Why are relics illegal in “Silo?”

Table of Contents

Introduction:

The fear of technology and relics, represented as objects from the past, is an enduring theme across dystopian narratives. In the television series "Silo," the prohibition of relics illuminates the fear of the past and its potential revelations that can disrupt the status quo. The ruling authority implements this rule to regulate the inhabitants' knowledge of the past, maintaining their ignorance and obedience. This essay will delve into the implications of this prohibition and draw comparisons with attitudes towards objects from the past in other dystopian works, namely Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451," Lois Lowry's "The Giver," and Anthony Burgess's "A Clockwork Orange."

Understanding the Prohibition of Relics in "Silo":

The possession of relics, or objects from the past, in the Silo society can lead to severe punishment, even death. These relics, varying from harmless items like PEZ dispensers to more dangerous objects like hard drives containing historical data, present the risk of unveiling the truth about the past and the world outside the Silo. They threaten the prevailing ignorance, prompting individuals to question the official narrative and disturb the societal equilibrium. Thus, the prohibition of relics is not merely an aversion to technology but an encapsulation of fear towards memory and history, revealing how a society manipulates the collective consciousness by controlling access to the past.

Comparative Analysis:

"Silo" and "Fahrenheit 451":

In "Fahrenheit 451," Bradbury presents a society terrified of books, symbolizing knowledge and history, similar to the fear of relics in "Silo." Both societies destroy these objects to suppress their past and uphold the societal order. However, the response differs; while "Silo" residents generally comply with the prohibition, some citizens in "Fahrenheit 451" resist by secretly preserving books, suggesting a different level of consciousness and rebellion.

"Silo" and "The Giver":

"The Giver" portrays a society devoid of personal history, much like the Silo's prohibition on relics. Memories of the past are suppressed, and a single individual, "The Giver," retains the community's collective memory. The control of historical objects in "Silo" and the centralization of memories in "The Giver" share a common goal - to maintain social conformity by limiting knowledge of the past. However, the means to achieve this differ, reflecting varying degrees of technophobia and fear of history.

"Silo" and "A Clockwork Orange":

In "A Clockwork Orange," Burgess presents a dystopian society ambivalent towards the past, contrasting sharply with "Silo." While "Silo" fears and prohibits historical relics, "A Clockwork Orange" seemingly trivializes the past, with its characters often displaying a lack of historical awareness or concern. The past becomes inconsequential amidst the society's ultra-violent present, reflecting a dystopian society less concerned with memory and history but equally oppressive.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the prohibition of relics in "Silo" represents a society's technophobia and fear of the past, underscoring how dystopian regimes manipulate memory and history to maintain control. This fear varies across dystopian literature, from the stark prohibition in "Silo" and destruction in "Fahrenheit 451," to the erasure of personal memories in "The Giver" and the disregard for history in "A Clockwork Orange." While the methods differ, the common thread remains: the suppression of the past serves as a potent tool for control, reflecting the inherent fear of change, rebellion, and the power of memory in dystopian societies.