Object and Human Value in RoboCop

 

            In the 1987 film RoboCop, Paul Verhoeven gives the audience a view of the world from the perspective of what is supposed to be a non-human object. Throughout the film, the line between object and human become blurred, and raises a question. Are human beings of equal value to societal systems in comparison to the technology surrounding them? According to Actor Network theory, the value of all objects in social or technological systems are valued the same.

Objective Review:

            The Scene that embodied the key message of the film takes place after Robocop is created, and the human cops see him, walking around the station and doing practice shooting. This cyborg, perceived to be an object by the officers, is born with a status, a self-imbued importance, and this ties in Actor Network Theory (ANT). The human cops are rightly confused at seeing an object do the job of a human better than they can, and they feel undervalued by this. The only person that suspects a human aspect to Robocop is his former partner, Anne Lewis. But it is the case that under Actor Network Theory, objects and people have the same value when it comes to any kind of system, including the justice system.

Reaction:

            This film shocked me and warmed me in a variety of ways. It was unknown to me going in that this film was one of the more violent features of its time, so I was surprised to see a man’s hand get blown off in graphic detail. In our time that kind of graphic portrayal is left to more fringe horror films, while most gore stays offscreen. I did not mind though, as I have a liking for many splatter-genre films, and it was refreshing to see the violence in your face instead of hidden away out of frame.

            I was also surprised how emotional the film was, as it is an action film about a robot police officer. Yet, the director managed to make the Robocop the most sympathetic character out of them all, and perhaps even the most human. Murphy is a tragic character as he is killed for the sole purpose of transmutation from one form to another, and though he is technically still alive, he cannot go back to the life he once had.

            Lastly, it was interesting to me that movies like this were common in the 80’s, as technology was on the rise and people were naturally apprehensive about the evolution of objects. It was and is a question of if human labor would be replaced entirely and people would be left with no purpose or reason. This ties into the readings as well, as people are unaccepting of the evolving status of objects to be of equal value to ourselves.

Analysis:

Actor Network Theory (ANT) is a sociological theory created and pioneered by Bruno Latour, Michel Callon, and John Law. It is defined as “a socio-philosophical approach in which human and material factors are brought together in the same analytical view.” (Alcadipani and Hassard, 2)

Throughout the film we see the transition of police officer Alex Murphy as he goes from human to machine, to a combination of both. Through this, the director showcases how machines and technology are as important in our society as human factors are, and perhaps why we should value them equally in importance to ourselves and nature. Latour says, in his article Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-Closer, “When humans are displaced and deskilled, nonhumans have to be upgraded and reskilled.” (Latour 301) In the film, the police precinct is failing. There is rampant crime that is taking over Detroit, and the police are helpless to stop it at such a large scale. They are considering striking until reparations are made and they can have better chances at stopping these crimes. The human aspect of the system is becoming deskilled, and therefore the company in charge of the police (OCP) must find a way to upgrade the non-human or technological aspect in hopes of having a better chance at fighting crime in the city.

When this occurs, and Robocop is revealed as a new asset to the team, he is greatly skilled in stopping crime. This is the Actor Network Theory in use, where in the system, a nonhuman actor has been placed at the same importance as the humans in the system. The cops are uncomfortable with the change, and this represents the theory as well, as it is still controversial that objects hold the same importance that humanity does. The only one who is accepting of Murphy as an object is Ann Lewis, who treats him the same despite the dehumanization. Over time, the object becomes more human. It holds grudges, and can disobey orders, but continues to fight crime like it has been designed to do. The object was humanized, but its status and inherent value to society did not change, and that is the true takeaway from Actor Network Theory. We are all just equally valued objects inside of a vast web of systems, and the way we affect the world is reciprocated by the objects and nature surrounding us.

References:

Alcadipani, Rafael, and John Hassard. “Actor-Network Theory, Organizations and Critique: towards a Politics of Organizing.” Organization, vol. 17, no. 4, 2010, pp. 419–435., doi:10.1177/1350508410364441.

Latour, Bruno. “Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-Closer.” Social Problems, vol. 35, no. 3, 1988, pp. 298–310., doi:10.2307/800624.