Editing The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (section)

===Authority and conformity===
''Caligari'', like a number of [[Weimar culture|Weimar films]] that followed it, thematises brutal and irrational authority by making a violent and possibly insane authority figure its antagonist.<ref name="Brockmann64" /><ref name="Budd1">{{Harvnb|Budd|1990a|p=1}}</ref> Kracauer said Caligari was symbolic of the German war government and fatal tendencies inherent in the German system, saying the character "stands for an unlimited authority that idolizes power as such, and, to satisfy its lust for domination, ruthlessly violates all human rights and values".<ref>{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|pp=64–65}}</ref> Likewise, John D. Barlow described Caligari as an example of the tyrannical power and authority that had long plagued Germany, while Cesare represents the "common man of [[unconditional obedience]]".<ref name="Barlow32" /><ref name="Brockmann66">{{Harvnb|Brockmann|2010|p=66}}</ref> Janowitz has claimed Cesare represents the common citizen who is conditioned to kill or be killed, just as soldiers are trained during their military service, and that Caligari is symbolic of the German government sending those soldiers off to die in the war.<ref name="Kracauer65" /><ref>{{Harvnb|Janowitz|1941|pp=224–225}}</ref> The control Caligari wields over the minds and actions of others results in chaos and both moral and social perversion.<ref name="Hirsch54-56">{{Harvnb|Hirsch|1981|pp=54–56}}</ref> Cesare lacks any individuality and is simply a tool of his master; Barlow writes that he is so dependent on Caligari that he falls dead when he strays too far from the source of his sustenance, "like a machine that has run out of fuel".<ref name="Barlow43">{{Harvnb|Barlow|1982|p=43}}</ref>

In his book ''From Caligari to Hitler'', Kracauer argues the Caligari character is symptomatic of a subconscious need in German society for a tyrant, which he calls the German "collective soul".<ref name="Budd28" /><ref name="Hirsch54-56" /><ref name="Brockmann59">{{Harvnb|Brockmann|2010|p=59}}</ref> Kracauer argues Caligari and Cesare are premonitions of [[Adolf Hitler]] and his rule over Germany, and that his control over the weak-willed, puppet-like somnambulist prefigures aspects of the mentality that allowed the [[Nazi Party]] to rise.<ref name="Peary51" /><ref name="Hirsch54-56" /><ref name="Brockmann59" /> He calls Caligari's use of hypnotism to impose his will foreshadowing of Hitler's "manipulation of the soul".<ref>{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|pp=72–73}}</ref> Kracauer described the film as an example of Germany's obedience to authority and failure or unwillingness to rebel against deranged authority,<ref name="Brockmann65-66">{{Harvnb|Brockmann|2010|pp=65–66}}</ref> and reflects a "general retreat" into a shell that occurred in post-war Germany.<ref name="Scheunemann125"/> Cesare symbolises those who have no mind of their own and must follow the paths of others;<ref name="LoBrutto63" /> Kracauer wrote he foreshadows a German future in which "self-appointed Caligaris hypnotized innumerable Cesares into murder".<ref>{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|p=272}}</ref> Barlow rejects Kracauer's claims that the film glorifies authority "just because it has not made a preachy statement against it", and said the connection between Caligari and Hitler lies in the mood the film conveys, not an endorsement of such tyrant on the film's part.<ref name="Barlow51">{{Harvnb|Barlow|1982|p=51}}</ref>

Everyday reality in ''Caligari'' is dominated by tyrannical aspects. Authorities sit atop high perches above the people they deal with and hold offices out of sight at the end of long, forbidding stairways.<ref>{{Harvnb|Barlow|1982|p=50}}</ref> Most of the film's characters are caricatures who fit neatly into prescribed social roles, such as the outraged citizens chasing a public enemy, the authoritarian police who are deferential to their superiors, the oft-harassed bureaucratic town clerk, and the asylum attendants who act like stereotypical "little men in white suits".<ref name="Barlow43" /> Only Caligari and Cesare are atypical of social roles, instead serving as, in Barlow's words, "abstractions of social fears, the incarnations of demonic forces of a nightmarish world the bourgeoisie was afraid to acknowledge, where self-assertion is pushed to willful and arbitrary power over others".<ref name="Barlow43-45">{{Harvnb|Barlow|1982|pp=43–45}}</ref> Kracauer wrote the film demonstrates a contrast between the rigid control, represented by such characters as Caligari and the town clerk, and chaos, represented by the crowds of people at the fair and the seemingly never-ending spinning of the merry-go-rounds. He said the film leaves no room for middle ground between these two extremes, and that viewers are forced to embrace either insanity or authoritarian rigidity, leaving little space for human freedom.<ref>{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|pp=73–74}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Brockmann|2010|p=67}}</ref> Kracauer writes: "''Caligari'' exposes the soul wavering between tyranny and chaos, and facing a desperate situation: any escape from tyranny seems to throw it into a state of utter confusion".<ref name="Kracauer74">{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|p=74}}</ref>

Caligari is not the only symbol of arrogant authority in the film. In fact, he is a victim of harsh authority himself during the scene with the dismissive town clerk, who brushes him off and ignores him to focus on his paperwork.<ref name="Brockmann64" /><ref name="Elsaesser63" /> Film historian [[Thomas Elsaesser]] argues that Caligari's murderous rampage through Cesare can be seen as a rebellious, anti-authoritarian streak in response to such experiences as these, even in spite of his own authoritarianism.<ref>{{Harvnb|Elsaesser|2003|pp=63–64}}</ref> The Expressionistic set design in this scene further amplifies the power of the official and the weakness of his supplicant; the clerk towers in an excessively high chair over the small and humiliated Caligari.<ref name="Brockmann64" /><ref name="Kracauer72">{{Harvnb|Kracauer|1947|p=72}}</ref> The scene represents class and status differences, and conveys the psychological experience of being simultaneously outraged and powerless in the face of a petty bureaucracy.<ref name="Elsaesser63">{{Harvnb|Elsaesser|2003|p=63}}</ref> Another common visual motif is the use of stairways to illustrate the hierarchy of authority figures, such as the multiple stairs leading up to police headquarters, and three staircases ascending to Caligari in the asylum.<ref name="Kracauer72" />

Franzis expresses resentment of all forms of authority, particularly during the end of the frame story, when he feels he has been institutionalised because of the madness of the authorities, not because there is anything wrong with him.<ref name="Barlow50-51">{{Harvnb|Barlow|1982|pp=50–51}}</ref> Franzis can be seen, at least within the main narrative, as a symbol of reason and enlightenment triumphing over the irrational tyrant and unmasking the absurdity of social authority.<ref name="Barlow32" /><ref name="Eisner18" /> But Kracauer contended the frame story undermines that premise. He argues if not for the frame story, the tale of Franzis's efforts against Caligari would have been a praiseworthy example of independence and rebellion against authority. However, with the addition of the frame story, which places the veracity of Franzis's claims into question, Kracauer argues the film glorifies authority and turns a reactionary story into an authoritarian film:<ref name="Kracauer67" /><ref name="Barlow32" /><ref name="Peary51" /><ref name="Brockmann65-66" /> "The result of these modifications was to falsify the action and to ultimately reduce it to the ravings of a madman."<ref name="Robinson32" /> Kracauer believed these changes were not necessarily intentional, but rather an "instinctive submission to the necessities of the screen" because commercial films had to "answer to mass desires".<ref name="Kracauer67" /> Fritz Lang disagreed with Kracauer's argument, and instead believes the frame story makes the film's revolutionary inclinations more convincing, not less.<ref name="Barlow33" /> David Robinson said, as time passed, filmgoers have been less inclined to interpret the film as a vindication of authority because modern audiences have grown more skeptical of authority in general, and are more inclined to believe Franzis's story and interpret the asylum director as wrongly committing Franzis to silence him.<ref name="Robinson33">{{Harvnb|Robinson|1997|p=33}}</ref>