Litz 1Stacy LitzKevin EganFilm and Political Theory9 December 2009Foucauldian DiaryWhen deciding to keep a Foucauldian Diary, I realized that it meant keeping track of my innermost thoughts, some that usually seem completely involuntary or subconscious. However, when simply reading Foucault, I realized that his philosophiesand writings were of the truth and could easily be found in our everyday lives.Concerning panopticism, the power of the norm, the art of distributions, examinations,classifications and hierarchical observation, Foucault’s ideas can be observed all aroundus.The first day of my diary was Sunday, December 6

. I decided to stay inside allday considering that most of my weekdays are spent pretty similar to each other, due toco-op, and staying inside my own apartment would allow me to see what thoughts beingreally alone would give me. My day began by waking up, and I immediately went to the bathroom. With no one being around, I closed the door behind me – a waste of time, perhaps – no one could see me anyway, so what was the point? After leaving the bathroom, I sat around on the computer for a while, as I usually do to waste time. When Istood up, I fixed my shorts and shirt in the mirror (one of my walls is fully a mirror) andthen thought that if I was all alone, why do I care about my shorts? No one can see them,right? But I figured it was a natural reaction due to circumstances outside my apartment,in which I must normalize myself. Not much else happened that related to “being

Litz 2watched,” and for the most part I acted like myself, I noticed – but simply putting on adifferent face when being alone might be enough to say that I act completely differentwhen with others – again being apart of normalization. Not much else happenedthroughout the day that could relate to Foucault, but I could tell that the way that I wasacting, even when alone, was shaped by norms and the fear of “deviation from the rulesof society” – which was a real awakening experience. Often times we learn aboutsubconscious thought and how much it controls our mind – but now that I see it in action,I can hardly believe it. Foucault, by bringing these ideas to the surface, does what few philosophers have ever done to me.On Monday, December 7

, it was time to go to co-op – and I knew that therewould be tons of observations there. I woke up and got dressed in my “business casual”clothes – which somehow make or break a person, regardless of their intelligence or personality. I have always had a problem with dress codes, and this could be comparedto Foucault’s idea of normalization. By enforcing a policy that makes everyone the sameand lacking individuality, it is created a “discipline” that is expected to be followed inorder to be stereotyped as a certain way. For example, most jobs that require businesscasual are professional in some sense – therefore, those that you see in society that aredressed this way are seen as being more professional than those who are dresseddifferently. Foucault’s definition of normalization mentions that it creates a generalstandard for society, which dress codes do on a small scale, as well as other examples likestandardized tests, mandatory licenses for certain practices and requirements on products.At my co-op, I enter the elevator to go up one floor, which I always findridiculous, but I blame normalization, yet again. Elevators are considered mandatory, for

Litz 3the most part, due to the handicapped and those who cannot take stairs. Also, becausethey are pricey to build and maintain, they symbolize wealth and, to an extent, power. Inever do anything out of the ordinary in an elevator, because I know that there could be acamera. One elevator out of six has a very blatant camera, a huge orb in the corner, whilethe other five do not have visible cameras – however, the fear that one could be hidden isso great that it keeps me in fear of doing anything weird. I then enter my office area,which consists of roughly a hundred cubicles. I can hardly believe that there would be a better example of discipline in the workplace. All the cubicles are set up in an orderlyfashion, one after another, and all about the same size. Once these one hundred or soworkers go into their cubicles, they become just as equal as the person next to them,regardless of position. I see that some workers try to make their cubicle original andunique, but mostly on the inside so pretty much they’re the only ones that can see thedécor. Some will put something on the outside or change their nameplate, but, in the end,they are all the same workers. This is an example of the art of distribution, whichrequires a location such as a school or office, the cubicles are cellular, and they are easilyinterchangeable.The head of the department does not have a cubicle, but an office room,and it is located at the end wall of the entire office. From this room, she could technicallysee all the cubicles, and while she does not have vision that can see through walls, it isassumed that she can “see all” from her spot in the office. This seems to be an aspect of panopticism – as well as the art of distributions regarding cubicles to office rooms andrank. Foucault, when describing the Panopticon, in

the Eye of Power

(1974) stated, “. . .You have the system of surveillance, which on the contrary involves very little expense.