Germany In the 1920s

The movie was made in Germany during the era known as the Weimar Republic. This was the government formed after Germany lost World War I. Germany was a mess in the 1920s; they lost the war, they lost land, the economy was terrible, and people were constantly fighting over politics. In the early 1920s, Germany also went through very bad inflation. Prices were rising rapidly, and it seemed like money was losing its value. People often carried large stacks of paper money just to buy food.¹ Although by the mid 1920s, Germany started to become a lot more stable. Cities like Berlin were popular for their art, film, and culture. Lots of new industries and buildings were starting to appear, but despite this, there was lots of tension between the rich and the poor. Many workers were mistreated and had to work long and hard hours in factories. Metropolis highlights these tensions throughout the film. The city of Metropolis is divided into two groups: the powerful and wealthy leaders and the workers who live underground. The workers are the backbone of the city as they operate the machines that keep it running, but they don’t even get a fraction of the wealth the rich people get. German film historian and professor Thomas Elsaesser says the film “dramatizes the fear of social conflict between labor and capital that shaped the politics of the Weimar period.² The city of Metropolis seems beautiful on the outside; it has gorgeous skyscrapers and flying cars, but on the inside, it’s entirely built on exhausted workers.

• 1918 – Germany lost the war and the Weimar Republic Begins.
• 1919-23 – Economic crisis and inflation affect Germany
• 1924 – Cultural growth begins in cities like Berlin.
• 1925 – Fritz lang begins production of Metropolis
• 1927 – Metropolis releases in Germany.

The Rise of Machines

The 1920s were also a time period where machines and industries were very important. Factories, assembly lines, and mass production revolutionized the way people worked. Cities were growing fast, and with the addition of large buildings, bustling streets, and bright lights became common in places like Berlin and New York. While these changes can feel exciting, they can also feel very overwhelming. Metropolis reflects these changes in the city in the film. It features huge skyscrapers, flying cars, and big factory machines. The film also showcases a world where machines control your everyday life, which was actually a common fear among the public in the 1920s. Siegfried Kracauer, a German writer and journalist, wrote that the film’s machines look almost like monsters that control the workers.³ The film features a “Heart Machine,” which is a big engine that keeps the city running smoothly. Although when the main character, Freder, takes a look at the Heart Machine, he hallucinates a monster named Moloch who eats a bunch of workers. This scene represented how industrial labor felt dehumanizing and even dangerous. They felt like they had to overwork themselves in order to keep the economy going. Fritz Lang was criticizing “Taylorism,” which was described as “a method of making factory work as efficient as possible by treating people like parts of a clock.”⁴ At the same time, the film also appreciates technology during the twenties. The city looks big, powerful, and overwhelming in a good way. This mix of excitement and fear of newer technology was very common in the 1920s.

German Expressionism and Film Style

One of the most prominent parts of the film is its visual style. The film was heavily influenced by the art movement known as German Expressionism. German Expressionist art tried to convey emotion through dramatic shapes, shadows, and designs. Many German films of the 1920s portrayed this style. Metropolis utilized large sets and sharp contrast between light and dark, the upper city, where all the rich people are is open and bright, but the underground, where most of the poor people are is crowded and dark. The film also had special effects that were considered advanced for its time. One of the many techniques they used was called Schüfftan. Believe it or not, Metropolis actually popularized this technique. This technique involved positioning a plate of glass at a 45-degree angle between the camera and the miniatures, outlining the area where actors would be inserted, and transferring this outline to a mirror.⁵ This helped a lot with creating the city scenes. Given that these techniques were way ahead of their time, the film was very expensive to make, and it was the most pricey film produced by the German studio UFA during the silent era.⁶

A Divided City

The main conflict of Metropolis is the division between classes. The city is ruled by John Fredersen, a very powerful leader who controls the city from his tower. His very own son, Freder, discovers the harsh reality the workers face and begins to question the system. The workers spend long hours operating machines that control the whole city. They move in strict routines and appear almost like parts of a machine. In Metropolis, the big city divided its citizens into two classes: The thinkers are rich and live in paradise-like skyscrapers. They spend their days enjoying life to the fullest. Then there’s the workers. The workers are the opposite; they’re poor and live deep underground. They walk in straight lines like complete zombies and dress in all black. The workers are shown to pine away in the subterranean machine room, keeping all the giant machines running.⁷ Throughout the film, Freder falls in love with a kind spiritual leader named Maria. Maria tells the workers, “The Mediator of the head and the hands must be the heart.” The film suggests that the “head” represents the wealthy people, such as John Fredersen, and the “hands” represent the workers. Maria is basically saying the only way to talk to the upper class and the people in power is if someone steps in as a mediator between the two. Someone will come to bring the rich and the poor together. In the late 1920s, people were disillusioned with the chaos democracy was bringing them. They wanted a strong leader who would unite everyone. The idea that a single person could be a “mediator” between the classes was later exploited by political parties trying to gain control over their respective country.⁸ Some critics believed this message was way too simple for such a serious problem. Film historian Anton Kaes argues that the ending suggests harmony without solving the deeper social issues.⁹ Despite this, the story reflects the fear of workers starting a rebellion and political conflicts during the 1920s.

The New Woman

The role of women is also a major plot point in the film. Maria represents kindness and moral guidance. She tries her best to help the workers without encouraging violence. However, the scientist Rotwang creates a robot version of Maira. The robot appropriates Maria’s appearance and begins to disobey her creator’s orders. She instead seduces male workers and tricks them into starting violent riots.¹⁰ The robot version of Maria is the complete opposite from the real Maria. Many film scholars define these two versions of Maria as representing the different sides of women in the 1920s. In the 1920s, the “New Woman” was a big thing. In many parts of the world, women started to become more independent, they started getting their own jobs, voting in elections, and completely changing the social norms. While some didn’t mind this change, some traditional men started to become very nervous. When Rotwang decided to create a “bad” version of Maria, who starts riots, the film shows the era’s fear of uncontrolled female power and the way technology could be used to trick or manipulate the public.¹¹ The robot version of Maria reflects these fears from traditional men by showing a modern woman who is chaotic and disrupts social norms.

Is the Film Still Relevant Today?

Despite Metropolis being released almost one hundred years ago, the themes and message of the film still remain relevant to this day. Cities are still shaped by technology, there’s still big industries and corporations out there, and economic inequality is still a thing. Instead of being worried about machines replacing workers, people today are worried about AI replacing workers. Metropolis also talks about social systems and different classes, which are still relevant today. American film historian David Brodwell claims that Metropolis remains powerful because it “combines spectacular imagery with deep concerns about modern life.”¹² After its initial release, the film was actually shortened and censored in many countries. For many years, people only saw an incomplete version of the film. It wasn’t until 2008 that a completed print of the film was discovered in Argentina. The discovery of the completed version of the film allowed a version that’s closer to the original film to be released.¹³ Today, we consider Metropolis to be one of the most important movies in film history. It even influenced other science fiction movies such as Star Wars, The Matrix, and Blade Runner. Robot Maria has also become one of the most iconic robotic characters in film history.

Conclusion

Metropolis isn’t just a science fiction movie. It serves as a reflection of the world from the 1920s. This time was filled with rapid changes, new technologies, and social tensions. The film can also be interpreted as a prediction for the future. They wanted these bright and huge cities with lots of technology, but they also feared what would happen if society became too divided between classes. If we look at Metropolis in a historical context, we can understand the film and the time period that influenced the film. Metropolis reminds us that changes such as new technology, social conflict, and inequality aren’t new and have been a part of the modern world for a very long time. I decided to pick this film because I love dystopian movies, and I thought Metropolis would be interesting to research as it’s described as a prophetic dystopian vision. The film fits into the historical context of the 1920s through the fears of the general public throughout the decade. Its deception of social division, fast urbanization, and the fear of technology taking over were things people worried about. The views on this film have also changed drastically over time since the 1920s. The initial reception was mixed; some didn’t like the ending at all and thought the ideas of the film were too silly. The film was also criticized for its heavy political themes and editing style. The views began to shift later in the 20th century when people began to appreciate the film’s influence on the science fiction genre. Metropolis is now regarded as one of the most influential films ever made. Metropolis also complicates our ideas about the 1920s, as it’s an accurate portrayal of the anxieties people had in the 1920s rather than a celebration of new technologies. The divide between the two creates a dystopian vibe for the movie.

1. Detlev Peukert, The Weimar Republic: The Crisis of Classical Modernity (New York: Hill and Wang, 1992), 53-55. ︎
2. Elsasser Thomas, Weimar Cinema and After: Germany’s Historical Imaginary (London; New York: Routledge, 2000), 90. ︎
3. KRACAUER, SIEGFRIED. From Caligari to Hitler: A Psychological History of the German Film. NED-New edition. Edited by Leonardo Quaresima. Princeton University Press, 2004. ︎
4. Kanigel, Robert. The One Best Way: Frederick Winslow Taylor and the Enigma of Efficiency. 1997 ︎
5. “The Schüfftan Process: Why Storytellers Need to Embrace Their Inner Magician.” 2017. ScreenCraft. July 20, 2017. https://screencraft.org/blog/storytellers-embrace-inner-magician-schufftan-process/.
   ‌ ︎
6. Kaes Anton, Metropolis (London: British Film Institute, 2000), 8-10. ︎
7. Benesch, Klaus. “Technology, Art, and the Cybernetic Body: The Cyborg as Cultural Other in Fritz Lang’s ‘Metropolis’ and Philip K. Dick’s ‘Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?’” Amerikastudien / American Studies 44, no. 3 (1999): 379–92. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41157479. ︎
8. KRACAUER, SIEGFRIED. From Caligari to Hitler: A Psychological History of the German Film. NED-New edition. Edited by Leonardo Quaresima. Princeton University Press, 2004. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvc77cxj. ︎
9. Kaes Anton, Metropolis (London: British Film Institute, 2000), 54. ︎
10. Huyssen, Andreas. “The Vamp and the Machine: Technology and Sexuality in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis.” New German Critique, no. 24/25 (1981): 221–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/488052. ︎
11. Huyssen, Andreas. “The Vamp and the Machine: Technology and Sexuality in Fritz Lang’s Metropolis.” New German Critique, no. 24/25 (1981): 221–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/488052. ︎
12. Thompson Kristin and Bordwell David, Film History: An Introduction, 4th edition. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2018), 148. ︎
13. Thompson Kristin and Bordwell David, Film History: An Introduction, 4th edition. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2018), 147 ︎

Some of these occupations included opportunities within botany, mathematics, architecture, blacksmithing, cinema operators, miners, artists and so on. With about 280 booths in attendance, over 100 occupations, career paths and opportunities were displayed. These events also intended to raise money for the Women’s Republican Party, several members of the organizing committee were a part of this organization.

The first fair was held from April 18th to the 25th, 1925, however there were years of preparation needed in order to organize such an event, and there are even newspaper clippings from as early as 1923 publishing the fair. Initially the fair was only intended to run for one year however, within the first years’ operation there were close to 160,000-200,000 visitors. The overwhelming number of visitors even caused the fair to expand into surrounding buildings just to adhere to the population. Due to the popularity, the fair then began to run annually until 1928 (see timeline for more specific dates), and  by that time several other foreign countries had joined in the fair’s events. Some of which included Greece, Great Britain and Germany. 

As a whole the fair intended to help women transition from their traditional positions in society, into their new ones. Within previous decades the ‘traditional’ role of women was held within the domestic, they were intended to keep the home clean, cook, tend to children, and any other responsibilities needed. If they were able to work it’s likely that their occupation still fell within the domestic sphere with jobs such as housekeeping often being readily available. However, as the years progressed women began to establish their place within the public sphere and therefore within the rest of typical society. Their jobs began to hold more public positions, which included jobs such as secretaries and salesclerks. However many women were limited in their knowledge of what was available to them, and resulted in many women working within the same jobs. The fair intended to expand women’s horizons and possibilities in their progressive era.

Who organized the fair?

With each fair came endless amounts of boards and committees created in order to ensure a successful and impactful fair. However two women credited with much of the fairs’ success are Helen Marie Bennett and Ruth McCormick.

Helen Marie Bennett: Born September 17th, 1972 in Washington, Iowa, Bennett was an American journalist and businesswoman, she worked for the Chicago Record and authored several books including ‘Women and Work.’ She also served as manager of the Chicago Bureau of Occupations, which essentially where college-educated women went to seek employment, the bureau acted as a sort of guide for these women. Despite all this Bennett is most known for being a part of the committee that organized all four woman’s fairs.  

Ruth McCormick: Born March 27th, 1880 in Cleveland Ohio, McCormick went on to become a very successful politician, activist, and publisher. Despite her familial wealth McCormick chose to live within the University of Chicago Settlement, which introduced her to working women and exposed her to the issues they faced. This in turn made McCormick a better writer and publicist at the Chicago Tribune, which she worked at very early in her career..  She was also a member of the Welfare Committee, the Women’s City Club of Chicago, she served as a chairwoman for the women’s welfare section of the National Civil Federation, and was an incredibly active member of the Progressive Party, she even went on to win a seat within the party in 1912. Her husband served one term in the US House of Representatives, and was Senate to Illinois in 1918, very often McCormick is credited with her husband’s political success and she eventually served as chairman to the women’s first Republic National Committee. However after the death of her husband in 1925 McCormick dedicated herself to the Woman’s Fairs. Where she went on to serve as a general executive and as a member on the Board of Directors. Even after the death of her husband McCormick was still incredibly active in politics, going on to become the Republican representative for Illinois from 1929-1931. 

The Influences of the Woman’s World’s Fair

The Fair was the result of a multitude of ever-developing factors within the late 19th and early 20th century. These factors and events challenged the traditional gender norms set within society and led to women gaining more freedom within society and their everyday lives. 

The 1893 World’s Fair

The 1893 World’s Fair, which is also referred to as the Columbian Exposition, was the first ever world’s fair held in Chicago. The Fair was meant to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’ arrival in the new world. The centerpiece of such a celebration was over 600 acres of land from the Frederick Law Olmsted Jackson Park were carved out and rebuilt specifically for this exposition. The fair grounds, which would later be referred to as The White City, aimed to demonstrate an ideal and almost euphoric United States. The city was specifically designed and covered in a white plaster, therefore giving it the nickname of White City, all of the buildings were also a specific height in order to give a more uniformed look, and at the center of the entire fair was a large water pool, meant to be representative of the voyage Columbus took. Due to the time and care put into the architectural aspects of the fair, it now serves as a great influence to Chicago architects. Over the six month residency the fair sought to host millions of visitors, from all walks of life, and from all over the world, over 46 nations participated in this fair. As a whole this fair served as an exposition for innovations in architecture, engineering, transportation, weaponry, art, and so much more. This specific fair also greatly impacted the American’s perception of beauty, since it exposed Americans to new cultural aspects from other countries.

 Overall the fair greatly impacted American culture, economics and even politics, it was meant to demonstrate the United States as being wealthy and progressive, however the fair truly exposed several flaws within American society. 

Every aspect of the 1893 World’s Fair was specifically designed, which is demonstrated within the very architecture of the fair. It would therefore make sense that the fair was also specifically designed to exclude those typically oppressed within this society, including women.  Although there was a Women’s Building within the fair’s design, it was on the very outskirts of the fair’s main buildings, and only a fraction of the size. Aside from this building there was a clear lack of representation of Women within the fair. Due to this many thought that a fair specifically tailored for and representing women was greatly needed, this idea then snowballed into what is now known as the Woman’s World’s Fairs. 

The Women’s Suffrage and Rights Movement 

The Women’s Suffrage movement stemmed from the women’s rights movements within the mid-19th century. At first these movements demonstrated several different goals, however despite this several leaders within the movement decided that gaining the right to vote would be most important. It would open doors to several other opportunities women were seeking within society, however disputes over how to gain the vote caused many divisions. Although historians tend to paint the women’s suffrage movement as being a part of the very early 20th century, the first recorded attempt at a national movement began in Seneca Falls, New York in July of 1848. After several other movements, demonstrations, and petitions, the division over how women would gain the right to vote eventually split the movement into two groups, the National Woman Suffrage Association (NWSA) and the American Woman Suffrage Association (AWSA). Around the 1890s the two groups realized their division only impeded on progress and the two combined to great the National American Women Suffrage Association (NAWSA), Thirty years after the groups united an incredible stride in the movement was made when Jeannette Rankin was elected to Congress as the Republican Representative of Montana. Rankin was an active member in the suffrage and rights movements, and used her platform to support the movement, her support was quickly felt in 1917 when she testified to Congress on the movements in order to keep it on the agenda. Soon a Committee on Women’s Suffrage was created in order to consider bills related to women’s voting rights. After two years of hearings, lobbying, and meetings Congress finally passed a bill on women’s voting rights July 7th 1919, and just over a year later the bill was officially adopted into the Constitution. 

Although this was an incredible achievement for the women’s suffrage movement, it still excluded a great deal of American citizens. Specifically African American men and women, it would be almost 40 years before their rights were granted. All in all the exclusion of this population of Americans demonstrated the country’s failed Reconstruction movement. 

This movement greatly influenced the development of the Women’s World’s Fairs, many members of the organizing committee, including Ruth McCormick, were at the forefront of the Suffrage and Rights movements. The results of these movements, including the right to vote, opened the door to many women and gave them access to the public sphere. However, even though many women were now able to be within the public sphere, they were still greatly limited in what they could do occupationally speaking. The fair was greatly needed in order to demonstrate to women what opportunities were available to them within this new public sphere. 

The New Woman 

Although the late 1800s and early 1900s demonstrate great times of progression for women’s equality, there is no surprise that older generations often pushed back against these ideas. Often the new and progressive women within society were referred to as the ‘New Woman,’ and as positive as it sounds it was typically meant as a sort of insult. The ‘New Woman’ typically referred to the younger generation of women, who demonstrated feminist ideals and who are now cultural icons. These women, often referred to as ‘flappers’ were actually just working class women. They were women who worked, were financially independent, voted, and spent their nights out on the town, however most importantly they were women who spent money free from male influence. So it’s no surprise that these new women were typically welcomed in urban environments such as Chicago. 

The Romanticization of the New Woman 

Often when eras of great progression, such as the women’s suffrage and rights movements, get romanticized, and many of the negative aspects are glossed over. First off, the jobs that became readily available for women were smaller-scale jobs men took on to start their climb within their careers, like salesclerks or secretaries. These jobs were then feminized and seen as lesser, therefore they were only paid about 42-63% of what men would make in that exact position. This pay gap was even greater for women of minority groups. Many women also worked within the same positions, and although the Women’s World Fair presented many opportunities, they were mainly directed toward white educated women. 

The Working Woman in the Media

Another interesting notion to keep in mind is the role that the media has played in encouraging the development of the New Women and of women within the public sphere. Of course the economy is going to encourage women to work, since in the end it meant they would receive more money. Between the 1900s and 1930s representation of the working women increased dramatically. At first women were presented as doing very simple jobs within offices and stores, but more importantly it was presented that the workplace was an environment in which women would be able to meet their husbands. As the years went on, and working women in media became a natural sight, the media began reflecting the realities of working women’s lives. Representing the mundane, repetitiveness of their lives.

Overall the development of the working women, the new women, and of flappers came as a direct result of the 19th amendment and directly influenced the women’s world’s fair. Although women began to enter the public sphere they were still very limited in what they could do, the fair acted as a networking agent for them. And although these were great times of progression it is extremely important to understand how romanticized this era is and how many negative details are simply glossed over. 

Conclusion

As a whole the Woman’s World’s Fair stood as a testament to the progressive nature of the early 20th century. The event, created by women and for women, provided them with access to the opportunities available to them. Achievements within several different fields were proudly displayed and hundreds of booths demonstrated new career paths women of the era could take up. The creation of this fair was the direct result of a multitude of events, including the limited representation in the1893 Columbian Exposition, the strides made within the Suffrage and Woman’s Rights movements, and the active development of what is now known as the ‘New Woman.’ Typically this era of history is presented as being extremely progressive, and the events of the World’s Fairs (both the Columbian and the Woman’s) only further emphasized this idea since they were intended to demonstrate progression in a culture, engineering, and many other topics. However it is important to keep in mind the large population of Americas that were outright discriminated against during these fairs. It’s also important to note that even women who were able to be a part of the public sphere through these job opportunities were still discriminated against and even sexualized in some aspects. Ripples of these misogynist, and racist ideas are demonstrated in the decades after the fairs, and aspects of such are even felt within modern day society. With any event in history it’s important to understand not only the context of the event, but the multifaceted sides of the event as well. By understanding this one can truly grasp the importance and influence that major events, such as the Woman’s World’s Fair, had on society and how it affects modern society. 

Timeline:

Citations:

““The New Woman” | US History II (American Yawp).” Courses.lumenlearning.com, courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-ushistory2ay/chapter/the-new-woman-2/.

“Chicago Architecture Center.” Chicago Architecture Center, 2024, www.architecture.org/online-resources/architecture-encyclopedia/worlds-columbian-exposition-of-1893.

Dumenil, Lynn. The Modern Temper : American Culture and Society in the 1920s. New York, Hill And Wang, 1995.

Estherwang. “The 1925 Woman’s World’s Fair in Chicago – Chicago History Museum.” Chicago History Museum, 22 Apr. 2025, www.chicagohistory.org/the-1925-womans-worlds-fair-in-chicago/. Accessed 18 Mar. 2026.

Ganz, Cheryl. The 1933 Chicago World’s Fair : A Century of Progress. Urbana, Univ. Of Illinois Press, 2012.

   Grossman, Ron. “Chicago’s Society Women Threw a World’s Fair of Their Own in the 1920s to Showcase Female Talent.” Chicago Tribune, March 11, 2024. https://www.chicagotribune.com/2024/03/03/womens-world-fair-chicago/

  Miller, Taylor Jade. “New Women, New Opportunities: The New Women of Chicago’s World’s Fairs, 1893-1934,” 2018

“MCCORMICK, Ruth Hanna | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives.” History.house.gov, history.house.gov/People/Detail/17791.

Patrick, Jeanette. “Ruth Hanna McCormick.” National Women’s History Museum, 2016, www.womenshistory.org/education-resources/biographies/ruth-hanna-mccormick-simms.

 Scott. “Woman’s Part at the World’s Fair, Part I.” Chicago’s 1893 Worlds Fair, April 2, 2024. https://worldsfairchicago1893.com/2019/03/01/womans-part-at-the-worlds fair-part-1/. 

“The House Supports Women’s Suffrage, 1917–1919 | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives.” History.house.gov, history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/WIC/Historical-Essays/No-Lady/House-Supports-Suffrage/.

“The World’s Columbian Exposition: The White City and Fairgrounds – Smarthistory.” Smarthistory.org, smarthistory.org/white-city-and-fairgrounds/.

Tracey Jean Boisseau, and Abigail M Markwyn. Gendering the Fair : Histories of Women and Gender at World’s Fairs. Urbana, University Of Illinois Press, 2010.

Weimann, Jeanne Madeline. The Fair Women: The Story of the Woman’s Building World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago 1983. Chicago, IL: Chicago, III : Academy Chicago, 1981. 

“Woman’s World’s Fair, 1925.” Chicagohistory.org, 2026, encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/1374.html. Accessed 18 Mar. 2026.

Suggested Resources:

The Chicago History Museum

The Chicago Digital Collections

The Chicago Architecture Center

The Chicago Tribune

madison

Madison is currently a senior at the Ramapo College of New Jersey, who took this course in the spring of 2026. She has a major in Visual Arts, with a concentration in Art History, along with a double minor in Anthropology and Museum and Exhibitions Studies. After graduating Madison hopes to continue her education in order to become an Archaeologist or Museum Educator.