This is not to say, however, that the people in this dystopian society do not practice or respect religion because it appears that it is at the core of the civilization. It is troubling that  people do not challenge the pre-programmed and sometimes nonsense replies they receive during their confessions. How can someone seek a deeper understanding of their individual existence if the institutions they are surrounded by only focus on automation and standardization? The answer is that people cannot find answers to questions of individuality because doing so would threaten the very structure of society: standardized thought. Those who do find a way to challenge the conformity forced upon them, are placed in detention where many go insane.

Like their religious practices, people are made to act and think like the automated powers they are surrounded by. In order to accomplish this standardization of the human brain, people are issued medication to keep them "sedated" and compliant with their society which lacks any appeal to humanity and emotion. This society is only focused on efficiency and standardization; any deviation from these two central ideas is thought of as unnecessary and wasteful. Therefore, in order to achieve the highest efficiency and standardization in a human, regulation of thought must be implemented.

"For more enjoyment and greater efficiency, consumption is being standardized."

THX and LUH challenge the ideas of standardization by placing their individual desires before the needs of "the masses". Wishing for the freedom to act, think, and feel independently THX and LUH try to escape oppression in order to live independently. Independence and individuality are dangerous, however, and must be eradicated through proper medication in order to benefit and protect society as a whole. I thought this film put an interesting twist on Abraham Lincoln's statement, "...government of the people, by the people, for the people..." from his Gettysburg Address. Instead of using the word "people", however, the OMM says, "Created in the image of man, by the masses, for the masses". This again shows how society has been stripped of its humanity because no longer are people referred to as "people" (which is the plural form of a singular person who has individual motives and thoughts), but rather they are referred to as "the masses" meaning they are a group of bodies similar in mind and body without any individuality. The human being has been standardized and THX and LUH no longer fit into "the masses"; therefore, they were removed. My question is, was there a gradual standardization of the human brain? Or was it implemented abruptly by an autonomous ruler?

Summary- "On Dystopia"

The rise in dystopian literature was a response to significant historical events such as WWII which signified the human ability to cause catastrophic destruction. Through a modernist movement of artists, new techniques and subject focuses were tested in literature in order to reflect the rapid changed in the world; to reflect the growing sentiment of darkness and pessimism, the dystopia was created. Dystopian societies are a result of social degeneration, meaning the human race has regressed to savagery. Degeneration can result from either a significant reliance on media and technology or a significant lack of modern technology and processes; however, in both cases, there is a focus on an oppressive society filled with violence (both emotional and physical) and inhumanity. Dystopian literature, films, and art are meant to stimulate what Booker refers to as cognitive estrangement: readers and viewers are exposed to a vastly different future based on their current reality and are thus inspired to thoughts and criticisms of their current society. There are many aspects of current culture on which dystopian writers focus: failure of utopia, suppression of individualism, anti-fascism/communism, power of military, economic anxiety, repressive private corporations, and gender/patriarchy. Writers create dystopian settings that are far enough in the future to allow for change, but close enough to reflect the immediacy of the problem addressed and to provide the reader with a sufficient connection to the future so as to increase the power of the message.

Fahrenheit 451

Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 exposes the dangers of society's reliance on media and the importance of individuality and free thinking. As Booker explains in his "Compare/Contrast" article in On Dystopia, the media acts to keep people's minds occupied and passive. Media does not have control over people, but rather it offers strong suggestions which take root in people's minds due to a lack of criticism and counter-suggestion. People lack the ability to think critically about the information streaming from their television screens because society has ripped away all other forms of influential expression. The difference between television broadcasts and books is that broadcasts can be controlled and manipulated by one source while literature stems from multiple authors. Anyone can write and express their thoughts; therefore, a vast collection of various perspectives is available to readers allowing for the stimulation of independent thought and the challenge of social ideas. Televisions programs on the other hand, must be facilitated through a larger/richer institution; therefore, those with money and power can filter certain perspectives and dictate what the audience is exposed to. What makes Fahrenheit 451 so powerful is that we can see this manipulation begin to happen in our current society through biases in the media. While we are nowhere near the extreme Bradbury suggests, we still must be aware of the possible future that lies ahead if our society does not implement precaution. The purpose of creating a dystopian setting is to suggest dramatic consequences for current actions. Bradbury wanted to emphasize the importance of individual thought and the pursuit of enlightenment; without it, humanity will spiral into thoughtlessness and passiveness which will disintegrate all hopes of social progress.

In order to effectively make use of a dystopian society, one must make it relatable enough to the reader so that the reality of this future society seems possible. I believe that director François Truffaut heightened the "realness" of Bradbury's dystopia through his use of visual symbols that the audience can recognize. The most obvious to me was the symbol of the apple. The first scene shows a man in his house moments before the fire department arrives to destroy his books. The man has a bowl filled with apples from which he takes one and bites into it. Apples symbolize the pursuit of knowledge and enlightenment; therefore, we know before the fire department arrives, that this man is scholarly and free thinking meaning he must have books hidden in his apartment. A symbol for intelligence and insight, the apple can also represent the pursuit of dangerous knowledge as suggested in the Adam and Eve story. In the Fahrenheit 451 setting, any knowledge acquired through reading is considered threatening. As the opening scene unfolds, a fireman takes an apple from the resident's table and as he takes a bite, his superior knocks it from his hand. 

This demonstrates a rejection of refined knowledge by the authority in this dystopian society. This act also foreshadows the realization that not even the firemen understand the purpose or meaning behind their jobs, but they continue nonetheless because they are kept ignorant and told it is required by their community. The apple symbol surfaces again when refugees at the camp in the woods share apples. This demonstrates the fundamental basis of this new community which relies on the acquiring and sharing of knowledge (stories and books). This symbol connects the audience to the dystopian society by revealing the nearness of symbolic practice between our reality and Bradbury's suggestion of the future.