Nadia Tahreem
ENG 3880
English Studies in the Digital Age
Dr. Jennifer Travis
04/22/14
The Concept and Portrayal of Privacy in Literature
Literature consists of various genres, it would be inappropriate to classify a novel
under a single genre. Certain works of literature have genres inside genres that are already
present. As puzzling as it can perhaps sound, but the subject of privacy is a very important
component of literature and how the concept of privacy is portrayed in literature is
extremely crucial because as citizens of America, the basic right of privacy is granted.
However, it is evident that this freedom is limited, and perhaps it is this very limitation that
novels and films tend to circulate around when it comes to privacy. Novels and films like
The Circle, The Giver, Harry Potter and 1984 revolves around the subject of secrecy and not
surprisingly enough, the topic of privacy and anonymity is portrayed very resolutely and
though perhaps they do not directly deliver the message that privacy is not considered to
be something negative, they definitely can give the audience enough approvals that
elimination of privacy is not beneficial at all.
Privacy is Theft, Secrets are Lies, Sharing is Caring
The Circle is a 2013 novel by Dave Eggers that concerns the topic of privacy and
secrecy. Oddly enough, the main character in this novel is exposed to the philosophy and
ideas that hidden things are generally a bad thing and ought to be eliminated. The company
Mae Holland works for vouches for the idea that everyone should go transparent and
become visible. This novel is a work of fiction, so it does not necessarily suggest that
privacy is a crime in all shapes and forms. But the interesting thing is that the main
character Mae Holland is exposed to many traumatic thoughts and despairing moments as
she tries to go transparent and follow the philosophy of “sharing is caring”. (The Circle,
303) There are conflicts in the novel between those that believe The Circle is trying to
establish totalitarianism, and the end conclusion in the novel somehow suggests that
privacy is neutral, it need not always be something related to thievery or dishonesty. If an
individual was to read this novel, he/she would perhaps come to realize that hidden things
may be considered wrong, but if there is no motivation to hide something, then everything
should be okay. In one sequence of the novel Mae temporarily steals a kayak to visit an
island. She just visited the island, and did not feel the need to tell anyone about it. The only
thing that was wrong in this scenario was that Mae had no knowledge of whom the kayak
belonged to, but her intentions were not to steal the kayak permanently, a reader can
assume so from reading. In fact, the word ‘steal’ is not necessarily right, she just ‘borrowed’
the kayak:
“Then she had a thought. The water was just thirty yards away, and she knew
that she could easily drag it to shore. Would it be theft to borrow a kayak that
had already been borrowed? She wasn’t lifting it over the fence, after all; she
was only extending the borrowing that someone else had extended. She
would return it in an hour or two, and no one would know the difference.”
(The Circle, 264)
Mae intends to return the kayak that had already been used by someone else, and
yet her actions were perceived as an action of intentional thievery, according to her boss
and colleagues. Though majority of the characters in this novel appear to be advocating
against privacy, the novel also features a character that is against the policies of The Circle,
and tries to warn Mae that The Circle is trying to establish a totalitarian type of society. It is
revealed in the novel that Kalden is one of those who came up with the idea of The Circle
and tells Mae that even in the digital world there must be a maintenance of privacy. The
novel does not give a direct conclusion that privacy is important, but there are a lot of
conflicts of whether or not privacy is actually considered to be criminal activity. In this
context, the concept of privacy is arguable and definitely takes a stand that lack of privacy
in the world can be seen as a totalitarian establishment, something that can be harmful to
society. Mae gets influenced by the company so she also comes to believe that nothing
should be kept hidden in the world, but her parents and ex-boyfriend do not approve of
these ideologies and dislike Mae’s defense of The Circle.
(Illustration by Clifford Harper/Agraphia.co.uk) An example of a “See Change”
camera that allows people to go transparent in The Circle, and caught Mae Holland stealing
the kayak without anyone’s knowedge and she is confronted by her boss who tells her that
“secrets are lies.”
The plot is set up in such a way that the binary of private vs. public is conflicted with
each other, and both arguments are presented so as to give each one an equal
understanding of the pros and cons of privacy and publicity. Since both factors are given
without a direct notion of which one is right or better can make the reader vulnerable to
choosing for themselves, though it is granted that they can disagree if the novel did give a
direct opinion. The Circle gives both privacy and publicity importance, but in a very subtle
way, that it all becomes gradual to understand what is right here and what is clearly wrong.
(www.occupy.com) A cartoon depiction of what internet privacy appears to be in the
digital age that is represented in The Circle.
You’ve Got Nothing to Fear, if You’ve Got Nothing to Hide
A popular work of science fiction that encapsulates the act of privacy and more so
secrecy is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Much unlike The Circle, Deathly Hallows
portrays privacy in a more aggressive manner, and is not at all subtle. Deathly Hallows
comprises of multiple genres; mystery, fantasy, war, secrecy, thriller, and in certain cases
the subjects of psychology and philosophy as well as social sciences are adressed. Privacy
now is definitely not questionable, it is a must- do for majority of the characters, because
the novel introduces a form of dictatorship that the fictionalized Ministry of Magic ensues
amongst its citizens, and the main character is ‘wanted for questioning,’ since Harry Potter
is a person of secrets. In this setting, the consequences of privacy are severe indeed, and
just goes on to show at mutiple times the corruption of government surveillance. The lives
of many people are threatened simply because of the interference of the Ministry of Magic
of an individual’s daily lives. After the death of Albus Dumbledore, the entire Wizarding
World fell apart and the Ministry became infiltrated with the activities of Death Eaters, who
insist that these “changes” can help clean up the wizarding community, according to the
standard that they feel is right. If laws become so harsh, then privacy becomes compulsory,
for the sake of self defense and protection. Obviously in this setting, privacy is shown as
something wrong by the negative characters who enjoy dictatorship, but in terms of
righteousness, the lead character safeguards privacy as something equivalent to heroism.
(harrypotter.wikia.com) In this film adaptation of Deathly Hallows, Death Eaters arrest
Ministry employee Dirk Cresswell, who faked his family tree to hide his inferior parentage
from the Death Eaters as they believe in superiority of pure bloods. Privacy is definitely
theft and calls for severe persecution.
Deathly Hallows portrays privacy as an act of heroism against the tyranny of the
totalitarian policies of the Ministry of Magic, so it is evident that privacy calls for
persecution only by those that feel threatened by it. But generally speaking, privacy
definitely has its benefits in this particular text and film.
Thoughtcrime Tyranny
The most common themes or forms that are seriously against secrecy is dystopia.
Dystopian communities and societies are portrayed as the most severe and extreme cases
of totalitarianism, and in such cases standing up or revolting can be seemingly frightening.
Even more terrifying is the fact that artistic works of literature and media that portray
dystopian communities are set for the future, that can make the audience vulnerable into
thinking that the world of tomorrow can hold possible construction of communism or
totalitarinism. 1984 is a dystopian novel that is against individualism and independent
thinking, which is percieved as “thoughtcrime.’ In this particular setting, freedom of
thought is prohibited, let alone actions of privacy. Unlike The Circle and Deathly Hallows,
1984 is a hardcore establishment of a totalitarian regime under the tyranny of some
unkown Big Brother. Big Brother can be comparable to the “See Change” camera from The
- Their purpose is meant to capture secrets and expose privacy. Similar to Deathly
Hallows, the main protagonist is a part of this dystopian world but undercover is against
Big Brother. Winston Smith dreams about rebellion from the world he lives in, and as such
he is committing “thoughtcrime”. There is a telescreen situated in every setting of the
novel. This device contains hidden cameras and microphones that assist the thought police
into spying on everyone so as to uncover those individuals who may pose as a threat to Big
Brother’s rule. There is a telescreen present in Winston’s apartment and office. However, in
his apartment, it is revealed that he sits beside the telescreen, not in front of it, and this is
the only way Winston feels he can become invisible to Big Brother and maintain his privacy.
Privacy now has a privacy within itself, and perhaps gets even deeper to the point where
some of it may become invisible or relinquished.
1984 introduces a world that intends to destroy indivualism, and this world is
considered tyrannical, hence this literary work also vouches for the right to privacy. The
novel ultimately delivers the message that constant tyranny is the cause of privacy, which
is why the main protagonist keeps himself confined in his own thoughts rather than
“sharing,” since “sharing” calls for persecution that is likely to be a death sentence.
(http://teams.as.edu.au/groups/11advancedenglishbarnsley/weblog/bb377/1984__George_Orwell_.html)
A telescreen of Big Brother that is present in all parts of the novel. This device can
and is meant to expose privacy and indivual “thoughtcriminals.” However, it is not even
certain if such a leader even exists.
In this typical context, privacy is now a compulsion.The “see change” camera in The
Circle just wanted to be aware of all thoughts and actions, be it good or bad. But in Deathly
Hallows and 1984, there is no freedom for thought or actions, because nothing is the law if
it is right. Everything is now right because it is the law. So now it can be assumed that
literature now wishesv to safeguard privacy, and those that are against secrets are
portrayed as villains. Big Brother is considered the tyrant, and the Ministry of Magic is
considered a dictator of freedom.
Perfection of Sameness
The Giver is a novel that introduces a society as utopian, but very gradually becomes
more and more dystopian. Initially it is revealed that The Community follows a policy of
“sameness”, to help perfect their world. Little or no privacy is allowed in The Community,
and eccentric behaviors, personalities, and appearances are extremely avoided and
frowned upon, sometimes even outlawed.
Privacy in this novel is not accepted, but with somewhat of good intentions. The
main protagonist Jonas is given a job that ultimately helps him realize that The Community
may appear to be perfect, only because the people living in it have no knowledge of a world
that can be better than The Community. It is definitely arguable whether the establishment
of sameness can help eliminate things like descrimiinaion and racism of differences, but
generally in Utopian civilizations, embracing the variety is widely accepted by the majority,
and acceptance of innovation and authenticity is greatly appreciated. So a reader would
obviously be against of living in such a society where privacy is limited and differences are
subdued. As the reader gets a more firm understsnding of The Community Jonas lives in, it
is revealed that this society also has no color, knowledge, or even tolerance. It becomes
more and more unattractive.
(www.glogster.com) A depiction of the society Jonas lives in is presentewd as black and
white, or colorless, hence the contrast of the significantly red apple and green stem.
Like The Circle, Deathly Hallows, and 1984, The Giver also outlaws privacy in the
belief that privacy can come in the way of what the novels present at first, but eventually
the writers of all the four novels mentioned tend to lean towards privacy for the
betterment of all kinds of societies. Neither novels have same societies, but the backdrop is
similar.The subject of privacy in literature somehow tend to deliver a similar message that
privacy itself has various factors, and perhaps it truly depends on how one interprets
privacy and utilizes it makes the difference of how privacy should be percieved. All positive
character keep things priavte simply for the sake of doing good. It is arguable as to what is
actually “good”, because the novels also feature characters who have a whole different view
of what is considered “good”. It is within this conflict that literature plays a role into
helping us as readers and the audience at large into realizing what privacy is, why it is
practiced, and why it should be allowed.
Literature is the key to knowledge in many shapes and forms, and knowledge itself
is enlightenment. And just like all Utopian societies, everyone should have the right to
enlightenment, and privacy can be a part of the enlightenment that is extremely necessary
for any beneficial society.
Works Cited:
Links to Images
1) http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/oct/09/circle-dave-eggers-review
2) http://www.occupy.com/article/learn-safeguard-internet-privacy-youre-007
3) http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Dirk_Cresswell
4) http://www.techremedy.net/blog/2012/09/the-technology-of-big-brother/
5) http://www.glogster.com/soccerplayer20/the-giver/g-6mh383qinf4u8f5gc287ha0
