
‘One flap of seagull’s wings would be enough to alter the course of the weather forever’ (Brown). A principle, now known as the butterfly effect, is pioneered by Edward Lorenz and reminds us that even a very small action from an individual can be amplified into the large-scale effects elsewhere. Interestingly, this idea of butterfly effect is illuminated as the main theme in the two texts: Pereira Declares, a novel written by Antonia Tabucchi, and The Lives of Others, a movie filmed by Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck. By comparing the similarities and the differences between these texts, we can understand how one text correlates to the other. In particular, through the setting, character’s occupations, and their actions, it is clear that a small change is the most significant and impactful step in order to have an effect on a complex system. 

Pereira Declares and The Lives of Others contain very similar setting throughout their stories. Tabucchi’s novel “describes events that took place in and around Lisbon in 1938 beginning on 25th July” (Murdoch). During this period, Portuguese liberal democratic ended, and the dictatorship of the right began to rule the country (Gallagher). António de Oliveira Salazar, Prime Minister of Portugal, exercised vast political powers by using censorship and secret police to quell opposition. As a result, “the capability of a single individual had been a fatal weakness” (Gallagher). This political system is known as totalitarianism. It refers to a belief that an individual must be controlled under any sort of surveillance, and he/she is worthwhile only when one is a part of the whole, in this case, the country. 

In the same way, von Donnersmarck’s movie reaches “back into the totalitarian past and over the Berlin Wall into the grim, brutal absurdity of the late, unlamented German Democratic Republic, and lay bare the anxious, cruel psychology of socialism as it once existed” (Scott). Just like Portugal, German Democratic Republic emphasized “the dictatorial character of the SED [the Socialist Unity Party] regime” (Epstein, 638). This totalitarianism theory also applied to East Germany, the setting of The Lives of Others. They used a “terroristic secret police, a monopoly on information and weapons, and a centrally planned economy” (Epstein, 638). Since both texts contain the similar political regime, they have the same response to the totalitarianism government. Both protagonists eventually fight against the oppressive system in order to recover the value of individuals.

 Although each protagonist lives under the identical regime, they have different occupations that demonstrate a contrast in their ability to confront the system. However, both have a job whose power is feared and therefore suppressed by the higher authorities. Pereira, a protagonist of Pereira Declares, is an old journalist who is responsible for “culture page” of the newspaper. As a journalist, he has freedom and right to choose his own topic for the newspaper. However, the Portuguese government forbad publishing any articles that are related to politics because of the fear of opposing forces. Thus, we can interpret that Pereira’s occupation is very submissive to its system, yet he has a potential to give rise to the butterfly effect by publicizing corruptions in the government. 

On the other hand, Wiesler, a protagonist of The Lives of Others, is one of the officers of state security service of the German Democratic Republic. He addresses his job with “the proud discipline of a professional and the zeal of a true believer” (Scott). He is capable of forcing other people to be punished under the system. In contrast to Pereira, Wiesler has more authoritative powers and has some capacity of manipulating the system to control others. However, it is his duty to obey the rules that the government and higher authorities have established. From this, we can realize that, under the same political regime, Pereira’s occupation as a journalist is oppressed by the system, whereas Wiesler’s job as a state officer oppresses others using the system. 

Since the characters have totally contrasting occupations, they act differently to fight against totalitarianism. At the beginning of Pereira Declares, Pereira always falls behind about the news that is going on around him. As Murdoch describes, “He lives in that world but he is not of that world.” He is not completely ignorant of the country, but he is more concerned with what to publish for his next article. However, after he develops a close relationship with his clinic doctor, he begins to question his isolated and apolitical life and opens his eyes to his ability to do something against totalitarianism. When the secret police officers beat his close friend to death in Pereira’s house, he immediately decides to take a revolutionary action and publishes a crime report about the murder by the police and condemning the regime in his newspaper page.

On the other hand, Wiesler is a firm believer of the totalitarian system. He is one of the authorities who is beyond the oppression. However, as he continues to spy over a famous playwright with opposing views of the system, Wiesler realizes that the higher authorities are not so superior after all. In fact, they are abusing their powers to fulfill their own needs and benefits. For this reason, Wiesler is disillusioned with the German Democratic Republic and the Stasi, and becomes to sympathize the playwright and chooses to stand on the “right” side. Therefore, he helps the playwright hide the evidence of any rebellious works from the police. 

Despite their different actions, it is obvious that they both are responsible for forming the opposing force. However, Pereira chooses to flee to another country with a counterfeit passport, whereas Wiesler does not run away and accepts his punishment by losing his careers. This difference implies that Pereira is still afraid of being penalized by the system and is still eager for a better life. Wiesler, in contrast, is more passionate and heroic in overthrowing the corrupt system. For Wiesler, saving his own country is more important than his own life. Yet, it is true that they both “faced with such corruption and cynicism at the highest reaches of the party” (Scott), and they chose to fight against them to alter the entire political regime, just like the butterfly effect.

By examining these similarities and differences between the two texts, we can discover that one does not have to be special in order to take actions against something. It is a matter of how loyal and desperate we are in changing a complex system. Regardless of what careers we have, there are always keys to unlock the oppression. In other words, doing the best of our ability to rebel is the most valuable factor, not what particular actions one takes. A big movement always starts from a small action of individuals, such as Pereira and Wiesler. It is usually easy to foresee what kind of consequences that one small action would bring to the world until it actually happens. However, we should now know that it surely has the power to alter the course of anything, and that it only takes one courageous step to change the world. 

 I figured my rough draft contained many mistakes such as choppy and wordy sentences and not fully-developed paragraphs. The peer review by Emma Frost was very helpful in revising my paper into stronger paper. In particular, she pointed out unclear and confusing paragraphs and unnecessary sentences. Before I start to revise my rough draft, I read closely and found out that my major issue was that there were many unclear sentences. So I paid close attention in developing each paragraph by supporting it with more sources, and rewriting any sentences that are confusing to make them clear. In addition, I worked on overall organization of paper so that my ideas flow more naturally.  
