The Evolution of Power

    Throughout human history, the rapid pace of development has left generations of individuals questioning the extent of their power over circumstance and fate. As technological and cultural innovations have flourished, the individual’s perception of their role in the world has also evolved. Within the Romantic era, humanity is often displayed as powerless to resist the strength of nature. In later years, many Modernist thinkers often portray the individual as primarily concerned with the preservation of the self. With the rise of Post-Modernism, mankind increasingly becomes aware of the effects of his actions on the entire society, and a single life becomes a key figure within the global community. As these movements progress historically, the individual transitions from a powerless victim to asserting influence on a global scale, realizing along the way violent self-preservation leads only to chaos. Not only does this shift mark a drastic change in the perceived influence of the person, it also bears important implications for society.

    Perhaps the clearest theme within Romantic writing is the lack of human influence over a confusing and complicated world. Often, the future is portrayed as being at the mercy of processes beyond human control. This is illustrated in Johann Wolfgang Goethe’s Romantic poem “Erlking,” in which a young boy flees a mysterious entity. As the poem opens, the child is clearly threatened by the Erlking, who tempts him with promises of comfort and security (194). The father seems to ignore this threat, either from disbelief or in the hopes of comforting his child. Though it is clear that the boy is frightened, the father claims that “its only old willows gleaming so grey” (194). By the end, the Erlking has captured the boy, and the father “arrives home with pain and dread; in his arms the child was dead” (194). Throughout the piece, the Erlking is portrayed as a ghoulish natural force with power over of life and death. Indeed, the word “Erlking” is Danish for “king of the elves,” and in German, “Erle” is a term used to describe forest plants (194). As a natural force, the Erlking becomes an intermediary for a seemingly larger cosmic fate. The father seems unable (or unwilling) to recognize this, and despite his attempts to dismiss the phantom, he is powerless in the face of the Erlking. With this poem, Goethe emphasizes what cannot be ignored; namely, that dismissing the inevitability of death will not make this reality disappear. The best we can do is resist for as long as possible, though in the end even the most innocent is not safe from nature’s power. No matter where we try to hide, we are defenseless and entirely incapable of changing our fate. Our inability to control our future becomes a defining part of being human, and is as inescapable as death. To many, this idea becomes angering, sparking a desire to exert control over a frightening future.

    With passing time, the Romantic notion of helplessness grows into a new perception of mankind. From within the Modernist movement, the individual emerges as the guardian of his own fate, with little emphasis placed on the rest of society, and human power becomes focused on survival. In “Rashomon,” Akutugawa Ryunosuke emphasizes this idea while also noting its implications. As a poor servant sits under a city gate contemplating his future, he is surrounded by a city which has been “visited by a series of calamities, earthquakes, whirlwinds and fires” (208). Despite this, he refuses to accept defeat, and his mind fills with “helpless incoherent thoughts protesting an inexorable fate” (209). Though his situation appears hopeless, he refuses to surrender to nature’s oppression and decides to become a thief (209). While the Romantic may have simply yielded in the face of destruction, something drives him to fight on. To him, his circumstances necessitate immoral behavior, because “if he chose honest means, he would undoubtedly starve to death...”(209). He soon discovers an elderly woman plucking hair from corpses, and though initially repulsed, listens as she defends her actions. To her, survival is the ultimate display of human power. Scolding his naiveté, she states that “making whigs out of the hair of the dead may seem a great evil to you, but these that are here deserve no better” (211). By telling of the dead woman before her (who once sold snake meat pretending it was fish), she illuminates the universality of self preservation, stating that “what she did couldn’t be wrong, because if she hadn’t, she would have starved to death” (211). The woman whose hair she now removes would not be angered because she also did what was necessary to preserve herself. Each person does what he must to survive, as those before have done; anything becomes justifiable when survival is in question. As the servant listens, all doubts vanish as he realizes that to live he must adopt this philosophy (211). As the servant robs her of her meager possessions, the old woman’s words betray her through his act of desperation (211). In deep contrast with the Romantic image of helplessness, the servant becomes united with humanity through his self preservation, and any concern for others is cast aside as he asserts control over his own circumstances. Akutugawa demonstrates the cycle of survival, as the elderly woman is left facing “...only darkness...unknowing and unknown” (211).  The servant has traded her his uncertainty to better himself, leaving her helpless. We are left to wonder if some day, he too will fall victim to an individual seeking to mitigate their suffering. This perception of human power leaves mankind locked in an endless struggle, each passing his misfortune like a virus in order to guarantee his own future.

    Within the framework of societal development, the individual slowly evolves from a powerless observer to an active defender of his own well-being. Yet the tumultuous twentieth century soon demonstrates that a world centered on selfishness can only lead to suffering. It is in response to this that the Post-Modern definition of mankind’s power develops. Within this movement, the individual becomes increasingly aware of his responsibility to the society. In this vein, Hannah Arendt, in “Organized Guilt,” forces us to examine ourselves with the mirror of society’s wrongdoings. Her argument is rooted in the corruptibility of human nature, yet she recognizes our ability to overcome this pitfall. She frames these ideas by asserting that the blame for the German atrocities of the second World War lie not only with lunatic politicians, but with the everyday German citizen. To her, the common man is supremely guilty because “...for the sake of his pension, his life insurance, the security of his wife and children, such a man was ready to sacrifice his beliefs, his honor, and his human dignity” (2109). Through his attempts to guard the well-being of his family, the German citizen neglected the power he held to rise against evil. Arendt recognizes that within each of us is the ability to shape the world, but emphasizes that this can only be used for good once we accept that mistakes are the fault of the entire society. Only to those who “are filled with a genuine fear for the inescapable guilt of the human race, can there be any reliance when it comes to fighting fearlessly...against the incalculable evil that men are capable of bringing about” (2112). In perhaps the strongest contrast to Romanticism, man becomes supreme commander of his own fate, as well as that of his peers. This idea gives the individual the power, and responsibility, to determine the fate of society, but Arendt warns that this must be accompanied by accepting that each of us can fall victim to selfishness. The starting point must be a recognition of “...what man is capable-and this is indeed the precondition of any modern political thinking” (2111). The responsibility lies only with us, and evil results from our failure to use our strength responsibly. In addition, the emphasis on self-preservation seen previously is offered as a warning, for this desire has lead to history’s greatest atrocities. Mankind can only use his power for good once he has accepted his own fallibility.

    In every age, humans have sought to understand their significance in the face of a daunting, unknown future. Accompanying this are feelings of powerlessness and despair, which lead many to desperately guard their own interests. In recent years, violent conflict has lead to the realization that a stable society depends upon an awareness of the individual’s role as one voice among many. Upon examining the historical origins of this idea, a trend emerges which marks the evolution of the individual’s perception of his own power. From the Romantic era to the Post-Modern society, the average citizen has risen from a helpless child to assume the responsibility of crafting a harmonious society. Along the way, this newly discovered power becomes misguided and selfish, but as time passes this reality rears its ugly head. No longer are we a lonely body floating in an angry sea; we must now accept our potential. With this progression blossoms a sense of hope rooted in the possibility that each of us can influence the world for the better. By heeding the warnings of the past, we may continue to guarantee a stable and successful future for generations to come. 

Idealism and Conformity in The Early Cold War

    In the years following World War II, American life was dominated by an insatiable desire to conform. To politicians and citizens alike, political stability could be realized only through a carefully maintained status quo. By encouraging the growth of a homogenous society it was believed that radical ideas and movements could be silenced. Citizens were barraged with images of the perfect family, accented by consumerism and a desire for goods. Freedom was seen as the ability to conform and consume, actions which would ultimately lead to happiness and stability. This idea is underscored in Richard Nixon’s speech opening the American Exhibition in Moscow, where the American system is praised as the definitive way of life. Though political propaganda of the day attempted to mold society into a perfect and homogenous ideal, however, many people spoke out and illustrated the weaknesses of this system. In television, particularly The Twilight Zone, screenwriters such as Rod Serling recognized the frailty of this image and demonstrated how easily society could turn to chaos. The Twilight Zone, through a seemingly implausible story, revealed that the idealized American society was not as perfect as it may have seemed. 

   
     In many ways, the politics of the 1950s were dominated by a desire to maintain a political and social climate which would reduce restlessness and discontent. America’s postwar boom allowed for an increase in economic prosperity and the production of luxury goods, and the average American had access to a greater variety of products which had previously been unavailable. From this, the societal definition of freedom shifted drastically to an emphasis on the accumulation of material goods. In addition, the image of the stereotypical ‘nuclear family,’ propagated through all levels of society, increasing the desire for a stable and traditional home life. This emphasis on materialism is displayed clearly in Richard Nixon’s speech delivered at the opening of the American exposition in Moscow in 1959. In an attempt to extol the virtues of American society, a display of US products and fragments of daily life were assembled in Moscow to give Soviet citizens a vision America what had to offer. In his opening speech, Nixon praises the consumerist culture, emphasizing the variety of comforts Americans enjoy. He proudly proclaims that “America’s 44 million families own a total of 56 million cars, 50 million television sets and 143 million television sets. And they buy an average of 9 million dresses and suits and 14 pairs of shoes per family per year” (245). Throughout it all, he paints an image of American liberty as the ability to obtain. He also outlines the classic ideas of political participation and social welfare, but presents them as secondary to the bountiful American economy. American wealth becomes a tantalizing luxury; the definitive example of American success. His speech illustrates the prevailing theory that by making the population materialistically satisfied, the resulting social climate will reduce feelings of radicalism. Considering the extreme competition being felt from the USSR, the spread of communist ideas and sentiments was especially feared. In order to maintain this system, however, it was vital to industrial and political figures to maintain a strong hold on working individuals in the industrial sphere.

    
    To many powerful business owners and politicians, a well organized society could only be maintained by placing limitations on the freedoms of workers. This idea is pronounced strongly in Clark Kerr’s 1960 piece “Industrialism and Industrial Man.” Kerr points out that to maintain a stable society, the working man must be content with limited freedom in his place of employment. In essence, his ideas harken back to the colonial idea of “freedom through submission,” claiming that through submission to authority one will ultimately be content. He emphasizes the idea of a society defined by an adoption of common ideas and social norms, claiming that “The industrial society...develops a distinctive consensus which...provides a common body of ideas, beliefs, and value judgments integrated into a whole” (250). To Kerr, a successful country depends on a framework rooted in uniformity, in which a standard set of values become adopted by the entire society. In addition, Kerr emphasizes the relinquishment of freedoms within the workplace, such that the working man “...will be subject to greater conformity imposed not only by the enterprise manager but also the state and by his own occupational association” (251). Yet he also recognizes the weaknesses of the system, stating that a successful industrial society requires that “people must perform as expected or it breaks down” (251). In this, we begin to see the first whispers of doubt as Kerr admits a weakness which Nixon never recognized. The idealized images of the two car garage and nuclear family begin to fade as it ivecomes clear that within every person is the ability to resist the system. In reality, many of Kerr’s contemporaries were already pointing out the foundation of sand which supported this vision for American society.

    
    To many individuals during this period, the idea of a homogenous society ignored one crucial factor: human nature. Perhaps the best example of this criticism is seen in the 1960 episode of The Twilight Zone titled “The Monsters are Due on Maple Street.” In the opening scenes, we enter the perfect suburban neighborhood; the narrator even referring to it as “Maple street, USA.” The standard gender roles are observed: the men are outside mowing lawns, fixing cars, and tending the yard. The women are all within the homes, cooking and cleaning. Men throughout the neighborhood admire their cars, and the homes are clean and new. This neighborhood fits Nixon’s image of America--nothing is lacking, everyone has what they could ever want. Yet things immediately take a turn for the worst after a bright flash is seen in the sky and every electrical device fails. The friendly citizens of Maple Street soon turn to paranoia and fear as they realize that their cars, radios, phones, and lights are dead. The first sign of trouble is when their things, their materialistic lifestyle, fails them. They soon begin to question the identity of their neighbors, wondering if perhaps one of them is an enemy from space. This paranoia acts as a startling criticism of the Cold War obsession with espionage. In many ways, their ruthless search for the deceiver among them can be seen as a reflection of the desperate attempt to root out communist spies and sympathizers manifested by Joseph McCarthy and those like him. By the end, they have lost complete control and the neighborhood has turned to anarchy. As the camera pulls back we are left with screams, gunshots, sounds of broken glass, and images of mayhem and murder. Their desperate attempt to protect themselves from the hidden enemy has destroyed the perfect society. An idyllic neighborhood, within less than a day, has turned into a lawless society. Yet the only unusual thing is that the power has gone out, leaving the scared citizens to invent a fantasy world for themselves. It is soon revealed that a race of extraterrestrial beings has been manipulating their devices as a way of turning them on themselves, finally observing the truth about this society: 

          Just stop a few of their machines; their radios and telephones and lawnmowers. Throw them into           darkness for a few hours and then sit back and watch the pattern....they pick the most dangerous enemy         they can find, and its themselves.

   Here, The Twilight Zone delivers perhaps its most poignant message. We are given the antithesis to the freedom put forth by Richard Nixon and Clark Kerr; a freedom defined by consumerism and conformity. Indeed, this episode premiered at the same time as these men proclaimed these ideas, demonstrating a clear voice of contemporary resistance. Through the men and women of Maple Street, we see what happens when a reliance upon things becomes the central tenet of a society’s well being. In addition, a world built upon a standard set of common beliefs and ideals is shown to be impossible. Each citizen ultimately looks out for one person: himself. Their eagerness to place the blame on each other quickly leads them to violence and brutality. In the ruthless quest to defend the self, all neighborly bonds are broken as each thinks he has found the real deciever. The writers of this story carefully present this scene in order to illustrete the disastrous consequences of a society built on blind acceptance of an idea. Through this, we see that a society must be based on reason and cooperation, not blind adoption of a materialistic and oppressive ideal.

    To many during the Cold War period, the only hope for America was to encourage the creation of a society in which everyone adhered to the same core beliefs and values. While there is some validity to this idea, the notion that everyone should follow the same status quo is unrealistic. Defining freedom as the ability to consume, as Nixon would, leads society down a rabbit hole of greed. So too does the idea of a world based around the same set of traditional values, championed by Kerr in his view of the industrial society. In The Twilight Zone, we are given a startling reminder of what happens when a society prioritizes material wealth and conformity, and in so doing becomes blinded to different viewpoints and ways of life. In the closing lines of the episode, Rod Serling states that “for the record, prejudices can kill, and suspicion can destroy. And a thoughtless, frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all of its own.” This statement challenges future generations to avoid the Cold War era obsession with eliminating subversive ideas. In reality, the ‘frightened search for a scapegoat’ damaged the morale of a nation, leading to numerous6 countercultural movements in the years that followed. Each of these movements, in their own way, were a reaction against these attempts to silence those who illuminated the flaws of the system. As we continue toward an unknown future, it is important to heed these words, and to remember that a society can function only when it is built upon tolerance and cooperation. In no way can we expect to develop successfully if we insist on maintaining the prejudices and biases of the past.