Week 3. Dr Selda Dagistanli. Prisons, Punishment & Criminal Justice Spring 2016

Transcription

1 Week 3 Prisons, Punishment & Criminal Justice

2 A recap of modernism social, economic and political changes of the period Norbert Elias and the civilising process (1939) of modernism as applied to prisons and punishment are we civilised? Emile Durkheim and punishment: prison as progress? The Marxists/ Labour Market theorists on punishment + prison Rusche & Kirchheimer (1939/68); Melossi & Paravini (1981) One of the most influential thinkers in the sociology of punishment: Foucault and his work Discipline & Punish (1977) some key themes

3 Feudal period gradually gave way to State monopoly on Criminal Justice: initially a church/state partnership which defined offences as harms against church, aristocracy or landowners Capitalism + Industrial Revolution cut ties of State with Church and gave way to centralised State power Modernism = the approximate period between the mid 18th Century (c 1750s) and latter third of the 20th Century (c 1970s) 18th Century new powerful class of citizen in middle classes and entrepreneurs (bourgeoisie) underpinned by classical theories of liberalism (recall Weeks 1 &2 Beccaria & Bentham) utilitarian aspects of punishment (eg deterrence) which became justifiable as offenders broke the social contract a period of penal modernism marked by a move away from punishment of the body to the emergence of imprisonment as the main form of punishment for routine crimes = punishment aimed at making bad people good (Hudson 2002: 235) and culturally unacceptable to inflict punishment on the body

4 Norbert Elias ( ) German sociologist wrote The Civilizing Process (1939/1984) London: Blackwell (See John Pratt s work, and David Garland in your recommended readings on the LG) Evolution of manners + personality in Western society since late Middle Ages due to changes in State formation Elias wrote principally about long term developmental changes to everyday etiquette eg. toilet habits, eating, washing, preparation of food etc

5 State = centralised authority Monopoly on force/imposition of legal sanctions Privatization of disturbing events due to increased sensitivity to the suffering of others internalisation of constraints Formation of firm and defensible territorial boundaries feelings of responsibility towards /identification with fellow citizens Interdependencie s necessitated inhibition of impulsive behaviour, emotion reduction of violence

6 Criminologist, John Pratt (2000 see additional readings for this week) uses Elias concept to explain rise of the prison. He argues: pre-modern brutal + ostentatious punishments shifted away from view of polite society/civilised sensibilities this prompted move towards private punishment & secretive, bureaucratised punishment that occurs behind prison walls (18th & 19th Centuries) rationalised, scientific, efficient, proportionate this bureaucratisation fits with the civilising mission but is increasingly subject to de-civilising forces driven by risk conscious, globalised societies

7

8

9 Punishment is an institution connected to the heart of society a tangible example of the collective conscience (conscience collective) both expressed and regenerated social values through examining punishment we could gain insight into moral life around which community and social solidarity form

10 Crime invokes moral outrage by violating codes of the conscience collective and provokes punishment for this reason Moral censure through punishment of crime is driven by passion, anger and vengeance (recall week 2): passion... is the soul of punishment (Durkheim, E. 1933, The Division of Labour) Less cultivated societies express this more clearly by punishing for the sake of punishing In modern societies one has to look harder to see the operation of these vengeful passions in punitive action displaced by utilitarian concerns where we claim that it is no longer wrath which governs repression, but a well premeditated foresight For Durkheim only our understanding of punishment has changed, not the reality: the nature of a practice does not change because the conscious intentions of those who apply it are modified. It might, in truth, still play the same role as before, but without being perceived

11 Break-up of undifferentiated societies and development of individualism ended ethic of collective responsibility + increased social mobility necessitated place of detention for offenders Eventually prison became punishment itself: the necessary and natural substitute for the other punishments which were fading away and deprivations of liberty, and liberty alone... tend to become more... the normal means of social control Durkheim saw prison as an example of modern leniency in punishing rather than a specific measure of punishment a prison cell another example through which we express disapproval or reproach. It is not intended to cause pain on the offender but signal the force of the moral message: pain... is only an incidental repercussion of punishment; it is not its essential element

12 Mid 1970s heralded general disillusionment with idea of penal progressiveness Theorists rejected the idea of prison as progress put forward by Durkheim labour market theorists (revisionists) linked the rise of prisons to needs of capitalist economies not humanitarianism Prisons as more sophisticated systems but not more humane... Rusche & Kirchheimer (1939/1968) in Punishment and Social Structure, argued that when demand for labour outstripped supply, punishment became less severe (and prisoners as potential labourers more valuable) and vice versa (more severe punishment when supply outstripped demand)

13 Forced labour of offenders and return to the labour market preferred to execution Prisoners imbued with an attitude that makes them ready for the workforce (Melossi & Paravini 1981 The Prison and the Factory, Basingstoke: Macmillan adapted this later) Prison and penal reform only when economic needs are relaxed humanitarian measures always likely to be surrendered to the mercy of every crisis in the market

14 For deterrence, the principle of less eligibility ie the conditions inside the prison for incarcerated labourers must be worse than anything outside of the prison for free labourers Less Eligibility has proved to be the leitmotiv of all prison administration down to the present time (Rusche & Kirchheimer 1939: 91) Imprisonment after the Enlightenment and Industrial crisis of 19th Century, became a rational system of deterrence based on terror and degradation rather than economic labour and reform solitary confinement 20th Century prison seen as more humane- re-education, reform schools, probation and after care... Is it???

15

16 Marxist functionalist account of Dario Melossi and Massimo Paravini (1981 see 1 slide ago for full reference!) seeks to answer this question where Durkheim or Rusche and Kirchheimer neglect it... Prison failed to control crime, therefore must have another function Imprisonment, like wage labour measured in units of time and, in the industrial era, warned the poor of what awaited them if they refused to accept discipline of factory labour Fulfilled requirement for a disciplined populace in era of industrial capitalism

17 Foucault s Discipline and Punish (1977) the most influential work in the sociology of punishment? To write today about punishment and classification without Foucault is like talking about the unconscious without Freud (Stan Cohen 1985, Visions of Social Control) Significant contribution and departure from Durkheim and Marxist traditions central themes discipline and disciplines Discipline & Punish begins with a public execution of regicide Damiens in 1757 and a timetable for young prisoners, 80 years later comparison illustrates the move away from corporal to disciplinary regimes in punishment in the modern era + different modes of exercising power sovereign and disciplinary... In some ways, Foucault s concept of discipline similar to Melossi and Paravini s - sees influence of modes of production but departs significantly from labour market analyses of punishment

18 Target of punishment shifted to affect soul of offender rather than destroy/strike the body primary objective not to avenge the crime but rather transform the criminal behind it Modern punishment sought to know the criminal and correct them (the ideology on which modern day corrections are based) New expertise/knowledge for reform/correctional purpose to improve troublesome individuals rather than destroy them Punishment a political tactic within the general field of power relations intimately linked with development of human sciences and the new specific ways of knowing they represent

19 Human body as the ultimate material which is seized and shaped by all political, economic and penal institutions Systems of production, of domination + socialisation fundamentally depend on the subjugation of bodies Specifically, these systems require bodies be mastered and subjected to training to render them docile, obedient and useful to a greater or lesser degree Internalised commands through working on the soul producing internalised discipline (ie the docile body) who does what is needed without further need of force A micro-physics of power has bodily materiality and effects Dr Selda Dagistanli

20 in thinking of the mechanisms of power, I am thinking rather of its capillary forms of existence, the point where power reaches into the very grain of individuals, touches their bodies, and inserts itself into their actions and attitudes, their discourses, learning processes, and everyday lives ( Prison Talk in Power/Knowledge 1980) Foucault s conception of power not top down (sovereign) power operates through individuals rather than against them and helps create the individual who is at the same time its vehicle Power relies on knowledge: control of a subject/object relies on understanding of its forces, reactions, strengths weaknesses and possibilities for change...

21 Discipline = an art of the human body and a political anatomy of detail Organising and sorting bodies according to organisational principles Techniques providing means of control and improvement over bodies generated first in a number of institutions: army (will be relevant in week 13!) monasteries schools hospitals Workshops From 16th Century onwards the blueprint for these institutions were reproduced wherever applicable This level of control achieved through uninterrupted surveillance

22 The constant surveillance required for training the body in prison: the panopticon (Jeremy Bentham) The epitome of power- knowledge principles Ensures discipline through self control Soon imitated in society s major institutions

23 The perfect disciplinary apparatus would make it possible for a single gaze to see everything constantly. A central point would be both the source of light illuminating everything, and a locus of convergence for everything that must be know; a perfect eye that nothing would escape and a centre towards which all gazes would be turned - Foucault 1977

24 Punishment as fundamentally involving questions of power and government but by examining the fabric of penality (techniques, institutions and knowledges) rather than only the contextual determinants (such as class for Marxists) Central theme in all of Foucault s work is a questioning of the forms of power + rationality that structure the modern world and the oppression they cause Discipline and Punish investigates the birth of the prison in order to explore wider themes of how domination and oppression are achieved in the modern world and how individuals are socially constructed in this context... Prison is seen as exemplifying modern techniques of control and power in unbridled operation manifested through gentler forms of control such as inspection, discipline, surveillance, normalisation etc...which take the place of repressive violence

25

26 MODERNISM AND THE RISE OF COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS