Cities of Surveillance: A Foucauldian Reading of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Arslanoğlu’s Silence Towers 2084

Based on Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon architectural system, Michel Foucault employs Bentham's model as a metaphor to illuminate the mechanisms of discipline and power. In Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Foucault discusses the Panopticon, a prison model designed by Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The Panopticon is a circular building with a high watchtower at its centre. In this model, the inability of the inmates to see the observer is critical since it gives them a sense of constant surveillance, which causes them to regulate themselves. Discipline is thus sustained through visibility of the inmates and the invisibility of the supervisor. Individuals are categorized, which makes controlling them simpler. With this design, the ultimate aim is to create order and obedience. Similar designs can be encountered on a large scale in dystopian cities. Cities embody the mindsets of the systems to which they belong. This analysis examines the cities that are portrayed in Kaan Arslanoğlu’s novel Silence Towers 2084, a novel by the Turkish author and the city in the renowned Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell from a Foucauldian stance. Both cities demonstrate how control and discipline are ordained through the visibility of citizens, revealing the urban exercise of power. The reason for selecting these two novels is their portrayal of how individuals are taken under control by various tools embedded in everyday life. While the city in Arslanoğlu’s 2084 showcases a more advanced society with technologies absent in Orwell’s 1984, it ultimately lacks crucial elements such as individualism, diversity, and autonomy. Orwell’s city presents a stark contrast. There are the megastructures of the ministries with wealthy neighbourhoods and areas in poverty. In those areas, the underprivileged live without meeting even their most basic needs as humans. In comparison, Arslanoğlu’s city has a more synthetic quality. Cities in both novels function like Bentham’s panopticon by incorporating mechanisms of surveillance, categorisation, discipline and self-regulation. In these cities, where visibility acts as a means of self-regulation and internalizing discipline without questioning, a disciplinary society, as Foucault suggests, emerges.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Kent Akademisi
Published
2025-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.1663863
Primary Topic
Urban Planning and Governance
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Cities of Surveillance: A Foucauldian Reading of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Arslanoğlu’s Silence Towers 2084

Alper TULGAR
Kent Akademisi
Urban Planning and Governance
article

Cities of Surveillance: A Foucauldian Reading of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and Arslanoğlu’s Silence Towers 2084

Alper TULGAR
article en

Abstract

Based on Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon architectural system, Michel Foucault employs Bentham's model as a metaphor to illuminate the mechanisms of discipline and power. In Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Foucault discusses the Panopticon, a prison model designed by Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The Panopticon is a circular building with a high watchtower at its centre. In this model, the inability of the inmates to see the observer is critical since it gives them a sense of constant surveillance, which causes them to regulate themselves. Discipline is thus sustained through visibility of the inmates and the invisibility of the supervisor. Individuals are categorized, which makes controlling them simpler. With this design, the ultimate aim is to create order and obedience. Similar designs can be encountered on a large scale in dystopian cities. Cities embody the mindsets of the systems to which they belong. This analysis examines the cities that are portrayed in Kaan Arslanoğlu’s novel Silence Towers 2084, a novel by the Turkish author and the city in the renowned Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell from a Foucauldian stance. Both cities demonstrate how control and discipline are ordained through the visibility of citizens, revealing the urban exercise of power. The reason for selecting these two novels is their portrayal of how individuals are taken under control by various tools embedded in everyday life. While the city in Arslanoğlu’s 2084 showcases a more advanced society with technologies absent in Orwell’s 1984, it ultimately lacks crucial elements such as individualism, diversity, and autonomy. Orwell’s city presents a stark contrast. There are the megastructures of the ministries with wealthy neighbourhoods and areas in poverty. In those areas, the underprivileged live without meeting even their most basic needs as humans. In comparison, Arslanoğlu’s city has a more synthetic quality. Cities in both novels function like Bentham’s panopticon by incorporating mechanisms of surveillance, categorisation, discipline and self-regulation. In these cities, where visibility acts as a means of self-regulation and internalizing discipline without questioning, a disciplinary society, as Foucault suggests, emerges.

Kent AkademisiVol. 18(6)
Atatürk University (TR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 55%
Urban Planning and Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.