A great number of similarities, despite their more obvious differences on many levels, are found in the styles, techniques, and symbolism of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein and Ridley Scotts Blade Runner. While Shelleys book was written in 1816 and Scotts movie was released in 1982, and thus forming a gap of more than two centuries between the works, the number of character similarities and shared themes alone are remarkable. Both stories portray individuals of high intelligence attempting to act as a creator of life, both of the created creatures in the stories are ultimately mistreated both by their society and by their creators, and in both stories, the reader or viewer is coaxed towards feelings of sympathy for the created rather than the creator despite the created. In both stories, ultimately the creator was unaware of the repercussions of their actions and the power of the forces which they were attempting to wield.
The creators in the stories each have a special fascination for human life. However the creations can be regarded as either monsters or lesser beings as far as society is concerned. Many examples of science fiction apparently show antagonistic creatures of this kind while directly compared to humanity, as is the Frankenstein creature and the replicants in Bladerunner. The creatures have human traits however they are not fully human, and for the reasons they are not fully human the societies which they are part of seeing them as essentially non-human and furthermore treat them as enemies for this classification alone. The creatures are ultimately shunned and despised for their mere existence. While the terrible traits which the monsters are treated as if they possess are never actually evident, the unconscious human mind is to blame for the perception of such negativity without physical cause.
A sort of role reversal is evident in Shelleys Frankenstein with the monster as an antagonist and the human as a hero, as the creator of the monster possesses more actual traits of what is thought to be terrible than the accused monster. Other characters within the book are able to perceive this, as evident in the passage Abhorred monster! fiend that thou art! the tortures of hell are too mild a vengeance for thy crimes. Wretched devil! you reproach me with your creation (Shelley p.72). The creator is portrayed as a character incapable of changing in course of action, due to levels of enthusiasm, anxiety, and self-imposed slavery in this regard. This flavor would ultimately be self-imposed doom and a lack of true free will implies man generally possesses an internal monster (Shelley; Scott).
The monsters of Ridley Scotts Bladerunner, the replicants, possess so many human traits that the creation company in the film refers to them as more human than human. Four primary replicants attempt to communicate with their maker so that they can gain a kind of help that is comparable to Frankensteins monster. Unlike Frankensteins monster, however, replicants are not legally allowed to exist. A legally sanctioned task force, the blade runners are to hunt and kill replicants entering the world from where they are made on the external slave colonies. A role reversal is also evident here, as the hunters ruthlessly slaughter replicants who are entirely harmless and may have lived beneficial lives. As such it is easily argued that the hunters are monstrous while the replicants seem more human overall, while society and law dictate the reversal be the reality of the situation.
It is also important to note that many humans in the Bladerunner movie are physically deformed or otherwise abnormal, a trait quite similar to the monster in Frankenstein. This may have been done intentionally to help to further illustrate a role reversal. Ultimately, in Bladerunner, the only perfect beings, both physically and seemingly morally, are the replicants. This level of innocence is comparable to the Frankenstein monster, whose ignorance of the world leads him to perform the only unpure actions which he does, though ultimately he is driven by very human and innocent desires and motivations. The replicants are, however, more victimized than the Frankenstein monster, as memory implantation is used in some cases to make the replicants feel more human and believe they are more human. While the Frankenstein monster can be said to have the rights to humanity since he was created to be a part of it, this same argument can be better argued for the replicants who were not only created to look identical to humans but furthermore act human and have human memories (Kerman; Scott).
Similar to the ultimately doomed existence of the Frankenstein monster due to the views and effects of society, the replicants in Bladerunner are doomed to be hunted and killed despite the fact they have programmed memories and life actions. Both stories are thus tragedies in this respect as the innocent are forced out of existence for the main reason of being different. As such, the argument of nature versus nurture has a place in both stories, while science and ethics are questioned in both stories. Perhaps in another two hundred years time another story will be created to portray more modern science and the inherent ethical implications. Bladerunner can essentially be viewed as the same story as Mary Shelleys Frankenstein in elements, though made more relevant for modern society while the same underlying themes of ethics, creation, and humanity are all questioned.
Works cited
Kerman, Judith. Retrofitting Bladerunner: Issues in Ridley Scotts Bladerunner. Popular Press, 1997.
Scott, Ridley et. al. Blade Runner. Warner Home Video, 1999.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. University of Chicago Press, 1982.
“The history of the world is but the biography great men.” – Thomas Carlyle.
“The end of rebellion is liberation, while the end of revolution is the foundation of freedom” – Hannah Arendt.
Though Carlyle’s insight is undoubtable, this author under the influence of Arendt believes that the history of the world is in fact the biography of great rebels. From Nelson Mandela opposing the legalised racism of apartheid to Galileo Galilei reorganising the stars, rebellion has punctuated revolution throughout history. The future, however, has been foreshadowed to be a tad more obedient with texts like Blade Runner and Fahrenheit 451 depicting dystopian societies where fear and authority are the padlock and deadbolt chaining vital rebellion.
Now why should I bother to read a column about rebelling against some far-off fictional government, you may be asking. The future may appear to be a distant number on your phone, but we are living in a time where the Chinese government think they can swallow Hong-Kong alive. Where the Russian government has already bitten a chunk out of Ukraine. Where the 2018 missile strikes against Syria have gone unanswered. The future is closer than you think, and it may very well be more terrifying than any text could convey.
Outwardly, the futuristic world of Fahrenheit 451 appears to be quite pleasant with its wall-wide televisions and beyond state-of-the-art toasters. However, dissatisfaction runs rampant with a totalitarian government guaranteeing its power by reassuring the ignorant and burning the dissidents. Such a future is personified through Mildred Montag, a woman obediently locked in a vicious cycle of vapid gratification by day, and suicidal self-destruction by night. Her society compels her to obey with any deviants being extinguished and labelled insane: as Captain Beatty puts it “Any man’s insane who thinks he can fool the Government and us”.
Mildred’s speeding, attempted suicide and utter rejection of meaningful thought highlight her inner turmoil, and yet she’s convinced of her happiness, announcing “Happiness is important. Fun is everything. I am [happy]… and proud of it” after conversing with Captain Beatty. Beatty represents authority within Fahrenheit 451, being the leader of the book burning fireman. Beatty stokes Mildred’s obedience to “fun” and effectively reassimilates her into their society after a long and surprisingly well-spoken monologue to her and her husband. Despite Guy’s pleas and her own overwhelming dissatisfaction, Mildred rejects any notion of free thinking, of disobeying, of rebelling, even up until her death.
Authority’s paramount influence over Mildred’s attitudes and beliefs reveal to the reader one’s nature to surrender to authority. This aspect of human nature isn’t exclusive to fiction either. An electrifying study performed in 1961, called the Milgram shock experiment, attempted to shed an academic light on the degree to which people obey authority despite it conflicting with basic human morals. The experiment disguised as a memory study entailed an unknowing participant – playing the teacher in the situation, being instructed by an authoritative figure (experimenter) to shock a student (actor) every time they got a question wrong. Shockingly, 65% of all participants delivered the maximum 450volts despite the distressing screams of the student (McLeod, 2017). Mildred’s complete obedience under authority may seem like something that you or I would never stoop to, however the 1961 experiment confirms the struggle man faces when trying to defy authority. As Faber articulates “So few want to be rebels anymore. And out of those few, most, like myself, scare easily”.
Bradbury juxtaposes the introduction of Mildred and Clarisse to illustrate the differences between the rebellious and obedient. Guy and Clarisse share an energetic exchange, with the dialogue unfolding in rapid sentences to represent the spontaneous mind of Clarisse. Conversely, Mildred is introduced with the simile “Her face was like a snow-covered island upon which rain might fall; but it felt no rain”, positioning the reader to see her as isolated, cold and impersonal. The effects of authority’s influence on these opposing characters invites the reader to perceive rebellion in an oppressive society as liberating while obedience as enslaving.
Unlike Fahrenheit 451, obedience is injected into the world of Blade Runner by fear more so than authority. The two most thematically significant characters, Deckard and Roy, share a common motivation of fear, with the latter fearing his own mortality and the former fearing persecution by the LAPD. Deckard begins his hunt free of doubt and desperate to retire the machines as quickly as possible. However, after killing Zhora, he questions what it means to be human as his own empathy towards replicants uproots his values and inculcated cultural assumptions (i.e. replicants are to be used as they cannot feel).
His unyielding doubts become apparent in his immediate search for liquor and are emphasized by the tone of the scene. The rainy, dark setting coupled with a piercing synthesizer in the background create an uneasy tone, positioning the reader to feel distressed like the protagonist. The scene maintains an eye-level medium shot solely framing Deckard and his disturbed expression as he walks toward Zhora’s dead body, highlighting his uncertainty and even regret. Yet despite all these factors, Deckard subsequently agrees to hunt down the remaining replicants including Rachel, the woman he later falls in love with, after talking to Bryant. The obedience fear can instill is made almost palpable in this scene, revealing one’s nature to instinctively favour survival over morality.
Roy Batty, the leader of the renegade replicants can simultaneously be viewed as both a parallel and complete antithesis to Deckard. The very purpose of a replicant is unequivocal obedience, but Roy chooses rebellion when faced with the fear of his impending death. A link between submission and the fear Roy is rebelling against is directly drawn in his iconic quote “Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a slave”. Both Roy and Deckard are motivated by fear but Roy contrasts early Deckard’s obedience with rebellion as he advances to Earth to reclaim his life. Roy rejects authority, killing Tyrell and in what this author considers the greatest act of cinema rebellion, spares Deckard. In his final moments, Roy singularly proved that he is more human than any of the men chasing after him with an appreciation for life and an empathy he nor any other character had displayed thus far into the film.
Not all forms of rebellion are as unadulterated as Roy’s, with many shades of revolt existing within both texts. From Beatty’s acceptance of his society despite its flagrant flaws, to Faber who acknowledges the failure in both his society and his ability to act, obedience and rebellion are intertwined throughout different layers of texts: especially Fahrenheit 451. The only survivors of the nuclear bombing at the end of Fahrenheit 451 are the true rebels of its world, Guy – the man who renounced the attitudes and values held by society and Granger’s gang – the men who had outright rejected the society. With this ending Ray Bradbury implicitly positions the reader to understand the importance of rebellion and its necessity for the survival of a man in an oppressive society.
Sadly, rebellion is double-edged as highlighted in the slaughter of all Nexus 6 replicants and the innocent Clarisse. However, their deaths weren’t in vain, their efforts not lost “like tears in the rain” as their actions sparked a new flame of rebellion in another. Clarisse was the pivotal influence that awoke Guy from his misery and the Nexus 6 replicants forever reshaped Deckard’s attitudes, values and beliefs towards replicants.
Symbolism is intertwined with rebellion in both texts. Guy stripping naked and entering the river while another man is killed in his place symbolises his transformation as a rebel, with his obedient identity dying as he is reborn – like the ever-prevalent phoenix. Roy misquotes William Blake with the line “Fiery the angels fell…burning with the fires of Orc”. Orc in Blake mythology represents revolution and rebellion. Orc was born a worm but transformed into a serpent, was chained to a mountain but then freed by his imagination. The intentional misquote (“rose” to “fell”) indicates Roy knows he has fundamentally rebelled by returning to earth and that he identifies with the fallen angels.
Now, a thousand words wiser and all the more rebellious, you my reader are faced with a decision. Will you rage against the obedience imposed by fear and authority like Guy, revel in the freedom of your rebellion like Roy for half-hearted intentions are a meagre drizzle in the intellectual and emotional drought of an impossibly dystopian future? If not, rebelling against this coda is okay to.
“Become so very free that your whole existence is an act of rebellion.” – Albert Camus.
References
McLeod, S. (2017). The Milgram Shock Experiment. Retrieved from Simply Psychology: https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
What are some common themes and characteristics of postmodernism that occur in two texts that you have studied in this unit so far? Whatever texts you choose, make sure that you have read, listened to, or watched them in their entirety! For example, you might choose a movie and a poem or two movies. Also, consider how someone else might see things differently, that is, include some reference to a different interpretation that you don’t support but that others might.
Blade Runner directed by Ridley Scott and Fight Club directed by David Fincher, though extremely different from each other, share the common theme of postmodernism. Postmodernism is a way of representing a specific point in time, making it possible to historicize certain cultural behaviors. Postmodernism has been described in many ways by different theorists. It is incorporated into art, literature, fiction, architecture, and philosophy as well as cultural and literary criticisms. It is not certain whether or not postmodernism is good for society, but it does exist in the world today. The use of an unreliable narrator, intertextuality, as well as fragmentation, are all elements that are present in the films Blade Runner and Fight Club.
Blade Runner and Fight Club are equally tremendous films that represent different forms of post-modernism. Both films, due to their success have won many awards and accomplished much of what is expected from a movie criterion. Blade Runner has a great number of existential elements along with indications of post-modernism. Fight Club, on the other hand, showcases many sexual acts in addition to the extensive number of violent scenes while representing postmodernism in the theatre. The two films share similarities in terms of post-modern themes. Even though they share these similarities they are under different genres which makes them unique and unrelated in many other ways.
A look at these postmodernist qualities in both movies begins with an unreliable narrator. The narrator in Fight Club is labeled as an individual who is not as reliable as he once was due to his split personality. Similarly, Deckard, who is the protagonist in Blade Runner, also loses his trusting quality due to his relations with a replicant that he had been ordered to assassinate. Due to Deckard’s feelings towards the replicant, throughout the film, the thought of him possibly being a replicant arises and is debated on many occasions (Saunders 2017). Likewise, the narrator in Fight Club deals with dissociative identity disorder. This disorder is the cause of Tyler Durden, who exists in the narrator’s imagination and is seen as his ulterior ego. As a valid example, The Narrator progressively becomes aware of the fact that there are two of him when questioning the bartender ‘who do you think I am?’ to which the bartender responds ‘…You’re Tyler Durden’ (Fincher 112). In general, Blade Runner is centered around unclear questions, however, mental illness is portrayed as a negative connotation for the protagonist in Fight Club. While the representation of an unreliable narrator affects the audience’s interpretation of the film, so does the interconnection of similar works or films. Intertextuality is another common aspect of post-modernism, that is also common in both Blade Runner and Fight Club.
Intertextuality requires the analysis of other sources to shape the content and its meaning by using literary devices. Some of these devices include allusion and pastiche. Intertextuality is an element that is consistent throughout Blade Runner. It is present through commercials, like the Coca-Cola logo, and additional iconography that is not affected by the Asian community. They are the majority that communicate their own “city speak” merging plenty of languages in the city of Los Angeles. Rachael who is a replicant in Blade Runner, is also known for mixing movements, styles, and hairdos from numerous periods. Blade Runner uses intertextual references through a more captivating and subtle method, Fight Club is very effective in their use of references, they are obvious and less complex than Blade Runner. During the bathroom scene in Fight Club, Tyler strikes a pose that is strangely similar to the Death of Marat painting by Jacques-Louis David (‘The Death of Marat’ 2017). Not finished
Finally, the use of fragmentation is evident in both films, although implemented differently in each one. Fragmentation is used in both movies to first analyze time and space to disrupt the chronological narrative, and second to split different generations. In Blade Runner, the focus is on the dividing and merging of previous and new genres to make an advanced joined reality that’s made up of science fiction as well as film noir. A grouping that is an example of fragmentation is the 1940s attire along with the hovering cars. On the other hand, Fight Club depends on the deliberate mutilation of time while breaking the fourth wall. Breaking the fourth wall is when the actor ignores the imaginary wall that keeps the performer from the audience, allowing the actor to speak directly to the audience. In a scene where Durden integrates pornographic pictures into movies that families watch, as a way to change the time for the people who are experiencing the film in a theatre setting. In the end, both movies carry out fragmentation in different ways, but both films have their distinctive ways of fragmenting their narratives by breaking down genres, space, and time successfully.
Both films succeed in revealing and questioning the realities, consequences, as well as weaknesses of modernism. Blade Runner can apply postmodernist elements to a higher degree compared to Fight Club, although questions are still left unanswered. Questions arise in Blade Runner concerning the possibility of Deckard being a replicant because of indications in the film. This confuses the right to exist for replicants, humanity, and the meaning that life has. Furthermore, the suspicion about what happens to society once the reset button is hit is left unexplained in Fight Club. It’s assumed that it may be necessary to dismantle the system altogether, but it is not clear how to do so. Conclusively, the idea of what comes with analysis of the modernist society is not tackled by Fight Club and Blade Runner.
Works Cited
Entries must be alphabetized. See OWL at Purdue MLA.
Bladerunner. Dir. Ridley Scott. Prod. Ridley Scott. N.p., n.d. Web.
Fight club. Dir. David Fincher. N.p., n.d. Web.
‘Blade Runner riddle solved’. BBC News. 2000-07-09. Retrieved 2017-11-30.
‘The Death of Marat.’ The Death of Marat – Jacques-Louis David. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 November. 2017.
Wiehardt, Ginny. ‘How to Recognize and Create an Unreliable Narrator.’ The Balance. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 November. 2017. New Works Cited https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/deckard-replicant-history-blade-runners-enduring-mystery/
‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ by Margaret Atwood and ‘Blade Runner’ directed by Ridley Scott both take place in dystopian societies that demonstrate power over their citizens. In both texts, those lower in power are controlled by their representative state and taken advantage of. In ‘Blade Runner’, power runs over humankind and freedom, while ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ demonstrates a similar plot, including the control of women. Replicants are created in ‘Blade Runner’ to live as controlled individual slaves who cannot live past their lifespan of four years, while in ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ the women who are being owned and sexually managed. The women are used as human fertilization, the women get no right to speak up for their independence. Both are forced to obey their commanders.
In ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’, Atwood established power in the novel by creating an oppressive society called the Republic of Gilead whose government demonstrates power with the use of military, the Wall, salvaging, and participation. The oppressed citizens are the Handmaids who are psychologically enslaved and controlled by the Aunts, imposing fear upon them. The citizens of the society are also controlled through the Commanders who establish immense power, and on the other hand, the Commander’s Wives empower their household. It shows that the lower in the Patriarchal society, an individual will result in a submissive and helpless citizen. When a citizen is then caught against the regime, they are hung on the Wall, which is a symbol of helplessness and impossible to be avoided, as stated by Offred: “It doesn’t matter if we look. We’re supposed to look this is what they are there for, hanging on the Wall. Sometimes they’ll be there for days, until there’s a new batch, so as many people as possible will have the chance to see them”. Offred is the prime example of not only being a weak character who is summoned to the power of the commander and his wife, property, and the state but that she is also abused by her gender due to the desire from many of the men around her. She later uses this motive to get leverage over the commander and become a figure of good power which tries to control gender rules with good nature.
The movie ‘Blade Runner’ has similar themes and plot analysis, as the characters are defined by their gender and controlled by the authorities. Being controlled by the state they are also sentenced to death if they act wrongly. “If you’re not one of us, your little people”, as mentioned from the state, it is understood that if you’re not part of the government or working for the government then you have no power. You are controlled and played around. Nevertheless, when Deckard is forced to join the police force to maintain his freedom, it is seen that freedom is yet still contained by the state as they force him to hunt down and kill the replicants for him to survive. Against his will, his physical power is taken advantage of by the senate to keep their actions moving. Along with this example, women are also sexualized and exploited for the desire of men, like in the example of Zhora which supports the idea of men’s power over women in the movie.
In conclusion, power can be favorable when it is in pair with good leadership, as control is always needed on a group of citizens which make up a society, for it to function properly. But as like anything exaggerated, too much power leads to unfavorable control that diminishes the individual freedom of the citizens and intervenes with their ordinary lives. Nowadays, we have both good and evil powers existing in the world, but it won’t be long for our society to end up like in one of the dystopian worlds seen in ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ and ‘Blade Runner’. The ‘weak’, which in both cases are the oppressed society and its residents, mainly those of women, are in truth weak only because they do not hold much power as they are incomers from a lower class. Through both pieces of work, Atwood and Scott demonstrate the potential of the use of power, particularly over the natural world, the inferior, and women. This causes strong emotional responses which in both cases successfully raises questions, provokes rage, and thought.
Authors create works to convey their experiences and views on society. The texts they create are utilized to send a message and express their standpoints on social narratives. In the related works, the movie ‘Blade Runner’ (1982) and the novel ‘Frankenstein’ (1818), the authors contradict the dominant social narratives of their time, supporting counter-narratives, including romanticism and the regress of technology and unfettered capitalism, respectively. These texts effectively portray a view of the world in their time in history through a different lens than the majority of society and depict views and morals which endure and effect on today’s society.
The gothic science fiction book ‘Frankenstein’ is a prime example of ideology going against the grain of the dominant social narrative, whilst simultaneously unveiling values in society which endure to today, providing insight into our lives today. ‘Frankenstein’ was published in 1818, during the midst of the Industrial Revolution, and whilst neo-classism was the most prevalent movement, there was a rise in romanticism. With the Industrial Revolution at its peak and the Ideology of neoclassicism dominating society in that point of history, Mary Shelly bravely constructed a text to challenge this dominant social narrative. Romanticism was a movement in literature and the arts which had a focus on imagination as a source of creativity rather than facts; and incorporated ideas such as the belief in the individual, the love of nature, interest in gothic and wondrous, and faith in inner experience and wholesomeness. A very strong example of these ideologies is Victor Frankenstein, the main character of the text, as well as the numerous examples of vivid nature imagery present. The depiction of nature as a vivid and wondrous thing supports a backbone of romanticism as a creative and whimsical movement, but moreover, the love of nature; conveying that nature and our climate must be appreciated and protected. Yet another prominent concept that exists within the carefully constructed text ‘Frankenstein’ is the value of life, and concurrently, what it means to be human. Victor Frankenstein acts as a representation of the hubris of humanity and folly whilst he is horrified by his attempt at the replication of human life. Furthermore, this creation serves as a biblical allusion, and depicts humanity acting as a god, again through Victor Frankenstein, although he was gravely punished for his ‘impossible’: “His limbs were nearly frozen and his body dreadfully emaciated by fatigue and suffering. I never saw a man in so wretched a condition”. He paid the ultimate price after attempting acting as God, whilst neglecting his creation, his ‘monster’ and paid the ultimate price.
Another prime example of a text using biblical allusions and the value and concept of human life, producing an excellent parallel to ‘Frankenstein’, is the science fiction cult film ‘Blade Runner’, directed by Ridley Scott in 1982. ‘Blade Runner’ was inspired by hard-boiled detective fiction work as well as genres such as cyberpunk, additionally being very loosely based on ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’ by Philip Dick in 1968. Scott astutely places the viewers in a dystopian California where there are blade runners who hunt and ‘retire’ artificial creatures known as ‘replicants’, created by Tyrell Corporation. Throughout the cityscape, there is constant acid rain, depicting the gloomy setting of the metropolis, as well as depicting the pollution in the environment hence producing it. During the ’70s and ’80s, there were immense advancements in technology but inversely, the decline of the climate. As Ridley Scott grew up in the dismal industrial landscape in northeast England before he moved to America. During the 1980s, a large quantity of Americans feared for the decline of their nation. The powerful Asian companies and untethered capitalism are depicted in ‘Blade Runner’ through the mammoth company Tyrell Corporation, with unchecked potential for biological discoveries, and allowing Dr Eldon Tyrell to play God and do as he pleases. The ziggurat in the opening scene shows a great example to one of the enduring qualities of the movie, depicting the world trade center, a place of wealth and trade, and this ziggurat, being at the opening and the tallest building, depicts the significance and prominence of trade and capitalism in Scott’s setting, but provides a powerful warning of how untethered capitalism can kinder our society conveying a strong illustration of the integrity of the text. The focus of wealth and science is perfectly portrayed in Tyrell, the owner of a large biotechnology company, where he creates artificial life, without considering the consequences. When Tyrell curses his creation with being ‘more human than human’, whilst creating a limited lifespan, leads to one of his creations, in particular, Roy, to confront him. When Roy approaches his maker, he is only told: “The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long – and you have burned so very, very brightly, Roy”. Tyrell is so uncaring or the consequences of the life he is created and is essentially talking up the wonders of his creation. This confrontation leads to Tyrell’s death, proving yet another strong relationship between the two texts, and Roy kissing Tyrell depicts a biblical allusion of the kiss of Judas. In Roy’s final ‘living’ moments, he saves the one person left he is determined to kill, Rick Deckard, a blade runner. In his final moments, Roy realizes that what he has ‘seen with your eye’ will just be ‘lost in time, like tears in the rain.’ Roy shows greater humanity than the ‘human’ he saved, and Scott ingeniously uses this scene to reflect on the value of human life, and produce another common idea between ‘Frankenstein’ and ‘Blade Runner’.
‘Frankenstein’ and ‘Blade Runner’ are two expertly crafted texts with interconnected themes and ideas, countering the dominant social narratives of their times. Whilst neoclassicism and the technological and capitalist growth of society at the cost of the environment were prominent views in the societies at the time of ‘Frankenstein’ and ‘Blade Runner’ respectively. Both authors ingeniously conveyed ideas in separate times in history, residing in different societies, portrayed contrasting counter-narratives as well as related and interconnected ideas, which still endure to this day, and provide a striking insight into present society and what could come of society.
The novel ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ written by Margret Atwood and the movie ‘Blade Runner’ share the similarities of power being distributed unequally throughout their respective society. Both protagonists have some sort of power although for Offred’s power is very minor and only used at very rare moments. Tyrell and the Commander in both of their societies have immense power, however both of them do not abuse as much as everyone else, for example, the officers forced Deckard into killing the replicants without taking his scrutiny into consideration. Even Tyrell commits the same acts of not exploiting people who have less status and power. Tyrell who is seen as a God when approached by a replicant was welcoming and understanding when they asked for their lives to be extended, with calm and patients he explained why such things couldn’t be reached, although this later led to him being murdered, he still was more understanding than anyone else. Deckard and Offred both have power to an extent in their respective societies. Deckard although is a type of law enforcement, police still hold power over him, Deckard still has power, but only over the replicants. Him being a blade runner which is a bounty hunter he is legally permitted to kill replicants on sight without any warrants needed or reason. Offred used her power to taunt men who cannot have her or have any women. The power distribution in both societies is what causes the exploitation of the weak and corruption that lingers with it. Though the exploitation of the weak tends to occur less frequently the more status the person has in the society, Tyrell and the Commander are great examples of this.
Tyrell and the Commander both possess the pinnacle power of both their respective societies. The power they have may in some cases be more than the actual governments that are supposed to be controlling the societies. Tyrell is the genius who designed and created the nexus-6 replicants, he is the powerful and rich God figure who lives in a pyramid shaped mega mansion that looks over the city and people below. This is a symbol showing that Tyrell is at the top and no can come close to him. The exploitation of his power is very similar to the Commander, both use their power to break the law with the knowledge that they will not receive any consequences for doing so. This is demonstrated when Tyrell is keeping a replicant on earth which is against the law and was experimenting with the replicant by placing memories in the coding to see whether it would make them more human-like. He performed this and even invited a blade runner to conduct the replicant test on his experiment. Similarly, the Commander invites his handmaid Offred to play a game of scrabble with him, while having the knowledge that women in the Gilead society are not allowed to read or even learn to write. The Commander doesn’t bat an eye towards this and pays little to no attention that a major law is being broken to the fact that his power is so immense that he would most likely not even get a slap on the wrist for this. In both ‘Blade Runner’ and The Handmaid’s Tale’ a recurring theme of uneven power distribution causes people to be more corrupt. It seems that the more power a person has the less they exploit people around them while the less power a person has the more, they exploit people around them. This is supported when Tyrell allows a replicant to conversate with him and discuss the possibility of prolonged life for replicants, a person like a police officer or middle hierarchy status person would not even allow a replicant to be in their presence to the perception that replicants are lower people. The exploitation of people is done less frequently by both the Commander and Tyrell, because of the immense power they hold and how exploiting people would not even benefit them.
In ‘Blade Runner’ Deckard’s occupation grants him power over normal civilians and replicants in the society. Though Deckard being a blade runner puts him below the other type of law enforcement, even the officers when encountering Deckard began to label him as part of the ‘little people’. However, Deckard does have some power over the officers due to him being able to kill replicants without needing the authorization or warrant to do so. Deckard realizes this and begins to exploit people such as Rachel. He forces himself upon Rachel, knowing she, even in strength, could not fight against Deckard, and Rachel knows that if she doesn’t comply, she is at risk of either getting killed or being handed to authorities. Though keeping Rachel alive for his own pleasure was a misjudgment of the amount of power he possesses. Deckard faces the consequences for his actions at the end of the movie when he is being hunted down for keeping Rachel alive. This demonstrated the extent of Deckard power and how insignificant it was. This is similar to Offred and how even though she was seen as the bottom of the hierarchy of her society, she still possessed a tiny amount of power. The power Offred possessed didn’t give her the ability to physically exploit people or break the law like Deckard, she rather used her body to taunt and exploit men who do not have the status or power to have women or even be married. Her exploitation of power was more subtle and leaned more towards the psychological aspect of manipulation. The reasons why Offred commits these actions was due to the fact that unlike other handmaid’s Offred a past life before the takeover of patriarchy, she knew what freedom was and wasn’t born into being a slave like the other handmaids. She even describes herself as being a ‘rat in a maze’ and how she is ‘free to go anywhere’, but she is still ‘inside the maze’. The knowledge of a past life gives Offred the power of free will and the dream of things going back to the way they were. Both protagonists do exploit their power, however the methods and the execution of how it is done are drastically different.
The film ‘Blade Runner’ and the novel ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ both demonstrate that a hierarchical distribution of power causes corruption and the exploitation of the weak. In ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ the women living inside the patriarchy governed Gilead are all subject to exploitation, whether it would be being a handmaid that is used for their fertility, or housewives who have the most power out of all the women but are only there to please their husbands. Although women are not the only people being exploited for Gilead, men who have insignificant power and status in the society are not granted the power to have their own handmaid or even the ability to have a wife. While in ‘Blade Runner’ the power is distributed through wealth and status rather than genitalia and achievements. This is why the exploitation in ‘Blade Runner’ seems to be more subtle at times although there are moments where it is directly shown, for example, Deckard using Rachel for his pleasure, or the police officers forcing Deckard to kill the replicants even though he quit that part of his life. The similarity is drawn when both the top hierarchy standing characters use their power to break the law rather than exploit the people. It demonstrated that the use of power differs depending on where a person stands in the hierarchy of power and status. A person who is in the middle of the hierarchy will without a doubt use and exploit people to work their way up to the top, while a person who is already at the top will break the law and conduct illegal activities for the sake of their boredom or curiosity. This demonstrates that power in both stories is used to exploit people however depending on how is exploiting the reasoning or method will differ.
Overall, both ‘Blade Runner’ and ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ show the audience or reader how power is used to exploit the weak, whether it is subtle or obvious. Both stories also demonstrate power isn’t always used to exploit just the weak or people, rather it can also be used to fulfill oneself benefits such as curiosity or boredom.
People have always been fascinated with the idea of glancing into the future, which is why the shelf life of most science fiction stories is remarkably long. Specifically, the relevance of Philipp K. Dick’s “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” and its central theme appears to be high with modern audiences. Set in a dystopian future and addressing the issue of humanity, the novel renders some of the fears that the late-60s technological breakthrough introduced, particularly the idea of artificial intelligence and the challenge of retaining humanity. The described concept is rendered in a more recent sci-fi creation, the 1982 “Blade Runner” movie, which reimagines Dick’s idea by skipping the concept of Mercerism and focusing on the conflict between retaining humanity and reconciling with the fear of AI becoming indistinguishable from people. Although Dick’s novel addresses the theme of empathy in a much more pronounced way than “Blade Runner,” both share a deep sense of disturbance and confusion over human nature and the fear of AI technology muddying the subject matter even further, while neither provides a definitive answer.
Background
Approaching both sci-fi creations critically, one should point out the authors’ backgrounds in greater detail to understand the context in which the novel and the movie were created. For instance, while Dick drew a substantial part of his inspiration for the novel from R. L. Hubbard’s work titled “Fear,” “Do Androids…” was also injected with a notable amount of concern for the technological advances of the time, particularly computer science and the prospects of creating AI (Dick).
In turn, having been produced in 1982, “Blade runner” represents a range of slightly different concerns. At the same time, the issues of humanity and identity, as well as its crisis, are also rendered in “Blade Runner” as some of the core issues facing the US. The population at the time. Specifically, with the dramatic foray into computer science that the 80s witnessed, particularly the emergence of the World Wide Web and the related innovations, the concept of AI became increasingly more vivid, thus, eliciting understandable fear (“Blade Runner”). As a result, “Blade Runner” and its themes turned out to be particularly relevant for the 80s audience. Still, even with the passage of time, both creations retain their impact and relevance.
Analysis
The theme of fear as the most pervasive element of both the novel and the movie reveals itself immediately, thus, becoming the leitmotif for both narratives. Though neither of the works mentions the idea of fear toward AI directly, it is heavily implied in the manner in which androids are treated (Kathrani 1.). Specifically, the very concept of hunting down and virtually destroying androids that may have developed sentience represents blatant fear for the unknown: “Thinking that he felt the fear grow; it snared him completely, now that he had let it approach his conscious mind” (Dick). Though being less pronounced and rarely addressed in a dialogue, the concept of fear of the unknown is represented thoroughly in “Blade Runner”: “Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a slave” (“Blade Runner”). Furthermore, unlike the book, the movie represents the experience of fear through the lens of an android, namely, the being deemed inhumane by the protagonist and society at large.
The described difference in perspectives introduces another common notion that both the movie and the novel approach yet render in a completely unique way. Namely, the notion of humanity and the threat of losing it by muddying the concept and embracing the AI’s ability to feel emotions are incorporated in both the novel and the movie effectively, even though in different ways.
Therefore, for present-day audiences., “Do Androids…” is likely to remain quite relevant and relatable since it seeks to address one of the core concerns associated with the rapid development of technology. Namely, the question of humanity, which both lies on the surface of the novel and eventually turns out to have multiple underlying meanings in the novel, is proven to be the core concept that both the film and the movie manage to address and examine.
However, apart from the specified notion, both works also render the theme of morality without naming it directly. Indeed, the need to face an ethical challenge or a specific moral choice haunts the leading character throughout the novel, making the reader question whether it is ethical to kill a sentient, albeit not quite humane, being. Both the movie and the novel themselves also name the specified dilemma several times: “Wake Up. Time To Die” (“Blade Runner”). However, “Do Androids…” focuses on the critical ethical concern in question in a slightly different way. Specifically, Dick alludes to the necessity to make ethically ambiguous or downright wrong decisions as a natural part of being a human and remaining a part of society: “You will be required to do wrong no matter where you go” (Dick). Therefore, the manner in which the novel approaches the concept of annihilation of a sentient being or, in essence, the murder of a human-like creature is both rational and cynical. On the one hand, the specified perspective suggests the presence of the nebulous greater good for the sake of which sentient beings are destroyed. On the other hand, it cynically recognizes the morally ambiguous issue yet does nothing to correct it.
In turn, the movie takes a slightly different route to address the specified issue. Namely, the theme of humanity and the concept of murder are tackled in a more down-to-earth yet quite a profound manner. Specifically, the idea of effectively murdering a sentient being is rendered at the very beginning, when the infamous eye test is performed on one of the androids: “Chew, if only you could see what I’ve seen with your eyes” (“Blade Runner”). Uttered by an android, the specified quote points to the presence of unique experiences and, perhaps, complex feelings in androids, therefore, making the notion of destroying them an almost criminal act. Furthermore, the specified statement questions etch legitimacy of the lead character’s humanity, allowing for the effective blurring of the line between an android and a human. Thus, in the movie, the problem of failing to recognize one’s humanity surfaces prominently.
Remarkably, some of the elements of the story have been updated so that they could be more palatable to modern audiences. Specifically, the aesthetics of the future environment, as well as the appearance of androids, have been altered in the film so that it could mirror the present-day reality better. Therefore, both the novel and the movie illustrate that the attitudes assumed by modern audiences in relation to the concepts of humanity and technological development, particularly the emergence of AI, have changed only slightly (Szollosy 435.). Having evolved past the initial perception of AI as a robot imitating a human being and focusing on a more comprehensive concept of AI, modern audiences have retained the fear of challenging their humanity. As a result, the ethical dilemma of annihilating a being that has developed sentience remains unresolved and raises quite a number of concerns, as the 1982 movie demonstrates in a rather transparent way.
Furthermore, fear as the main fuel behind the development of biases toward androids and the attempts at shutting them down once they gain any semblance of emotions and the need for independence also proves that the core factor driving the resentment in both the novel and the film, which indicates that suspicion and apprehension toward innovative and disruptive technologies are of the essential characteristics of modern audiences. Moreover, the fact that the concept of fear was initially injected into the novel and then expanded in the movie shows that the specified attitude used to be a dominant perspective for the audiences of the 60s as well. Therefore, the specified quality, namely, the inherent fear of disruptive technology that replicates certain functions of the human brain, appears to be emblematic of any audience at any time.
Conclusion
Despite a substantial difference in the themes, namely, the complete removal of the issue of empathy from the movie’s thematic elements, both “Blade Runner” and “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep” render the same unsettling sense of unease that borders fear once the concept of AI becomes nearly indistinguishable form the human nature, thus, bringing the essence of the latter into question. Therefore, both the novel and the movie share profoundly philosophic thematic elements.
Works Cited
Blade Runner. Directed by Ridley Scott, performances by Harrison Ford, Rutger Haure, and Sean Young, Warner Bros., 1982.
Kathrani, Paresh. “Do Androids Dream of Asylum: The Blade Runner Films (1982, 2017) and Fear of the Other.” ESLJ, vol. 16, 2018, p. 1.
Szollosy, Michael. “Freud, Frankenstein and Our Fear of Robots: Projection in Our Cultural Perception of Technology.” Ai & Society, vol. 32, no. 3, 2017, pp. 433-439.
The universe of Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner is repulsive but strangely familiar, like many works of futuristic science fiction. The film is about flash technology and the startling cultural contrasts that separate different societies, yet their parallels to the contemporary reality are riveting. Blade Runner is set in a post-human, postmodern future when replicants, or genetically altered people, are prohibited from existing and from returning to Earth because they were effectively produced to serve as slave labor in other colonies. Four of these replicants, however, have come back to Earth and are being pursued by Blade Runner Rick Deckard, whose goal is to eliminate these rebellious beings. This paper investigates the movie from the perspective of anthropology in an attempt to uncover the connections between human anthropology and Blade Runner’s repercussions and reflections on replicants.
Replicants are genetically engineered beings that resemble humans in many ways. They behave and think like humans, and they have a body. However, they can be prolonged in terms of their service life. They are beings created to be employed as slave labor in the exploration and colonization of distant planets, produced in large quantities by Tyrell’s genetic engineers. They are viewed as disposable replacements for their human hosts since they are manmade artifacts. Replicants are treated as disposable because they have no moral or legal rights. These sophisticated androids are built to only live for four years, ensuring that they will never catch up to humans despite having human-like appearances, behaviors, and intelligence (Byron 2008). They are recognized as replicants since they have not naturally developed their emotions.
Dominant Culture and Mortality
It quickly becomes apparent that Blade Runner reflects on mortality and a desire to define what it is to be human. In its attempt to trace the anthropological setting, the movie was quite successful. This is well reflected in the plot, where it was seen how replicants became more humane than actual human beings. As the spectator witnesses Roy was laughing, crying (after Deckard kills his fiancée Paris), killing (killing Tyrell), and philosophizing, he is the most fully realized character in the movie (right before he dies). The allegories and reflections on dying are prevalent in the film since Roy and his friends were unsure how long they had to live. And because they began to experience feeling, they fear, love, and live much more passionately than real human characters. After some time, Roy comes to the conclusion that life is anthropologically sacred and is kind to Deckard (Byron 2008). Roy eventually came to the conclusion that if death hurts, it must be because it takes something valuable—the value of life—from the world.
It is customary for the passage storylines in human clone movies to highlight the limitations of the dominant culture’s originals. In Blade Runner, for instance, the replicants have greater physical and moral strength, discipline, talent, capacity for feelings, or selfless self-sacrifice than humans. Replicants are doomed to conceal a racially segregated urban underworld characterized by cosmopolitanism when they alter their boundaries, become actors of their own future, and demonstrate that they are “more human than humans” (Tyrell’s corporation slogan) (Battaglia 2001). Taking into account different perspectives, such as anthropology, it can be asserted that because their bodies are made and thus unique to their creators, they differ from one another. No other being made us as humans since there is no God, according to different philosophers and anthropologists who were contemplating on this topic (Byron 2008). Humans are living creatures with autonomy over how to live their lives. As a result, it can be seen in the movie that the Replicants have a materialistic body that is only their essence.
The movie’s characters, however, can be argued to be dependent on something larger than themselves, namely the genetic engineer who created them. However, one of Batty’s tasks is to kill his creator in order to prolong his life. This storyline became particularly interesting for this topic. It is reflected in how he yearns for humanity which makes Batty remarkably close to what it is to be a human. It may be considered that this is the allegorical desire to alter one’s fate and life in general. Anthropology, in this sense, assumes that hopelessness strengthens human traits by encouraging us to pursue a life of autonomy and opportunity.
Anthropology of Emotions
Another interesting topic concerns Leon Kowalski, the first replicant encountered in the movie, who appears human-like, and it is hard for a viewer to tell that he is a replicant. This trash disposal engineer not only appears to be human, but he also exhibits tell-tale signs of trepidation when being scrutinized. There must be a discernible difference in drawing the line between created products and humans, and if the characters in the movie are right in asserting that there is a difference between a replicant and a person (Battaglia 2001). The reason why they should obey someone is unclear if there is no discernible difference.
In Blade Runner, the Voight-Kampff test, which tracks emotional response through involuntary iris variations, capillary dilation, and blush response, is the only way to determine if someone is a human or a replicant. However, not all emotional reactions are necessary to tell a person from a replicant. The test makes no attempt to distinguish between emotions like fear or fury. Even a four-year-old can experience the fundamental emotions of fear and anger. In contrast to more primal emotions, empathy demands maturity, which takes longer to develop than four years. The Voight-Kampff test concentrates on emotion by posing hypothetical questions about the suffering of people or animals. Leon is very immediately recognized as a replicant by the test because he lacks that level of emotional sophistication.
In contrast, the characters in the movie do not seem to be able to act or react in real human ways. In Blade Runner, Deckard is depicted as being a lonely person. He is unsure of whether he should be practicing his real vocation, killing replicants, and he also appears to lack the ability to determine whether it is morally proper to do so. But as the movie goes on, this alters in a number of ways. Deckard slowly comes to realize his humanity via his love for Rachel, a replicant and is thus better able to comprehend what it is to be human. This has a lot to do with accepting one’s own personal human experience. The replicants and the characters in the movie are similar, making it challenging to distinguish between the two.
Deckard’s moment of truth occurred as he recognized that everyone had self-doubts regarding their anthropological position. While Deckard takes some time to properly understand the potential of memory implants, the crucial information is made abundantly obvious in this sequence. This can be explained that as soon as this last pillar of self-assurance is shattered, he is once again faced with all of his other moral issues. His awareness of the moral affinity between himself and his target and his confusion over the anthropological meaning of replicants is now seen in a different light. Because if memories can be implanted into machines without the machines realizing that the memories do not belong to them, then the seeming sense of self is not at all evidence for the existence of the “I.” This understanding would be terrifying and disorienting for any person, but for someone who continuously considers these issues and who acts based on the difference between a human and a lethally violent replicant, the implications are, if possible, considerably worse.
Allegories of Replicants’ Cyberculture
The issue of replicants is multi-layered and can be approached from numerous perspectives. Asserting the anthropological lenses, by putting the other group down, people always attempted to retain their alleged superiority. According to the pre-modern perspective of the anthropological three-level model, man and animals are not fundamentally different from one another. It was widely acknowledged in the contemporary era that man is a more complicated animal, asserting dominance over other species. Later, in the postmodern era, categorizing people using scientific methods was dropped, while the concept of dominant specie stayed the same. Animals became the lower beings, but in the world of Blade Runner, they are uncommon. This leads to the fact that animals must thus be replaced by a different species since the impression of the other group as inferior is necessary to maintain the illusion of superiority (Graves-Brown, 1997). Obviously, superiority results in the enslavement or tyranny of the group that is thought to be under it (Bowker et al. 2009). Only an emotional immaturity or lack of empathy could permit such hierarchical thinking.
Batty, in many ways, ended up saving Deckard. He preserved both his biological life and his humanity. Eventually, he allegorically demonstrated to Deckard what it meant to be a responsible adult free of artificial constraints, as opposed to Tyrell’s imprisoned mechanical bird. The movie advances the argument that what defines a person as truly human is their emotional development and their decision to show empathy and compassion (Battaglia 2001). Since Tyrell and other genetic engineers cannot make Batty human, he must develop human characteristics within himself. The movie vividly depicted that being human is a condition of mind and feelings rather than a unique DNA structure (Downey et al. 2005). He shows emotional maturity by accepting his own death and rescuing the man who attempted to kill him. The Voight-Kampff test would have been passed by him.
Nowadays, being human is directly correlated with technology and other artificial personality traits. One can assert that the threshold of what it means to be human has been crossed and that it is no longer plausible to assert that being human requires the possession of particular physical characteristics (Hines 2010). In light of this, consideration should be given to cybercultures and how they perceive the anthropological attitude toward new technology, as well as how these technologies have fundamentally altered conceptions of what it is to be human and the anthropology of the question.
New technologies are being created and adopted at an unprecedented rate in the 21st century. They are numerous: people use computers, phones, and other gadgets that are designed to enhance social connection and communication. Human bodies, however, have fundamentally changed as well. The physical qualities and other elements of the body can now be enhanced artificially (Downey et al. 2005). The potential of natural human biology can be nearly endlessly increased (Boellstorff 2011). The genetic engineers in Blade Runner provide an illustration of how this is possible. They generate bodies that are quite similar to human ones. Given that the replicants in the movie are likewise capable of emotion, touching, and perception, it is hard to distinguish the distinctions.
Identities, personalities, and other facets of the human condition are undoubtedly impacted by these developments. The development of technology has made people’s ability to communicate and perceive themselves mobile yet shallow. It is possible to have numerous identities and “I” in cyberspace. This is illustrated in an intriguing way by the characters in Blade Runner, who seem to be evolving continually. Sometimes they behave like replicants; other times, they appear to be more human. This implies that one is evolving, and with that, his identity.
Conclusion
The anthropological perspective is largely predicated on the notion that existing in society and being comprised both by others and by one’s own actions are essential components of what it means to be human. It is believed that biology and culture are closely tied to humans. A person exists in a society, but his or her biological characteristics also influence how that individual interacts with the outside world (Sturken 1997). This area is particularly interested in how humans have shaped society throughout history by acting like living things. Therefore, when seen through the perspective of anthropology, physical characteristics are both a product of culture and a product of nature. Generally speaking, humans are able to separate themselves from the outside world and establish a sense of their place within it.
The main aspect from the anthropological perspective is that the body is a crucial tool for a person’s perception and exploration of the outside environment. This implies that the body can also be many, pliable, and fluid, but it is crucial that it retain its core characteristics (Sturken 1997). Materiality is viewed in transhumanistic theories as an immobile, passive substance that may be modified to suit the preferences of the individual. Blade Runner demonstrates how the flesh and its anti-religious connotations exist in the digital world.
With regards to understanding the topic of “what it means to be human,” some of Blade Runner’s most important themes are intertwined with debates on cybercultures, new technology, and anthropological considerations. Although technology has become a part of humanity, one should think about how it will change the way humanity exists and, moreover, to what extent they are actually necessary for human life. It can be said that philosophy, computer science, anthropology, and many other fields are key areas in discussions related to this topic. The visual and textual rhetoric of resistance in movies such as Blade Runner frequently focuses on the status of the subject of the possible aspect. Concluding, it can be seen that replicants perform acts of memory and forgetting and demonstrate that they can learn and transform relationship patterns for them. Their activity becomes crucial in comprehending whether the human anthropology lens should consider it just a technological advancement or a major breakthrough in methodology.
References
Battaglia, Debbora. “Multiplicities: An anthropologist’s thoughts on replicants and clones in popular film.” Critical Inquiry 27, no. 3 (2001): 493-514.
Boellstorff, Tom. “Virtuality” In A Companion to the Anthropology of Body and Embodiment. Blackwell Publishing, 2011.
Bowker, Geoffrey C., Karen Baker, Florence Millerand, and David Ribes. “Toward information infrastructure studies: Ways of knowing in a networked environment.” In International handbook of internet research, pp. 97-117. Springer, Dordrecht, 2009.
Byron, John. “Replicants R Us: The Crisis of Authenticity in ‘Blade Runner.” Sydney Studies 34, no. 1 (2008).
Downey, Gary Lee, Joseph Dumit, and Sarah Williams. “Cyborg anthropology.” Cultural Anthropology 10, no. 2 (1995): 264-269.
Graves-Brown, P. (1997). From highway to superhighway: The sustainability, symbolism and situated practices of car culture. Social Analysis: The International Journal of Social and Cultural Practice, 41(1), 64-75.
Hines, Dwight. “In Pursuit of Experience: The Postindustrial Gentrification of the rural American West. ” Ethnography 11, no. 2 (2010): 285-308.
Sturken, Marita. Tangled memories: The Vietnam War, the AIDS epidemic, and the politics of remembering. University of California Press, 1997.
Alan Turing, the founder of artificial intelligence established the Turing Test to aid in differentiating between human and artificial intelligence among other things.
The test symbolizes the move to believe that positions are not permanent, while essentialist ideas of human nature are diluted. This post-modernistic thinking argues that humans develop themselves through dreams, histories, myths, stories, and memories. Langer says that postmodernism is symbolized by numerous questions as human beings attempt to understand the mystery of this world.
The breakthrough in genetic engineering and artificial intelligence makes it hard to differentiate what is imaginary from what is real among others. Films and cinematic texts give reliable resources of understanding our consciousness. Ironically, these resources give a notion of “present”, while in actual sense they establish an artificial understanding of space and time. Films impress patterns in our every day occurrences and together with statements and differences of our humanity thus shaping consciousness.
Blade Runner is one of the films that show how humanity shapes its identity and the expectations it makes based on the nature of its surrounding. The film shows a world full of corporate greed and technological growth. It portrays the city of Los Angeles as a city that cannot be inhabited.
While most of the reasonable people choose to live in the outer space, they encounter a crisis of living with genetically engineered beings referred to as “replicants”. The crisis narrows the boundary between artificial and human. The film shows the existing level of expectation and confusion in humankind by showing instances of constant happenings, disappearances, and flourishing information.
There is a division in society such that people speak different languages. Besides, harshness in the society is so great that only adults live in the society. Technology has led to the establishment of social classes where the intelligent use and discard the less intelligent at will. As the film continues, it reveals that most of the people living in Los Angeles do not enjoy their freedom as their superiors direct them on what to do.
Only those in authority like Tyrell enjoy freedom. The power-holders signify the shaping of a culture that uses and later throws away what it uses. Tyrell throws away Rachel (a replicant) after using her for a long period. The replicants’ abilities indicate the tailor-made work programs, employment arrangements, and production systems that currently exist in the modern corporations.
According to the film, disbelief is high in postmodernism in terms of distinguishing the real and imaginary. There is no clear difference between the replicants and the real people as shown by the tests conducted. Man has made most of his understandings in his own image such that it is hard to distinguish the real from the artificial and thus man is in the struggle of establishing his identity.
Blade Runner warns on the dangers of chauvinistic science that is dominating the postmodern world. The film portrays the Los Angeles of 2019 as a total ruin caused by men’s dominance. Men dominate everything.
As the film shows the development of human images and their destruction, it brings out the idea of creation and death or destruction. The film uses a dove to signify its opinion that a law, which embraces feminism, ought to rule post-apocalyptic society characterized by corporate greed in a bid to deal with male dominance in the society.
A great number of similarities, despite their more obvious differences on many levels, are found in the styles, techniques, and symbolism of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner. While Shelley’s book was written in 1816 and Scott’s movie was released in 1982, and thus forming a gap of more than two centuries between the works, the number of character similarities and shared themes alone are remarkable. Both stories portray individuals of high intelligence attempting to act as a creator of life, both of the created creatures in the stories are ultimately mistreated both by their society and by their creators, and in both stories, the reader or viewer is coaxed towards feelings of sympathy for the created rather than the creator despite the created. In both stories, ultimately the creator was unaware of the repercussions of their actions and the power of the forces which they were attempting to wield.
The creators in the stories each have a special fascination for human life. However the creations can be regarded as either monsters or lesser beings as far as society is concerned. Many examples of science fiction apparently show antagonistic creatures of this kind while directly compared to humanity, as is the Frankenstein creature and the replicants in Bladerunner. The creatures have human traits however they are not fully human, and for the reasons they are not fully human the societies which they are part of seeing them as essentially non-human and furthermore treat them as enemies for this classification alone. The creatures are ultimately shunned and despised for their mere existence. While the terrible traits which the monsters are treated as if they possess are never actually evident, the unconscious human mind is to blame for the perception of such negativity without physical cause.
A sort of role reversal is evident in Shelley’s Frankenstein with the monster as an antagonist and the human as a hero, as the creator of the monster possesses more actual traits of what is thought to be terrible than the accused monster. Other characters within the book are able to perceive this, as evident in the passage “Abhorred monster! fiend that thou art! the tortures of hell are too mild a vengeance for thy crimes. Wretched devil! you reproach me with your creation” (Shelley p.72). The creator is portrayed as a character incapable of changing in course of action, due to levels of enthusiasm, anxiety, and self-imposed slavery in this regard. This flavor would ultimately be self-imposed doom and a lack of true free will implies man generally possesses an internal monster (Shelley; Scott).
The monsters of Ridley Scott’s Bladerunner, the replicants, possess so many human traits that the creation company in the film refers to them as “more human than human.” Four primary replicants attempt to communicate with their maker so that they can gain a kind of help that is comparable to Frankenstein’s monster. Unlike Frankenstein’s monster, however, replicants are not legally allowed to exist. A legally sanctioned task force, the “blade runners” are to hunt and kill replicants entering the world from where they are made on the external slave colonies. A role reversal is also evident here, as the hunters ruthlessly slaughter replicants who are entirely harmless and may have lived beneficial lives. As such it is easily argued that the hunters are monstrous while the replicants seem more “human” overall, while society and law dictate the reversal be the reality of the situation.
It is also important to note that many humans in the Bladerunner movie are physically deformed or otherwise abnormal, a trait quite similar to the monster in Frankenstein. This may have been done intentionally to help to further illustrate a role reversal. Ultimately, in Bladerunner, the only perfect beings, both physically and seemingly morally, are the replicants. This level of innocence is comparable to the Frankenstein monster, whose ignorance of the world leads him to perform the only unpure actions which he does, though ultimately he is driven by very human and innocent desires and motivations. The replicants are, however, more victimized than the Frankenstein monster, as memory implantation is used in some cases to make the replicants feel more human and believe they are more human. While the Frankenstein monster can be said to have the rights to humanity since he was created to be a part of it, this same argument can be better argued for the replicants who were not only created to look identical to humans but furthermore act human and have human memories (Kerman; Scott).
Similar to the ultimately doomed existence of the Frankenstein monster due to the views and effects of society, the replicants in Bladerunner are doomed to be hunted and killed despite the fact they have programmed memories and life actions. Both stories are thus tragedies in this respect as the innocent are forced out of existence for the main reason of being different. As such, the argument of nature versus nurture has a place in both stories, while science and ethics are questioned in both stories. Perhaps in another two hundred year’s time another story will be created to portray more modern science and the inherent ethical implications. Bladerunner can essentially be viewed as the same story as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in elements, though made more relevant for modern society while the same underlying themes of ethics, creation, and humanity are all questioned.
Works cited
Kerman, Judith. Retrofitting Bladerunner: Issues in Ridley Scott’s Bladerunner. Popular Press, 1997.
Scott, Ridley et. al. Blade Runner. Warner Home Video, 1999.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. University of Chicago Press, 1982.