In the first
chapter of Space, Place, Sex: Geographies of Sexualities, Johnston and
Longhurst (2009) articulate the importance of discourse in creating individual
and collective bodies. In addition, the two authors narrate how Michel Foucault
provides examples “in which individuals and populations are regulated through
the power of a surveillant gaze” (Johnston and Longhurst, 2009, p. 30).
However, the example that Michel Foucault uses in his groundbreaking book Discipline
and Punish (1977) is the Panopticon.
The Panopticon
was developed in the 18th century by Jeremy Bentham. It is an architectural
design to ensure the power of a surveillance machine (Ozguc, 2010). The idea
was first developed to control and discipline prisoners through making a dark
watchtower. “The whole purpose of the Panopticon is to ensure that the unseen gaze
of the inspector creates an illusion of constant surveillance which would deter
abnormal behavior and discipline individual bodies” (Ozguc, 2010). This design
is commonly used today in prisons as well as in social and public institution
such as schools, hospitals and governmental offices.
(Inside the
Presidio Modelo Prison in Cuba. Image source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon#mediaviewer/File:Presidio-modelo2.JPG)
This Panoptic technology
is also constructed in social spaces to create spatial injustice. In the
reading entitled Spatial Justice: A Frame for Reclaiming our Rights to Be,
Thrive, Express and Connect, the writers mention that one of the ways to
create spatial injustice is spatial attacks. Spatial attacks include a
construction of a segregation wall as the one in the case study “Sweet Auburn”
in Atlanta, Georgia. Walls also serve as a panoptic gaze in creating spatial
injustice, uncertainty, unpredictability and subordination (Ozguc, 2010).
The example
that Ozguc (2010) provides in his article is the West Bank Wall, which was
constructed by the Israeli government in 2002. The Israeli Wall in the West Bank
is an eight meter high concrete wall (26 foot), with electric fence, electronic
sensor, watchtowers and monitoring systems, which does not separate the West
Bank from Israel, but it also separates Palestinian villages, buildings, the
connection between Palestinian enclaves, and communities (Ozguc, 2010;
Leuenberger, 2011).
However, Ozguc (2010) argues that the Panopticon system cannot be applied to the West Bank Wall, since the wall which creates chaos, uncertainty and unpredictability in the Palestinian side, and the Panopticon system aims to create an ideal society. Nonetheless, the West Bank Wall creates spatial injustice, not only because ethnically segregate between Palestinians and Israelis, but because it excludes Palestinians as the “Others” (Ozguc, 2010). The construction of such physical objects in social spaces generate the stereotypes and homogenizing the "Other" (Leuenberger, 2011), and “administer the exclusion of the Other” with permits of entering and rights of movement and accessibility (Ozguc, 2010).
References:
Design
Studio for Social Intervention. Spatial Justice: A Frame for Reclaiming our
Rights to Be, Thrive, Express, and Connect. Retrieved from: http://ds4si.org/storage/SpatialJustice_ds4si.pdf
Johnston,
L., & Longhurst, R. (2009). Space, place, and sex: Geographies of
sexualities. Rowman & Littlefield.
Leuenberger,
C. (2011). From the Berlin Wall to the West Bank Barrier: How material objects
and psychological theories can be used to construct individual and cultural
traits. In Gerstenberger, K. & Braziel, J. (Eds.), After the Berlin
Wall: Germany and Beyond (pp. 59-83). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ozguc,
U. (2010). Beyond the panopticon: The separation wall and paradoxical nature of
Israeli security imagination. In Australian Political Studies Association
conference, Melbourne, September (pp. 27-29).
Spatial injustice in school was mentioned in the article "Spatial Justice: A Frame for Reclaiming our Rights to Be, Thrive, Express, and Connect." according to the article, spatial power can be defined as how a given place creates conditions that allow (or deny) ability to accomplish something. The article states: "Youth within historically racially and economically
ReplyDeletemarginalized groups have a fifty percent drop out
rate inside of public schools"(4). One can't help but wonder if this is due to the lack of spatial power, and the increase in spatial injustices within public school systems.
As mentioned in the Blog above, Jeremy Bentham's creation of the concept Panopticism was originally intended for prison in order to better account for people's every move, and ensure obedience amongst inmates.
Jeremy Bentham's system of surveillance may have contributed to advancements in today's society ( (the internet, telephones, cell phones, social security numbers, the census, ATMs, credit cards, and the ever increasing number of surveillance cameras in urban spaces). These are all positive outcomes of panopticism, but there are negatives as well.
Many public schools today have formed a panopticistic environment. School systems have camera surveillance throughout the entire school, rules and regulations on when a student can leave/enter classrooms, and even what time they must eat lunch. Students cannot even leave the building without permission or else they receive consequences. Most schools are even fenced in or lined with barbed wire. Students cannot walk in the halls without a hall pass, and must eat at a specific time everyday. They must walk in a single file line when told to do so, and are assigned a specific seat in class. It is evident school systems are ran extremely similar to that of a prison.
School is supposed to be an inviting friendly environment focused on helping every student exceed their potential. Bulletin boards, posters, art work, and other inviting decorations are what students are used to and comfortable with. Approachable staff members/ teachers also enhance the positivity of the environment and learning as a whole. However, over the years school systems may have taken it too far. With all of the strict rules and surveillance, many students may feel uncomfortable. The increase in drop out rates in public school systems may be a result to students associating their school with being spatially in-just. Student's seem to be treated as if they are in prison when they have done nothing wrong. They are merely controlled, and not treated as innocent human beings. This video does a good job of comparing a school and a prison.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogmtAQlp9HI
references: http://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/theory/newhistoricism/modules/foucaultcarceral.html
Spatial Justice: A Frame for Reclaiming our Rights to Be, Thrive, Express, and Connect.
The topic of surveillance is certainly something to be discussed with regards to the affects that it has on society. It’s interesting that within different contexts, surveillance can create either order or it can create chaos. You demonstrated this well with the comparison of the prison to the West Bank Wall.
ReplyDeleteIt’s also interesting to consider how surveillance affects different groups of people. “Being watched” could make an individual feel more secure or on the other hand, this could make an individual feel uncomfortable. So is this ‘utopia’ created by the design of a panopticon meant to ensure control by those in power or is it really going to create a safer, more secure environment for those in that space? This question is partially answered by the observation of ‘spatial injustice’ and ‘spatial attacks’ by Ozguc in his observation that unrest is often created by extreme surveillance and spatial control from a ‘top down’ approach from a group that’s more advantaged than another.
I also like how your post brought forth the question of how architecture can affect social spaces. Even outside of the concern of surveillance, architecture has a variety of aspects, like history or aesthetic, that can affect the feelings of an individual or community. This would be an interesting topic to investigate in the future ~