Analysis Of When Privacy Is Theft By Margaret Atwood

The article “When Privacy Is Theft” from The New York Review of Books published online on November 21, 2013 provides Margaret Atwood, an award winning novelist, the opportunity to closely examine the symbolism, purpose, and thought process behind Dave Eggers widely successful novel The Circle, published in October 2013 (“Margaret Atwood”). Atwood presents much evidence and analysis of Eggers’ work to arrive inductively at the strong argument that “To live entirely in public is a form of solitary confinement” (Atwood). Atwood began her inductive reasoning by first examining the central ideas, or perhaps motifs, present in Eggers’ The Circle. She examines the idea of privacy, more specifically who owns and controls individual and collective privacy, by arguing “What is withheld can be as

Atwood transitions into an analysis of the main characters present in The Circle by primarily examining the significance in name choice. As Atwood argues, a name is the central, founding piece of human public representation so Eggers’ decision behind each character’s name should not be disregarded. Her analysis of Maebelline, also known as MaeDay, leads to the conclusion that Maebelline is a “...a makeup accessory, a distress signal, a totalitarian power-show” (Atwood). Atwoods observation of Maebelline’s need to hide and disguise herself supports Atwood’s next point that despite The Circle’s glass buildings and motto that privacy is theft, The Circle holds many secrets and is a factor of deception. Atwood makes the observation that the Circlers are inherently going to be even more aware of the potential monitoring which will lead to paranoia, fear, and notes “scribbles with some obsolete mark-making device on that despised substance, paper”