Heterotopias, he argues, occur in every culture in various manifestations. This point is one I find difficult to challenge when taking into account his broad definition of a heterotopia. Foucault breaks down the concept of the heterotopia into different classifications. He notes the evolution of the “crises” heterotopia into one that encompasses deviant behaviour is in keeping with the shift away from ‘primitive’ traditions in our society. The crises heterotopia is replaced by one that allows deviant or abnormal behaviour to take place; a comment on the often repressive nature of current societal norms. Rather than classifying the Internet as a whole as a heterotopia, I would argue that the Internet is a collection of heterotopias that serve a variety of very different purposes. For example, a website where users can stream or download pornography might be classified as a kind of crises heterotopia, as this behaviour is generally kept behind closed doors in our society.
With regards to the Fourth Principle, Foucault looks to a library as a heterotopia. A library or a museum is a storehouse of information/history that is constantly “topping its own summit” with new material. If we were to view the Internet as a single entity, and not as individual heterotopic sites this might be the best comparison. Internet users are capable of archiving and recording information, both new and old (for example: e-books). As the museum and library were heterotopias of the 19th and 20th Centuries, the Internet may be viewed as providing a similar function in the 21st Century.
Foucault uses the action of looking in a mirror to demonstrate the nature of the utopian space and the heterotopia that sometimes accompanies it. The image of oneself in the mirror is a utopia, removed from reality. The utopian state of the mirrored image fosters a heterotopia as well, however. The individual is removed from reality whilst simultaneously realizing reality, albeit from a different perspective. The dual function of the mirror – that being something that both removes one from reality as well as emphasizing a connection to reality is one of the defining traits of the heterotopia. This concept is also in line with Foucault’s thoughts on a heterotopia as an intersection of time, space, and realities.
In relation to the Internet and online identity, Foucault’s concept of the utopia and heterotopia is fascinating. Do we consider the multiple facets of our identities in the virtual world to have utopian qualities? I think that for most Internet users the image we project online is censored and monitored to at least some degree, making this virtual identity an “improved” version of reality. Perhaps I am interpreting this in too literal a sense, but could an individual’s online identity be capable of recreating Foucault’s mirror heterotopia scenario? Although infinitely more complex, as identity formation is not entirely under the control of the user, there are definite similarities between these situations. The online identity is virtual and un-real, while also serving to amplify our connections and experiences in the offline world. In this sense, does online identity through Web 2.0 sites such as Facebook create and function as a heterotopia?
