Foucault, 1984, and Fahrenheit 451

The Fear of Foucault



A world in which someone is always watching you. It’s a bit of a creepy idea on the surface, when we think of ourselves being constantly watched. We feel as though we are being analyzed, and controlled. It’s no wonder that much of our literature focuses on the idea of the people or the government spying on the population. Many comparisons are made between Panopticism and Orwell’s 1984, but I believe that these are erroneous comparisons. This misconception is what gives Panopticism that “creepy” edge. There is a fundamental difference between Michel Foucault’s Panopticism and George Orwell’s novel 1984, which is often missed and causes people to fear that that Panopticism will result in that world, when actually the ideas of Panopticism is far more likely to result in Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451.

In Orwell’s 1984, the people do watch each other. Like in Foucault’s imaginary prison, the common people all watch each other and are able to report on each other. They are also able to see how things are run. Everyone is in control:
“Furthermore, the arrangement of this machine is such that its enclosed nature does not preclude a permanent presence from the outside: we have seen that anyone may come and exercise in the central tower the functions of surveillance, and that, this being the case, he can gain a clear idea of the way in which the surveillance is practised” (Foucault).



Yet there is not the true transparency which I believe was present in Foucault’s world. No one is watching the watchers in 1984. No one knows what is going on, no one knows what the Inner Party is doing. In Foucault’s world, everyone is watching everyone. In Foucault’s vision “the exercise of power may be supervised by society as a whole”. We all see how the schools are taught how the prisons are run. In contrast, no one knows what happens in 1984’s Ministry of Love except for the people in it! The transparency of society is a mere illusion, a front to keep the Outer Party watching each other and nothing else so that those who are in control may remain in control. This is a completely contradiction of Foucault’s ideas, and thus following his principles would be unlikely to result in the world of Orwell’s 1984. Mandatory openness does not result in that type of domination.

I think it is far more likely that Panopticism would result in the world which is presented in Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. Panopticism is dependant upon citizens having control. It is they who watch each other, who are the keepings. It is this control which resented in Fahrenheit 451. It is outright stated that people being oversensitive and overreacting to everything is what led to books being banned. People watched each other, they watched too much, and they saw everything as being unsafe. They did it to themselves, because they were the ones watching and they were the ones in power. There is transparency in the world which Bradbury wrote. Everyone knew what happened to people who had banned books – they books and the houses were burned, and everyone knew when and how and why it happened. In Panopticism everyone would know how the prisons were run, how the guilty were punished, and this is exactly what occurs in Fahrenheit 451. Of course, Bradbury’s novel presents us with a world in which Foucault’s ideas had been distorted. Eventually, instead of watching each other, they grew complacent. They stopped watching anything. Until their own city was bombed in a war of which they knew little.

Although Panopticism seems creepy and intrusive on the surface, in reality there is o need to fear the oppression and all-seeing eyes of Big Brother. Although someone may be watching us at any time, we would have the ability to watch our watchers. We have the ability to see what is going on. The world would not devolve into the world of 1984. This means that we are the ones that we must watch out for, however. We must be careful to not relinquish control over our own lives, and become ignorant to our emotions, our lives, and our fellow man. It was not the watchfulness of Panopticism that destroyed the world of Fahrenheit 451, but oversensitivity combined with lack of caring. So long as we continue to care, we can watch without fear.




Works Cited
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995. Print.
Foucault, Michel. From Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. NY: Vintage Books, 1995. Translated from the French by Alan Sheridan, 1977. pp.195-228. Web.
Orwell, George. 1984. New York: New American Library, 1961. Print.