After reading Foucault’s Discipline and Punish, I cannot help but to view everything through the lenses of power. Foucault describes in his article the focus of the Panopticon, is to “induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power” 627-628. His core argument is that such arrangement imposed by the one in power imposes surveillance upon the prisoners. This strict notion of social hierarchy through this architectural apparatus is what fuels the continuum of surveillance, enforcing this kind of arrangement to ensure “dissymmetry, disequilibrium, difference.” It is evident to acknowledge that Foucault tries to expose power as something larger than yourself, something majestic, something of status that hovers over you. This clear identification recognizes that power is fuelled by a single state government, or in Foucault’s context, prison guards in the Panopticon sustaining clear power relations which, “whatever use one may wish to put it to, produces homogenous effects of power” 628. The individual’s identities are stripped by the authorities who are present in the higher social hierarchal ladder. In other words, the surveillance imposed upon the inmates sourced from the central power erases every trace of the prisoner’s individuality.
From reading this article up until I attended an UBC event on “Cultural Identity”, I believed that power has always been someone, someone out there that provoked fear and intimidation, such as a nation’s government. However my outlook shifted when I attended this dialogue event which focussed on Identity Crisis of the self.
At the beginning of the event when I sat down, the keynote speaker of the event handed me a sheet with “Cultural Identity Survey” printed at the top. On this survey were 5 statements in which I must circle on a scale from 1-5 where I stood on the continuum between the value statement on the left and the value statement on the right, based on my personal beliefs. The statements were:
1) An individual’s identity is shaped by themselves. —- An individual’s identity is shaped by society.
2) Identity is fixed and doesn’t change. —– Identity is fluid and changes depending on time and space.
3) I feel I am the same person with different people — I feel I am a different person with different people.
4) My cultural background has no effect on my identity. —- My cultural background is central to my identity.
5) My ethnicity is central to my identity —- My ethnicity is one of many things that inform my identity.
He began to introduce that because each person is rooted from various different cultures, we possess our own powers to identify ourselves with who we are. “Ethnicity no longer defines us, but informs us” – Obama (the keynote speaker mentions this during the discussion). It is key to recognize from this quote that, society used to categorize individuals into certain groups, whether thinking about gender, sexuality, or cultural background. Ever since the 19th century, questionnaires would ask: Please check one of the following: 1) Japanese 2) Chinese 3) Latino … etc. By checking a single box, it cancels out the rest of the unchecked choices, forcing the individual to be categorized into a homogenized group. The ease of this process allows society to define who we are on the basis of a single check mark. As a result, Obama’s notion that in the 21st C, ethnicity today informs us, referring to the acknowledgement that our own background awards us the power to identify ourselves with whatever we like. By doing so, it breaks down the walls of strict groupings, de-emphasizes the scary idea of powerful state government who defines us through these processes. Similarly, this quote dismantles Foucault’s Panopticon ideal of defining one’s identity through surveillance and authority.
In addition, the event not only provided dialogue regarding how to identify yourself through learning and knowing your cultural background, but also provoked an underlying notion that each individual holds the power to yourself. Through our previous class discussions we mentioned that one’s identity is more than often constructed based on how other’s react to you, or in other words, identity as a “social construction”. This is certainly not false, however we also must look in a contrary light in that each person is the power. Power is something imagined, and unfortunately is often portrayed as the intimidating sublime or the large figure hovering over you. This kind of control possesess the individual and thus creates a ‘false reality’ that your identity is fostered by someone else. However, we must free ourselves from the prison cells that we have so deeply believed in and redeem power for ourself. Foucault is not wrong, but he is not right either in this context. I must criticize him in this regard that this reading is what created this “power-phobia” with the image of the authoritarian watching your every move.
After attending this event, I have learned to re-think the ideals of power and whether or not my identity is formed by social constructions or by who I really am. As a UBC Student studying Sociology, I ask of you, please, empower yourself to be yourself. Governmental Powers (prison guards in Foucault’s context) impose authority upon citizens in order to standardize everyone for simply the ease of management. However each person is different. We come from different backgrounds. Hold onto your power and resist standardization, because we are more than just a questionnaire checkmark.
References:
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish. New York: Pantheon, 1975. Pg. 622-636.