The wretched of the panoptic city: an evaluation of the spatial power in JM Coetzee’s Foe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores Michel Foucault’s heterotopia and Fredric Jameson’s cognitive mapping in JM Coetzee’s Foe (1986). It also finds links between social colonialism and socio-spatial identities within the terrain of the cities of London and Bristol. The paper thoroughly examines the crucial role of cities in shaping the spatial identities of the main characters in the novel. The urban space of London and Bristol is the third space for Susan and Friday, where they strive to find their true selves. Susan Barton and Friday are embroiled in a world divided into center and periphery, where they are grappling with a serious identity crisis. This is all happening within a closely monitored system under Mr. Foe’s watchful eye. The cities bestow a sense of freedom on neither Susan nor Friday and under the supreme power of Mr. Foe, Susan’s endeavor to give voice to Friday ended in a debacle. The novel unequivocally illustrates the perpetuation of urban authority by deploying panopticism and heterotopic space, albeit at the cost of fragmenting identities within the city.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".