Dose of amusement: my heroes.
Foucault quote of the day: It’s a machine in which everyone is caught, those who exercise power just as much as those over whom it is exercised. This seems to me to be the characteristic of the societies installed in the nineteenth century. Power is no longer substantially identified with an individual who possesses or exercises it by right of birth; it becomes a machinery that no one owns.
Haha, okay if that dorky attempt at a Foucault joke wasn't warning enough here's your official disclaimer: this is that email where I hook you up with the down low on Foucault. Don't worry it won't be intense or anything, but I figure since he's the reason I'm here it would make sense to just give a basic run down of what I'm doin exactly. I'm even currently dressed for this momentous occasion. Yep, I'm wearin that sexy little number and it's hotter than the 7 black dresses I own. Yeah I own that many.
Well here we go, and for those of you who hate when I talk philosophy enjoy this cause you can shut me up with just one click, but that wouldn't be very nice to Monsieur Foucault. My finger puppet agrees. Yeah I own one.
For my thesis, as I mentioned and sent the wikipedia link earlier, I'm writing on the French post-modern philosopher/historian/genealogist Michel Foucault. I'm focusing on one of his more popular books Discipline and Punish. Here are two short youtube videos (5 mins each) that basically give you a run down with some cool pics and Foucault's cute english. Here's a bit of a simple thought experiment to wrap your mind around what Foucault is talking about:
_____
Let’s say it’s four o’clock in the morning and you find yourself driving in a small town. It is still dark outside and there is no one in the car with you, nor is there another car in sight. You are completely alone on the road and you have been for the entirety of your journey. As you approach an intersection and notice you have the red light you slow down and come to a stop. Even though there are no cars for miles in any direction, you stop. Perhaps you do so grudgingly or your mind momentarily considers not stopping. Yet, your first impulse is to stop and you do. Moreover, not only to you stop but you wait, you hesitate. Something keeps you at that stop light while thoughts pass through your mind: Is it really necessary for me to stop? There’s no one around, should I just go ahead? Time drags on as these questions go through your mind. Maybe you go before the light turns green. Maybe you stay.
There is not something about the stop light that physically forced you to stop. It is not an untenable wall in your path. It’s a symbol, one of many we encounter everyday, to which we have been taught to respond. We stop without even thinking. Everyone stops not only because they fear getting in an accident but also because they fear getting caught. At any moment a police officer could catch you or there’s the chance the intersection has cameras which monitor traffic. In this simple commonplace event, we are able to see a way in which we become objects of scrutiny. We live a field of surveillance, always aware of the potential to be watched, to be caught, even if no one is actually watching. It is that awareness which makes us stop at a stoplight at four in the morning when no one is around. Even in absence of a verifiable form of scrutiny or the actual presence of an individual, we are constantly aware of the potential to be observed. This fear then seems to be something we have internalized. We have become our own police, our own discipline.
Whatever it is that makes you stop at a stoplight at four in the morning when no one is around is one way to begin thinking about central questions Foucault explores in Discipline and Punishment. Foucault is interested in the “what”: the complex forces that make you stop; the forces that make you aware of surveillance and of punishment.
___Foucault uses what has become an extremely popular metaphor to explore these forces: the Panopticon, a prison designed by Jeremy Bentham, which was never fully implemented. The pic in the link will help this make sense, but basically there's a central tower and all the cells face in to the tower. The prisoners cannot see each other or anything else, only the tower, and the tower is designed as such that the guards can at all times see all the prisoners but the prisoners can never see the guard in the tower. Bentham argues that the genius behind this is that there then doesn't even need to be a guard in the tower because the prisoners will discipline themselves because at any given moment, they know they could be watched-- the potential threat of observation like with the stop light. Foucault then uses this as a metaphor for our society as a whole. The stoplight would just be one example of how we are aware of the potential thread of surveillance in our daily lives. Basically, society is one big panopticon, of course in a non literal sense.
In my thesis I deal directly with this metaphor and I will argue that it should be interpreted in a non-literal sense, meaning that we de-emphasize the visual element. I know, wtf matey, huh? Meaning I don't think we should say we are living in a panoptic society because of the literal ability to be seen. There are different ways we can become "visual" or legible to power. For example, if you're writing a paper for a prof, while you're writing you're constantly thinking "Will the prof like this? Is this making sense? Will I get an A? Do I sound smart?" etc. While writing you paper there is [hopefully] no way your prof could see you. Unlike with the stop light, you're not worried about a camera or being visible, you're worried about inteligibilty, the ability to be understood. And you are constantly discilplining yourself, being your own police, with the potential threat of being misunderstood. Even thought the prof isn't there, you're changing your behavior based on what you think he or she might think of your paper.
Perhaps to make it a bit clearer, the panopticon has become a really popular subject in the U.S. There are a ridiculous amount of articles that say "look my bosses' desk is in the middle and we're all sitting around it in the circle...my work is the panopticon!" I'm going to argue against those people. Foucault's metaphor, I believe, isn't about actual architecture, spacial arrangement, or the the ability to see someone with your eye. Power relations are more complex than that and we're missing the picture if we think Foucault is just talking about videocameras and desks. It's the way we've been disciplined to sit, talk, act, think, or even communicate with our professors.
Okay now look at the cute monkies and don't hate me. There you go, now you're thinking about cute monkies and your mind can relax or do whatever it does when it thinks about monkies ;)
Well I hope you can forgive me, and if you can't remember it was voluntary and this is really important to me and the reason I'm in another country where don't speak a word. I promise this will be the only email of it's kind, and thanks for letting me share my project which I'm really passionate and excited about. If you have any q's do ask and if you want to learn more I have a cute intro to Foucault book you're welcome to borrow that you could read in under 40 mins and has tons and tons of fun pictures. Peace out!
