Analysis of Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison Article by Michel Foucault - Assignment Example

Supervisor 15 April History Michael Foucault, in the article, ‘panopticism,’ describes power systems in history and transition from plague model to panopticism. The author, based on an order that existed in the seventeenth century, outlines measures that were taken in response to occurrence of a plague. Once a plague occurred in a city, it was partitioned and sealed. Houses were closed, people were closely monitored, and penalty for violation was death. Families planned for their utilities and ratios were offered at strategic points, within each quarantine areas. Interactions between families were however restricted within this time. Finally, a process of purification followed. The process also involved isolation of lepers from the society with the aim of ensuring purity. The plague, however, is a symbol of modern measures for ensuring a disciplined society. Response measures to a plague symbolize mechanisms and authorities for identifying and evaluating indiscipline for adequate corrective measures. Operation of similar forces to brand those who are not disciplined and to transform them towards an organized society is then discussed (Foucault 195- 199). Foucault also discusses Bentham’s panopticon, another symbol for the modern day authority. In the figure, each prisoner was placed in a room that could be watched from a centralized tower. Each room had two windows, one directed towards the tower and another in the opposite direction and open to light. The light would then illuminate prisoners and allow an observer at the tower to see whatever happened in the rooms. No communication is however possible between prisoners or between prisoners and the observers. Unlike the previous approach to isolation, the panopticism model offered access to light and visibility and improved efficiency of discipline. It allowed for use of lesser personnel and effectiveness of administration (Foucault 200- 204). Questions asked The author’s discussion of the two imageries, the plague and Bentham’s panopticon, are ways of seeing history and developed bases for the author’s exploration of history. Based on the images, the author explores many questions that form major themes of the article. The first question can be framed as follows, how is power attained and managed in ensuring discipline? The author uses both imageries to answer this question. From the plague imagery, the author reports that power is attained through mobilization of authority for extensive influence and through isolation of subjects. The panopticon approach is a replica of the approaches but operates more efficiently because of its modification. The following are some of the questions that can be inferred from the text’s themes and explain the author’s opinions on discipline and panopticism. What are the roles of disciplinary mechanisms? What are the roles of the different systems for discipline? What are the processes in disciplinary institutions? What processes influenced formation of a disciplinary society? From the questions, themes such as roles of disciplinary actions that include reformation, treatment, instruction, and confinement, based on identified need for a normal society, are implemented. Processes towards discipline such as “inversion of disciplines” (Foucault 210), “swarming of disciplinary mechanisms” (Foucault 211), and centralized control of approaches for discipline are also discussed. Other themes such as economic, political, and scientific effects on evolution of disciplinary society are also addressed on the inferred questions (Foucault 206- 219). Research strategy and methods Even though the author does not disclose applied research strategy and method for developing the content, a qualitative approach that involves review of exiting literature is the most probable approach. The approach to literature development that refers to occurrences from the seventeenth and eighteenth century, a long period that means impossibility of possible observation into development of the history means that the author reviewed literature into ancient response strategies to plagues and the panopticism approach to managing prisoners. Reliance on such literature is particularly evident from the author’s reference to an order that was published in the seventeenth century. References to existing literature that the author makes throughout the text also show the use of literature review in developing the work. The approach defines an in-depth analysis of knowledge from knowledge from existing sources on a subject with the aim of consolidating facts on the issue and identifying knowledge gaps for possible advancement literature. The approach is particularly suitable for developing knowledge in history because the past is the focus and Foucault’s test is an example because it discusses ancient systems and their transitions that influenced the current law enforcement systems. Payoff of the approach Developed knowledge from the research identifies an improved system from the ancient approaches to punishment. With the transition, the author concludes that focus is made on discipline instead of the power of the king or the judging authority. This is contrary to the ancient approach that focused on punishing the body of the criminal and establishing authority over the criminal. A systematic and due process that focuses on justice is the identified final state of the disciplinary system in which prisons resemble other social institutions such as barracks and factories. Another payoff of the literature review approach is credibility in the developed knowledge because the audience is convinced that the author’s opinion is informed. Reliance, specifically on published sources that are also credible, further facilitate this. consolidation of historical facts under the article’s topic is another payoff of the research and promotes knowledge development and analysis of historical facts. Contribution to historical knowledge The greatest payoff of the author’s research approach is contribution to historical knowledge. Description of the ancient measures for managing plagues and the panopticism architecture and their relation to the disciplinary approaches, both ancient and contemporary, explains existence of the justice system across history and the fact that it has just evolved and become efficient. The two imagery illustrate the transition in the earlier periods that has continued to the contemporary society and even though the imageries are limited to the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, developed knowledge on the transition explain that gradual historic changes has taken place to result in the current justice system. Historical knowledge also exists under different subjects and each author and work may focus on a specific area. Developing a work that integrates many previous literatures means consolidation of earlier works and analysis of the work’s consistency. This validates existing historical knowledge, from the author’s perspective and allows the audience to understand consistency of existing historical facts. The author therefore develops new historical information, validates existing historical knowledge, and offers basis for future research into further knowledge development. Limitation to the author’s research approach Potential bias is the greatest limitation to the author’s approach to research. The qualitative approach is susceptible to such biases as sampling bias and interpretation bias. Since the researcher is the instrument for data collection, identification of literature to be reviewed and collection of data from the selected literatures, it is likely that an author selects literatures that are consistent with personal opinion. Similarly, a person can be selective on information from existing sources to convey only those that support personal interest. Bias can also occur in analysis of collected data and these undermine credibility. In such a case, no valid contribution can be attributed to a work. Inability to validate information in the explored literatures, either by the author or by the audience, is another limitation to the study. The author has to assume validity of ancient facts such as the 17th century order for dealing with plagues just because such facts exist in literature. Lack of technology such as live coverage that could show actual occurrence of such facts identifies the limitation and undermines reliability existing and developed history. Possible additional questions The following are possible additional questions to the inferred questions from the text. What have been effects of the historical transitions in the disciplinary approaches on rates of defiance? What conflicts of interest have existed along the transitions? While the author discusses the transitions under the imageries, he fails to explain associated effects on wrongdoers. Did the transition from the initial incarceration approach to the panopticism approach deter wrongdoing or did it just make it efficient to manage inmates? Has future development in disciplinary approaches been able to deter defiance to authorities? Answering these question would add to the author’s developed history and improve consolidation. Changes also elicit conflicts as some parties offer resistance and any objection to the transitions should be discussed. In addition, some changes are automatic while other are based on needs and history should clarify the types of force behind reported transitions in disciplinary approach. Foucault’s addition to the history of industrial revolution Foucault associates the transition in disciplinary measure with operations and structure of industries. The transition identified efficiency of the disciplinary system through reduced number of officers, and therefore reduced cost, and through improved structure, and associating it with industrial set up means that its economic effects influenced industries and therefore contributed to industrial revolution. The author therefore implies that the transition was replicated in industries to focus on low expenditure through reduced number of personnel and use of machines, and to minimize possibility of failure (Foucault 218). Industrial revolution’s shift from reliance on human as primary source of labor to use of machines could have therefore been a result of the changes in the disciplinary system towards efficiency. Conclusion Foucault developed the article from literature review, an approach that develops in-depth knowledge on an issue but is susceptible to bias. The historian does not state any question but develops rich history through consolidation of historical knowledge on the subject. This facilitates critique of existing literature for further knowledge development. Questions on possible forces behind the reported transition and effects of the transitions on defiance rates could however still be asked and used to improve the literature. Achieved efficiency from the transitions, and based on relevance of elements of the transitions to industries suggest effects of the transition in industrial revolution towards reliance on machines. Works cited Foucault, Michael. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group, 2012. Print. Read More