Severed Spaces: Memory, Identity, and the Politics of Space
Summary
Spaces are not neutral. They reflect systems of power and inequality—and we can challenge them.
Severance isn’t just a gripping drama—it’s a masterclass in understanding how inequalities are designed into the spaces we inhabit.
"What if your sense of self was shaped by the spaces you inhabit? How does this reflect the inequalities we face today?"
Due to the anticipated and well-deserved hype around the newly released Season 2 of the critically acclaimed show "Severance" on Apple TV+, we wanted to take this opportunity to highlight its importance in drawing parallels to inequalities and control in today's society. We will discuss Season 1 and its real-world applications through a critical lens borrowed from sociology. We will aim to guide you through understanding the implications of “space” on memories, identity, forms of power, and sense of belonging.
In Season 1, which is nine episodes, the show thrusts viewers into a dystopian version of a Wes Andersonian world—this time created by Ben Stiller— where memory and identity are surgically divided into two distinct entities in individuals forming two different personalities: the "innie," who exists solely for work, and the "outie," who lives a personal life, free from the burdens of labour. While the show initially presented this division as a fascinating speculative idea, it soon unveiled a deeper critique of the systems that structure not only our labour but also our very sense of self and identity.
At its core, Severance offers a profound meditation on the ways in which space shapes our identities. Just as the show's characters are divided between their work and personal selves, real-world spaces, both physical and social, often create similar divisions. Similarly, spaces, particularly those shaped by today’s policies, act as arenas of control, exclusion, and commodification, where economic and political factors determine access, autonomy, and belonging.
Figure 01: an image taken from the first episode of season 1 depicting one of the main protagonists of the show; this scene marks the moment of birth of the "innie" personality at the workplace, where they will spend their time exclusively there. Source: https://pin.it/7tioYqHpD
Neoliberalism's Influence on Space and Labour
Neoliberalism is an economic and political ideology advocating for free-market capitalism, deregulation, privatisation, and reduced government intervention in economic activities1,2. This economic philosophy has gained considerable influence globally since the 1970s, shaping economic policies and practices in numerous countries1,2. It was also popularised in the 1980s by Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher, and economist Milton Friedman and remains prominent today. The commodification of space in Severance reflects broader trends in neoliberal economic policies, where the value of individuals is often reduced to their economic output. The show's art direction, space selection and colour palette —which can only be described as a homage to the '60s and '70s brutalist and post-modern era— mirrors how spaces under neoliberalism are often reduced to mere tools for capital accumulation and powerplay without any regard to the human element. In this framework, workspaces become arenas of production and oppression, designed not for the social good but to enhance the profit-making potential of affiliated industries.
Figure 02: an image depicting how contemporary workspaces act as agents for neoliberalism; this is a top view of the main hall used in the show. It was shot in the former headquarters of Bell Labs and designed by the architect Eero Saarinen. Source: Link
Moreover, the commodification of space under neoliberalism marginalises those who do not fit the mould of the "ideal". As Severance shows, the spatial separation between the "innie"— who is not seen as human— and the "outie"—the real human— parallels the ways in which marginalised groups become excluded from certain spaces, both physically and socially, in today's climate. Just as the "innies" are relegated and confined to a world of endless labour, spaces under this ideology are often designed to oppress those deemed undesirable, whether through physical barriers, constant surveillance, policing, or discriminatory laws. In the show, multiple scenes depict the way in which "innies" are subjected to physical and psychological discipline through space, from the transitional one-person elevator that switches your personality from "outie" to "innie" to the confusing floor layout and the brightly lit maze-like corridors that are devoid of any wayfinding systems. These simple spatial characteristics play a major role in amplifying the various forms of subtle and unconscious spatial control of users that echo real-world scenarios today.
Figure 03: The basic office layout for the main characters in the show; this top view shows the mechanisms where the staff interact with one another while remaining physically isolated. Source: https://pin.it/4mki8UFmR
Behavioural Conditioning and Subtle Control
Many physical spaces in the show reflect a subtle form of control exerted over individuals in modern times, where social norms and surveillance technologies act as tools of behavioural regulation and bodily "in-autonomy". One of these spaces is the "Break Room", a powerful metaphor for how environments are engineered to control behaviour, from the journey to get to it to actually using it. Here, employees who disobey are forced to walk for an extended period in silence through multiple corridors without any visual guidance that links to a door that opens to a dark single-person corridor. This corridor ends with a small metal door with one red light above it. It is dark on purpose and in stark contrast to the white layout of the floor to evoke fear and anxiousness. Once inside, you are presented with a dimly lit transparent screen in a claustrophobic dark room with an apology message written across it. The employee is connected to a lie detector at this point and asked to read the message repeatedly, a form of psychological conditioning that reinforces submission and compliance. The employee will not be allowed to leave until they read the apology sincerely.
Figure 04: An image taken from the show depicting the Break Room corridor; this narrow corridor is a part of the discipline process. Source: Link
Michel Foucault's concept of "biopower" —where power is exercised through subtle forms of control and normalisation —illuminates the parallels between the corporate world in Severance and the contemporary spaces of work and leisure that follow the same logic in our cities. In these spaces, users are constantly monitored, nudged into conformity, and conditioned to accept their position within the broader system, often without questioning it. People in power justify their soft control over others in favour of maintaining and preserving life, keeping profit margins, amplifying security and maintaining social order3,4,5. Focualt brilliantly displayed these ideas using the concept of the panopticon that architect Willey Reveley drew for Jeremy Bentham. The design is simple: a surveillance tower built in the middle of a circular prison where every cell is visually accessible to security. This type of control is insidious because it operates at the level of the subconscious, shaping actions and decisions without overt awareness. The modern interpretation of the panopticon can be linked to surveillance technology and controlled infrastructural access in cities, along with the current efforts of the "smart cities" initiatives. For example, smart cameras that monitor and record violations with facial recognition algorithms in public spaces such as airports, parks and commercial spaces embody the subtle forms of discipline and punishment. It, too, calls for maintaining and preserving life, enhancing profit margins through the collection of violations while masquerading as a beacon for strengthening security and social order. For us, this alone should warrant an extensive ethical and scientific review of today’s practices around surveillance and control.
Figure 05: Plans of the panopticon used by Foucault to describe the modern disciplinary society in Discipline and Punish, drawn by architect Willey Reveley for Jeremy Bentham. Source: Bentham MS Box 119a 121, UCL Special Collections
Spaces of Power, Memories and the Construction of Identity
The severance procedure in the series reflects a harsh reality familiar to those of us navigating contemporary cultures: the relentless compartmentalisation of our identities. Drawing on the work of theorists like Henri Lefebvre, we can interpret the severance procedure as a literal manifestation of what he called the "representation of space" —which is a dominant “space” in any geography— that is usually created by policies or people in power6. In modern times, these spaces are designed to prioritise the needs of the powerful, shaping not only how we use space but who belongs and who is excluded. Much like the innie's existence in Severance, we are exposed to various spaces that adhere to certain regulations and social protocols where we become forced to compartmentalise our identities to fit them. If we don’t do that, we automatically become excluded. Imagine your normal day for a second. You probably use between 10-20 different spaces, if not more, and in each one of these spaces, you find yourself behaving in a certain way that complies with the purpose of that space; mind you, sometimes, this switch in behaviour is not even on the conscious level. If you look closer, you will find, more often than not, that your autonomy is circumscribed by external forces that demand conformity and obedience. Why is that? How does that affect where we live, for example?
Figures 06,07: Images taken from the show depicting the interaction between the innies to create workplace-only memories and identities. More often than not, these interactions are surface-level and devoid of any emotional depth or affection, the same way the space is experienced. Source: Link
At the heart of Severance lies an exploration of memory and identity, particularly the ways in which our memories shape our sense of self. The show posits that even when memory is severed or blocked, other forms of memory—such as procedural and semantic memory7 —continue to inform our actions and shape our personalities. This notion parallels how, in sociology, spaces could influence our sense of identity and social positionality, even in the absence of explicit recognition or belonging. Indeed, the "innies" managed to construct memories of the workspace that found their way to the "outies" and got expressed in various forms outside. An example of this is presented through one of the main characters of the show. Irving’s "outie" is an artist; through his art, the show tried to convey how his memories of the infamous Break Room manifested in his paintings as an "outie". While the exchange of memories between the two personalities is not bound by physical space, it is influenced by it. A space that, in this case, became social.
Figure 08: An image taken from the show depicting Irving and his paintings. Source: Link
Going back to Lefebvre's concept of "representation of space"—offers a framework for understanding how space impacts identity formation and social classification. The sterile, soulless office space in Severance is carefully designed to control and regulate behaviour. Similarly, our environments are intrinsically social spaces, often reinforcing certain identities while marginalising others who do not conform or do not meet the means for access. Let's zoom out for a moment and think of a bigger phenomenon, such as gentrification, a phenomenon where urban spaces are reimagined to cater to the affluent while pushing out lower-income groups like in most European Cities. Or the desire of the affluent to move outside the centre when the centre becomes occupied by the undeserving or the displaced, like in most Arab Cities. Regardless of the direction, space became a form of capital, a spatial status, an agent of social classification, and a fuel for inequalities8.
A Call for Collective Resistance
Despite the gloomy portrayal and oppressive systems at play in Severance, there is a glimmer of hope. The show's protagonists begin to challenge the boundaries set by the corporate structure, recognising the power of collective resistance and acknowledgements of the systemic factors behind the status quo. This moment of solidarity echoes real-world movements pushing for more inclusive policies, rigorous ethical reviews, authenticity, and fairer practices. Whether through education, unions, protests, or grassroots activism, collective action remains a powerful tool for challenging the forces that shape our spaces and our identities.
In Severance, the innies' resistance represents a call to action. Just as the innies strive to reclaim their autonomy, we must recognise that our identities are defined by the spaces we occupy or the actions we perform; understanding this is the first step towards a positive change. While, in theory, we might have control over our private spaces, other types of spaces put forth by people in power remain to be challenged.
Figure 09: An image taken from the show depicting the four main characters in their innie personalities at the workplace coming together after a journey of discovery and enlightenment. Source: Link
Severance offers more than just a critique of corporate culture; it's a potent exploration of the ways in which space, identity, and power intersect. By examining the show's narrative through the lens of urban theory, social space and biopower, we gained deeper insights into the forces that shape our identities and the spaces we inhabit. The question that Severance poses is not just about memory and labour—it's about the very systems that control both. As we try to map the challenges of navigating spaces that shape our identities, we must ask ourselves: are we the ones who must change and conform to these spaces, or do the systemic issues creating these spaces need to be severed and properly addressed?
A good starting point for answering that question begins with acknowledging the forms of spatial control manifesting in your city and workspace.
References
Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford University Press.
Smith, N. (2002). ‘New Globalism, New Urbanism: Gentrification as Global Urban Strategy’, Antipode, 34(3), pp. 427–450. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00249.
Foucault, M. (2019a). Power: The Essential Works of Michel Foucault 1954-1984. Penguin UK.
Foucault, M. (2019b). Discipline and Punish. London: Penguin Random House (The Birth of the Prison).
Foucault, M. (1998). The history of sexuality. Vol. 1, The will to Knowledge. London: Penguin.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford, UK ; Blackwell.
Finley, J.R. and Naaz, F. (2023). Strategic use of internal and external memory in everyday life: Episodic, semantic, procedural, and prospective purposes. Memory, 31(1), pp.108-126
Rérat, P. (2018). Spatial capital and planetary gentrification: residential location, mobility and social inequalities. In Handbook of gentrification studies (pp. 103-118). Edward Elgar Publishing.
