Foucault's Panopticon

Foucault in a few short words does not like the implementation of the panopticon or the idea of

Panopticism is a social theory named after the Panopticon, according to Foucault, his describes a watch tower in a prison and he thinks Panopticism is how people act different when they’re being watched. Rayner perspective on Panopticism is how we can use social media to our advantage. In this essay, I will analyze both Foucault and Rayner perspective on Panopticism and will determine the rhetorical appeals of both writings.

To start, is Foucault 's Panopticism. Panopticism uses the idea of Bentham’s Panopticon to elaborate the disciplinary ideas that he is trying to explain. The Panopticon is an “all seeing” structure that makes observations without the people ever knowing when they were being watched, even though it is clearly visible (Foucault, 204). Its gaze can be upon anyone, from a “madman, a patient, a condemned man” (Foucault, 200). These features allow Panopticism to be a passive power, rather than an active one. With this in mind, power is shifted from the hands of the individual to the anonymous “supervisor” of the Panopticon (Foucault, 200). This method of observation facilitates the transformation of individuals to controllable individuals (Foucault, 205).

The final sentence reveals the Panopticon’s true purpose: a political tool. The previous sentences break down the previously configured definition of the Panopticon and with this final piece, Foucault finishes redefining the term. Understanding that limiting the definition of the Panopticon would eliminate its functionality, Foucault chooses to interpret it loosely without assigning a set meaning to it. Thus, allowing the concept of the Panopticon to be used in other subject areas and not just as a tool for prisons. John Berger also addresses a similar issue through the example of artwork in his text, “Ways of Seeing”. Berger’s description of present day reproductions of images from the past explains how past processes can find use in the present through interpreting the essence of its meaning. More specifically, Berger believes that we can assign several different uses to objects of the past because the information that they provide remains the same even if the actual, physical object does not. “It is not a question of reproduction failing to reproduce certain aspects of an image faithfully; it is a question of reproduction making it possible, even inevitable, that an image will be used for many different purposes and that the reproduced image,

Michel Foucault wrote a book called History of Sexuality. In Part five of the book Right of Death and Power over Life, he discusses about the historical “Sovereign Power” where one is allowed to decide who has the right to live and who has the right to die. The sovereign uses his power over life through the deaths that he can command and uses his authority to announce death by the lives he can spare. Foucault then moves on to Disciplinary Power where he came up with the “Panopticon” where one is to believe they were under surveillance at all times. Such surveillance is still used in our everyday life such as schools, prisons, offices, hospitals, and mental institutes. Later in his life, Foucault discovered Bio-power. This bio-power

Panopticism is a social theory named after the “panopticon”, which was originally developed by the French philosopher, Michel Foucault. Panopticon was first mentioned in his book, Discipline and Punish. In his book, he refers "panopticon" to “an experimental laboratory of power in which behaviour could be modified.” Foucault considered panopticon as a symbol of the “disciplinary society of surveillance” (Panopticism). In the two novels, Nineteen Eighty-Four and Frankenstein, panopticism is an element shown greatly. Though these two novels have many differences, this similarity shared between the two is equally important.

     The Panopticon, a prison described by Foucault, “is a machine for dissociating the see/being seen dyad: in the peripheric ring, one is totally seen, without ever seeing” (321, Foucault). This literally means that in the formation of the panopticon those who are being seen can not see one another and the one who sees everything can never be seen. That is the most important tool of the panopticon. Foucault makes this assumption about today’s society by saying that we are always being watched whether we know it or not. One always keeps an eye over their shoulder as a

The author of the essay “Panopticism”, Michel Foucault gives his opinion on power and discipline in Panopticism. He describes Jeremy Bentham’s “Panopticon”, a tower in the centre of a room which has vision to every cell, generalized for prisoners. In simple words, it functioned in maintaining discipline throughout the jail. It’s most distinctive feature was that; prisoners could be seen without ever seeing. Prisoners would never really know when they are watched and when not. They are always under the impression that someone is keeping an eye on them continuously and if anything goes wrong, or they make mistake, they would be punished severely. Since, a prisoner would never know when he/she is watched, they have to be at their best. In a

Serial killers are usually made because of a significant event/events that may have happened during their childhood. Albert DeSalvo may be one of those serial killers. He grew up in an abusive household. He was taught at an early age about sex and physical abuse. This behavior demonstrates the characteristics of the social learning theory. This paper will go into great detail on Albert DeSalvo’s family background and the crimes that he committed in his lifetime, give a brief description of social learning theory, discuss differential association, and show how Albert DeSalvo and the social learning theory are related.

In “Panopticism”, Foucalt describes the architecture of a Panopticon, and how it makes it so unique and efficient. A person in the middle is watching at all times, yet the people can never know if they are being watched or not. Also, the prisoners cannot communicate with one another, which prevents the threat

The Panopticon better known as the perfect prison offers a jarring reflection of how society has been monitoring and policing our women through several different practices within a social cycle. Feminist philosopher, Sandra Lee Bartky, displays how everyone in society is guilty of monitoring and policing of femininity in her article, “Foucault, Femininity, and the Modernization of Patriarchal Power” Bartky’s symbolic use of the Panopticon is a way to allude that systems set in place by the male patriarchy have been a tool in order to oppress and objectify women. Despite the idea of the Panopticon being used to show how women are scrutinized the rest of Bartkey’s argument seems to have flaws by not fully exploring content and making generalizations on who can and cannot be policed. Bartky’s inference to the Panopticon is poignant but despite this the argument made in her article is lacking as she does not fully develop upon her ideas.

According to Foucault, power does not belong to the individual, but to the system, to the institution. In his essay on Discipline and Punish, Foucault presents his idea of the panopticon mechanism, a mechanism in which visibility is a trap. With little importance over the actual individual in the role of the observer or of the observed, the object of the system is total power over the observed. Due to the unique shape of the panopticon, there are no corners and thus no blind spots for the observed to hide in. The private space is replaced by the public one. Furthermore, as final evidence of total control, the observed never knows for sure if they are being watched or not, as they can’t see the observer (Foucault 200-205). Foucault further argues that this system is followed by any government institution, placing the society under permanent observation. Individuals might try to evade the system, but achieving liberation and freedom is not something that anyone could do. Dostoevsky’s famous novel, Crime and

Every individual is seen however cannot communicate with the jailers or other detainees. The panopticon affects a feeling of perpetual visibility that guarantees the working of force. Bentham declared that power ought to be obvious yet unverifiable. The detainee can simply see the tower but never knows if he is being watched. The twentieth century French theorist Michel Foucault understood that that model could be utilized for detainment facilities as well as for each establishment that looks to control human conduct: schools, healing centers, work environments. Once more, Foucault said that this mentality, this system found by Bentham, was the key method for societal control for cutting edge, Western social orders, which no more need the plain weapons of oppression rebuffing or detaining or murdering nonconformists, or legitimately convincing dependability to a specific gathering on the grounds that mass observation makes a jail in the psyche that is a considerably more inconspicuous however a great deal more powerful method for encouraging consistence with social standards or with social conventionality, significantly more successful than forced power could ever

Foucault's "Panopticism" (1979) is a careful piece that talks about how a panoptic framework would impact culture, society, the political, and individuals. Foucault describes panopticon is to “induce the inmate a state of conscious and visibility that assures the automatic function of power.” Foucault mentions, surveillance has a lasting effects, regardless of the fact that it is discontinuous in its activity; that the perfection of power ought to render its real unneeded practice. The Inmates are in a dominating circumstance that they are them-selves the bearers. Foucault (201, 202–3) also mentions that "He who is subjected to a field of visibility, and knows it, expect responsibility regardless of the constrains of power; he makes them play spontaneously upon

“The Panopticon functions as a kind of laboratory of power,” Foucault declares; indeed, much knowledge can be ascertained by “penetra[ting] into men’s behavior” (379).