Presentation Script Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the - PDF document

Presentation Script Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison, a book written by Michel Foucault, is a relevant but controversial perspective on the way in which people are controlled through a series of power relations. Th e chapters “Means of correct training” and “the panopticon” we are focussing on provide insight into the methods by which institutionalized spaces subject people to discipline in order to better exercise control. Foucault presents many structural relationships between architectural space and its resulting behaviours. “The exercise of discipline presupposes a mechanism that coerces by means of observation; an apparatus in which the techniques that make it possible to see induce effects of power and in which conversely, the means of coercion make those on whom they are applied clearly visible.” Some examples of spaces in which these disciplinary techniques are used are – prisons, academies of learning, hospitals, and of course military camps. All of these institutions have a very precise layout that allows coercion by means of observation to occur. The use of very specific designs allows the superiors to observe every activity and control the movement of those activities within the space. It is also importan t that the “gaze of the superior” is manifest everywhere and this is enabled by many small design decisions throughout the space. One example that we still use today is the typical bathroom stall. It is designed to have fully separating walls while the front door allows the top and bottom of the stall to be observed similar to a prison cell. Foucault argues that the “underlying the principle was found in urban development”. This principle was one of the embedding or “spatial nesting of hierarchized surv eillance.” The intention is that architecture acts on those it shelters. The hospital, the camp, etc. effectively have become social and cultural moulding agents. They impose observation, economy, calibration, separation, prevention. These buildings are, in a sense, pedagogical machines for training people in accepted norms. Norms can be defined as sets of socio-cultural measurements that dictate human methods of living and set requirements on existence. They normalize by differentiating individuals from one another and define an average that must be respected or seen as an “optimum toward which one must move.” The norms are principles of coercion. People will actually coerce themselves to a norm that is produced and/or implied by their surroundings. Foucault argues that they do this under the assumption of constant surveillance. This constant surveillance is accompanied by routine examinations of how well an individual is aligned with the acceptable standards and norms. The examination is a ritualized process. It is the ceremony of the objectification of people such as the commander, gazing upon his troops. Examination introduces individuality or cases, based on how you compare with the norm. During the examination individuals are faced with objectification and possible punishment for not complying with the norms. Objectification is the gaze placed on individuals that are disciplined by compulsory visibility which renders them an object. This is the discipline of people, such as the troop inspection, the person in stocks, or the university exam held in the gym with hundreds of other students. Examination creates a method of control based on a small set describable differences which renders people as tools for use (in other words they are objectified). It is interesting to note that we still use these techniques of examination today

despite the fact that in reality they are not objective and that the results are based on many other external conditions which are unaccounted for. The panoptic modality of power is the pervasive nature of surveillance. If you perceive you are being observed, you feel the need to discipline yourself by subscribing to norms. Although we are talking about discipline today, they are minute and tiny and invisible powers that are not easily perceived. It involves discipline that is now at the speed of light, that categorizes, that moulds, and that produces behaviours and perceptions which are administered through architectural space. The four examples that Foucault used as institutions of discipline could be loosely applied to an office or governing body or even a walk down the street where you are only supposed to cross at the crosswalk. You must wait for the sign, open the door for the person behind you, be polite and don’t make a fuss. Focault claims that through these mediums of examination, discipline and norms, power produces reality. In short, our reality is that society is organized and functions as a military space evident everywhere. “We are entering the age of the infinit e examination and of compulsory objectification.” (201) The tactics of power used for the ordering of human multiplicities are to utilize methods at the least cost. Foucault argues that methods meet the least resistance when they come at the least cost to the individual. It also seeks to achieve a maximum intensity and to extend its power as far as possible. A third goal is to link this economic growth to the output of the apparatuses by which it is exercised. Discipine reduces the inefficiency of the mass phenomenon or the multiplicity of people. It is an economical means of control through an invisible means. It effectively reduces the political force of the individual at the least cost and, in theory, maximizes it as a useful force. One of these useful forces is that everyone moniters themselves and each other. Panopticism is referenced as one way in which this occurs. Panopticism is more of an analogy than an actual form. Focault takes the architectural idea of panopticism and reveals how it is at its purest form an apparatus of discipline. Prisoners within the Panopticon, and for those of you who haven’t read the article…., the Panopticon is a prison with a central tower and a view which allows the guard to observe all the prisoners without them being aware of it. The prisoners within must assume that they are under constant scrutiny and therefore moniter their own actions so that they fit into the expected norms and rules of the institution. Focault argues that the discipline can be seen as a “counterlaw” that operates as a structure beneath judicial law. The judicial law attempts to set limits on the exercise of power and to produce a system based on equality but the discipline through its panopticism supercedes it. He refers to these as “minute disciplines” or the “panopticisms of everyday”. Simple examples of these fill our Western culture which has many norms, expectations, stereotypes and obligations. Our reality is that our lives are governed by these minute disciplines and thus our space is largely militarized.

So what does subscribing to these theories imply for our space? The space we inhabit are spaces in which we feel that we are under constant supervision. We withhold our innermost feelings and subscribe outwardly to the norms imposed on us by society. Eventually we get accustomed to these feelings and live out our lives with an awareness of the constant discipline but perhaps without the awareness of what we may be sacrificing. We can still live our lives because this militarized space is smoothed over by functions such as an equalitarian judicial system, the illusions of choice, technological benefits and other symbols of a desirable lifestyle. The minute disciplines seem miniscule and it is difficult to connect all the dots to see how immense and all- encompassing they really are. questions Can you think of any ways by which the spaces you inhabit and/or utilize become militarized through the means we have just talked about? How does it change the way we feel about or act in these spaces? Are we perhaps becoming used to the idea of infinite examination and compulsory objectification and even subscribe to it by making our lives an open book online using facebook and twitter? People question where the use of robotics in warfare is leading us and how their incorporation into the war effort pushes society onward with inevitable results. Our question is how are the military spaces in our societies, although they might range from small, moment influences to obvious but accepted violations of personal space, influencing and reproducing us? Virillio claims that the message our government sends us is that “we can just drop dead” when it concerns our morals and/or values along with more personal judgmental decision and that they will take care of the rest. Do you get that message? Are we becoming more apathetic to the tangible things that really matter in life in favour of being distracted by technological invasions of everything in our daily life? The Total Accident is about the argument that when we design the technology we also design its accident or inevitable unintended, catastrophic consequences. Does this mean we are the producers of our own eventual doom? Are there “accidents” in the making right now?