Madness and Civilization
Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity
in the Age of Reason (French: Folie et Déraison: Histoire
de la folie à l'âge classique) is a 1964 abridged edition of a
1961 book by French philosopher Michel Foucault. An
English translation of the complete 1961 edition,
entitled History of Madness, was published in June 2006.[1]
Foucault's first major book, Madness and Civilization is
an examination of the evolving meaning of madness in
European culture, law, politics, philosophy and medicine
from the Middle Ages to the end of the eighteenth century,
and a critique of historical method and the idea of history.
It marks a turning in Foucault's thought away
fromphenomenology toward structuralism: though he uses
the language of phenomenology to describe an evolving
experience of "the other" as mad, he attributes this
evolution to the influence of specific powerful social

The book developed out of Foucault's earlier writing on
psychology,[3] his own psychological difficulties, and his
experiences working in a mental hospital, and was written
mainly between 1955 and 1959 while working in culturaldiplomatic and educational posts in Sweden (as director of
a French cultural centre attached to the University of
Uppsala),[4] Germany, and Poland.[5]
Foucault traces the evolution of the concept of
madness through three phases: the Renaissance, the
"Classical Age" (the later seventeenth and most of the
eighteenth centuries) and the modern experience. He
argues that in the Renaissance the mad were portrayed in
art as possessing a kind of wisdom – a knowledge of the
limits of our world – and portrayed in literature as revealing
the distinction between what men are and what they
pretend to be. Renaissance art and literature depicted the
mad as engaged with the reasonable while representing
the mysterious forces of cosmic tragedy,[5] but it also
marked the beginning of an objective description of reason

and unreason (as though seen from above) compared with
the more intimate medieval descriptions from within
Foucault contends that in the mid-seventeenth
century, in the depths of the age of reason, the rational
response to the mad, who until then had been consigned to
society's margins, was to separate them completely from
society by confining them, along with prostitutes, vagrants,
blasphemers and the like, in newly created institutions all
over Europe – a process he calls "the Great Confinement."[2]
The condition of these outcasts was seen as one of
moral error. They were viewed as having freely chosen
prostitution, vagrancy, blasphemy, unreason, etc. and the
regimes of these new rational institutions were meticulous
programs of punishment and reward aimed at causing
them to reverse those choices.[2]
The social forces Foucault sees driving this
confinement include the need for an extra-judicial
mechanism for getting rid of undesirables, and the wish to
regulate unemployment and wages (the cheap labour of

and these new institutions were the product of a blending of two motives: the new goal of curing the mad away from their family who could not afford the necessary care at home. He sees the nominally more enlightened and compassionate treatment of the mad in these modern medical institutions as just as .[2][5] For Foucault the modern experience began at the end of the eighteenth century with the creation of places devoted solely to the confinement of the mad under the supervision of medical doctors. and the old purpose of confining undesirables for the protection of society. He argues that the conceptual distinction between the mad and the rational was in a sense a product of this physical separation into confinement: confinement made the mad conveniently available to medical doctors who began to view madness as a natural object worthy of study and then as an illness to be cured. and the institution soon came to be seen as the only place where therapeutic treatment can be administered.the workhouses applied downward pressure on the wages of free labour). These distinct purposes were lost sight of.

the constitution of madness as mental illness.cruel and controlling as their treatment in the earlier. it no longer exists. rational institutions had been. — Foucault.. The language of psychiatry. gives the separation as already enacted.] There is no common language: or rather.. deviant .. in which the exchange between madness and reason was carried out. at the end of the eighteenth century. could only have come into existence in such a silence. of no fixed syntax. spoken falteringly. Preface to the 1961 edition[6] Reception Sociologist José Guilherme Merquior discusses Madness and Civilization in Foucault (1985). Merquior argues that while Foucault raises important questions about the influence of social forces on the meaning of. and expels from the memory all those imperfect words. bears witness to a rupture in a dialogue. and responses to.[2] .modern man no longer communicates with the madman [. which is a monologue by reason about madness..

Madness was typically linked with sin by Christian Europeans. and an inspiration for Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari's Anti-Oedipus (1972). Merquior notes that there is abundant evidence of widespread cruelty to and imprisonment of the insane during eras when Foucault contends that the mad were perceived as possessing wisdom. Brown's Life Against Death(1959). Lewes sees . and was therefore regarded as much less benign than Foucault tends to imply.[7] Author Kenneth Lewes writes that Madness and Civilization is an example of the "critique of the institutions of psychiatry and psychoanalysis" that occurred as part of the "general upheaval of values in the 1960s". Madness and Civilization is nonetheless so riddled with serious errors of fact and interpretation as to be of very limited value. Merquior sees Madness and Civilization as "a call for the liberation of the Dionysian id" similar to Norman O. noted Merquior. and that Foucault has thus selectively cited data that supports his assertions while ignoring contrary data.behavior.

Thomas Szasz's The Myth of Mental Illness (1961). characterizing it as a "beautiful book" that will be "of central importance for our understanding of the Classical period." Later endorsements have been even stronger. Madness and Civilization. the works of Michel Foucault occupy a special and central place in the historiography of psychiatry. not to say polarized. There are many acknowledgements of its seminal role. at first reading. beginning with Robert Mandrou's early review in Annales.Foucault's work as being similar to. Michael MacDonald confirmed Mandrou's prophecy: "Anyone who writes about the history of insanity in early modern Europe must travel in the spreading wake of Michael Foucault's famous book." Roy Porter: "Time has . but more profound than. ambivalent." Twenty years later.[8] Philosopher Gary Gutting writes in Michel Foucault's Phanomenologie des Krankengeistes (1994): The reactions of professional historians to Foucault's Histoire de la folie seem. Jan Goldstein: "For both their empirical content and their powerful theoretical perspectives.

2006. 2009. 3.proved Madness and Civilization far the most penetrating work ever written on the history of madness. 46. Jump up^ Foucault M. editor. Michel Foucault. Foucault has recently been heralded as a prophet of "the new cultural history. translator. New York: Routledge. NY: Routledge. Jump up^ *a licence de psychologie (1949) a diplome de psycho-pathologie (1952) Jump up^ Macey. David (2004). Introduction. Khalfa J. p. translator & Murphy J. See also  Cogito and the History of Madness  The Archaeology of Knowledge References 1. History of Madness.  4. in Foucault M. p. ISBN 978-1-86189-226-3 . ISBN 0-41547726-3. 2. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Khalfa J." More specifically. ISBN 0-415-27701-9." But criticism has also been widespread and often bitter. History of Madness. Reaktion Books. xiiv–xxv.

2009.5. (1985).. Fontana Press ISBN 0-00-686226-8 8. "Michel Foucault". J. New Jersey: Jason Aronson Inc. xxvii–xxxix. Jump up^ Lewes. p. 7. History of Madness.G. p.) 6.. Preface to the 1961 edition. Jump up^ Merquior. Northvale. Translated by Khalfa J. Zalta (ed. ISBN 0-41547726-3. ISBN 1-56821-484-7 . Kenneth (1995). Gary. ^ Jump up to:a b c Gutting. 201. Foucault. Jump up^ Foucault M. NY: Routledge. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2013 Edition). Psychoanalysis and Male Homosexuality. Edward N.

the book has become a locus classicus of the history of medicine. but here largely referring to teaching hospitals). Madness and Civilization. with admirers and critics in equal measure. Foucault traces the development of the medical profession. First published in French in 1963.The Birth of the Clinic The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perception (French: Naissance de la clinique: une archéologie du regard médical) is a 1963 book by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. the work was published in English translation by Alan Sheridan Smith in the United States in 1973.[2] In continuous publication since 1963. Its central points are the concept of the medical regard ("medical gaze") and the sudden re-organisation of knowledge at the end of the . and specifically the institution of the clinique (translated as "clinic".[1] followed in the UK in 1976 by Tavistock Publications as part of the series World of Man edited by RD Laing.[3] Developing the themes explored in his previous work.

but it is now frequently used in graduate medical and social work courses. specifically medical doctors. The medical gaze Foucault coined the term "medical gaze" to denote the dehumanizing medical separation of the patient's body from the patient's person (identity). as sages who would in time .18th century. The Order of Things. which would be expanded in his next major work. Originally. The material and intellectual structures that made possible the analysis of the body were mixed with power interests: in entering the field of knowledge. (see mind-body dualism). the term "medical gaze" was confined to postmodern andpost-structuralist academic use. He uses the term in a genealogy describing the creation of a field of knowledge of the body. becoming a possible target for manipulation. the human body also entered the field of power.[4] Foucault also argued that the French and American revolutions that spawned modernity also created a "metanarrative" of scientific discourse that held scientists.

illness. and cause. the doctor's medical gaze was believed to penetrate surface illusions. The epistemic change Foucault's understanding of the development of the clinique is primarily opposed to those histories of medicine and the body that consider the late 18th century to be the dawning of a new "supposed" empirical system. medical doctors replaced the discredited medieval clergy. a doctor deduces symptom. This myth was part of the greater discourse of the humanist and Enlightenment schools of thought that believed the human body to be the sum of a person: biological reductionism that became a powerful tool of the new sages: through thorough examination (gazing) of a body. not souls."[5] In Foucault's view. For the nineteenth-century moderns.abolish sickness and so solve all of humanity's problems. the birth of modern medicine . "based on the rediscovery of the absolute values of the visible. in near-mystical discovery of hidden truth. therefore achieving unparalleled understanding of the patient — hence. physicians save bodies.

[6] Thus the empiricism of the 18th and 19th centuries is not a naive or naked act of looking and noting down what is . rather than result of a number of great individuals discovering new ways of seeing and knowing the truth: The clinic .was not a commonsensical movement towards simply seeing what was already there (and therefore a science without a philosophy). the modesty of its attention. as an epistemological rupture.constantly praised for its empiricism. and the care with which it silently lets things surface to the observing gaze without disturbing them with discourse .owes its real importance to the fact that it is a reorganization in depth. modern medicine is not a mere progression from the late 18th century wherein an understanding of the true nature of the body and disease is gradually acquired. but of the very possibility of a discourse about disease. Foucault recommends a view of the history of medicine. and clinical medicine in particular. but rather a decisive shift in the structure of knowledge. not only of medical discourse. That is to say.

[8] In other words.[7] Rather. in which case the criteria that distinguishes a diseased organ from a healthy one is thoroughly historical. where one epistemological era gives way to another. as outlined in The . diagnosis and treatment all followed that contemporary organisation. Foucault would later formalise this notion in the episteme. the contact between the doctor and their individual patient does not pre-exist discourse as "mindless phenomenologies" would suggest. The relationship between subject and object is not just the one who knows and the one who tells.before the doctor's eyes. Investigation. the observations and analysis of an object (for instance a diseased organ) depended entirely upon the accepted practices as outlined in the contemporary organisation of knowledge. the clinical science of medicine came to exist as part of a wider structure of organising knowledge that allowed the articulation of medicine as a discipline. thus allowing one concept of what is scientific to move aside for another. making possible "the domain of its experience and the structure of its rationality". In this case.

the taxonomic era gave way to the organic historical era. diseases. an early 18th-century doctor could observe an organ with exactly the same disease as a 19th-century doctor. the clinic was not simply founded upon the observation of truth. both accounts would be 'true'. but rather an artefact of a theory of knowledge inserted within a specific discursive period.Order of Things. Because of this. since they were both spoken in an episteme that considered such statements to be true. thus. instead of a relationship to a non-discursive state of affairs ('reality').[9] The epistemic change meant that the bodies. even though their work was only thirty years apart. and therefore more correct than any preceding medicinal practice. tissues and pathologies that each cut open and . Despite this difference. The authority of the clinician relies on a relationship to the then current organisation of knowledge. This means that anatomists like Morgagni and Bichat were not students of the same discipline. with both doctors coming to vastly different conclusions about what caused the disease and how to treat it.

Colin. ISBN 0422761907. London: Routledge. The Birth of the Clinic. but simply and suddenly arrived. medicine. London: Tavistock Publications Ltd. . The Birth of the Clinic. Notes 1. ISBN 0415075424. (1994). Roy. Michel (1973). Michel (1976). Reassessing Foucault: power. 3. the clinic had no origins. 2. and the body.explored were articulated in completely different and discontinuousdiscourses from one another. Thus anatomy's claim to be a privileged empirical science that can observe and determine a true bodily schema cannot stand when its beginnings were not in a discovery of a way of coming to know what was real. Porter. eds. New York: Pantheon Books. Jump up^ Foucault. but rather emerged amongst a new philosophical way of granting meaning and organising certain objects. Hence the use of "birth" in the title. Jump up^ Foucault. Jump up^ Jones.

1503/cmaj. xix. xiv. (2005). Jump up^ Michel Foucault. doi:10. E. p. Jump up^ St. xv. Birth of the Clinic. 5. xii. 9. 6. Birth of the Clinic. Canadian Medical Association Journal 173 (9): 1072–1037.051067. p. Godard. Birth of the Clinic. Jump up^ Foucault. 128-133 . Jump up^ Foucault. p. pp. Jump up^ Foucault.4. "A better reading". 8. Birth of the Clinic. 1973). 7. p. E. Jump up^ Foucault. The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perception (London.

For the metal album.The Order of Things This article is about the Foucault book. hiddenness. Then it develops its central claim: that all periods of history have possessed certain . The book opens with an extended discussion of Diego Velázquez's painting Las Meninas and its complex arrangement of sightlines. (Foucault had preferred L'Ordre des Choses for the original French title. For the Kipfer book. It was translated into English and published by Pantheon Books in 1970. and appearance. Foucault endeavours to excavate the origins of the human sciences. see The Order of Things (album). but changed the title because it had been used by two structuralist works published immediately prior to Foucault's). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences (French: Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines) is a 1966 book by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. see The Order of Things (Kipfer book). particularly but not exclusively psychology andsociology.

from one period's episteme to another. biology. scientific discourse. Foucault develops the notion of episteme.[1] Foucault analyzes shifts in the paradigm of thought between the classical and modern periods:  In respect of language : from general grammar to linguistics  In respect of living organisms : from natural history to biology . Foucault demonstrates parallels in the development of three fields: linguistics. for example. The concept of episteme The key concept of the book is that various periods of history have been characterized by a certain number of conditions of truth or discourse which are common to various areas of knowledge and determine what it is possible or acceptable to affirm. and argues that these conditions of discourse have changed over time. and economics. and that these have been subject to change over time.underlying epistemological assumptions that determined what was acceptable as.

characterized by representation. The modern episteme. such as Theodore Porter. but not subject to a distinct epistemological awareness.[3] The various shifts in consciousness that he points out in the first chapters of the book have led several scholars. the character of which Foucault seeks to uncover. Foucault references three epistemes : 1. giving rise to categorization and taxonomy 3. The classical episteme. The episteme of the Renaissance. Within the classical episteme. ordering. which is characterized by resemblance and similitude 2. Foucault claims that the concept of "man" was not yet defined : certainly man was spoken of.[4] to scrutinize the bases for knowledge in our present day as well as to . identity and difference. In respect of money : from the science of wealth to economics.[2] Influence Foucault's critique has been influential in the field of cultural history.

A review by Jean-Paul Sartre attacked Foucault as "the last barricade of the bourgeoisie".. If they needed me as a 'barricade'. p. Jump up^ Chambon. compared Foucault's episteme to Thomas Kuhn's notion of a paradigm. "Poor bourgeoisie. 320 3. New York: Columbia University Press. Reading Foucault for Social Work. Adrienne (1999). in Structuralism. Dits et Écrits I. ISBN 0-231-10717-X. pp. Les mots et les choses. 36–37. p. Jump up^ Foucault. then they had already lost power!"[5] Jean Piaget. in Sur la justice populaire. in spite of historical knowledge.critique the projection of modern categories of knowledge onto subjects that remain intrinsically unintelligible. op. Jump up^ Foucault. Foucault responded.1239 2. The Order of Things brought Foucault to prominence as an intellectual figure in France. cit.[6] Notes 1. .

Jump up^ Miller. 633–651. Social Studies of Science 22(4): pp. an analytical method he implicitly used in his previous works Madness and Civilization. p. The premise of the book is that systems of thought and knowledge ("epistemes" or "discursive formations") are . and The Order of Things. Quantification and the accounting ideal in science. Jean (1970). It is a methodological and historiographical treatise promoting what Foucault calls "archaeology" or the "archaeological method".4. The Passion of Michel Foucault. 6. Theodore (1992). 5. New York: Anchor Books. New York: Harper & Row. James (1994). p. 132. Structuralism.159. Jump up^ Piaget. The Birth of the Clinic.[1] It is Foucault's only explicitly methodological work. Jump up^ Porter. The Archaeology of Knowledge The Archaeology of Knowledge (French: L'archéologie du savoir) is a 1969 book by the French philosopher Michel Foucault.

personal projects and preoccupations. the many influences that inform the discourse of the time. thus being exclusive and excluding. The . explicitly and implicitly. portraying continuous narratives as naïve ways of projecting our own consciousness onto the past. and. although it targets moments of transition between historical worldviews.governed by rules (beyond those of grammar and logic) which operate beneath the consciousness of individual subjects and define a system of conceptual possibilities that determines the boundaries of thought and language use in a given domain and period. ultimately depends on continuities that break down under close inspection.[1] Most prominently in its Introduction and Conclusion. Characteristically. Foucault demonstrates his political motivations. the book also becomes a philosophical treatment and critique ofphenomenological and dogmatic structural readings of history and philosophy. Theory Foucault argues that the contemporary study of the history of ideas.

Foucault argues that "discourses" emerge and transform not according to a developing series of unarticulated. collective meaning of those statements.[2] He does. [3] Thus.[2] Foucault defines a "discourse" as a 'way of speaking'. Foucault argues for and against various notions of what are inherent aspects of a statement. common worldviews. his method studies only the set of 'things said' in their emergences and transformations. however. but the assumption that those modes exist as wholes fails to do justice to the complexities of discourse. . During most of Archaeology. without arriving at a comprehensive definition. without any speculation about the overall.history of ideas marks points of discontinuity between broadly defined modes of knowledge. a phrase. which are defined as much by breaks and ruptures as by unified themes. but according to a vast and complex set of discursive and institutional relationships. and carries his insistence on discourse-in-itself down to the most basic unit of things said: the statement (énoncé). argue that a statement is the rules which render an expression (that is.

In contrast to structuralists. These rules are not the syntax and semantics [7] that makes an expression signifying. This concept of meaning differs from the concept of signification:[4] Though an expression is signifying. for instance "The gold mountain is in California". Foucault demonstrates that the semantic and syntactic structures do not suffice to determine the discursive meaning of an expression.even .[8] Depending on whether or not it complies with these rules of discursive meaning. the "statement" is an existence function for discursive meaning. it may nevertheless be discursively meaningless and therefore have no existence within a certain discourse. It is additional rules.a proposition. a grammatically incorrect sentence may be discursively meaningful . inversely. [5] For this reason.[6] Being rules. the "statement" has a special meaning in the Archaeology: it is not the expression itself. or a speech act) discursively meaningful. a grammatically correct phrase may lack discursive meaning or. but the rules which make an expression discursively meaningful.

the discursive meaning of an expression is reliant on the succession of statements that precede and follow it. and that he is not seeking to displace other ways of analysing discourse or render them as invalid. or speech acts. "statements" constitute a network of rules establishing which expressions are discursively meaningful. Foucault reiterates that the analysis he is outlining is only one possible procedure. However.[11] . phrases. like other rules. Rather. or speech acts to have discursive meaning. the "statements" Foucault analysed are not propositions. Foucault's analysis then turns towards the organized dispersion of statements. because. and these rules are the preconditions for signifying propositions.meaningless letters (e.[9] Thus. "QWERTY") may have discursive meaning. "statements" are also 'events'. which he calls discursive formations. utterances.[10] In short.g. they appear (or disappear) at some time. the meaning of expressions depends on the conditions in which they emerge and exist within a field of discourse.

h tml 3. ^ Jump up to:a b http://www. 117 5. p. "the most decisive step yet taken in the theory-practice of multiplicities. Jump up^ the construction rules. 115 7.2 Jump up^ French version p. ^ Jump up to:a b 12"[12] Notes 1.Foucault concludes Archaeology with responses to criticisms from a hypothetical critic (which he anticipates will occur after his book is read). Jump up^ French version p.sparknotes. Jump up^ French version p.michelfoucault. Dits et Écrits I. Reception Gilles Deleuze describes The Archaeology of Knowledge as. 728 .stanford. Jump up^ http://www.html 4.

1986. References  Deleuze. 12. Jump up^ Deleuze. 2002. 1-21.14). ISBN 0-521-40887-3. Trans. Gary (1994). London and New York: Routledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. NEE-UNICAMP (Campinas). The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. London: Althone. ISSN 1807-1783. Foucault. The Archaeology of Knowledge. 108. 118– 19. 1969.8. Jump up^ French version p. p. 1988. M. História e-História. ISBN 0-415-28753-7 . “O método arqueológico de análise discursiva: o percurso metodológico de Michel Foucault”. 1. 134 9. 231. Foucault (1986. Jump up^ Sérgio Campos Gonçalves. Sheridan Smith. Gilles. A. Jump up^ Gutting. Feb 2009. Sean Hand. 114 10. Trans. ISBN 0-8264-5780-0. Michel. v. p. p.  Foucault. 113–14. Jump up^ French version: p. 11.

which can also be found. Foucault argues against the idea that the prison became the consistent form of punishment due mainly to thehumanitarian concerns of reformists. Population. hospitals. it focuses on historical documents from France. a new technological power. in places such as schools. Foucault admits that he was somewhat overzealous in his . An analysis of the social and theoretical mechanisms behind the massive changes that occurred in Western penal systems during the modern age.[1] In a later work. Territory. Security.Discipline and Punish Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (French: Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la Prison) is a 1975 book by the French philosopher Michel Foucault. Prison is a form used by the "disciplines". according to Foucault. focusing on the body and questions of power. and military barracks. He traces the cultural shifts that led to the prison's dominance.

These examples provide a picture of just how profound the changes in western penal systems were after less than a century. punishment.[1] Torture Foucault begins by contrasting two forms of penalty: the violent and chaotic public torture of Robert-François Damiens. discipline. and the highly regimented daily schedule for inmates from an early 19th-century prison (Mettray). [2] Summary The main ideas of Discipline and Punish can be grouped according to its four parts: torture. who was convicted of attempted regicide in the mid-18th century.[3] . and prison.descriptions of how disciplinary power conditions society. he qualifies and develops his earlier ideas. Foucault wants the reader to consider what led to these changes and how did western culture shift so radically.

because liberation already exists as a facet of subjection. "The man described for us. as opposed to the common belief that knowledge exists independently of power relations (knowledge is always contextualized in a framework which makes it intelligible. whom we are invited to free. He explains that power and knowledge imply one another. He defines a "micro-physics" of power."[5] The . preserved or possessed. but as part of a continuing trajectory of subjection. nor to more exactly punish or rehabilitate.He believes that the question of the nature of these changes is best asked by assuming that they weren't used to create a more humanitarian penal system. Foucault wants to tie scientific knowledge and technological development to the development of the prison to prove this point. is already in himself the effect of a subjection much more profound than himself. which is constituted by a power that is strategic and tactical rather than acquired.[4] That is. so the humanizing discourse of psychiatry is an expression of the tactics of oppression). the ground of the game of power isn't won by 'liberation'.

In What is an Author? Foucault also deals with notion of identity.problem for Foucault is in some sense a theoretical modelling which posits a soul..g. and describes an extensive legal framework in which it operates to achieve specific . an identity (the use of soul being fortunate since 'identity' or 'name' would not properly express the method of subjection—e. and tracking.purposes. regulation. if mere materiality were used as a way of tracking individuals then the method of punishment would not have switched from torture to psychiatry) which allows a whole materiality of prison to develop. Foucault stresses the exactitude with which torture is carried out. Foucault describes public torture as ceremony :The intended purposes were . He argues that the public spectacle of torture and execution was a theatrical forum the original intentions of which eventually produced several unintended consequences. and its use as a method of control.[3] He begins by examining public torture and execution.

 Enacting the revenge upon the convict's body. To make the secret public (according to Foucault the investigation was kept entirely secret even from the accused). which the sovereign seeks for having been injured by the crime. The secret of the investigation and the conclusion of the magistrates was justified by the publicity of the torture.  To show the effect of investigation on confession. If the torture failed to elicit a confession then the investigation was stopped and innocence assumed.)  Reflecting the violence of the original crime onto the convict's body for all to see. (According to Foucault torture could occur during the investigation. in order for it to be manifested then annulled by reciprocating the violence of the crime on the criminal. Foucault argues that the law was considered an extension . because partial proofs meant partial guilt. A confession legitimized the investigation and any torture that occurred.

It also made the body of the condemned man the place where the vengeance of the sovereign was applied. the power of . the crime had to be manifested and annulled. but of identifying enemies and attacking them. Crime and rebellion are akin to a declaration of war. the procedure of investigation on the operation of the confession.of the sovereign's body. the anchoring point for a manifestation of power. it made it possible to reproduce the crime on the visible body of the criminal. the secret on the public. The sovereign was not concerned with demonstrating the ground for the enforcement of its laws."[6] Foucault looks at public torture as the outcome "of a certain mechanism of power" that views crime in a military schema. It [torture] assured the articulation of the written on " the oral. and so the revenge must take the form of harming the convict's body. in the same horror. an opportunity of affirming the dissymmetry of forces.

and it did so through the ritual of investigation and the ceremony of execution—the reality and horror of which was supposed to express the omnipotence of the sovereign but actually revealed that the sovereign's power depended on the .  Redistributing blame: the executioner rather than the convict becomes the locus of shame. Foucault notes that public executions often led to riots in support of the prisoner.[7] :Some unintended consequences were  Providing a forum for the convict's body to become a focus of sympathy and admiration. Public torture and execution was a method the sovereign deployed to express his or her power.  Creating a site of conflict between the masses and the sovereign at the convict's body.which was renewed by the ritual of investigation and the ceremony of public torture. Frustration for the inefficiency of this economy of power could be directed towards and coalesce around the site of torture and execution.

the public execution was ultimately an ineffective use of the body. Thus. Hence. qualified as non-economical. though it ran its course rapidly. its political cost was too high. So it had to be reformed to allow for greater . Prison was preceded by a different form of public spectacle. by heroizing the victim (admiring the courage in facing death) or in moving to physically free the criminal or to redistribute the effects of the strategically deployed power. It was the antithesis of the more modern concerns of the state: order and generalization. and to force them to participate in the method of control by agreeing with its verdicts.participation of the people. But problems arose in cases in which the people through their actions disagreed with the sovereign. it was applied non-uniformly and haphazardly. The . Torture was made public in order to create fear in the people. As well.stability of property for the bourgeoisie Punishment The switch to prison was not immediate. he argues. There was a more graded change.

according to Foucault. Reformists felt the power to punish and judge should become more evenly distributed. Prisoners would have been forced to do work that reflected their crime. The sovereign's right to punish was so disproportionate that it was ineffective and uncontrolled. controlled. This would have allowed the public to see the convicts' bodies enacting . and effective spectacle.arguments Out of this movement towards generalized punishment. thus repaying society for their infractions. a thousand "mini-theatres" of punishment would have been created wherein the convicts' bodies would have been put on display in a more ubiquitous. though not for humanitarian reasons. He argues that reformists were unhappy with the unpredictable. the state's power must be a form of public power. Punishment became "gentle". was of more concern to reformists than humanitarian . unevenly distributed nature of the violence the sovereign would inflict on the convict. of public torture gave way to public chain gangs. Foucault suggests.

and thus to reflect on the crime. He looks at the development of highly refined forms of discipline. But he suggests that the shift towards prison that followed was the result of a new "technology" and ontology for the body being developed in the 18th century. according to Foucault.their punishment. But .discipline. of discipline concerned with the smallest and most precise aspects of a person's body. he suggests. and towards more generalized and controlled means of punishment. Discipline. Modern institutions required that bodies must be . and the ontology of "man as machine Discipline The emergence of prison as the form of punishment for every crime grew out of the development of discipline in the 18th and 19th centuries. developed a new economy and politics for bodies.these experiments lasted less than twenty years Foucault argues that this theory of "gentle" punishment represented the first step away from the excessive force of the sovereign. the "technology" of ".

as well as for training. and control.the modern age and continuing to today The individuality that discipline constructs (for the bodies it controls) has four characteristics. he argues. political. and military organizations emerging in .individuated according to their tasks. Therefore. discipline created a whole new form of individuality for bodies. which enabled them to perform their duty within the new forms of economic. observation. namely it makes :individuality which is  Cellular—determining the spatial distribution of the bodies  Organic—ensuring that the activities required of the bodies are "natural" for them  Genetic—controlling the evolution over time of the activities of the bodies  Combinatory—allowing for the combination of the force of many bodies into a single massive force .

But the development and generalization of disciplinary mechanisms constituted the other. coded and formally egalitarian juridical framework. but :use discipline to construct non-egalitarian power relations Historically. by all those systems of micro-power that are essentially non-egalitarian and asymmetrical that we call the disciplines. (222) Foucault's argument is that discipline creates "docile bodies". dark side of these processes.Foucault suggests this individuality can be implemented in systems that are officially egalitarian. representative regime. politics and warfare . everyday. physical mechanisms. the process by which the bourgeoisie became in the course of the eighteenth century the politically dominant class was masked by the establishment of an explicit. ideal for the new economics. made possible by the organization of a parliamentary. The general juridical form that guaranteed a system of rights that were egalitarian in principle was supported by these tiny.

of the modern industrial age - bodies that function in
factories, ordered military regiments, and school
classrooms. But, to construct docile bodies the disciplinary
institutions must be able to (a) constantly observe and
record the bodies they control and (b) ensure the
internalization of the disciplinary individuality within the
bodies being controlled. That is, discipline must come
about without excessive force through careful observation,
and molding of the bodies into the correct form through
this observation. This requires a particular form of
institution, exemplified, Foucault argues, by Jeremy
Bentham's Panopticon. This architectural model, though it
was never adopted by architects according to Bentham's
exact blueprint, becomes an important conceptualization of
power relations for prison reformers of the 19th Century,
and its general principle is a recurring theme in modern
.prison construction
The Panopticon was the ultimate realization of a
modern disciplinary institution. It allowed for constant
observation characterized by an "unequal gaze"; the

constant possibility of observation. Perhaps the most
important feature of the panopticon was that it was
specifically designed so that the prisoner could never be
sure whether they were being observed at any moment.
The unequal gaze caused the internalization of disciplinary
individuality, and the docile body required of its inmates.
This means one is less likely to break rules or laws if they
believe they are being watched, even if they are not. Thus,
prisons, and specifically those that follow the model of the
Panopticon, provide the ideal form of modern punishment.
Foucault argues that this is why the generalized, "gentle"
punishment of public work gangs gave way to the prison. It
was the ideal modernization of punishment, so its eventual
.dominance was natural
Having laid out the emergence of the prison as the
dominant form of punishment, Foucault devotes the rest of
the book to examining its precise form and function in our
society, laying bare the reasons for its continued use, and
.questioning the assumed results of its use

In examining the construction of the prison as the
central means of criminal punishment, Foucault builds a
case for the idea that prison became part of a larger
"carceral system" that has become an all-encompassing
sovereign institution in modern society. Prison is one part of
a vast network, including schools, military institutions,
hospitals, and factories, which build a panoptic society for
its members. This system creates "disciplinary
careers"[8] for those locked within its corridors. It is
operated under the scientific authority
of medicine, psychology, and criminology. Moreover, it
operates according to principles that ensure that it "cannot
fail to produce delinquents."[9] Delinquency, indeed, is
produced when social petty crime (such as taking wood
from the lord's lands) is no longer tolerated, creating a
class of specialized "delinquents" acting as the police's
.proxy in surveillance of society

began to show the traits Foucault was searching for.The structures Foucault chooses to use as his starting positions help highlight his conclusions. the Church.[10] Criticism Five theoretical arguments in favor of rejecting the :Foucauldian model of panopticism may be considered Displacement of the panoptical ideal by (1 . and the workhouse (industry) . Within it is included the Prison. and Mettray Netherlands were perfect examples for Foucault. the creation of the 'delinquent' class. the School. and the disciplinary careers emerging.mechanisms of seduction . In particular. The prisons at Neufchatel[disambiguation needed] .all of which feature heavily in his argument. Mettray. They showed the body of knowledge being developed about the prisoners. because they. his choice as a perfect prison of the penal institution at Mettray helps personify the carceral system. even in their original state.

and it is increasingly relevant in the age of Facebook and online self-disclosure.[12] The second argument concerns surveillance redundance.prediction and action before the fact .Supplementation of the panopticon by the synopticon (4 5) Failure of panoptical control to produce reliably docile subjects.[11] The first point concerns Zygmunt Bauman’s argument that the leading principle of social order has moved from panopticism to seduction.[citation needed] . socialized. .Redundancy of the panoptical impulse brought (2 about by the evident durability of the self-surveillance functions which partly constitute the normal.‘Western’ subject Reduction in the number of occasions of any conceivable (3 need for panoptical surveillance on account of simulation. This argument is elaborated in his 1998 essay ‘On postmodern uses of sex’. .

unobtrusive. . . Now. Increasingly the technological enlargement of the field of perceptual control. . . sight and foresight. . we are told. . unverifiable – all elements of artifice designed into an architectural arrangement of spaces to produce real effects of discipline. . the erasure of distance in the speed of electronic information has pushed surveillance . and react immediately with pre-programmed responses to the actual course of events . Surveillance. is articulated by William Bogard The figure of the Panopticon is already haunted by a parallel figure of simulation. . surveillance as its own simulation. one can simulate a space of control. concerning :action before the fact. is discreet. to the elimination of the Panopticon itself . . project an indefinite number of courses of action. train for each possibility. . Eventually this will lead. by its means of perfection. camouflaged. with simulation. Now it is no longer a matter of the speed at which information is gained to defeat an enemy.The third argument for post-panopticism. actual and virtual begin to merge.

[11] The fifth point concerns the self-defeating nature of panoptical regimes. the coliseum. The failure of surveillance states is illustrated by examples such as “prison riots. Panopticism I refers to Jeremy .[citation needed] Fourth. ego survival in Gulag or concentration camp.beyond the very limits of speed toward the purest forms of anticipation. asylum subcultures.”[11] In their 2007 article. This “reversal of the Panoptical polarity may have become so marked that it finally deconstructs the panoptical metaphor altogether”. [and] retribalization in the Balkans. the ‘Synopticon’ concerns the surveillance of the few by the many.[14] Examples of this kind of surveillance may include the theatre.[13] Anticipation is evident in emergent surveillance technologies such as social network analysis. and celebrity tabloid reporting. Dobson and Fisher[15] lay out an alternative model of post-panopticism as they identify three panoptic models.

effective. Panopticism III. refers to the high-technology human tracking systems that are emergent in the 21st century. These geographical information systems (GIS) include technologies such as cellphone GPS. child. Initial purchase prices and monthly service fees are equivalent to cell-phone costs. parent. Surveillance formerly justified solely for national security and high-stakes commerce is readily available to track a spouse. employee. and available to anyone who wants to use it. In less than five years. RFIDs (radio-frequency identification tags). and is it the model of panopticism that Foucault responds to in Discipline and Punish.Bentham’s original conceptualization of the panopticon. Panopticism III is also distinguished by its :costs Panopticon III is affordable. [15] . Panopticism II refers to an Orwellian ‘Big Brother’ ideal of surveillance. or stranger. the cost of continuous surveillance of a single individual has dropped from several hundred thousand dollars per year to less than $500 per year. neighbor. and geo-fences.

Jump up^ Discipline and Punish.. Jump up^ MODEL PRISONS . p. b Schwan. Post- Panopticism. Jump up^ "Discipline and Punish". 269-280. p. S. 30 (1977) 6.55 (1977) 7. 13(3). p. 285-307. . 2011. Territory. b Sargiacomo. p.References ^ Jump up to:a 1. & Shapiro. London : Pluto Press.The New York Times 1873 11. ^ Jump up to:a b c Boyne.48-50 (2007) ^ Jump up to:a 3. p. 29:2. (2009).26-27 (1977) 5. Jump up^ "Discipline and Punish".266 (1977) 10. Jump up^ Discipline and Punish. Economy and Society. (2011). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. How to read Foucault's discipline and punish.View Article . Michel Foucault. 2. M. Journal Of Management And Governance. A.300 (1977) 9. 4.57 (1977) 8. p. Jump up^ Security. Roy (2000). p. Population. Jump up^ Discipline and Punish. Jump up^ "Discipline and Punish".

—— 1999 ‘On postmodern uses of sex’. Cambridge: Polity. . 15. 2007. Jump up^ Bogard. Geographical Review 97 (3): 307-323. and P. (1997) ‘The viewer society’. F. (1998) Globalization: The Human Consequences.12. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fisher. Jump up^ Bauman. Theoretical Criminology 1(2). London: Sage. 13. 14. J. Z. T. Jump up^ Mathiesen.) Love and Eroticism. in Mike Featherstone (ed. W. The Simulation of Surveillance . The Panopticon's changing geography. (1996). ^ Jump up to:a b Dobson. E..

was first published in 1976 by Éditions Gallimard. The Will to Knowledge (La volonté de savoir). In Volume I. and The Care of the Self (le souci de soi). Foucault examines the emergence of "sexuality" as a discursive object and separate sphere of life.The History of Sexuality The History of Sexuality (French: L’Histoire de la sexualité) is a three-volume study of sexuality in the western worldby French historian and philosopher Michel Foucault. It was followed by The Use of Pleasure (l'usage des plaisirs). . Foucault explores the "repressive hypothesis".1984 In The History of Sexuality. the idea that western society suppressed sexuality from the 17th to the mid-20th century due to the rise of capitalism and bourgeois society. The first volume. He argues that the notion that every individual has a sexuality is a relatively recent development in Western societies. an English translation by Robert Hurley was published by Allen Lanein 1978. both published in .

encouraging people to confess their sexual feelings and actions. with some reviewers praising the book and . and that discourse on sexuality proliferated during this period. According to Foucault. In the second two volumes. The History of Sexuality received a mixed reception.Foucault maintains that the hypothesis is incorrect.others criticizing Foucault's scholarship Background . In the 18th and 19th centuries. the mentally ill. the criminal and the homosexual. Foucault deals with the role of sex in Greek and Roman antiquity. by the 19th century sexuality was being readily explored both through confession and scientific enquiry. during which experts began to examine sexuality in a scientific manner. society takes an increasing interest in sexualities that did not fit within the marital bond: the "world of perversion" that includes the sexuality of children. he argues.

and translated in 1977. 1: la volonté de savoir in French) was published in France in 1976.Publication Three volumes of The History of Sexuality were published before Foucault's death in 1984. II: l'usage des plaisirs) and The Care of the Self (Histoire de la sexualité.[1] The second two volumes. focusing primarily on the last two centuries. III: le souci de soi) dealt with the role of sex in Greek and Roman antiquity. The Will to Knowledge (previously known as An Introduction in English—Histoire de la sexualité. The Use of Pleasure (Histoire de la sexualité. The latter volume deals considerably with the ancient technological development of . and the emergence of biopowerin the West. The work was a further development of the account of the interaction of knowledge and power Foucault provided in Discipline and Punish (1975). and the functioning of sexuality as an analytics of power related to the emergence of a science of sexuality. The first volume.

and the third in 1986 In his lecture series from 1979 to 1980 Foucault extended his analysis of government to its ". It cannot be published under the restrictions of Foucault's estate. Foucault's death left the work incomplete.wider sense of techniques and procedures designed to direct the behaviour of men". Both were published in 1984. These themes of early Christian literature seemed to dominate Foucault's work.[2] .. the second volume being . and the planned fourth volume of his History of Sexuality on Christianity was never published.translated in 1985. which involved a new consideration of the ". alongside his study of Greek and Roman literature.examination of conscience" and confession in early Christian literature. The volume was almost complete before Foucault's death and a copy of it is privately held in the Foucault archive. However.the hypomnema which was used to establish a permanent relationship to oneself. The fourth volume was to be entitledConfessions of the Flesh (Les aveux de la chair)... the year of Foucault's death.. until the end of his life.

was socially repressed during the late 17th... the widespread belief among late 20thcentury westerners that sexuality. a by-product of the rise of capitalism and bourgeois society. Arguing that this was never actually the case. a ". noting that in portraying past sexuality as of earthly delights". and the open discussion of sex.repressive hypothesis". 19th and early 20th centuries. abandon the hypothesis that modern industrial ” . he asks the question as to why modern westerners believe such a hypothesis.Volume I: The Will to Knowledge Part I: We "Other Victorians" Part One.[3] Part II: The Repressive Hypothesis “ We must. it provides a basis for the idea that in rejecting past moral systems. 18th. entitled "We “Other Victorians”".. opens with a discussion of what Foucault calls the "... future sexuality can be free and uninhibited.

the proliferation of specific pleasures and the multiplication of disparate sexualities. through a network of interconnecting mechanisms. We have not only witnessed a visible explosion of unorthodox sexualities. even if it is locally dependent on procedures of prohibition. . but – and this is the important point – a deployment quite different from the law. has ensured.societies ushered in an age of increased sexual repression.

a political. when one could talk about it. economic.[4] Proceeding to go into further depth in Part Two. As evidence for the obsession of talking about sex. "The Repressive Hypothesis. 1976.. albeit using an "." Foucault notes that from the 17th century to the 1970s. Indeed.— Foucault.with selfappointed experts speaking both moralistically and rationally on sex. he highlights the publication of the book My Secret Life. He .".. and with whom.veritable discursive explosion" in the discussion of sex. and technical incitement to talk about sex. He argues that this desire to talk so enthusiastically about sex in the western world stems from the Counter-Reformation.authorized vocabulary" that codified where one could talk about it... when the Roman Catholic Church called for its followers to confess their sinful desires as well as their actions. the latter sort trying to categorize it. anonymously written in the late 19th century and detailing the sex life of a Victorian gentleman. there had actually been a "... Foucault states that at the start of the 18th century. there was an emergence of "...

"The Perverse Implantation".notes that in that century. which is monitored by both canonical and civil law. and that as such they had to concern themselves with such issues as birth and death rates. where previously a man who engaged in same- . society ceases discussing the sex lives of married couples. instead taking an increasing interest in sexualities that did not fit within this union. Firstly. Foucault argues that prior to the 18th century. the "world of perversion" that includes the sexuality of children. He notes that this had three major effects on society. he argues. there was increasing categorization of these "perverts". thereby increasing their interest and changing their discourse on sexuality.[5] Entering the second chapter of this section. discourse on sexuality focuses on the productive role of the married couple. the criminal and the homosexual. the mentally ill. marriage. In the 18th and 19th centuries. and contraception. governments became increasingly aware that they were not merely having to manage "subjects" or "a people" but a "population".

" readily engaging in perversity but regulating where it could take place. Thirdly.[6] Part III: Scientia Sexualis In part three. . he argues that bourgeoisie society exhibited "blatant and fragmented perversion. In contrast to the West's sexual science. Secondly. Foucault argues that the labeling of perverts conveyed a sense of "pleasure and power" on to both those studying sexuality and the perverts themselves." that of homosexual. now they would be categorised into a new "species. he argues that this scientia sexualis has repeatedly been used for political purposes. the attempt to unearth the "truth" of sex. Foucault explores the development of the scientific study of activities would be labeled as an individual who succumbed to the sin of sodomy. "Scientia Sexualis". Foucault introduces the "ars erotica" which he states has only existed in Ancient and Eastern societies. Furthermore. being utilized in the name of "public hygiene" to support state racism. a phenomenon which Foucault argues is peculiar to the West.

he maintains. "The Deployment of Sexuality. entering into the relationship between parent and child." arguing that scientists begin to trace the cause of all aspects of human psychology and society to sexual factors. the concept of confession survived and became more widespread." Foucault explores the question as to why western society wishes to seek for the "truth" of sex. arguing that as Roman Catholicism was eclipsed in much of Western and Northern Europe following the Reformation. Foucault proceeds to examine how the confession of sexuality then comes to be "constituted in scientific terms. lays . By the 19th century. he looks at the relationship between the confessor and the authoritarian figure that he confesses to. patient and psychiatrist and student and educator.Returning to the influence of the Catholic confession.[7] Part IV: The Deployment of Sexuality In part four. "Objective". the "truth" of sexuality was being readily explored both through confession and scientific enquiry. Chapter one.

"We must.construct an analytics of power that no longer takes law as a model and a code. Foucault argues that westerners still view power as emanating from law. disguised their intentions by claiming that they were necessary to maintain law. As a leftover concept from the days of feudalism. submission. and also how power masks its true intentions by disguising itself as beneficial." Foucault states. he highlights the manner in which the feudal absolute monarchies of historical Europe. and power without the king. "at the same time conceive of sex without the law.. proclaiming that we must ".." and announcing that a different form of power governs sexuality. As an example. themselves a form ofpower. and subjugation. Highlighting that power controls sex by laying down rules for it to follow.out Foucault's argument that we need to develop an "analytics" of power through which to understand sex."[8] . he discusses how power demands obedience through domination. and peace. order. but he rejects this.

"The Right of Death and Power over Life." In this way. This has changed to a "right to live.In the second chapter." as sovereign states are more concerned about the power of how people live. As in feudal times the "right to life" was more or less a "right to death" because sovereign powers were able to decide when a person died. because it comes from everywhere. "Method". . Power becomes about how to foster life. but instead remarks that power should be understood "as the multiplicity of force relations immanent in the sphere in which they operate. [9] Part V: Right of Death and Power over Life In part five. For example." Foucault asserts that the motivations for power over life and death have changed. Foucault explores what he means by "Power". he argues." emanating from all social relationships and being imposed throughout society bottom-up rather than top-down. explaining that he does not mean power as the domination or subjugation exerted on society by the government or the state. . "Power is everywhere . a state .

Foucault says it is "centered on the body as a machine: its disciplining. First. as vengeful justice. the level of health. it is argued. the optimization of its capabilities. births and mortality. as it once was. This new emphasis on power over life is called Biopower and comes in two forms. life expectancy and longevity. as states became interested in regulating and normalizing power over life and not as . with all the conditions that cause these to vary. Foucault argues.[11] Biopower. emerged later and focuses on the "species body. is the source of the rise of capitalism. the parallel increase of its usefulness and its docility.concerned about punishing and condemning actions Scholarly reception . the extortion of its forces. its integration into systems of efficient and economic controls. the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes: propagation."[10] The second form.decides to execute someone as a safe guard to society not as justified.

[13] Feminist Germaine Greer writes that Foucault rightly argues that. "what we have all along taken as the breaking-through of a silence and the long delayed giving of due attention to human sexuality was in fact the promotion of human sexuality. the creation of an internal focus for the individual's preoccupations. indeed.The reception of The History of Sexuality among . but criticizes Foucault for using "an undifferentiated concept" of speech and an imprecise notion of "power".[12] Gay activist Dennis Altman describes Foucault's work as representative of the position that homosexuals emerged as a social category in 18th and 19th century western Europe.scholars and academics has been mixed 1976–1989 Historian Jane Caplan calls The History of Sexuality "certainly the most ambitious and interesting recent attempt to analyse the relations between the production of concepts and the history of society in the field of sexuality"."[14] .

and thus 'authorizes."[17] . but that "his procedure is anecdotal and almost wholly unencumbered by facts. using his accustomed technique (reminiscent of the principle underlying Oscar Wilde's humor) of turning accepted ideas upside down.' exactly what needs to be explained: the philosophical establishment of the autonomous male subject".Historian Peter Gay writes that Foucault is right to raise questions about the "repressive hypothesis"." [15] Classicist Page duBois describes The Use of Pleasure as "one of the most exciting new books in the field of classical studies" and "an important contribution to the history of sexuality". but adds that Foucault "takes for granted.[16] Historian Patricia O'Brien writes that Foucault was "without expertise" in dealing with antiquity. he turns out to be right in part for his private reasons. and especially of Discipline and Punish. and that The History of Sexuality lacks "the methodological rigor of Foucault's earlier works.

J.[19] Scholar Camille Paglia rejects Halperin's views as uninformed.[20] Jurist and economist Richard Posner calls The History of Sexuality "a remarkable fusion of philosophy and intellectual history". together with the publication of K. Halperin writes in One Hundred Years of Homosexuality (1990) that the appearance of the English translation of the first volume of Foucault's work in 1978. Paglia observes that the book "is acknowledged even by Foucault's admirers to be his weakest work". calling The History of Sexuality a "disaster" and claiming that much of it is fantasy unsupported by the historical record. [18] He suggests that The History of Sexuality may be the most important contribution to the history of western morality since Friedrich Nietzsche's On the Genealogy of Morality (1887).1990–present Classicist David M. adding that Hurley's translation is . Dover's Greek Homosexuality the same year. marked the beginning of a new era in the study of the history of sexuality.

brilliant and that the book is lucidly written.[22] Literary critic Alexander Welsh criticizes Foucault for failing to place Sigmund Freud in the context of 19th century thought and culture. astonishingly bold. [21] Historian Michael Mason writes that in The History of Sexuality Foucault presents what amounts to an argument "against the possibility of making historical connections between beliefs about sex and sexual practices"." [24] . chronologies.[23]Historian Roy Porter calls The History of Sexuality. shocking even. in its subversion of conventional explanatory frameworks. and that Foucault does not make a case for such a need. proposed for example by Herbert Marcuse in Eros and Civilization (1955). that "industrialization demanded erotic austerity. "a brilliant enterprise." Porter credits Foucault with discrediting the view. Mason writes that Foucault's argument is only acceptable if one accepts the need to shift attention from "sexuality" to "sex" in thinking about the sexual culture of the last three centuries. and in its proposed alternatives. and evaluations.

Jump up^ Foucault 1999. [27] References Footnotes 1.Classicist Bruce Thornton writes that The Use of Pleasure. surveying the ancient evidence to make some good observations about the various techniques developed to control passion. [25] Philosopher Roger Scruton dismisses The History of Sexuality as "mendacious". is "usually quite readable. pp. 34. arguing that a form of ars erotica has been evident in Western society since at least the eighteenth century. Thornton criticizes Foucault for limiting his scope to "fourthcentury medical and philosophical works". and calls his book Sexual Desire (1986) an answer to Foucault's work. the second volume of The History of Sexuality.[26] Romana Byrne criticizes Foucault's argument that the scientia sexualis belongs to modern Western culture while the ars erotica belongs only to Eastern and Ancient societies. p. 47 . 2. Jump up^ Bernasconi 2005." However. 310.

139. Jump up^ duBois 1988. 21. 15. p. p. 92–102. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. Jump up^ Posner 1992. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. 49. 22. 17. 4. 37–49. 18. 198. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. 77–91. 10. 139. 48. pp. 172-3. 14. p. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. p. 13. 23. 12. p. 11. Jump up^ Caplan 1981. 6. p. Jump up^ Halperin 1990. p. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. pp. 4. p. Jump up^ O'Brien 1989. 187. 19. Jump up^ Greer 1985. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. pp. pp. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. 1–14. Jump up^ Halperin 1990. 15–36. 165. p. pp. 7. Jump up^ Gay 1985. 62. 2. 5. p. 42. . p. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. 9.3. p. 16. 53–73. 468-9. Jump up^ Mason 1995. p. 8. p. Jump up^ Foucault 1976. 20. pp. Jump up^ Paglia 1993. Jump up^ Altman 1982.

26. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. Jump up^ Thornton 1997. 128. 55. Romana (2013). p. . Jump up^ Porter 1996. Robert (2005). 24. 27. Dennis (1982). Bibliography Books  Altman. Aesthetic Sexuality: A Literary History of Sadomasochism. London: Virago.  Bernasconi. Jane (1981). ISBN 0-8070-4143-2. ed. External link in | title= (help)  Caplan. Jump up^ Welsh 1994. The Cambridge Women's Studies Group. New York: Bloomsbury. 25.  Byrne. pp. Jump up^ Scruton 2005. pp. 1-4.23. 248. ISBN 0-86068-083-5. 246. 252. Jump up^ Byrne 2013. Ted. Boston: Beacon Press. p. The Homosexualization of America. ed. Honderich. ISBN 978-1-4411-0081-8. ISBN 0-19-926479-1. Women in Society: Interdisciplinary Essays. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy.

Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality: And Other Essays on Greek Love. Oxford: Oxford University Press. London: Allen Lane. Routledge. Michel (1979) [1976].  Gay. The History of Sexuality Volume 1: An Introduction.  Foucault. ISBN 0-415-92362-X. ISBN 0-7139-1094-1. David (1993). London: Hutchinson.  Macey. ISBN 0-415-90097-2. Michel (1999).  Foucault. Peter (1985). ISBN 0-330-28551-3. Sex and Destiny: The Politics of Human Fertility. . Sowing the Body: Psychoanalysis and Ancient Representations of Women. (1990). ISBN 0-226-16757-7. Volume I: Education of the Senses. duBois. ISBN 978-0091753443. Religion and culture: Michel Foucault. The Lives of Michel Foucault. Germaine (1985).  Halperin. David M. Victoria to Freud.  Greer. ISBN 0-19-503728-6. New York: Routledge. London: Picador. Page (1988). The Bourgeois Experience.

ed. and American Culture: Essays. Cambridge. Patricia (1989). London: University of California. London: Routledge.  McGee. Camille (1993). Mason. Art. The New Cultural History. New York: Simon & Schuster. . James (1993). Richard L. Michael (1995). Lynn. ISBN 978-0671695507. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. New York: McGraw Hill. ISBN 0520-06429-1. Sara (2004). ISBN 0-14-017209-2.  Miller. ISBN 0-67480279-9. Warms. Hunt. Michel Foucault. The Making of Victorian Sexuality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (2011). ISBN 0078034884. Richard (1992). ISBN 0-19285312-0. New York: Penguin Books. Sex and Reason. Sex. ISBN 978-0415245692. Jon.  Posner. The Passion of Michel Foucault.  Paglia. R. Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History.  O'Brien.  Mills.

Debating Gender. ISBN 0-8147-4655-1. Porter. No. ISBN 0-8264-8033-0. Michel Foucault. Vol 8. "Critical Inquiry.  Welsh. Journals  Foucault. ed. 1982.  Scruton. Gentle Regrets: Thoughts from a Life. . Roy (1996). Freud's Wishful Dream Book. Keddie.. Princeton: Princeton University Press. New York: New York University Press. Michel (1982). Bruce S. London: Routledge. Alexander (1994). ISBN 0-8133-3226-5. Barry (2002).  Smart. Colorado: Westview Press. Debating Sexuality. Boulder. Nikki R. Roger (2005). (1997). Eros: The Myth of Ancient Greek Sexuality. ISBN 978-0415285339. 4". ISBN 0-691-03718-3. New York: Continuum.  Thornton.

These are expressed through language and behavior.[1][2] The method analyzes how the social world.[3] . and studies categorizations. and the relationship between language and power. as the researcher tries to understand how our society is being shaped (or constructed) by language. personal and institutional relationships. is affected by various sources of power. ideology.Foucauldian discourse analysis Foucauldian discourse analysis is a form of discourse analysis. which in turn reflects existing power relationships.[1] As such. Theory Besides focusing on the meaning of a given discourse. and politics. the distinguishing characteristic of this approach is its stress on power relationships. focusing on power relationships in society as expressed through language and practices. expressed through language. this approach is close to social constructivism. and based on the theories of Michel Foucault.[1][2] The analysis attempts to understand how individuals view the world.

[3] Foucauldian discourse analysis.The approach was inspired by the work of both Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.[4] Process Kendall and Wickham outline five steps in using "Foucauldian discourse analysis".  making practices material and discursive at the same time.[5] . The subsequent four steps are based on the identification of rules on:  how those statements are created. is often used in politically oriented studies.  what can be said (written) and what cannot.  how spaces in which new statements can be made are created. It is preferred by scholars who criticize more traditional forms of discourse analysis as failing to account for the political implications of discourse. like much of critical theory. The first step is a simple recognition that discourse is a body of statements that are organized in a regular and systematic way. and by psychoanalysis and critical theory.

The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. ISBN 978-1-4129-4163-1. Retrieved 22 February 2012. Given (2008). ^ Jump up to:a b c d Lisa M. 2. In a specific example. Emerald Group Publishing. a study may look at the language used by teachers towards students. 152. ISBN 978-184855-832-8. p. . p. [1] References 1.Areas of study Studies employing the Foucauldian discourse analysis may for example look at how figures in authority use language to express their dominance. and request obedience and respect from those subordinate to them. Autopoiesis in organization theory and practice. 249. Retrieved 22 February 2012. Ron Sanchez (2 November 2009). or military officers towards conscripts. This approach could also be used to study how language is used as a form of resistance to those in power. SAGE. ^ Jump up to:a b Rodrigo Magalhães.

Jump up^ Robin Wooffitt (23 April 2005). 147. SAGE. Using Foucault's methods. 146. Retrieved 22 February 2012 . p. Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: a comparative and critical introduction. ISBN 978-0-7619-5717-1. Retrieved 22 February 2012. Gary Wickham (8 February 1999). 5. Jump up^ Gavin Kendall. 42. 4. ^ Jump up to:a b Robin Wooffitt (23 April 2005). Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: a comparative and critical introduction. ISBN 978-0-7619-7426-0. SAGE. ISBN 978-0-7619-7426-0. p.3. Retrieved 22 February 2012. p. SAGE.

 The totality of codified language (vocabulary) used in a given field of intellectual enquiry and of social practice.[2] Therefore. such as legal discourse. and statements. repeatable communications to. religious discourse. et cetera.Discourse Discourse (from Latin discursus. statements in conversation. medical discourse. and that of the social theoreticians he inspired: discourse describes “an entity of sequences.[1]  In the work of Michel Foucault. and so communicate specific. "running to and from") denotes written and spoken communications such as:  In semantics and discourse analysis: Discourse is a conceptual generalization of conversation within each modality and context of communication. subjects. in that they are enouncements (énoncés)”.[2] As discourse. of signs. and among objects. an enouncement (statement) is not a unit of semiotic signs. but an abstract construct that allows the semiotic signs to assign meaning. a . between.

and knowledge. and statements. The term "discursive formation" (French: formation discursive) conceptually describes the regular communications (written and spoken) that produce such discourses. Michel Foucault applied the discursive formation in the analyses of large bodies of knowledge. the term discourse is studied in corpus linguistics. information. such as political economy and natural history. As a philosopher. thestudy of language expressed in corpora (samples) of “real world” text. In the second sense (the codified language of a field of enquiry) and in the third sense (a statement. Moreover. un énoncé).[3][4] In the first sense-usage (semantics and discourse analysis). the analysis of a discourse examines and determines the connections among language and structure and agency.discourse is composed of semiotic sequences (relations among signs that communicate meaning) between and among objects. because a discourse is a body of text meant to communicate specific data. . subjects. such conversations.

conducted according to the meanings (denotation and connotation) of the concepts (statements) used in the given field of enquiry.. two notably . Discourse affects the person's perspective. but is related to other discourses. ethnography.there exist internal relations in the content of a given discourse. . the discourse is a social boundary that defines what statements can be said about a topic. and sociology. such as anthropology. the philosophy of science and feminism. therefore. cultural studies and literary theory.? and What is not. in the course of intellectual enquiry. . it is impossible to avoid discourse. the discourse among researchers features the questions and answers of What is . For example. a discourse does not exist per se (in itself). likewise. . . by way of interdiscursivity. The humanities In the humanities and in the social sciences. the term discourse describes a formal way of thinking that can be expressed through language. As such. . there exist external relations among discourses.

Discourses are embedded in different rhetorical genres and metagenres that constrain and enable them. Modernism Modern theorists were focused on achieving progress and believed in the existence of natural and social laws . the chosen discourse provides the vocabulary. expressions and perhaps also the style needed to communicate. [5] Discourse is closely linked to different theories of power and state.distinct discourses can be used about various guerrillamovements describing them either as "freedom fighters" or "terrorists". In other words. This conception of discourse is largely derived from the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault. at least as long as defining discourses is seen to mean defining reality itself. That is language talking about language. for instance theAmerican Psychiatric Association's DSMIV manual tells which terms have to be used in talking about mental health. thereby mediating meanings and dictating practices of the professionals of psychology and psychiatry.

[7] Modernist theorists therefore viewed discourse as being relative to talking or way of talking and understood discourse to be functional.[9] Structuralism . [8] Discourse and language transformations are ascribed to progress or the need to develop new or more “accurate” words to describe new discoveries. freedom.which could be used universally to develop knowledge and thus a better understanding of society. language and discourse are dissociated from power and ideology and instead conceptualized as “natural” products of common sense usage or progress. this rhetoric masked substantive inequality and failed to account for differences. according to Regnier. however. and justice. understandings.[8] Modernism further gave rise to the liberal discourses of rights.[6] Modernist theorists were preoccupied with obtaining the truth and reality and sought to develop theories which contained certainty and predictability. or areas of interest. equality.[8] In modern times.

self-regulated.” [11] In other words. it is the structure itself that determines the significance. [7] Rather. and that structures are to be understood as selfcontained. emerged postmodern theory.[6] Postmodern theorists rejected modernist claims that there was one theoretical approach that explained all aspects of society. argue that all human actions and social formations are related to language and can be understood as systems of related elements. such as Ferdinand de Saussure and Jacques Lacan. [10] Postmodernism Following the perceived limitations of the modern era. and self-transforming entities. Structuralism has made an important contribution to our understanding of language and social systems. . meaning and function of the individual elements of a system.Structuralist theorists.[12] Saussure’s theory of language highlights the decisive role of meaning and signification in structuring human life more generally. [10] This means that the “…individual elements of a system only have significance when considered in relation to the structure as a whole.

Postmodern researchers therefore embarked on analyzing discourses such as texts. Postmodern theorists shifted away from truth seeking and instead sought answers for how truths are produced and sustained. In Discursive Struggles Within Social Welfare: Restaging Teen Motherhood. postmodern theory is more fluid and allows for individual differences as it rejected the notion of social laws.[13] Iara Lessa summarizes Foucault's definition of discourse as “systems of thoughts composed of ideas. contextual.[8] French social theorist Michel Foucault developed a notion of discourse in his early work. . Postmodernists contended that truth and knowledge is plural. language. especially the Archaeology of knowledge (1972).[8] In contrast to modern theory. and historically produced through discourses.postmodernist theorists were interested in examining the variety of experience of individuals and groups and emphasized differences over similarities and common experiences. policies and practices.

who may speak.[8] Discourse according to Foucault (1977. [8] Foucault (1977. and the privileged. 2003) is related to power as it operates by rules of exclusion.attitudes." In his . where and how one may speak. ritual. how they are maintained and what power relations they carry with them. [15] Coining the phrases power-knowledge Foucault (1980) stated knowledge was both the creator of power and creation of power. what can be spoken of. 1980. An object becomes a "node within a network. emphasizing the construction of current truths.” Foucault later theorized that discourse is a medium through which power relations produce speaking subjects. courses of action.[14] Foucault further stated that power is always present and can both produce and constrain the truth. Discourse therefore is controlled by objects. 1980) argued that power and knowledge are inter-related and therefore every human relationship is a struggle and negotiation of power. beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak." Foucault traces the role of discourses in wider social processes of legitimating and power.

Foucault uses the example of a book to illustrate a node within a network. which he related very closely to his conceptualization of governmentality in his lectures on biopolitics. overarching web of knowledge and ideas to which it relates. A book is not made up of individual words on a page.[16] This trajectory of Foucault's thinking has been taken up widely within Human Geography. other texts. | first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help). ." The meaning of that book is connected to a larger. but rather "is caught up in a system of references to other books. The Archaeology of Knowledge. Jump up^ .net. other sentences. each of which has meaning. Notes 1. Missing or empty |title= (help). June 2001. One of the key discourses that Foucault identified as part of his critique of power-knowledge was that of neoliberalism.

"Ideology and cultural identity: Modernity and the third world presence". b M. Foucault (1970 [1966]). 3. ISBN 1-57230-221-6. Thesaurus and Wordpower Guide (2001). Jump up^ Catherine F. The Order of Things. and Professional Identity Formation. Oxford University Press.^ Jump up to:a 2. The postmodern turn. Pantheon. Schryer and Philippa Spoel. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 2005. Health-Care Discourse. L'Archéologie du savoir. New 6. Genre Theory. 19. Paris: Éditions Gallimard. The Guilford Press.sagepub. ^ Jump up to:a b J. Jump up^ Compact Oxford Dictionary. 249http://jbt. Larrain (1994). 7. Foucault (1969). 5. Check date values in: |date= (help) 4. ISBN 0-415-26737-4. ^ Jump up to:a b Steven Best & Douglas Kellner (1997). Cambridge: Polity Press. Jump up^ M. .

ISBN 0-415-28752-9. Jump up^ D.doi:10. 2005 10.Pantheon 15. ^ Jump up to:a b Strega. 1972--1977. "Discursive struggles within social welfare: Restaging teen motherhood". Foucault (1972). Discourse. 17. Selected interviews and other writings 1972. Jump up^ I. Pa. Pa. M Foucault.1093/bjsw/bch256. Lessa (2006). Philadelphia.1977.: Open University Press.ISBN 0-33520070-2. Aaron. Howarth (2000). Jump up^ Sommers.ISBN 0-335-200702. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g 9. Jump up^ Regnier. Howarth (2000). 1980 . 2005 D. Jump up^ Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. 11. Discourse and Difference "University of New Hampshire Cosmology Seminar" [1] 13. Archaeology of knowledge. 14. p.8. Philadelphia. 12. New York: Pantheon.: Open University Press. British Journal of Social Work 36 (2): 283– 298. Discourse. . Jump up^ M.

ISBN 0-8147-5480-5. McHoul & W. Grace (1993).pubrev. (2008) The Birth Of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France. Mullaly (1997).doi:10. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press. 1978-1979. Structural social work: Ideology. A Foucault primer: Discourse. New York: Picador.  M.2007. References  M. ed.  J. M. power. Society Must Be Defended. "A toolbox for public relations: The oeuvre of Michel Foucault". Public Relations Review 33 (3): 263–268. Leitch (2007). theory." in Colin Gordon. New York: Pantheon. and practice (2nd ed.  R. "Two Lectures.004. Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews. Discipline and Punish. ISBN 0-7710-6673-2. Foucault (1980). New York: Pantheon.16. . Jump up^ Foucault.. Foucault (1977). ISBN 0-394-49942-5. and the subject.  M.  A. ISBN 0-312-42266-0. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. New York: Oxford University Press. Foucault (2003). Motion & S.05.).1016/j.

In Brown L. "Language. and the ownership of English".. Inc. 199–235). New York: PalgraveMacmillan. Gendered discourses. Brown.). In L.2307/3587831. JSTOR 3587831.  S. indigenous and antioppressive approaches. (TESOL))31 (3): 409– 429. (Eds. Sunderland (2004). B. Strega (2005). & S.  Research as resistance: Critical.  J. doi:10. Strega (Eds. The view from the poststructural margins: Epistemology and methodology reconsidered.(2005). Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press. Research as resistance (pp. TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages. Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press. identity.). . Strega S. A. Norton (1997).

Residing within cells flooded with light. Background Jeremy Bentham proposed the panopticon as a circular building with an observation tower in the centre of an open space surrounded by an outer wall. Discipline and Punish. with concrete walls dividing their cells. occupants would be invisible to each other.Panopticism Panopticism is a social theory named after the Panopticon. occupants would be readily distinguishable and visible to an official invisibly positioned in the central tower. the panoptic style of architecture might be used in other . Due to the bright lighting emitted from the watch tower. This design would increase security by facilitating more effective surveillance. This wall would contain cells for occupants. occupants would not be able to tell if and when they are being watched. Conversely. originally developed by French philosopher Michel Foucault in his book. Although usually associated with prisons. making discipline a passive rather than an active action.

"He who is subjected to a field of visibility. and who knows it. such as schools. is always "the object of information.[2] Foucault offers still another explanation for the type of "anonymous power" held by the operator of the central tower. he becomes the principle of his own subjection" (202-203). Foucault's Discipline and Punish In Discipline and Punish. assumes responsibility for the constraints of power. he makes them play spontaneously upon himself. suggesting that. factories.[1] He adds that. "We have seen that anyone may come and exercise in the central tower the functions of .institutions with surveillance needs. never a subject in communication". he inscribes in himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles. Michel Foucault builds on Bentham's conceptualization of the panopticon as he elaborates upon the function of disciplinary mechanisms in such a prison and illustrated the function of discipline as an apparatus of power. The ever-visible inmate. or hospitals[citation needed]. Foucault suggests.

if they are schoolchildren. no waste of time. such as: prisoners.surveillance. no coalitions. no chatter. [3] By including the anonymous "public servant. there is no danger of contagion. bad reciprocal influences. there is no danger of a plot. and that this being the case. or workers: "If the inmates are convicts. there are no disorders. he can gain a clear idea of the way the surveillance is practiced". the planning of new crimes for the future. if they are madmen there is no risk of their committing violence upon one another." as part of the built-in "architecture" of surveillance. make it less perfect or cause accidents". if they are workers.[1] . this panoptic design can be used for any "population" that needs to be kept under observation or control. no noise. medical patients. there is no copying. schoolchildren. none of those distractions that slow down the rate of work. the disciplinary mechanism of observation is decentered and its efficacy improved. an attempt at collective escape. no theft. As hinted at by the architecture. if they are patients.

world of information. increasingly digitalized. It is in this respect that the Panopticon functions automatically.By individualizing the subjects and placing them in a state of constant visibility. and factories in their structural similarities. Foucault goes on to explain that this design is also applicable for a laboratory. schools. Furthermore. Examples in the late 20th and early 21st centuries A central idea of Foucault’s panopticism concerns the systematic ordering and controlling of human populations through subtle and often unseen forces. it guarantees the function of power. even when there is no one actually asserting it. Such ordering is apparent in many parts of the modernized and now. Its mechanisms of individualization and observation give it the capacity to run many experiments simultaneously.[1] This is all made possible through the ingenuity of the geometric architecture. . In light of this fact Foucault compares jails. the efficiency of the institution is maximized. These qualities also give an authoritative figure the "ability to penetrate men’s behavior" without difficulty.

The Canadian historian Robert Gellately has observed. new technologies. These apparatuses of behavior control are essential if we are to govern ourselves. for instance. without the constant surveillance and intervention by an "agency" in every aspect of our lives. while on one hand. that Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon provides us with a model in which a self-disciplined society has been able to develop. such as CCTV or other surveillance cameras. that because of the widespread willingness of Germans to inform on each other . have shown the continued utility of panoptic mechanisms in liberal democracies. Foucault argues. for instance. it could also be argued that electronic surveillance technologies are unnecessary in the original "organic" or "geometric" disciplinary mechanisms as illustrated by Foucault. However.Contemporary advancements in technology and surveillance techniques have perhaps made Foucault’s theories more pertinent to any scrutiny of the relationship between the state and its population.

to the Gestapo that Germany between 1933-45 was a
prime example of Panopticism. [4]
Panoptic theory has other wide-ranging impacts for
surveillance in the digital era as well. Kevin Haggerty and
Richard Ericson, for instance, have hinted that
technological surveillance "solutions" have a particularly
"strong cultural allure" in the West.[5] Increasingly visible
data, made accessible to organizations and individuals
from new data-mining technologies, has led to the
proliferation of “dataveillance,” which may be described as
a mode of surveillance that aims to single out particular
transactions through routine algorithmic production. In
some cases, however, particularly in the case of mined
credit card information, dataveillance has been
documented to have led to a greater incidence of errors
than past surveillance techniques.[6]
According to the tenets of Foucault's panopticism, if
discursive mechanisms can be effectively employed to
control and/or modify the body of discussion within a
particular space (usually to the benefit of a particular

governing class or organization), then there is no longer
any need for an "active agent" to display a more overtly
coercive power (i.e., the threat of violence). Since the
beginning of the Information Age, there exists a debate
over whether these mechanisms are being refined or
accelerated, or on the other hand, becoming increasingly
redundant, due to new and rapid technological
Panopticism and capitalism
Foucault also relates panopticism to capitalism:
"[The] peculiarity of the disciplines [elements of
Panopticism] is that they try to define in relation to the
multiplicities a tactics of power that fulfils three criteria:
firstly, to obtain the exercise of power at the lowest
possible cost (economically, by the low expenditure it
involves; politically, by its discretion, its low exteriorization,
its relative invisibility, the little resistance it arouses);
secondly, to bring the effects of this social power to their
maximum intensity and to extend them as far as possible,
without either failure or interval; thirdly, to link this

'economic' growth of power with the output of the
apparatuses (educational, military, industrial or medical)
within which it is exercised; in short, to increase both the
docility and the utility of all elements of the system" (218).

"If the economic take-off of the West began with the
techniques that made possible the accumulation of capital,
it might perhaps be said that the methods for
administering the accumulation of men made possible a
political take-off in relation to the traditional, ritual, costly,
violent forms of power [i.e. torture, public executions,
corporal punishment, etc. of the middle ages], which soon
fell into disuse and were superseded by a subtle, calculated
technology of subjection. In fact, the two processes - the
accumulation of men and the accumulation of capital cannot be separated; it would not be possible to solve the
problem of the accumulation of men without the growth of
an apparatus of production capable of both sustaining
them and using them; conversely, the techniques that
made the cumulative multiplicity of men useful accelerated

the accumulation of capital . in short. could be operated in the most diverse political régimes. from the time a . discipline and. in some cases. such as building structures and direct human supervision. apparatuses or institutions" (220-221). Everything. 'political anatomy'.[2] Panopticism and Information Technology Building onto Foucault's Panopticism and Bentham's original Panopticon. The growth of the capitalist economy gave rise to the specific modality of disciplinary power..[9] Instead. "In the Age of the Smart Machine. whose general formulas. punishment in a work environment."[7] In chapter nine. Information Panopticons do not rely on physical arrangements.. techniques of submitting forces and bodies. Zuboff provides a very vivid portrayal of the Information Panopticon as a means of surveillance.[8] The Information Panopticon embodies Bentham's idea in a very different way. a computer keeps track of a worker’s every move by assigning him or her specific tasks to perform during their shift. Shoshana Zuboff applies the Panoptical theory in a technological context in her book.

All this is monitored by supervision from a computer. In chapter ten of “In the Age of the Smart Machine. Based on the data.[12] The conferencing system. originally intended to facilitate communication among the corporation’s many branches. [10] Workers are given a certain amount of time to complete the task based on its complexity. in which those under surveillance were unwilling subjects. a computer conferencing system used at a pharmaceutical corporation in the 1970s.[11] Unlike the Panopticon envisioned by Bentham and Foucault. is recorded. the supervisor can monitor a worker’s performance and take any necessary action when needed. The Information Panopticon can be defined as a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology as observational tools and control mechanisms. Zuboff’s work suggests that the Information Panopticon is facilitated by the benefits it offers to willing participants. quickly became popular with .task is started to the time it is completed.” Zuboff provides the example of DIALOG.

when managers were able to gain access to the informal discussion boards where employees posted offcolor jokes. [13] Employees widely reported that using the system was a positive experience because it created a culture of shared information and discussion. now knowing there was a possibility that their contributions could be read by managers and fearing .[15] Messages from the discussion were posted around the office to shame contributors.[12] The Panoptic function of the conferencing system was revealed. however.[14] This positive culture was enabled by the privacy seemingly offered by the conferencing system. as discussion boards could be made to allow access only to those who were invited to participate. as many employees began to use the system to joke with one another and discuss non-work related topics. which transcended the corporation’s norms of formality and hierarchy that limited the spread of information between divisions and employees of different ranks. Users of DIALOG found that the system facilitated not only innovation and collaboration. and many of DIALOG’s users. but also relaxation.employees.

they would face disciplinary action. but they may also use the system to conduct surveillance of others by monitoring or reporting other users’ contributions. compared to Bentham’s Panopticon. or whether they believed that the benefits offered by the system outweighed the possibility of punishment.[16] Some users. . Thus. This is true of many other information and communication technologies with Panoptic functions – cellphone owners may be tracked without their knowledge through the phones’ GPS capabilities. the Information Panopticon is one in which everyone has the potential to be both a prisoner and a guard. as prisoners in Bentham’s Panopticon would. but they may also use the device to conduct surveillance of others. Zuboff’s work shows the dual nature of the Information Panopticon – participants may be under surveillance. stopped using the system. kept using the system. however. raising the question of whether remaining users modified their behavior under the threat of surveillance.

[17] A society that values objectivity over everything else.[18] The Information Panopticon diverts from Jeremy Bentham's model prison by adding more levels of control. workers within the Information Panopticon know they are being monitored at all times. The system's objectivity can have a psychological impact on the workers. [19] While the Bentham's model prison system is made up of inmates at the lowest level monitored by a guard. the Information Panopticon can have various levels. and then a regional supervisor monitoring . Even if a supervisor is not physically there. each monitored by a supervisor. Contrasting with Bentham's model prison. the computer records their every move and all this data is at the supervisor's finger tips at all times. The point of this is to get as much productivity from the workers as possible.It is argued by Foucault that industrial management has paved the way for a very disciplinary society. A company or firm can have various satellite locations. Workers feel the need to conform and satisfy the system rather than doing their best work or expressing concerns they might have.

the lack of direct supervision only adds to a potentially precarious situation. [21] Furthermore. Now.[20] It is solely based on numbers. the efficiency of the Information Panopticon is in question. According to Zuboff. each monitoring all the levels beneath it. some people find the system to be highly advantageous. information Panopticons can have several levels.the supervisors below him or her. while others think it is very flawed because it does not account for the effort a worker puts into a task or things outside of a worker's control. Post-Panopticism Theoretical arguments in favor of rejecting the Foucauldian model of Panopticism may be considered under five general headings:[22] . Depending on the structure and size of a firm. Does it really lead to a better work place and higher productivity. or does it simply put unnecessary stress on the people being monitored? A major criticism of the system is its objectivity. therefore not allowing for human error.

Supplementation of the Panopticon by the Synopticon. The first point concerns Zygmunt Bauman’s argument that the leading principle of social order has moved from Panopticism to seduction. socialized. Failure of Panoptical control to produce reliably docile subjects. Redundancy of the Panoptical impulse brought about by the evident durability of the self-surveillance functions which partly constitute the normal. 2. Reduction in the number of occasions of any conceivable need for Panoptical surveillance on account of simulation. 3. Is the metaphor of a panopticon appropriate for voluntary surrender of privacy? . Displacement of the Panoptical ideal by mechanisms of seduction. 4. and it is increasingly relevant in the age of Facebook and online self-disclosure. prediction and action before the fact. ‘Western’ subject.1.[23] The second argument concerns surveillance redundance. 5. This argument is elaborated in his 1998 essay ‘On postmodern uses of sex’.

. is discreet. camouflaged.The third argument for post-Panopticism. unobtrusive. . we are told. to the elimination of the Panopticon itself . by its means of perfection. train for each possibility. . . Surveillance. actual and virtual begin to merge. surveillance as its own simulation. project an indefinite number of courses of action. . Now. . Now it is no longer a matter of the speed at which information is gained to defeat an enemy. the erasure of distance in the speed of electronic information has pushed surveillance . Eventually this will lead. . . one can simulate a space of control. with simulation. unverifiable – all elements of artifice designed into an architectural arrangement of spaces to produce real effects of discipline. is articulated by William Bogard: The figure of the Panopticon is already haunted by a parallel figure of simulation. concerning action before the fact. . . sight and foresight. Increasingly the technological enlargement of the field of perceptual control. and react immediately with pre-programmed responses to the actual course of events .

the Coliseum.[22] Finally.[24] This kind of anticipation is particularly evident in emergent surveillance technologies such as social network analysis.” [22] In their 2007 article. asylum sub-cultures. The ‘Synopticon’ concerns the surveillance of the few by the many. the fifth point concerns the self-defeating nature of Panoptical regimes. This “reversal of the Panoptical polarity may have become so marked that it finally deconstructs the Panoptical metaphor altogether”. Panopticism I refers to Jeremy Bentham’s original conceptualization of the panopticon.[25] Examples of this kind of surveillance may include the theatre. ego survival in Gulag or concentration camp. Dobson and Fisher[26] lay out an alternative model of post-panopticism as they identify three panoptic models.beyond the very limits of speed toward the purest forms of anticipation. . The failure of surveillance states is illustrated by examples such as “prison riots. and celebrity tabloid reporting. [and] retribalization in the Balkans.

and available to anyone who wants to use it. These geographical information systems (GIS) include technologies such as cellphone GPS. neighbor. effective. the final model of panopticism. Initial purchase prices and monthly service fees are equivalent to cell-phone costs.and is it the model of panopticism that Foucault responds to in his 1975 Discipline and Punish. or stranger. Panopticism II refers to an Orwellian ‘Big Brother’ ideal of surveillance. In less than five years. [26] The Cornell University professor and information theorist Branden Hookway introduced the concept of a . and geofences. RFIDs (radio-frequency identification tags). parent. child. refers to the hightechnology human tracking systems that are emergent in this 21st century. Panopticism III is also distinguished by its costs: Panopticon III is affordable. Panopticism III. Surveillance formerly justified solely for national security and high-stakes commerce is readily available to track a spouse. employee. the cost of continuous surveillance of a single individual has dropped from several hundred thousand dollars per year to less than $500 per year.

. Ericson and Kevin D. Haggerty. The object is defined only in relation to a specific issue." University of Toronto Press. Retrieved 2008-01-29. Jump up^ Foucault. 1990 pages 1112 & 22. p. "The new politics of surveillance and visibility. Haggerty. 198 4. Vintage Books. Jump up^ Richard V. Ericson and Kevin D. Jump up^ Richard V. but everyone and everything is monitored." University of Toronto Press. Discipline and Punishment. p. Michel. Clarendon Press: Oxford. Cartome.. 2006. 5.. Panopticism". Vintage Books. ^ Jump up to:a 2. Jump up^ Gellately. 2006. [27] References ^ Jump up to:a 1. Discipline and Punishment. 17 . 3. Michel. p. 14 6. "The new politics of surveillance and visibility. Robert The Gestapo and German Society.Panspectrons in 2000: an evolution of the panopticon to the effect that it does not define an object of surveillance more. New York: 1995. b c "Part Three: Discipline 3. b c Foucault. New York: 1995.

^ Jump up to:a b Zuboff. New York: Basic Books. 326. Science and Technology Alliance and Collaboratory. p. Jump up^ Zuboff. ISBN 0465032117. 12. Humanities. 11. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Jump up^ Kolar. p. New York: Basic Books. Shoshana (1988). p. 322. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Jump up^ Zuboff. Shoshana (1988). 315–361. ISBN 0465032117. Shoshana (1988). 331. Jeff. Arts. p. 8. "Business as Usual: The Information Panopticon and the Workplace". Jump up^ Zuboff. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465032117. 364. Jump up^ Zuboff. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465032117. . pp. Shoshana (1988). 10. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power.7. ISBN 0465032117. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. 9. Retrieved30 April 2014. Shoshana (1988). New York: Basic Books.

In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. New York: Basic Books. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Shoshana (1988). .13. 342. Shoshana (1988). 17. p. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. p. 368. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Shoshana (1988). Jump up^ Zuboff. Shoshana (1988). p. ISBN 0465032117. p. New York: Basic Books. Jump up^ Zuboff. New York: Basic Books. 380. Jump up^ Zuboff. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. 377. ISBN 0465032117. Shoshana (1988). New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465032117. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465032117. 14. p. 16. ISBN 0465032117. 18. 378. Jump up^ Zuboff. ISBN 0465032117. Jump up^ Zuboff. 319. 15. New York: Basic Books. p. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Jump up^ Zuboff. Shoshana (1988).

22. ISBN 0465032117. pp.19. 337–341. Roy (2000). Cambridge: Polity. 20. 23. 351–353. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 0465032117. T. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. . 285-307. in Mike Featherstone (ed. New York: Basic Books. pp. 360. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 21. (1998) Globalization: The Human Consequences. ^ Jump up to:a b c Boyne. 25. Theoretical Criminology 1(2). The Simulation of Surveillance . ISBN 0465032117. New York: Basic Books.) Love and Eroticism. (1996).—— 1999 ‘On postmodern uses of sex’. Jump up^ Bogard. 29:2. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. 24. W. Shoshana (1988). Shoshana (1988). Jump up^ Zuboff. Shoshana (1988). Post- Panopticism. Economy and Society. London: Sage. Jump up^ Zuboff. Jump up^ Bauman. p. Z. (1997) ‘The viewer society’. Jump up^ Mathiesen. Jump up^ Zuboff.

^ Jump up to:a b Dobson. ISBN 0465032117. Retrieved2014-0425 . The Panopticon's changing geography. pp. 315–361. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison. E. 27. Fisher. In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. Retrieved 2008-0615. 2007. Geographical Review 97 (3): 307-323. J.26. F.php/fm/article/v iew/1363/1282  Foucault. Jump up^ http://uncommonculture.  Michel (1995). New York: Vintage Books. New York: Basic Books. and P.. Shoshana (1988).