James D. Dyer
Dr. Kim DeVries
English 5870
Spring 2009
“It programmes, at the level of an elementary and easily transferable mechanism, the basic functioning of a society penetrated through and through with disciplinary mechanisms.”
I would say that it is evident that we are all trapped in panopticonism. Most people don’t even notice, not even most educators, those who are, next to prison guards and police forces maybe, the largest group of people involved in constructing and perpetuating the universal nature of the panopticon. We have already seen the way in which education is usually simply packaged experience, passed on arbitrarily by a system designed to produce “good citizens” not independent thinkers through the implications of Percy’s “Loss of the Creature,” and Foucault has come upon a good metaphor for the way this actually functions in the world, in the classroom, at the mall, and on deserted crossroads in the middle of nowhere at three am.
Think about it, if you are driving down north Geer for instance, at three in the morning, somewhere between Turlock and Riverbank, and you come to a crossroad with a stop sign. You will almost certainly stop, look both ways, and then continue on your way, even though you can see the road clearly for hundreds of yards ahead, and to the right, and to the left. I do. I don’t do it because I am worried about getting into an accident, there is no one there. I do it because I am unconsciously aware that there might be a cop with his lights off behind that shed over there, or a radar equipped traffic plane overhead., but more than that, I have been conditioned by the nature of discipline and control in a panoptical society to stop at stop signs.
“It programmes,” or, to use the American spelling, a panoptical society programs its citizens to behave in an orderly way, without them really noticing the programming. It is an extremely subtle and effective method of brainwashing. As teachers, particularly in the K-12 system, but also in college, we are the agents of that programming, students are always under observation, and they know that if they do something against the rules, they might be penalized. They will not always be penalized, but any infraction might be penalized, which has been shown in psychological and penal research to be even more effective in governing behavior over time. You never know when you are being watched, so you behave as if you are always being watched.
A guy named Powers (I think that is his name, I can’t find the book right this minute) wrote an essay that essentially says that the networks and television have made the panoptical society a nearly universal situation worldwide, the “global society”, the interconnections between nations and corporations, cheap cameras and memory spread this phenomena into even extremely isolated regions.
So the society of the future will be even more self regulated by the discipline of the panopticon than it has been for the past two hundred years. I agree with him. This is not necessarily a bad thing for society, maybe not so good for individuals, but inevitable nonetheless.
As teachers, we should be aware of this function of what we do, and ethnographers it is especially important to note the methods of control and discipline used in different situations so that they can be articulated in our observations. Understanding how control is exercised in the larger sense makes it easier to recognise the implications of the classroom dynamic.
For instance, I am acutely conscience of the fact that my students have all been through twelve (or more) years of the panopticon we call the K-12 system here in the US, some of them have gone to school in other countries for part of that time, but they tend to be even more conditioned to obedience to authority figures than my native born American students. That means that I want to break that conditioning where I can, they will do what I want, or they would not be in college, so I can afford to have them do things, and read things, that make them aware of the unconsciousness of their obedience to the dictates of the social structure, and challenge them to question authority. That might be a bad idea with first graders, but the college student is already conditioned—programmed—and the needs of a free society dictate that the people going into positions of dominance in said society should at least be aware of their biases, and the reasons for them, so that they can mitigate against those biases influence on their behavior and the exercise of power.
Wow, thanks James, for this fascinating interpretation of “Panopticism.”
So, we are all “rats” in someone’s pedagogical experiments…
Somehow, I don’t feel very privileged, as a rat, I mean.
Well, the entire universe is an experimental system, constantly changing, evolving, some parts get better, some parts go nova, and others become black holes. I kinda feel privileged to at least be aware I’m a rat so, if you don’t mind me mixing my metaphors, I can toss wooden shoes into the gears from time to time. That is how things change. Margaret Mead once said something like, “Don’t ever underestimate the power of individuals and small groups to change the course of history, that is the only way anything ever changes.” I suspect Lenin would have agreed with her, as he was the first guy to really make use of the “cell system” on a large scale, though it is also mentioned in passing in the Bible (don’t let your left hand know what your right hand is doing), and Machiavelli also spoke about it. Pretty sure Osama Bin Laden got the message from the CIA back during the first conflict in Afghanistan, the one the Russians lost. And I can assure that corporations, and every modern government are well aware of the principle, for all their talk of “transparency.” Hell, one of our “forefathers” can’t remember who right now called the us A “GREAT SOCIAL EXPERIMENT” or words much like that, but keep in mind, once you know you are a lab rat, it is easier to find your way through the maze and become a scientist.
“That might be a bad idea with first graders, but the college student is already conditioned—programmed—and the needs of a free society dictate that the people going into positions of dominance in said society should at least be aware of their biases, and the reasons for them, so that they can mitigate against those biases influence on their behavior and the exercise of power.”
Wow! What an awesome quote. I do my best to keep my biases in check when I’m in the classroom. I certainly have strong opinions about politics, culture, reliogion, and education, but I realize that if I want to create a collaborative learning environment in the classroom, I need to facilitate the learning of my students through the articulation of their own opinions and beliefs. For example, when I teach Camus’ The Stranger, a philosophical book that explores the very nature of the universe, I’m always the one asking the questions. Every so often, students will ask me what I think, but I tell them that I do not want to isolate anyone in the class by telling them my opinion, thus I stay non-biased and let them speak on behalf of their own beliefs. Looking at this also ties into your analysis of power in the classroom. I purposely do not articualte my beliefs because I do not want anyone to feel isolated; I realize that my opinion holds sway in the classroom because of the power hierarchy that I constructed. Since a hold a position of authority in my classroom (especially knowledge), I realize that stating my own beliefs would not only be a discussion killer, but an exercise of power that, because of my teacher relation to the students, can become oppressive.
BTW. I really like your style of writing as well.
James, I agree with Maria. That analysis of Foucault was great. I loved the example of the stop sign analogy. We do it with blinkers too, at least I do. I turn my blinker on in an empty parking lot. My husband always says, “Who you blinking at?” I never answer because I don’t know. I guess it’s the conditioning. I just remember when I was growing up, privacy was a really valued. There were things that you simply did not discuss with strangers. Now, maybe with confessional literature such as poetry, the fascination with memoir and the reality TV shows and the internet, we seem as a a society to have a different view. Private lives are now public display. It’s a shame in a way because in my opinion it turns everyone into conformers.