ANTH 3420 Urban Archaeology OER

Public Group active 2 years, 8 months ago

Week 4: Architecture and Urban Plans as Technologies of Control

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #78470

    The two readings for this week focus on the panopticon of Jeremy Bentham used as a method of self-policing and a way to control space and action within that space-surveillance. Compare the two readings discussions on this form of power and control and explore the idea of the panopticon or legacy of this form of surveillance and control in today’s society. How are they similar? How do they differ?

    #78525
    Blessing Tate
    Participant

    For me, this read was a bit heavy in connotations. I had to do some research outside of the text to gather a better understanding of the ideologies that were presented. Hopefully, this is a suitable reflection of what both authors are attempting to postulate.

    Leone offers a thorough understanding of historical archaeology and capitalist processes; his analysis of the ancient archaeology of capitalism is political. The article portrays Leone’s concern with the social impacts of archaeology in the present and the various ways to nurture vital perceptions among multiple publics. He uses the capitalist theory to show the outcome of creating resources of social exploitation. Leone discusses some of the central themes that are associated with historical archaeology of capitalism, such as consciousness, consumption patterns, advocacy, commodity fetishism, and the ideology of individualism.
    Foucault analyzes the formulation of modern prisons and the developments in the western penal system. The author draws his inspiration to the discussion of “Panopticism” from the work of Jeremy Bentham and his ideas of panopticon. Bentham’s panopticon is considered the most famous and effective model of a prison—a domed building constructed with multiple sides and a watchtower where all prisoners could be observed, but no prisoner could see any other. Foucault’s central thesis is that measures that seemingly serve to rehabilitate criminals and hence the society are in real sense power instruments of discipline which are not exceptional to prisons but can be utilized by other institutions such as hospitals and schools. In “Panopticism,” Foucault describes how discourse works in parallel with discipline to produce the contemporary individual who is seemingly independent and distinctive but is ideally controlled.
    Both Leone and Foucault examine archaeological developments of modern societies. Foucault’s ideas concerning surveillance and discipline contribute to Leone’s study of capitalism in local historical viewpoint. Leone used Foucault’s description of Bentham’s panopticon and surveillance in his assessment of the discipline of the self.

    #78627
    nolcie pierre
    Participant

    Leone describes Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon as a model prison famous for its architecture. The panopticon is modeled as a multisided, domed building in which all inmates are visible from a central point inside the prison (and or rehabilitation center). The most important aspect of this model is the idea that these inmates will never know at what point they are being watched so it should encourage them to be on their best behavior at all times (for fear that they could be surveilled at a time they least expect it leading to punished for their transgressions). They also never know who exactly is watching them and for how long they are being watched.

    Although I found difficulty in reading the piece by Focault due to his poetic style in writing, I was happy to see that Leone mentioned Foucault’s notions of Panopticism. It was clear that Leone had a secure understanding of Foucault’s thesis on the panopticon. Going along with the most important aspect of the panopticon model, the idea of subjects being surveilled by an “all-knowing unknown” is rooted in the 18th and 19th-century ideals of individualism. Those who were “sane” and “secure” with themselves felt it was an obligation to watch and to feel watched, to monitor and to be monitored. Somehow the need to be watched evolved in the hands of authority figures (like the government). The idea of “the Panoptic gaze” is constructed in other buildings like hospitals, churches, insane asylums, schools, libraries, and forts (like Castle Williams on Governors Island) all of which were designed for surveillance. Authority figures took this “all-knowing- unknown” idea and used to control those they thought were uncivilized. These buildings were made so that the inhabitants can feel like they are being watched all the time, therefore, they should behave well all the time (because someone is “always” watching). This idea is definitely prevalent in the 30 odd years. There are cameras on every corner of the block in New York, mini police towers in “dangerous” neighborhoods, and with every domestic terrorist attack comes thousands of more cameras added to our streets, coffee shops, and even our everyday devices. The government places its citizens under surveillance under the same idea that it is for our protection and reformation.

    #78630
    Denille Samuel
    Participant

    Both readings where interesting and I believe power is the common factor in both. I understand power as possessing control. One can have the power to influence or the power to manipulate, or the power to change or destroy through discipline or punishment. That power can be placed in the body as a form of control, self-control or self-policing. Foucault elaborates on how the mechanism of “Panopticism” becomes internalized to the point of no longer needing a physical presence of authority exacting control. In todays society we police ourselves for the most part, with the exception of those that eventually end up in some form of prison because they are unable to fully internalize the gaze (the feeling aware of being watched which in turn makes one control their own behavior). While I felt Foucault’s focus was more on the body and how the panoptic schema can produce controlled behavior, Leone’s section on “Baroque and Panoptic Planning” was more focused on landscapes being structured to control the population. Both are similar in the sense that both are geared toward control of the individual in society, Foucault’s seemed to explain this phenomenon on a more micro level while Leone’s landscapes explained the phenomenon on a more macro level.
    In society today we have face recognition camera on the streets and in our phones, the watchful eye of the public as we walk down the street, our Google and Alexa devices are always listening. Whenever I go out to a restaurant to eat and I notice my elbows are on the table, I remove them and give a glance around to see if I was noticed. I understand fully that if one acts a way in public that is not fit, it can warrant an arrest, or some negative response and I truly have no desire to do so. I believe this is the self-surveillance that Foucault and Leone addressed in the readings.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #78636

    Reflections #4

    The two readings for this week focus on the panopticon of Jeremy Bentham used as a method of self-policing and a way to control space and action within that space-surveillance. Compare the two readings discussions on this form of power and control and explore the idea of the panopticon or legacy of this form of surveillance and control in today’s society. How are they similar? How do they differ?

    The first article is “Panopticism from ‘Discipline and Punish: The Birth of a Prison’” by Michel Foulcault, a French philosopher. The second article is “Historical Archaeology of Capitalism” by Mark P. Leone, an American archaeologist.

    In his article, Foulcault notes that the first formation of a prison or one could call it a proto-prison was the result of plague quarantine at the end of the 17th century.   The local townspeople were confined to their homes.  The town was then broken up into quarters and special attendants were selected to watch each quarter.  The townspeople were required to report once a day as the attendants made their rounds.  The townspeople were given food and supplies as needed.  There was a system of canals which ensured that the townspeople had as little contact as possible with other healthy or sick people.  The plague quarantine and the leper ostracism that Foulcault’s article describes are examples of two different types of control of people.  The quarantine allows for the strict breakdown and regimentation of the daily lives of the populous.  What I understand from the reading is that there were two forces at work—exclusion and control through visibility—which came together in the 19th century in the form of insane asylums and prisons meant to isolate and control those deemed the other by society.  An example would be the Bentham’s panoticon, which is basically a circular building, with a tower in the middle, and the cells are all open to human observation at all times.  With the threat of constant observation, the people housed within start to act as if they are being constantly observed by obeying the rules.  Basically the subjects become their own suppressors, acting as their jailors want them to act.  It appears to have long lasting effects.  Panoticonism can be used to break down and analyze the traits of a population.

    Leone’s article begins with exploration of the use of existing buildings and monuments to analyze how politics/capitalism have changed over time.  Leone states that for capitalism to work properly its workforce needs to be controlled.  Panopticism is related to capitalism in that it allows the government or the business owner to control the population or workforce. The article goes over how the layout of different buildings and landscapes through the use of panopticism can be used to separate and control the populace, while at the same time making them feel unified and actively playing a part in the government.  Leone gives as an example the town of Baltimore, Maryland, which in the early 19th century was a major center of wealth and trade.  The layout of buildings, such as town hall, allowed the townspeople to actively participate in government meetings, while at the same time they were visible to the governmental leaders and anyone else who attended.  This would lead to self-censorship because any comments they made at the meetings would be known to not only the leaders but anyone else who attended, making it easy to retaliate against those who voiced unpopular opinions.

    While I really didn’t understand the Foucault article and it seemed to be repetitive, Foucault seems to be neutral or somewhat supportive of panopticism.  He doesn’t seem to criticize it and he even gives some examples of how it could be expanded.  This seems to indicate that he views panopticism in a positive light.  Leone analyzes how panopticism was used in Baltimore.  He believes that panopticism was essential for keeping parts of the populace, such as women and black communities in Baltimore, apart and unequal to the rest of society, which he views as a bad thing.  Leone gives a few examples of how oppressed groups in other places resisted capitalism.  While the authors understand the ways in which panopticism can be used, they disagree on whether it should be used.

    Panoticism is used today through cameras which record nearly our every move.  There are cameras on personal electronic devices.  Stores, banks and other businesses track our purchases through their various cards and send incentives in the form of coupons to get us to spend more.  Whenever you look for a location or store through Google, it asks for your location.  Businesses track their workers at work through different devises—punch cards or fingerprint readers and cameras– and some also track their workers when they are not on the job through social media.  All these devices provide data to predict and to a certain extent to control or direct consumers purchases and workers actions.  There are also cameras on light poles and at entrances to buildings.  There are cameras at intersections, which photograph license plates, to catch speeding drivers.  The purpose is ostensibly for public protection and to catch lawbreakers.   All this tracking means that it is difficult to do anything undetected in by various commercial and governmental groups.  This makes us vulnerable to hackers working for criminal groups and foreign countries who might want to steal from us or attack us or influence our elections.

    Attachments:
    You must be logged in to view attached files.
    #78638
    Kellen Gold
    Participant

    Both readings point to the individualizing power of the panopticon – by isolating people, they are reduced down to their individuality and all group identities are forcibly shed. This has the ability to stifle political awareness and action, as the individual no longer feels part of something bigger. Foucault focuses on the automatizing effects of panopticism (consolidating power through rote, coerced activity), while Leone argues that a critically applied historical archaeology can allow marginalized groups to resist the burden of the panopticon and capitalism by claiming the political privileges of recognized heritage. A major difference between the articles is the contexts they were written in. Foucault wrote in France during the 1970s and 1980s; Leone is American and published this piece in 1995. This affects the perspective of the authors.

    In contemporary times, the power of the panopticon has only increased as technology improves. There are cameras everywhere, and one feels constantly watched. In one of my previous anthropology classes, the concept of the panopticon came up and I argued that it’s current version is one that covers the whole world and causes an omnipresent awareness of the monitoring of one’s activities. The power of the panopticon has also become highly individualized, as many people’s smartphones act as an ever present distraction and constraint of power.

    #78639
    Jared West
    Participant

    I must admit that this week’s reading went over my head, as I had a difficult time understanding both of the readings but nevertheless I will try and do my best. The first reading, written by Michael Foucault starts off by talking about the plague. Foucault goes into depth about how a city would police themselves during an outbreak of the plague; the city would be closed off, all stray animals would be killed, the town is divided into sectors and everyone must stay indoors. This “self policing” is a common theme throughout this work as  he uses it to segue into discussing the main point of this chapter, that being the Panopticon. Located in Dublin, the Panopticon is a “multi-sided, domed building in which all inmates are visible from one central building, but in which no inmate could see each other.” (Leone pg 7)  As far as my understanding goes, what this means is that each person in this prison can assume that they are being watched but, has no idea when which in turn would cause them to  consistently be on their best behavior i.e a form of self policing. One thing that I found interesting within this reading was that this building makes it possible to “perfect the exercise of power by reducing the number of those who exercise it while increasing the number of those who on whom it’s exercised on.” (Foucault pg 10) What this means is that just by using it, as less people are able to use it giving it an exclusivity, in which it gets power from.

    The second reading written by Mark P. Leone discusses the historical archaeology of capitalism. The reading also talks about a form of self-policing however rather than using something like a panoptican, poverty lines is used as the method of policing. In this article it is mentioned that poverty alongside enslaved people tend to lead lived that are unpredictable, however this is essential to America. Leone beings to mention the idea of a baroque towns. Baroque towns plans are a city planning method when drawn up which gave the illusion which was a city designed to enhance centers of power by separating the classes, so there is a very clear distinction between the powerful and the powerless while at the same time still giving off the facade of unity. These social hierarchies were separated physically which aided in maintaining the illusion of unity while at the same time segregating the poor from the rich The poor would work hard while the rich would remain unchallenged, distinct districts.

    These two readings both discuss how self-policing can be done not in an obvious way, through more conniving methods. In the case of the Panopticon, you wouldn’t know when your being watched, so you assume you always are being watched. In the case of Leone’s reading, the “invisible” segregation can deter any form of uprising by making it seem as though everyone is living together harmoniously.

    #78640

    The article by Michael Foucault was about Bentham’s Panopticon. Through the article Foucault describes how the building is used and the reason for its use. He also gives reasons for why it works. According to Foucault the Panopticon is a “marvelous machine” that “produces homogeneous effects of power. Foucault’s image of the Panopticon is that of a form of power and control that is better than any other method. He goes so far as to say that the panopticon can be used for more than just prisons. He believes that it works for hospitals, schools and production companies.

     

    The article by Leone does not view the Panopticon in a similar way. Leone argues that historic archaeology must be used to study the class structure of america throughout its history in order to understand the divide capitalism created. He cited various scholarships throughout his argument including Foucault. Before mention Foucault and the Panopticon he mentions another scholar named Edmund S. Morgan. He brings up how Morgan said american freedom wasn’t possible without poverty. Leone is arguing that America’s history and its poverty are intertwined. Leone brings up Foucault and the Panopticon because he believes the government didn’t trust the poor. He studies the layout of Baltimore and mentions how there are various buildings within the city that are Panoptic so the government can keep tabs on those they don’t trust. Leone believes these buildings were created to maintain the hierarchy created by capitalism.

     

    Leone talks about power and control because he wants to understand how these functioned in American History. Its his goal to use historical archaeology to learn about class struggle and the capitalist hierarchy in american history. Foucault however views the Panopticon as a positive way of government citizens whereas Leone is outline that says in which it divides people and controls them in a negative way.

     

    Today we can see surveillance at all times especially in NYC there are surveillance, security, and even just phone cameras running 24/7. However, I don’t believe it has the effect of the Panopticon is supposed to have. I believe many people, including myself, walk around ignoring or forgetting that there are cameras on them. People just go about their lives as if its all normal. Crime still occurs and people are still rude.

     

    #78643

    All responses bring up excellent points! These were tough and dense pieces but you all got the main points the authors were projecting. Let’s bring these points to class and discuss more.

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.