|
Kyle
read and liked
Shonn's
review of Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison:
"Discipline and Punish may indeed be one of Michel Foucault’s more accessible works. Indeed his arguments, while lengthy and at times tangential all generally point in a single direction: In studying the change in the theory of dealing with crimin...more
Discipline and Punish may indeed be one of Michel Foucault’s more accessible works. Indeed his arguments, while lengthy and at times tangential all generally point in a single direction: In studying the change in the theory of dealing with criminal offenders, Foucault is arguing that behind a façade of humanitarianism, the new Liberal order actually put into place a far more insidious and pervasive form of power relations. These relations allowed governments to not only exercise power over the bodies of subjects, as it had in the Ancien Regime, but allowed it instead to directly influence the day-to-day behavior of its citizens through a regime of discipline which affected the very way in which people lived their lives and used their time.
Some of the major criticism used against this particular work of Foucault’s is that he emphasizes the theories involved in the development of the prison, but is less emphatic about how these theories fully translated into practice. For example, despite a lengthy consideration of Panopticism, the actual influence of Bentham’s theory, at least in the case of Prisons is open to debate, particularly as it took decades until a prison designed after Bentham’s dictates was actually built, and such designs to not predominate prison design even today.
However, such criticism overlooks a key issue in reading Discipline and Punish, which is that the study of the development of criminal theory is essentially an extended metaphor. On one level Foucault really is considering the development of the modern prison through the shift in the theories of punishment and discipline. However, his arguments go deeper than the development of prisons, for Foucault the change in disciplinary theory is indicative of a far larger change in the relations of power in society.
For example, beyond the clear symbol of justice “Ancien Regime style” which the execution of the attempted regicide Damiens demonstrated, it was also an effective demonstration of power relations under absolutism. Nothing is subtle; everything is done with a maximum of ritual, symbolism and pomp. Authority is reinforced with excessive displays of brute force and violence which demonstrate the power of the monarchy and its right to exercise it in the defense of its own interests. Furthermore, direct connections between the masses and the government are generally governed by such ritualistic conventions, which due to the risks of disorder and riot are otherwise limited. Indeed, much like the absolutist justice system, the government attempts to ignore the masses as much as possible.
On the other hand, the rigorous, regimented, intensely focused liberal systems of punishment and discipline indicate a far more continuous and invasive entrance of power into the lives of the people. It is notable here that while Foucault speaks of the regimented lives of prisoners, he gives a considerable amount of time to other institutions of the new enlightenment state, particularly the military and education. In each case he notes how time is carefully structured, behavior is minutely managed and minor infractions are summarily dealt with. In doing so, Foucault demonstrates how the new liberal theories of power relations, may have sought a more humane and less violent form of criminal punishment, but it came at the price of far more insidious and penetrating invasions of power into everyday life, as many everyday activities heretofore beneath the interest of the state became intensely scrutinized and altered. In essence, greater political participation and industrialization required greater discipline of the masses in order to avoid chaos. In a bitter irony of history, the reforms and developments which supposedly brought greater freedom also made us far less free.
(less)
"
|
]]>
