I didn't intend on posting anything else today, but I have chosen not to complete my homework for my class that starts in an hour so that I may do something better! (AKA: write!)
In my 19th Century Literature course (the one referenced above, actually), we have been discussing various literary theories. Most of them happen to be commonly known theories by people like Freud, Derrida, and Foucault that we apply to literature (which is a fascinating endeavor in itself). I am going to write about Foucault's panopticon and how Facebook settles into this theory perfectly, but first, I will explain what the theory is.
To fully understand the idea of a panopticon, you have to understand the systems put into place to deal with the plague and leprosy.
The plague consumed many lives, but so did the system that attempted to control the plague. Officials appointed specific doctors for citizens to see so that the citizens could be evaluated. To be put simply, if one was deemed healthy, he or she could return to life as normal, but if one was determined plagued, he or she was removed from society and killed. This was an extremely individualized system because each and every person was evaluated and then directed based on their diagnosis. It was very strictly managed with a goal of segmentation and expulsion of disorder and confusion.
The system for dealing with leprosy was set up in a very different way. Rather than individual evaluation, there were two strict categories: sick or well. If one was considered well, he or she was left in the "pure" society. On the other hand, if one was considered sick, he or she was sent to a leper colony. This binary structure was based entirely on exclusion and separation. The goal was to have two societies: the pure and the impure.
Finally, a panopticon is a combination of the leprosy and plague systems. A successful panopticon pulls individualism from the plague and the idea of a pure society from leprosy and combines them to create a system in which residents are always being monitored. The most fascinating part about the panopticon system in my opinion is the monitoring. The goal is to get everyone to self-monitor, so from an early age, children are taught to follow the rules, not because it's what they want to do, but because it is what they are supposed to do. A great example of this is school. From day one, kids are taught to ask to use the bathroom, follow in a single file line, speak when spoken to, and more generally, follow the rules. The main goal of all of these lessons (and others) is to teach children to self-monitor. In addition to self-monitoring, kids are always being watched by someone else, much like in a panopticon.
Schools teach self-monitoring and respect of societal laws, therefore creating useful and disciplined individuals. This is also the overall goal of a panopticon.
Beginning to see the connection?
Let me explain how Facebook fits in. As an individual, you are the one who decides what to put on your profile and what you want to say...you self-monitor. You think that you have control over yourself, your words, your actions. You take pride in this right. Individualism. What everyone forgets is that you don't really have control over anything. Your friends can post whatever they want on your wall, tag you in any pictures they see fit, and Facebook officials can go as far as deleting your account. So really, what freedoms do Facebook users possess?
In American society, we have a multitude of rules that we live by. I could never create an inclusive list of these rules, but one of the most predominant is appearance. It is important in our society to look the best you can at all times, but it is much more complex than that. The example that my professor used is college girls getting ready to go out on weekends. As they leave, they check themselves in the mirror and subconsciously (though sometimes quite consciously) answer the following: am I too conservative? too slutty? revealing enough to encourage attention, but not so much I get disrespected? These are all questions that society has instilled in our minds as important questions, but how pertinent to life are they really?
I will leave you with a quote from my professor that refers to the subject of societies rules on appearance. She is a humorous lady.
"I am now experiencing my own oppression...let me check myself."
