Clarification regarding "Buttle" spelling mistake/connected consequences

Oh no, I'm not a bureaucrat at all, far from it really. It's just one of those niggling film issues that I would like to understand - 'Primer' had me drawing diagrams after I saw it for the first time to try and get my head around the time travelling system. I'm just curious if it is a goof of the film or simply my own clunky perception/interpretation? I tend to think I'm off and there is an easy explanation for understanding the implications of the clerical error given that I haven't read anything that also takes point with the issue.

Yessssss, thank you fellow questioner!!!

It has been some time since I saw the film in question, and I reread my original post and thought I wasn't as clear as I could have been.

Just some random thoughts that have not been entirely thought through on this drunken Friday night:

The whole Buttle/Tuttle thing should have been the other way around, right?

The film direction department should have no need of the name change gimmick if Tuttle had already somehow appropriated Buttle's identity (his address and occupation). Tuttle has, in all his Machiavellian glee, somehow requisitioned Buttle's true address and occupation and effectively, on paper, become the latter. This would so work for Brazil's identity theft setup.

However, When you get Tuttle's description getting switched for Buttle's in the early typewriter scenes then you have a false logical step. Who gives a *beep* about Buttle?! It is Tuttle that the Security Department is interested in anyway. Why would a mechanical typewriter error leading to a spelling of Tuttle as Buttle on a form lead to his arrest and death when they are after Tuttle anyway? Security would kill anyone already at the address under the presumption that the residing tenant was indeed Tuttle as per the form they ostensibly received!!!

The whole Buttle name change is redundant and serves no purpose in explaining why Buttle himself fell foul of the Security Department given the additional explanatory architecture inferred from the film.

Oh my God!!!

I'm ranting, sorry.

Hmmm... However, if that was the case why does the scene show multiple copies of the Tuttle detention form listing Buttle's personal details (job - shoe repairer, address - 12 North Tower, Shangrila Towers)? Then a single copy of the form is misprinted with the Buttle surname due to the bug, but subsequent copies revert to the original printing of Tuttle? In other words, the associated scene shows the typewriter already filling out detention forms with the Tuttle surname but also with Buttle's personal details before the bug (though the viewer is oblivious to the significance of the form's personal details until the later scene between Lowry and Kurtzman in the latter's office).

This made me think the potential implication was that Tuttle had somehow appropriated Buttle's identity or at least was somehow linked to his personal details. This makes tentative sense when in latter scenes we understand that Tuttle has been, and is, dodging the Ministry and continuing his clandestine operations under their radar.

Separately, it seems impossibly coincidental for the film to use the surname misspelling on the detention form as a device to set up the subsequent pursuit, arrest, and consequences pertaining to Archibald Buttle. That is to say it is very convenient that the misspelled single character "T" as "B" on the form also happened to be the first character of an individual's surname - Buttle - that Tuttle has somehow independently been linked to through the Ministry' records. If you accept the ostensible linkage between Tuttle's name and Buttle's personal details depicted in the typewriter scene, then the actual surname misspelling aspect seems entirely extraneous. Both the Department of Work and Ministry Security forces conduct business that lead them to Tuttle's address (which is of course Buttle's address). This is logically coherent as the forms incorrectly list Tuttle's address as Buttle's, and so both departments assume that the resident inside is actually Tuttle. However, given the logic used in the scene and its ultimate ramifications, Buttle's arrest would still play out regardless of any kind of surname alteration on the same form.

I offer that the film gives the impression that Buttle was wrongly arrested due to the surname misspelling glitch in the typewriter scene, but that this is really either a logical misstep, a clumsily cut scene, or a half-baked red herring of sorts. Instead, it appears to me as though Buttle was actually wrongly arrested due to his personal details being somehow linked to Tuttle's surname as also depicted in the same scene. I still don't really have a definitive understanding of the typewriter scene and feel it offers conflicting interpretation in its connection to the fate of Buttle. Specifically, the significance, if any, of the misspelling of Tuttle as Buttle on one of the original forms, and the presence of Buttle's personal details on the forms that are intended for Tuttle.

OK, so after carefully re-watching the film yesterday, I made some fundamental errors in attempting to understand this entire issue. I agree with "alex_nox2"'s concept of the personnel code numbers being linked to individuals. Crucially, this is the primary piece of information that the Ministry utilized to wrongfully arrest Buttle.

Information Retrieval receives the detention form containing the misspelled Buttle surname intended for Tuttle. Tuttle's personnel code number on the misspelled form remains unchanged and Information Retrieval incorrectly assumes Buttle matches with the personnel code number. Evidently, no cross-referencing of the personnel code number with the individual's name to ensure accuracy ever occurs. Ultimately, it is purely coincidence - however unlikely - that the misspelled form listed Buttle instead of Tuttle. One can see the potential plot obstacles if the spelling change of Tuttle to Buttle was altered to anything else; one might imagine that if the surname was misspelled as anything else, the Buttle family would immediately challenge the arrest on the grounds of personnel misidentification by Information Retrieval. I could envisage Buttle screaming at the black-clad intruders who have just stormed his residence: “But I am Archibald BUTTLE, not this other person you’re looking for. Look at my identification card”. Such a possibility would potentially have changed Buttle's fate entirely for the better but also undermined the film’s narrative premise of blundering bureaucracy.

So, Information Retrieval arrives at Buttle's address and arrests him. In the same scene, we also hear the Department of Work, who are operating on Buttle's damaged ceiling, state that they believe they are repairing Tuttle's ceiling. The implication is that there is conflict regarding the personnel identities linked to the address, likely due to the lack of cross-referencing personnel code numbers with personnel details, and further suggests that Information Retrieval has indeed received the misspelled detention form.

Later at the Department of Records, Kurtzman attempts to record Buttle's arrest information on his computer from another form, presumably generated from Information Retrieval’s own erroneous record, and encounters an error after he types Buttle's name followed by the associated personnel code number that obviously belongs to Tuttle. Kurtzman calls in Lowry to address the error. Lowry observes the mismatch between Buttle and the personnel code number of Tuttle, and he states that a charge of 36 pounds 1 pence was incorrectly debited against Buttle's account in lieu of Tuttle's. This charge appears to have occurred upon/during Buttle's arrest.

I'm unclear about what Lowry states next. He notes that “Expediting” has put in for “electrical procedures” in respect to Buttle, but that “Security” has invoiced “Admin” for Tuttle. Maybe this is just further exposition to explain the nature of the personnel code mismatch. Do the charges for “electrical procedures” pertain to the Department of Work's earlier repairs to Buttle's ceiling or a separate charge? Is the “Security”-issued invoice the same charge, or does it pertain to the 36 pounds 1 pence charge that Lowry initially mentions or something entirely separate? I'm particularly unclear as to the first question because, as previously mentioned, one Department of Work employee states that he believes he is working on Tuttle's ceiling - not Buttle's... I don’t feel I’m able to draw a definitive conclusion based on the information Lowry mentions so it bugs me.

Finally, a refund cheque of 36 pounds 1 pence made out to Buttle arrives at the Department of Records, and Kurtzman again calls in Lowry to assist. The cheque can't be credited to Buttle as he has been entirely removed from the Ministry of Information's records. Lowry deduces he has been killed. I assume that upon Buttle's arrest he was charged the 36 pounds 1 pence and then, through some cross-referencing system independent of Information Retrieval, the mismatch between Buttle's personnel details and the personnel code number of Tuttle was recognized and the incorrectly issued charge refunded. I only hypothesise the involvement of an independent department/alternative system as whilst there is an obvious recognition of the erroneous charge - unlikely behaviour given what we’ve previously witnessed from Information Retrieval - there is also an apparent ignorance of Buttle’s wrongful arrest in the first place - the vagaries of bureaucracy at the heart of Brazil, ha!

I think that is as clear as I understand it. Goes to show how simply re-watching the film in question can clear up a swathe of subjective misinterpretations, ha! My only other gnawing, original question, that I don't believe is ever explicitly addressed, is why in the typewriter scene do the Ministry records list Buttle's personnel details as Tuttle's in the first place?