Essay on Conformity in the 1960s

Rod Serling’s 1960 ‘Eye of The Beholder’ from the series The Twilight Zone, and Charlie Brooker’s 2016 ‘Nosedive’ from Black Mirror, both respectively highlight how the science fiction genre emerged out of the 1960 American society and the modern technological society and projects into the future. Both films are set in a future dystopian society, exploring the dehumanizing effects of conformity and societal values. Serling depicts the strength of conformity during the 1960s American society, where society ostracized those who did not conform to societal norms and ideals.

While many themes are present within this episode, Serling particularly focuses on exploring how beauty is determined. Conversely, ‘Nosedive’ explores modern society concerning the unanticipated consequences of a social rating-based system, to provide a deeper perspective on social and socioeconomic identities. In both texts, a wide range of techniques are used to explore and elaborate on the common theme of conformity to influence similar target audiences but achieve different purposes.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

While both films share a mutual purpose of entertaining their respective audience, they also communicate different moral messages. Brooker’s intended purpose was to make the audience not only question their behavior as an individual, but collectively as a nation, whereas Serling’s purpose was to make the audience reconsider their perceptions of beauty. Brooker may explore the murky relationship between humans and technology; however, it is in no way a criticism against it. Rather, Brooker celebrates what modern society has become and heightens aspects of real life within the film by offering an entertaining interpretation of the characters for a dramatic purpose and entertainment. This is demonstrated when Lacie, the leading character repeatedly yells, “F--K”, utterly releasing her built-up repression and emotions to allow for a bittersweet ending. In comparison, Serling demonstrates that everyone can recognize beauty and ugliness with some variation based on their frame of reference. He particularly achieves this through a dictator yelling indirectly at Janet, the protagonist, “We must have a norm…[and] conform to that norm”, which shows how Serling utilizes language to stress the audience about today’s pressures of conformity.

Audience

Determined by various factors and interests regarding the science-fiction genre, both individual films attract a specific target audience. In today’s modern world, the younger, impressionable generation is strongly influenced by social media, whether it be by the number of likes they receive on Instagram or by the appearances of others. While both films are targeted towards young adults, ‘Eye of the Beholder’ differs in the intended audience, as the notion that beauty is always changing can be aimed at anyone. This idea where every culture and individual has their perceptions of standard beauty, supports that the film can be targeted to a broader audience. Moreover, both films target an audience that can identify and comprehend complex themes such as conformity, which is crucial for the audience to understand how these issues reflect on their current society. Hence, these exaggerations of reality create a deeper connection between the intended audience, young adults, who would be more inclined to empathize and relate with the protagonists

Context

Both directors incorporate aspects of their period with an exaggeration, to deepen the impact on their audience. Today, the ability for one to curate not only content, but a unique persona, creates a cultural push and an incentive to portray an ingenuine life of perfection. Brooker takes this familiar approach to the next level where he conveys that technology has become a distraction from raw experience. He provides a palatable version of reality, that offers an easy way to ignore the deeply ingrained prejudice and systematically corrupt world, that most benefit from. In other words, Brooker conveys the notion that social media functions as a set of “rose-colored glasses”, used to fabricate modern privilege into a more comfortable reality and to dilute the awareness of the injustices that maintain the system of privilege. Serling however, makes a commentary regarding the 1960s, taking aspects of his society’s notion of beauty at the time and exaggerating them to reflect on society’s intolerance. His message of the film lies entirely within its title and is presented by Serling himself, “Beauty is within the eye of the beholder”, meaning the perception of beauty is subjective. Thus, Serling’s message remains as relevant as it did during his century as the notion of beauty is always changing.

Ideas and perspectives

A defining similarity between ‘Nosedive’ and ‘Eye of the Beholder’ is how they each convey their respective idea that social media creates an ingenuine but comfortable reality and that the perception of beauty is subjective, through the experiences of prejudice and conformity pressures. In both films, the female protagonists are placed within dystopian societies with great pressure to conform to ideals and norms. While Lacie is strongly adored for her high rating in society, Janet is feared and pitied by the doctors. Janet’s facial revelation and Lacie’s confrontation with truth are met with malice and criticism from society’s judgment, believing that these characters are the root of disturbance in their perfect society, and should be isolated and imprisoned. In a desperate and final act to conform to societal values, Janet tries to escape in hopes of another chance to treat her “grotesque face” and Lacie attempts to boost her social score at the wedding, “they’ll vote me through the roof”. Thus, attempting to win over their society’s validation, they both ultimately result in separation from society.

Language and stylistic features

The use of color progresses the films into becoming more realistic, warning the audience of today’s prejudiced society. ‘Nosedive’ exposes and elaborates upon Brooker’s ideology with intentional aesthetic choices to demonstrate the contrast between the naive contentment of “rose-colored glasses” and the harsh reality behind Brooker’s dystopian system. A range of muted tones and pastel colors correspond to the population’s dull sense of reality, whereas the use of stark black and dark colors, found only during the final scene, corresponds to the confrontation of truth. Alternatively, Serling shoots ‘Eye of the Beholder’ so each frame is filled with an ideal blend of light and shadow, shaping the reality of Janet’s society to manipulate shadows and provide an atmosphere of suspense and anticipation.

The intention is evident when the audience is presented with a bandaged patient under a single overhead light so that she alone is illuminated, as if under a spotlight. Surrounded by large overpowering shadows, Janet yells, “[I’m] grotesque, ugly, deformed…I want to belong!”, to which the doctor replies, “If treatment fails, we’ll move you…[where] your kind have been congregated,” drawing suspense within the audience as they have not been presented with any faces. Janet may not be ugly, however, Serling uses dialogue to influence the audience’s thought process to believe she is indeed deformed. ‘Nosedive’ however, provides the concept of choice between a comfortable but naive state of thinking and an uncomfortable but honest grasp of reality, which is often referred to using the analogy of a red pill versus a blue pill. The same analogy is subtly woven into the film’s dialogue where Lacie meets a truck driver, “blue thermos is coffee, red’s whiskey”. Naomi, Lacie’s childhood friend, later says, “Don’t come to my wedding”, and Lacie replies, “I will…you’ll weep your f--king eyes out”, demonstrating that she chose the red thermos which serves as a tool to push Lacie and the audience closer to confronting the deep truth behind the veiled society. Alternatively, Serling’s anticipating revelation brings closure to the suspense as the audience is presented with Janet’s beautiful face and the doctors’ deformed faces. Serling presents a group of deformed people, but in their eyes, that’s beautiful, demonstrating that when someone the audience perceives as beautiful is put in a place where they are a minority, they lose that association of beauty; it is all down to the individual or society. Serling’s manipulation of light and shadows presents the audience with a visceral realization that there cannot be one objective standard concerning which beauty is and is not acceptable. Thus, these examples showcase how the directors’ use of color influences the audience's interpretation of events and looks to contribute to their opinions.

Similar stylistic features including dialogue and camera angles enhance ‘Nosedive’ and ‘Eye of the Beholder’ to showcase different reflections of today’s society. As a consequence of genuine self-expression and thus, confrontation of truth, Lacie is imprisoned. The extreme close-up on the removal of Lacie’s rating-system eye implant reinforces the audience with the discomfort and acknowledgment of the brutal realization. This shot serves to communicate that her “rose-colored glasses” have been ripped out and it demonstrates how deeply society has internalized this ingenuine life. Similarly, this idea is showcased during the close-up of Janet and the doctors’ face reveal, but instead of internalizing Janet’s appearance, Serling’s society externalizes their feelings of disgust upon realizing the treatment failed, “No change at all!”. As Janet is dragged away with a dictator yelling, “Glorious conformity,” there is a close-up shot of the doctors’ deformed faces. Their expression can be interpreted in various ways, however Serling primarily demonstrates this moment as a moment of longing. Exiled characters like Janet, are isolated to a “lovely village” where they will be “accepted by a community unconditionally”, and these deformed doctors will never experience that. Their presence in society, is at every moment, contingent on their conformity, and when deviants like Janet are taken away, all Serling leaves with the audience are these apathetic people waiting to become the monsters they just got rid of.

This is not exactly true to life, however; to be othered by an authoritarian regime, usually does not mean they will be sent to a community of “acceptance”, and this is contrasted in ‘Nosedive’. Brooker utilizes Lacie’s muddied dress as a juxtaposition to her previously pristine dress to convey that her curated persona became part of her own identity, but only after the removal of the “rose-colored glasses”, is she able to genuinely connect with herself and reality. Much like Lacie’s stained dress, Brooker also drenches the entire scene in grey tones to demonstrate the quickly unfolding truth that is sinking into both Lacie and the audience. This is supported by a long shot of Lacie removing her dress, conveying her shedding the final layer of her curated persona. Cross-cutting between Lacie’s tear-stained face and a cascade close-up shot of white dust contrasting with the dark background, Brooker demonstrates how Lacie begins to find beauty in raw truth. Lacie then argues with a man across her prison, “What the f--k are you looking at...I was wondering…don’t...Don’t wonder? It’d be a dull world without wonder…”. Not only does Brooker use this statement to prod at the use of muted colors and its implications throughout the film, but he also bridges a gap in human connection and communication. These examples establish how the directors are specific in the collaboration of the dialogue, camera angles, and color to concern the audience about society’s perspective on differences.

Conclusion

Despite being fifty-six years apart in production, both films achieve the intended purpose by offering an entertaining and relatable interpretation of the characters, ideas, and storyline. Both directors engage their intended audiences by including complex issues and exaggerating aspects of real life to raise people’s consciousness and provoke their emotions in criticizing society’s mistreatment of different individuals. Brooker achieves this through the utilization of film techniques including close-up shots of Lacie’s face to show raw and genuine emotions. Comparably, Serling incorporates dialogue and a dictator to achieve his purpose and influence the audience’s opinions on the notion of beauty. ‘Nosedive’ illustrates a more realistic prediction of the near future and provokes the audience to fear technology. However, although one talks about beauty and the other about technology, both films prove to be effective as they both showcase the sacrifice of freedom and individuality in exchange for acceptance. Each film aims to provoke the audience into criticizing today’s society, therefore being aware of their self-consciousness. Similarly, the films convey the consequence of a society built on conformity, and the overall ideology of both is framed meticulously with color, dialogue, and camera angles to serve as a direct juxtaposition to the pre-established dystopian society. Thus, each text achieves its intended purpose and successfully engages the audience in a chillingly real exaggeration of modern society.