AKANSHA RUKHAIYAR – 20151324

JURISPRUDENCE 2
SHORT ESSAY

This essay will briefly describe Michel Foucault’s perspective on discipline and its
objectives. His theory will be explained through the Panopticon, which was
conceptualized by Jeremy Bentham. This paper will then juxtapose the Panopticon with
the system of surveillance on our campus and the consequences of having such a
system of discipline.

The object of discipline, according to Michel Foucault can be interpreted as a form of

control or extreme regulation that leads to submissiveness or docility among those
being disciplined. Discipline is not merely about punishing, but about exercising power –
exercising power over someone else’s actions and therefore, exercising power over their
bodies, which become docile over time, i.e. they resign to the surveillance and power
exercised over them and act in response to or according to that surveillance. Hence,
discipline creates obedient bodies and individuals through supervision and observation.

The end product of discipline is the creation of docile of bodies. These are bodies that
can be “subjected, used, transformed and improved”. This means that they are
submissive and have no agency of their own and act in a fixed manner as they are
supposed to.

Foucault’s theory on the object of discipline can be explained through the lens of Jeremy
Bentham’s Panopticon. The Panopticon is a building that is the epitome of surveillance.
It is an architectural watch tower completely surrounded by cells, each containing a
prisoner. While those in the watch tower can see every movement made by any
prisoner in all the cells, the prisoners cannot even determine who is watching them and
at what point in time, if at all. Thus, the prisoners behave in a particular way because
they feel they are under constant surveillance. The point is not that they are being
watched all the time, but the fact that even the possibility of being watched is sufficient
to govern their conduct.

Our campus can be considered a micro-version of the Panopticon, with CCTV cameras in
every corner, so as to make every part of the campus come within the “watch” of the
authorities. Just like the prisoners of the Panopticon, one can never be sure whether
they are actually being monitored, so the assumption that guides how we behave is that
we are being watched. Therefore, even though there is no one physically restraining us
or directing us how to act or has control over our body, our freedom gets limited by the
surveillance done by these cameras, and results in us becoming nothing more than
 AKANSHA RUKHAIYAR – 20151324

submissive or docile bodies. We have internalized the power exercised by the

authorities through this projected constant surveillance and thus we feel we must
behave accordingly.

Therefore, the major effect of the Panopticon, and the CCTVs on campus is to induce a
sense of being constantly watched and thus being reminded of the discrete power being
exercised over our bodies. The beauty of this system of control and power is that at no
point can the prisoner/student verify that they are in fact being watched. The constant
presence of the watch tower/CCTV is enough. CCTV cameras thus fulfill the object of
discipline just as Foucault interpreted it – not an overt physical domination, but a
discrete psychological power over the prisoners.

This technique of creating docile bodies through surveillance is referred to as

hierarchical observation. Hierarchical observation refers to the exercise of power over
someone (thus having the effect of disciplining) merely through observation to such an
extent that it is coercive. Strict observation would indicate control, without force. In the
context of our college, the CCTVs merely watch, and nothing else. Another aspect that
makes these CCTVs an efficient disciplinary tool is the fact that they operate within a
confined space, thus making the control all the more concentrated and the disciplining
more effective.

While the objective of discipline as conceptualized by Foucault is fulfilled by the

environment created through CCTVs on campus, such a system of control is doing more
harm than good. While it can be argued that we need such kind of surveillance because
we, just like the prisoners of the Panopticon, will behave irrationally if we are not
constantly monitored (or at least think that we are not being monitored), this kind of
internal disciplining will eventually make us detached from how we behave and thus
lead us to not be accountable to ourselves for our own actions, because there will
always be someone we are answerable to, whether it is the prison warden of the
Panopticon or the those watching us through CCTVs.

Hence, this system of control might lead to discipline and control over our bodies, but it
is not teaching us to be independent. It not only destabilizes our freedom, but also
prevents us from learning how to be answerable to ourselves.