Two films with prisons as settings will compliment Foucault’s writing on the subject: Frank Darabont’s Shawshank Redemption (1994) and Stuart Rosenberg’s Cool Hand Luke (1967). Within the prisons explored in the films the prisoners find themselves subject to just the sort of power described above: a power over the body supported by the very structure that confines the prisoners. Though the prisons themselves do not resemble the panopticon, the systems of control in place at the institutions also offer an image of power at work. The man with no eyes finally conquers Luke’s spirit in Cool Hand Luke. Within Shawshank two different responses to the power of the prison system lead to different characterizations of Brooks and Andy, one of conquered and one of conqueror. These and other images displayed in the films capture power at work in the prison system. Before discussing these films that center on prisons a brief analysis of one scene from The Count of Monte Cristo (2002) shows the old manifestation of power typical to the time of public torture.
Edmond Dantes finds himself imprisoned inside the Chateau d’If, a cliffside fortress in Marseilles, France, with cells of rock. The prison looks nothing like the panopticon; indeed its architecture is far from symmetrical. Contrary to the more modern prisons that promise surveillance at all times, the prisoners are largely ignored. The food comes through a slot low on the door; their toilet buckets leave the same way. In fact, the prisoners are only actually seen once a year: on the anniversary of their arrival at the prison. The warden promises to visit the prisoners on this anniversary for a whipping.
This annual contact for physical torture is the only contact the prisoners have with any human. Left alone in their isolation, they are out of sight but not out of the influence of power. The promise of physical pain each year weakens their morale and their willingness to attempt any rebellion or escape. This is the power of torture described by Foucault. But the prison changed for simple reasons of efficiency: for a cell to offer isolation and also to be impenetrable requires too much space. To accommodate more prisons as well as a new economy of power, prisons became places where power was distributed through means other than physical torture – though the body remains the chief target.
Monday, April 30, 2007
Introduction to prison films and the Count of Monte Cristo
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
what is the year of production for the version of Monte Cristo you are using?
The year of release is 2002. Here is the imdb page: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0245844/
Would you consider institutionalization the means through which the panopticon asserts itself?
Not necessarily. I see what you are getting at, but for it to be different the panopticon needs to "institutionalize" better than other institutions - a traditional prison, for example, or a mental hospital. I think the means by which the panopticon asserts itself is more in a silent efficiency, unseen, and to the prisoner, immeasurable. In this way, the panopticon also functions as a metaphor for power in our every day experience.
would not the panopticon's wide range of application ensure that instutions, prisons or mental hospitals,not be the only places, which assert a panoptic force. Institutionalization is not the act of a single organization rather its a collective force. For example, societal norms collectively mold and systematically shape behavior. The panopticon is not a preclusionary act targeting institutions, prisons or mental hospitals, however, it asserts itself, as you said, in a silent and efficient manner. My question is, Can individuals such as luke, McMurphy, or Andy truly seperate themselves from the panopticon. Do they subconsciouly act as individuals to have a claim of power over power, or are they merely conduits of the panopticon.
Post a Comment