Panopticism vs Privacy
In the twenty-first century, privacy is dead, and the disillusionment by the government fractured. With all the information leaking to the public, people are awakening to the authorities slowly taking control and utilizing new methods to spy on them. An early blueprint of this idea, the Panopticon is a tall tower capable of spying on everyone at once, while the targets have no way of identifying the spies. In Michel Foucault's article, “Panopticon,” from his book, Discipline and Punish, he explores the invasive nature of the modern state and the outlandish measures they take to perform surveillance, raping the citizens of their freedoms. Foucault’s description of the Panopticon mirrors the encroaching nature of the
…show more content…
In his article, the centralized tower requires a heavy infrastructure, making it infeasible in practice. He describes the cells as having “axial visibility” and “lateral invisibility,” making every action of the prisoner visible while ensuring that the prisoners cannot see the actions of the captors (Foucault 999). In reality, this kind of surveillance is impractical since it requires a great deal of architectural planning and drains economic resources. Despite the heavy monitoring of citizens, crime does not stop. As Kietzmann and Angell suggest, “only one crime is solved by each 1,000 CCTV cameras” and implementing these methods “leads to massive expense and minimum effectiveness” (Kietzmann and Angell 135). Although the government spends millions of dollars investing in new surveillance methods, the inefficacy of their approach cannot justify this great expense. If an individual intends to commit a crime, not even the heaviest surveillance in the world can hinder them. Although heavy surveillance rarely prevents criminal activities, it successfully creates what Saladdin Ahmed deems a “totalitarian space,” which he defines as “a unified, flat, transparent control [that] can best be described as panoptic,” the result of “spatial technologies” (Ahmed 2). Essentially, a totalitarian space seeks omniscience and omnipresence, instilling fear into the people, and …show more content…
"Panopticism and Totalitarian Space." Theory in Action, vol. 11, no. 1, Jan. 2018, pp. 1-16. EBSCOhost, doi:10.3798/tia.1937-0237.1801.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. 6th Ed. John Schilb and John Clifford. Making literature matter: an anthology for readers and writers, Boston, MA: Bedford/ St. Martin’s, 2015. 998-1000. Print.
Kietzmann, Jan and Ian Angell. "Panopticon Revisited." Communications of the ACM, vol. 53, no. 6, June 2010, pp. 135-138. EBSCOhost,
Perhaps no other event in modern history has left us so perplexed and dumbfounded than the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany, an entire population was simply robbed of their existence. In “Our Secret,” Susan Griffin tries to explain what could possibly lead an individual to execute such inhumane acts to a large group of people. She delves into Heinrich Himmler’s life and investigates all the events leading up to him joining the Nazi party. In“Panopticism,” Michel Foucault argues that modern society has been shaped by disciplinary mechanisms deriving from the plague as well as Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon, a structure with a tower in the middle meant for surveillance. Susan Griffin tries to explain what happened in Germany through Himmler’s childhood while Foucault better explains these events by describing how society as a whole operates.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline & Punish. New York: Random House Inc, 1978. Print. 3 May 2014.
Foucault, Michel. “Panopticism.” Ways of Reading. Fifth ed. Ed. David Barholomae and Anthony Petrosky. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 1999, 312-342. Print.
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Ever feel as though someone is watching you? You know that you are the only one in a room, but for some reason you get an eerie feeling that you are not alone? You might not see anyone, but the eyes of a stranger could be gazing down on you. In Foucault's "Panopticism," a new paradigm of discipline is introduced, surveillance. No one dares to break the law, or do anything erroneous for that matter, in fear that they are being watched. This idea of someone watching your every move compels you to obey. This is why the idea of Panopticism is such an efficient form of discipline. The Panopticon is the ideal example of Panopticism, which is a tool for surveillance that we are introduced to in “Panopticism.” Kurt Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron," has taken the idea of surveillance one step further. The government not only observes everyone, but has complete control over society. The citizens of the United States cannot even think for themselves without being interrupted by the government. They are prisoners in their own minds and bodies. The ideals of “Panopticism” have been implemented to the fullest on society in Vonnegut’s "Harrison Bergeron," through physical and mental handicaps.
Foucault once stated, “Our society is one not of spectacle, but of surveillance; under the surface of images, one invests” (301). By this, he means that our society is full of constant supervision that is not easily seen nor displayed. In his essay, Panopticism, Foucault goes into detail about the different disciplinary societies and how surveillance has become a big part of our lives today. He explains how the disciplinary mechanisms have dramatically changed in comparison to the middle ages. Foucault analyzes in particular the Panopticon, which was a blueprint of a disciplinary institution. The idea of this institution was for inmates to be seen but not to see. As Foucault put it, “he is the object of information, never a subject in communication”(287). The Panopticon became an evolutionary method for enforcing discipline. Today there are different ways of watching people with constant surveillance and complete control without anyone knowing similar to the idea of the Panopticon.
As each person feels alone and alienated under big brother’s watchful eye, they have no choice but to build the only relationship and bond they can, with that of their oppressor. The knowledge that the thought police watches the citizen’s every move influences the masses towards a “norm” of a constant state of fear and discipline resulting in utmost loyalty to Big Brother. Also, because people have no idea when they’re being watched, they learn to behave as if always under scrutiny. This transforms people into their own forms of a panoptic gaze, policing their own thoughts and actions from the fear of possible surveillance. Foucault refers to it as “ becoming the bearers of our own oppression”.
Principles of the Panopticon can appear just about everywhere in our everyday life. The Panopticon itself is a simple system of centralized visualization. The basis of the original Panopticon was a circular prison system with a tower sitting in the middle that had a full, unobstructed view of all the prison cells. I can apply this idea to many situations in my life varying from computer use to my college classrooms. An instance, which stands out the most in my mind as being a panoptic environment, is my experiences in gaming casinos.
In Michael Foucault’s “Discipline and Punish”, the late eighteen century English philosopher Jeremy Bentham's model of Panopticon was illustrated as a metaphor for the contemporary technologies of mass surveillance.
Michel Foucault’s essay, “Panopticism”, links to the idea of “policing yourself” or many call it panopticon. The panopticon is a prison which is shaped like a circle with a watchtower in the middle. The main purpose of the panopticon was to monitor a large group of prisoners with only few guards in the key spot. From that key spot, whatever the prisoners do they can be monitored, and they would be constantly watched from the key spot inside the tower. The arrangement of panopticon is done in excellent manner that the tower’s wide windows, which opened to the outside and kept every cell in 360-degree view. The cells were designed so it makes impossible for the prisoners to glances towards the center. In short, none of the prisoners were able to see into the tower. The arrangement of cells guaranteed that the prisoner would be under constant surveillance. This is the beauty of the panopticon that anyone can glance at the cells from the tower but no prisoners can see the tower. The prisoners may feel like someone is watching, and know the he or she is powerless to escape its watch, but the same time, the guard in the tower may not be looking at the prisoners. Just because the prisoners think that someone is watching them, they will behave properly.
In doing so, Foucault famously compares contemporary society to a prison- “prison is not so unlike what happens every day.” Ultimately, Foucault attempts to exemplify
Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be known that the laws made so long ago can still uphold proper justice? With the laws that are in place now, it’s a constant struggle to balance security with privacy. Privacy laws should be revised completely in order to create a better happy medium between security and privacy. A common misconception of most is that a happy medium of privacy and security is impossible to achieve. However, as well-said by Daniel Solove, “Protecting privacy doesn’t need to mean scuttling a security measure. Most people concerned about the privacy implications of government surveillance aren’t arguing for no[sic] surveillance and absolute privacy. They’d be fine giving up some privacy as long as appropriate controls, limitations, oversight and accountability mechanisms were in place.”(“5 Myths about Privacy”)
In his book titled Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Michel Foucault explores the beginning of the modern-day prison system and the culture of surveillance that it has created. Foucault argues that the modern penal system is one that executes mental and psychological punishment w...
Foucault, M. (1995) Discipline and Punishment The Birth of the Prison [online]. 2nd ed. USA: Penguin Books, Ltd. [Accessed 01 January 2014].
Foucault wrote a book called Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison explaining his thoughts on how he discipline should be taught. Discipline and Punish is a book about the emergence of the prison system. The conclusion of the book in relation to this subject matter is that the prison is an institution, the objective purpose of which is to produce criminality and recidivism. The system encompasses the movement that calls for reform of the prisons as an integral and permanent part. Foucault states that The more important general theme of the book is that of “discipline” in the penal sense, a specific historical form of power that was taken up by the state with professional soldiering in the 17th century, and spread widely across society, first via the panoptic prison, then via the division of labor in the factory and universal education. The purpose of discipline is to produce “docile bodies,” the individual movements of which can be controlled, and which in its turn involves the psychological monitoring and control of individuals, indeed which for Foucault produces individuals as