![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Running around the place at the minute, vaguely panicking. Never mind. Have some really random fly-by thoughts:
I've been watching snippets of Fritz Lang's Metropolis (which I adore, by the by - silent movies have a particular ... something ... and this proto-type of sci-fi film was always going to find a soft spot in my heart). And ...
There's a section in the Irish Leaving Cert Exam for English, where you're tasked to compare and contrast three texts on certain themes, genre conventions, etc. And thinking about that, and thinking about Metropolis, and idly browsing Sanctuary on TV Tropes ... got me to thinking. Because apparently, aside from drawing huge inspiration from the Bible and the story of the Tower of Babel (which is interesting in a Sanctuary context anyway), apparently the film drew enough on Victorian melodramas and proto-sci-fi that HG Wells apparently complained that he was being plagarised. Which ... made me look at them, and that led to ...
The Five watching Metropolis. Or perhaps the remaining four of them, in 1927, watching Metropolis. Or later, so much later, because there are so many periods of their lives that echo with that film ...
I've been watching snippets of Fritz Lang's Metropolis (which I adore, by the by - silent movies have a particular ... something ... and this proto-type of sci-fi film was always going to find a soft spot in my heart). And ...
There's a section in the Irish Leaving Cert Exam for English, where you're tasked to compare and contrast three texts on certain themes, genre conventions, etc. And thinking about that, and thinking about Metropolis, and idly browsing Sanctuary on TV Tropes ... got me to thinking. Because apparently, aside from drawing huge inspiration from the Bible and the story of the Tower of Babel (which is interesting in a Sanctuary context anyway), apparently the film drew enough on Victorian melodramas and proto-sci-fi that HG Wells apparently complained that he was being plagarised. Which ... made me look at them, and that led to ...
The Five watching Metropolis. Or perhaps the remaining four of them, in 1927, watching Metropolis. Or later, so much later, because there are so many periods of their lives that echo with that film ...
Look at Helen. She is (or at least wants to be) Maria, the visionary speaker, seeking to unite the world Above and Below, the Human and the Abnormal. The one with the courage to stand up even to the Powers that Be of the City, the one who brings the underworld slowly out into the light, and seeks to intergrate it into the above. The passionate visionary, who speaks despite her own personal ordeals, and who is the target of many a plot.
But at the same time, how much of her is also Joh Frederson, the architect of the city? The one who created those lines, above and below, human and abnormal, in the first place? How much is she responsible for holding them apart, perhaps justifiably, perhaps not. For the good of everyone? How much of Helen is echoed in Frederson, and his decision to control the workers/abnormals by segregating them out into their own institution, and allowing the upper city/human world to develope as wastefully as it pleases? Considering Praxis, and the darker echo of the Sanctuaries, and the lingering influences of Gregory's way of thinking ...
And too, in her personal relationships ... how much of Helen is the Robot Maria, who incites men to violence, madness, darkness and despair? Perhaps not willfully destructive or malicious, but an inciting figure, a modern day Salome ...
And for the others of the Five ... For Nikola, most obviously, there's Rotwang, though considering how much the mad scientist archetype was based on him himself, it might be debateable how much he'd appreciate him. But still. The scientist betrayed, by love and for a cause, for the construction of something (Joh Frederson and his dream), who turns to science and electricity and the creation of/returning to life of a lost love (in his case the vampire race rather than Rotwang's literal lost love, but there are shades there too ...) in revenge. The creation of vampires through blood and electricity echoing Rotwang's construction of a robotic lost love, clothing it in flesh. The destructive dream Rotwang nursed for the city, perhaps echoed in Nikola's vampiric dream. The final betrayal of Rotwang by Frederson, perhaps a dark and far angstier echo of some of Nikola's dealings with Helen and the Sanctuary (which, like Rotwang, are admittedly largely his fault) ... There's a lot in Rotwang that might echo with Nikola.
A lot of Joh, too, though. A lot of the grand arching dream of machinery building a better world, Joh's Metropolis. A dream that was meant, originally, to be free, the machinery needing no human workers (this interpretation is from the commentary, not the movie itself, admittedly), but later corrupted to better control a population. A dream Joh let be corrupted. Nikola and the vampires, once technology failed to be free in and of itself?
For James ... for James, too, Rotwang might strike a chord. Considering the triangle of Joh/Hel/Rotwang, set against the triangle of Helen/John/James. Rotwang, who saw the woman he loved fall for another man, and then be destroyed by him (in childbirth), which one could argue would be echoed in James watching John fall for Helen, and be destroyed by her experiments. Which, ironically enough, puts John as Hel, the lost love resurrected as the Robotic Maria, who brings the city to its knees in a veritable orgy of destruction ... Interesting. And for James, Rotwang also has the angle of being a man partially remade by machinery (his robotic hand) after losing everything ...
John ... John is a strange tangle. In parts Robo-Maria, as above, as much an inciter as Helen. In parts Rotwang himself, reversing the triangle from his point of view as Helen and James cleave together after he's lost. And, I think, in parts Freder, Joh's son, who wanders unknowing from a pampered life into a maelstrom of conflicted worlds, into a world of blood and pain and visionaries and abnormals, lured there in part by his own impetuousness, and in part by the beautiful woman who captured his dreams ...
And Nigel? Poor Nigel, who managed to make a decent life of it, admittedly through the occasional larceny and dip into sin and decadence. Nigel, who quietly carved out his own little piece in the midst of this nightmare tangle of visionaries and monolithic dreams? *smiles* Nigel's sympathy, I think, would rest almost wholly on 11811/Georgy, the poor worker Freder rescues from the machine and the life of a worker, and sends to sample the decadences of the upper city, a world he'd never dreamt of. A man who, realising the poor idiot's left him a bit richer than perhaps he intended, promptly absconds with the cash and goes to make a life for himself with a girl from the red light district. Heh.
And overall ... the conflict in the film between above and below, worker and city-born, abnormal and human. The use and misuse of science. The grand dreams that are subsequently perverted, not necessarily by ill-intent, but by human nature, and the ease with which so many things may be misused. The travails of love, and how it can induce someone to save or break worlds. The Tower of Babel. The clash of vision and pragmatism and personal grudges. There's a lot there ... that would echo, no?
I think the Five watching Metropolis would be ... an interesting experience. There's a lot there that they would see in themselves, in the others, a lot there they wouldn't want to see. Heh.
*smiles, shakes head* Anyway. Grand digression aside. This is what you get when you cross wires in my brain. Hehe. Shutting up now.
But at the same time, how much of her is also Joh Frederson, the architect of the city? The one who created those lines, above and below, human and abnormal, in the first place? How much is she responsible for holding them apart, perhaps justifiably, perhaps not. For the good of everyone? How much of Helen is echoed in Frederson, and his decision to control the workers/abnormals by segregating them out into their own institution, and allowing the upper city/human world to develope as wastefully as it pleases? Considering Praxis, and the darker echo of the Sanctuaries, and the lingering influences of Gregory's way of thinking ...
And too, in her personal relationships ... how much of Helen is the Robot Maria, who incites men to violence, madness, darkness and despair? Perhaps not willfully destructive or malicious, but an inciting figure, a modern day Salome ...
And for the others of the Five ... For Nikola, most obviously, there's Rotwang, though considering how much the mad scientist archetype was based on him himself, it might be debateable how much he'd appreciate him. But still. The scientist betrayed, by love and for a cause, for the construction of something (Joh Frederson and his dream), who turns to science and electricity and the creation of/returning to life of a lost love (in his case the vampire race rather than Rotwang's literal lost love, but there are shades there too ...) in revenge. The creation of vampires through blood and electricity echoing Rotwang's construction of a robotic lost love, clothing it in flesh. The destructive dream Rotwang nursed for the city, perhaps echoed in Nikola's vampiric dream. The final betrayal of Rotwang by Frederson, perhaps a dark and far angstier echo of some of Nikola's dealings with Helen and the Sanctuary (which, like Rotwang, are admittedly largely his fault) ... There's a lot in Rotwang that might echo with Nikola.
A lot of Joh, too, though. A lot of the grand arching dream of machinery building a better world, Joh's Metropolis. A dream that was meant, originally, to be free, the machinery needing no human workers (this interpretation is from the commentary, not the movie itself, admittedly), but later corrupted to better control a population. A dream Joh let be corrupted. Nikola and the vampires, once technology failed to be free in and of itself?
For James ... for James, too, Rotwang might strike a chord. Considering the triangle of Joh/Hel/Rotwang, set against the triangle of Helen/John/James. Rotwang, who saw the woman he loved fall for another man, and then be destroyed by him (in childbirth), which one could argue would be echoed in James watching John fall for Helen, and be destroyed by her experiments. Which, ironically enough, puts John as Hel, the lost love resurrected as the Robotic Maria, who brings the city to its knees in a veritable orgy of destruction ... Interesting. And for James, Rotwang also has the angle of being a man partially remade by machinery (his robotic hand) after losing everything ...
John ... John is a strange tangle. In parts Robo-Maria, as above, as much an inciter as Helen. In parts Rotwang himself, reversing the triangle from his point of view as Helen and James cleave together after he's lost. And, I think, in parts Freder, Joh's son, who wanders unknowing from a pampered life into a maelstrom of conflicted worlds, into a world of blood and pain and visionaries and abnormals, lured there in part by his own impetuousness, and in part by the beautiful woman who captured his dreams ...
And Nigel? Poor Nigel, who managed to make a decent life of it, admittedly through the occasional larceny and dip into sin and decadence. Nigel, who quietly carved out his own little piece in the midst of this nightmare tangle of visionaries and monolithic dreams? *smiles* Nigel's sympathy, I think, would rest almost wholly on 11811/Georgy, the poor worker Freder rescues from the machine and the life of a worker, and sends to sample the decadences of the upper city, a world he'd never dreamt of. A man who, realising the poor idiot's left him a bit richer than perhaps he intended, promptly absconds with the cash and goes to make a life for himself with a girl from the red light district. Heh.
And overall ... the conflict in the film between above and below, worker and city-born, abnormal and human. The use and misuse of science. The grand dreams that are subsequently perverted, not necessarily by ill-intent, but by human nature, and the ease with which so many things may be misused. The travails of love, and how it can induce someone to save or break worlds. The Tower of Babel. The clash of vision and pragmatism and personal grudges. There's a lot there ... that would echo, no?
I think the Five watching Metropolis would be ... an interesting experience. There's a lot there that they would see in themselves, in the others, a lot there they wouldn't want to see. Heh.
*smiles, shakes head* Anyway. Grand digression aside. This is what you get when you cross wires in my brain. Hehe. Shutting up now.