Written by Maddie

In the 1960s, a man by the name of Stanley Milgram had a question in mind: How far would somebody go if given an order by an authority figure? The infamous experiment that’d go on to be known as the “Obedience Experiment” was conducted as a result, testing to see how far a person could be ordered to go. Participants were brought in as teachers, supposedly going to teach another participant (an actor in reality) with a word list – shocking them each time they got a word pairing wrong. Each shock, participants were told, would need to be increased intensity, and participants who hesitated or refused would be met with up to four verbal prods. While this was going on, the actor, pretending to be shocked, would exhibit signs of distress and pain.

In the end, 65% of participants continued to administer shocks as ordered, even when it was clear the shocks were doing great harm. There are plenty of things to take away from this experiment, and variants on it have been run. Some continue questioning the ethical implications of it and how it was run, and some question the very results of it. Either way, when it comes to psychology, the “Obedience Experiment” is typically one of the most well-known studies, even if it’s remembered under a different name.

So, what would you do if I told you there was a music video project known as MILGRAM which clearly took inspiration from this real-life experiment?

MILGRAM is managed by Japanese company OTORIO – a music company run by Vocaloid producer and cover singer DECO*27, and with Yamanaka Takuya as co-producer and primary author of MILGRAM’s ever-evolving storyline. The story follows an amnesiac 15-year-old dubbed “Es” waking up in an odd prison seemingly run by the mysterious Jackalope called… Jackalope. Es is dubbed the “Warden” of the alien prison known as MILGRAM, operating outside the number boundaries of the law. They’re given the task of judging 10 prisoners, all of whom have been deemed “murderers” by MILGRAM itself (with MILGRAM assigning this title being very important – remember this fact.) The verdict of forgiven or not forgiven – somewhat confusingly translated as innocent or guilty – must be passed down, either validating or invalidating the prisoners’ actions over three different trials.

The story of MILGRAM is primarily told through a series of music videos and voice dramas, although there is additional side content such as comics, prisoner Q&A sessions, and novels. I’m mostly going to focus on the voice dramas and music videos when talking about the project, which are the most accessible due to a combination of official and fan translations on social media and YouTube. If any of MILGRAM’s story interests you, however, don’t be afraid to dig up some of this side content – it’s still really entertaining.

MILGRAM isn’t just an intriguing story, after all – it’s an interactive project. The verdicts delivered each trial are determined by popular opinion – meaning that, through voting online, the audience is able to influence Es and the very reasoning behind each verdict. Each day, votes are reset, allowing you to cast a new one to try and fight for your side. The current state of voting can be viewed through the Judge tab on the MILGRAM website. Each voting period lasts 3 months after the prisoner’s music video is released, leaving plenty of time for tides to unexpectedly shift. After this voting period ends, and after an appropriate period of waiting passes, the MILGRAM YouTube channel will release a video about what verdicts each prisoner received, and how these verdicts have affected the prisoners’ mentalities, relationships, and the atmosphere within MILGRAM.

It was revealed at the end of trial one that voting a prisoner as forgiven – or innocent – would validate a prisoner’s current worldview, while voting not forgiven – or guilty – would reject the prisoner’s worldview instead. This would lead to the rejected prisoner being tormented mentally, and in the first trial was accompanied by tighter restraints. There’s been hints the punishment could potentially escalate as of trial two, but we don’t know this for sure. What actually is worth more attention is the fact that both rejecting and affirming a prisoner’s worldview can lead to drastic change within the prisoner – for better or worse.

Regardless of verdict, there’s implications that prisoners can actually hear the comments the audience made about them and their crime. The most common interpretations of why they acted the way they did or audience reactions to the character are commonly heard and may even be addressed in music videos if a prisoner was particularly affected by what they heard.  Interestingly, this has also translated to Es seemingly subconsciously aware of the audience’s presence and influence. They sometimes indicate they know they don’t fully decide the vote or refer to themselves through “we”, although whenever any prisoner points this out, Es is quick to begin breaking down, seemingly unable to consciously handle the idea of the audience. What this all actually means is unknown, but it’s yet another fascinating aspect of MILGRAM’s interactive on display.

While the story is engaging, however, it pales in comparison to the voting system MILGRAM uses. After all, a competitive system that allows people to campaign for one verdict over the other has a tendency to spark thrilling debates, each side fervently arguing for their own opinion to triumph and sway the undecided masses. Not every trial is guaranteed to end how you want – Amane’s first trial is personal proof of that for me – and some fans will take things way too far (to the point of there being voting scandals or general toxic behavior) but connecting with others and hearing their perspective is one of the best experiences one can have in MILGRAM.

MILGRAM doesn’t only encourage you to vote based on your beliefs, after all – it encourages you to vote for whatever reason you see fit. For example, if you just find a prisoner attractive, that’s considered a valid reason to vote them forgiven. Or, to name another example, if you want to vote a character unforgiven and they’re already grievously injured, is it worth potentially risking their life? Should people vote exclusively based on the nature of the crime the prisoner committed, or should motive matter more? What about their behavior in MILGRAM, should that factor into their sentencing? It’s a complicated series of questions with no true correct answer that makes up the core of MILGRAM.

MILGRAM itself is also ripe for interpretation, which helps maintain the fanbase it has. After all, each crime is initially presented in a vague light, with no motive or method confirmed. The second trial started to paint clearer pictures of things – with some prisoners outright confirming what crime they committed – but you never quite get the full details of what happened and why, having to wait to see how things play out or for the prisoner’s direct commentary.  Further complicating attempts to analyze prisoners and their crimes is that the music videos which reveal details seem to reflect the prisoner’s mental states, although imagery and symbolism to inform you how exactly the prisoner sees the world – if you can interpret it the same way that prisoner does.

It might be confusing why a prisoner’s reflection of the world complicates understanding them, so let me explain: MILGRAM itself can become a center of focus in the videos instead of the prisoners’ crimes. Multiple second trial songs have had prisoners actively call out both Es and MILGRAM voters, whether it be because of how they voted or why they voted. The way in which a crime is presented may also shift depending on how accepted the prisoner feels in MILGRAM, rapidly changing public opinion as the prisoner’s world view has clearly been impacted by the voters. In this way, YOU have a clear impact on MILGRAM which makes discovering the truth much more difficult and much more fun.

And none of this is even getting into the pressing question of what exactly a not forgiven on trial three might mean – especially since MILGRAM has proven itself not to be a fully ethical system – and if it’s even worth risking a not forgiven verdict if it may result in a prisoner’s death, regardless of their crime.

Of course, I’ve admittedly also been dancing around a rather important fact about MILGRAM, so I do hope you’ll find it in yourself to forgive me for that. The thing is, each of the prisoner’s crimes is meant to relate to a different “issue” in society, whether the issue be directly related to the cause of death or more accurately linked to a motive. With topics ranging from vigilante justice, abortion, bullying, cyberbullying, cults, and toxic relationships, MILGRAM clearly wants people to talk and delve into the specifics of each issue. Notice how I put murders in quotation marks earlier, and tend to refer to the prisoner’s actions as “crimes” instead of “murders?” MILGRAM has a very liberal definition of what counts as a murder, counting things such as abortion or driving somebody to suicide, regardless of your intent. This does contribute to the MILGRAM prisoner seeming shady, but also naturally invites a lot of discussion into what should actually be judged under this lens of “murder” – another source of debate amongst fans that keeps the series fresh.

Now, I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know if MILGRAM handles each topic well. I don’t think I’m informed enough to properly give a rundown on what MILGRAM fails at and what it succeeds at, but there are plenty of great, informative posts out there that do a better job at explaining these matters than I ever will, and I also encourage you to check them out. MILGRAM has made the decisions to tackle subjects such as DID, after all, and from what I can tell it lands somewhere in the middle of “A Research Effort was Made” and “Murderous Alter Trope” scale, but I’d advise actually looking at the opinions of people with DID on the internet instead of consulting somebody like me. Still, even with the potential for problematic depictions of material in mind, I think there’s merit to discussing the societal issues that Milgram covers and what they mean. Nothing is truly black-and-white, after all, so let’s review a few examples.

In theory, vigilante justice is great, but what about when the person executing it is using it as an excuse to act violently? What if she places little value in herself outside of acting on this twisted justice, to the point she takes your word as gospel and starts attacking any prisoner who happens to get a guilty verdict until they’ve sustained severe damage? Does giving her a guilty verdict just enforce her worldview that forgiveness for criminals is unnecessary and potentially add Es to her hitlist, or are you stopping a greater threat who you know will harm others if things play out a certain way?

It’s easy to support a bullying victim finally getting fed up and killing her bully and see it as a forgivable crime, but what happens when it comes to light that she used to be a bully herself? What happens when the person she killed is also one of her former victims, who turned the tide on her? In this case, the prisoner never lied about having been bullied – she’s just now been proven to be on both sides of the fence, so to speak. Is she still worthy of the forgiveness she was granted before?

What do you do when you encounter somebody so initially full of self-loathing and doubt, unsure if he was right in his crime? The natural instinct, as it turns out, is to forgive him. However, that forgiven verdict he was given acted as a form of guidance, seemingly convincing him the murder committed was entirely acceptable. How do you proceed from there, knowing you have helped him to move past remorse and potentially encouraged unstable behavior? Should your verdict change, or will that make things worse?

There’s something absolutely fascinating about debating complicated scenarios like these, especially with the biggest question of all lurking in the background: Should we be so hasty in our judgements when we know we fail to grasp the whole picture?

MILGRAM is more than just a story about a twisted prison complex and the prisoners trapped there. It’s a story that shows us our own reflections. What exactly do we consider forgivable, and what stops something that originally considered forgivable from being forgivable in the end? How do we handle the consequences of our judgments, especially when they indirectly lead to others being harmed? How easy it is it to place yourself in the shoes of another and be empathetic towards them? Is there any real good to be found in a system like this, or will our continued insistence in judging these prisoners through Es ultimately just harm everybody involved?

MILGRAM certainly isn’t perfect, but it’s a fun project with a rich story and a lot of heart behind it. Personally, I’d recommend checking it out yourself – so long as none of the material covered is too much for you. It’s a lot of fun, and now’s the perfect time to join in, with the second trial coming to an end!  We don’t know when we the third – and final – trial will begin, but all we know is that chaos is probably inevitable, and I know I’m excited to see what this is all building up to!