Panopticism In Citizen Four

Johnson asserts that surveillances that are further promoted by increased use of technology for gathering data undermine the citizen’s ability and potential for democratic citizenships. As such, living in a panopticon implies that persons have limited space of independently developing themselves.

George Orwell’s novel 1984 reflects on the society of dystopian city Airstrip 1 where main character Winston Smith lives. Along with the many other citizens, Winston is controlled by the Inner Party by constantly being monitored via telescreens that keep sight of everybody and their actions. Besides using telescreens the government also easily arrests people in any case of “thoughtcrime” which consists of any thoughts that regard disobedience towards the government. Thoughtcrime and telescreens are two of the several factors that reflect the extreme surveillance in 1984. Orwell uses surveillance as the central theme of the novel to spread his idea that the usage of more extreme surveillance could eventually lead to a totalitarian society. On a less extreme scale, today’s society also has a significant amount of surveillance but many question whether or not more surveillance is necessary. With the many current text sources, it is certain that we need less surveillance in order to keep a stable society that does not take away the individualism of people.

From a towering architectural manifestation stationed in Saint Petersburg, a television surveillance system labeled “Big Brother,” and the everyday global positioning system located in handheld devices, the Panopticon in all forms has been an attempt at total surveillance. In order to understand the literal and metaphorical panopticons as concepts of total surveillance, we must first define their most prominent features and components, which include geography, cost and benefit. This can be done by examining the generality of the Panopticon’s nature, the concept behind the making, how people can better understand concepts, and both the literal and metaphorical forms of the panopticon.

George Orwell's 1984 is a book that is purely based on power and propaganda. The party manages to accomplish this power and propaganda by using surveillance. Party members in Oceania are constantly under surveillance, whether it is of their private or public life. There are numerous surveillance techniques which are used by the party to maintain and even gain more power. This leads to the concept of a panopticon, originally thought up by Jeremy Bentham. Thus this essay will include the concepts of the panopticon with relation to the novel and consider how these extensive surveillance techniques eliminate party member’s private space and how it has the ability to constrict the thoughts of party members.

Surveillance is not a new thing. In fact, espionage, tracking, and sleuthing were part of society ever since 5000 B.C. But in the rise of the modern era, the idea of surveillance in the public eye serves as a controversial topic of discussion. People everywhere complain about the existence of security cameras, government tracking, and the right to privacy. Such problems, however, are not due to the sudden discovery of surveillance, but the modern abuse of it. Seeing the disastrous effects of over surveillance from George Orwell’s 1984, the public rightfully fears societal deterioration through modern surveillance abuse portrayed in Matthew Hutson’s “Even Bugs Will Be Bugged” and the effects of such in Jennifer Golbeck’s “All Eyes On You”. The abuse of surveillance induces the fear of discovery through the invasion of privacy, and ensures the omnipresence of one’s past that haunt future endeavors, to ultimately obstruct human development and the progress of society overall.

Foucault once stated, “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance; under the surface of images, one invests” (301). By this, he means that our society is full of constant supervision that is not easily seen nor displayed. In his essay, Panopticism, Foucault goes into detail about the different disciplinary societies and how surveillance has become a big part of our lives today. He explains how the disciplinary mechanisms have dramatically changed in comparison to the middle ages. Foucault analyzes in particular the Panopticon, which was a blueprint of a disciplinary institution. The idea of this institution was for inmates to be seen but not to see. As Foucault put it, “he is the object of information, never a subject in

In his essay “Panopticism,” Michel Foucault introduces the Panopticon structure as proof of modern society tending toward efficient disciplinary mechanisms. Starting with his example of the strict, intensely organized measures that are taken in a typical 17th-century plague-stricken town, Foucault describes how the town employed constant surveillance techniques, centralized a hierarchy of authorities to survey households, partitioned individual structures to impose certain behavior, and record current information about each individual.

Many Americans do not realize that at any time of the day the government could be observing their “private” lives. On the other hand, some individuals have predicted the government would develop a form of constant surveillance, like George Orwell who forecasted a futuristic government, which used technology as a relentless eye on the members of the society in the novel 1984. 1984 was correct, to an extent, in predicting that the government would increase their usage of technology to constantly observe their people, whether in public or their private homes.

According to Foucault, power does not belong to the individual, but to the system, to the institution. In his essay on Discipline and Punish, Foucault presents his idea of the panopticon mechanism, a mechanism in which visibility is a trap. With little importance over the actual individual in the role of the observer or of the observed, the object of the system is total power over the observed. Due to the unique shape of the panopticon, there are no corners and thus no blind spots for the observed to hide in. The private space is replaced by the public one. Furthermore, as final evidence of total control, the observed never knows for sure if they are being watched or not, as they can’t see the observer (Foucault 200-205). Foucault further argues that this system is followed by any government institution, placing the society under permanent observation. Individuals might try to evade the system, but achieving liberation and freedom is not something that anyone could do. Dostoevsky’s famous novel, Crime and

The author of the essay “Panopticism”, Michel Foucault gives his opinion on power and discipline in Panopticism. He describes Jeremy Bentham’s “Panopticon”, a tower in the centre of a room which has vision to every cell, generalized for prisoners. In simple words, it functioned in maintaining discipline throughout the jail. It’s most distinctive feature was that; prisoners could be seen without ever seeing. Prisoners would never really know when they are watched and when not. They are always under the impression that someone is keeping an eye on them continuously and if anything goes wrong, or they make mistake, they would be punished severely. Since, a prisoner would never know when he/she is watched, they have to be at their best. In a

     The Panopticon, a prison described by Foucault, “is a machine for dissociating the see/being seen dyad: in the peripheric ring, one is totally seen, without ever seeing” (321, Foucault). This literally means that in the formation of the panopticon those who are being seen can not see one another and the one who sees everything can never be seen. That is the most important tool of the panopticon. Foucault makes this assumption about today’s society by saying that we are always being watched whether we know it or not. One always keeps an eye over their shoulder as a

Schools, factories, hospitals and prisons today resemble each other, they are fit into the format of a panopticon structure, examining pupils, workers, patients and prisoners at any given time. When we enter a building, make a phone call, purchase with a credit card, or visit a website, we are being watched, if not recorded, analyzed. The increasing use of surveillance by commercial and government entities caused the technology to become omnipresent in our lives. With the name of

The definition of a dystopian society is “an imaginary society that is as dehumanizing and as unpleasant as possible.” What makes them this way is that the vast majority of people living in them have zero control or power over themselves, even if they think they do. The select people in the society (i.e. the government, the rich) are the one who pull the strings behind the scenes for the majority that are ‘below’ them. The ones with the power are in the minority and are vastly outnumbered by those without power, yet the systems are so efficient at control those without power do not have the will to rebel. Control is enforced through surveillance and monitoring of the actions of the citizens. There is also the fear of discipline if you are caught acting out of line. In each society there is an atmosphere of bleak helplessness and a lack of individuality. A dystopian society fits the definition of Foucault’s Panopticism, the society has an efficient, systematic control in which power is exerted by the few to control the many, although the system is not always a negative.

The Panopticon is a building which has an annual part in the periphery and a tower in the centre. Next to omitting little details its most important feature is the ability to see into every cells without being visible. “The panoptic mechanism arranges spatial unities that make it possible to see constantly and to recognize immediately.” (Calhoun et al., 2007: 209) The consciousness of being watched make people put on their best behaviour, their best way of acting thus the inmates do not commit any further crimes as it usually occurs that could happen without being watched.

Sandra Bartky begins her piece by explaining Michel Foucault’s ideas about modern power dynamics. Unlike in the past, power in modern society focuses not only on controlling the products of the body but, rather, on governing all its activities. In order for this power to continue, people are disciplined into becoming “docile bodies” which are subjected and practiced (Bartky, 63). This discipline is imposed through constant surveillance in a manner similar to the Panopticon. Inmates in said prison are always visible to a guard in the central tower, so they mentally coerced into monitoring their own behavior. In the same way, individuals become their own jailers and subject themselves to the society’s whim due to being in a “state of conscious and permanent visibility” to its all-seeing eye (65). Bartky, however, breaks from Foucault’s theory by claiming that there is a clear difference in the disciplines imposed on men and women that are ignored in the latter’s writings.