I have been re-reading 'Discipline and Punishment : The Birth of the Prison' by Michel Foucault. I have turned to this work because I think that it is a good starting point for thinking about notions of visibility and the effects of surveillance in my work. Foucault argues "visibility is a trap" (Foucault 1977:200). Furthermore, he has a number of things to say about the role played by surveillance on the disciplining of society. He is particularly dark on the subject of Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon .
I found the image above of this 'all-seeing' piece of architecture on WIKIpedia. Foucault notes that the prisoners are in individual cells around the edge of the structure and the warden is housed in the central observation post. In this configuration the prisoner "is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication" (Foucault 1977:200). According to Foucault's account the major effect of the Panopticon is "to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power". Basically, they act to discipline themselves!
Arguably, the most contention thing that Foucault argues about the Panopticon is that it is not just a pile of bricks and mortar. It is a "generalizable model of functioning; a way of defining power relations in terms of the everyday life of men" ( Foucault 1977:205). As I understand this, it means that we are all disciplined through the metaphorical equivalents of the panopticon. Basically, we are self-normalizing and conform to ill-perceived social norms because of an internalized sense of being constantly watched by others.
I think this argument is important for any work of art that makes use of detection or surveillance technology because there is a need to acknowledge that the sense of being under surveillance does not end with the direct observations being undertaken through the apparatus of the work. These effects carry on outside of the work in the internalized prohibitions of society. It raises ethical issues about constructing panoptic spaces that observe the actions of the participants engaging with the work.
These issues, in turn, raise issues for this research project. Primarily, what is the role of this work? What is it intending to do (if indeed I can talk about intention in this convoluted context) with this technology?
I guess I am saying that I am keen to move away from merely deploying the technology as a novelty or curiosity. I am beginning to ask myself - How does the work relate to the technology it deploys? Does it serve as warning about effects of the particular technology. A Cassandra wailing about doom in the face of a world that is not listening? Or is it more like an engagement with the pre-existing issue of the role played by surveillance in ordering and disciplining our societies.
I came to these technologies from my work with Mikhail Bakhtin. I had argued in that work that the addressivity of certain examples of computer-mediated textual art help foster a valuable self-consciousness about participating in the act of meaning-making. I had a rather agnostic view of technology in that work. I did not make a techno-utopian argument but I tended to sound a cautious but optimistic note about these works of art. I am now feeling less optimistic and less confident about deploying these technologies. I am keen not to turn into a luddite but instead to come up with a more nuanced response to encountering surveillance technologies.
I find myself encountering fundamental questions in response to this pessimistic view of observation and control which I need to explore further. One task that I have set myself is to try and photograph all the apparatus of surveillance on my route into my office. I am thinking about traffic cameras, CCTV cameras, automatic door sensors, computer log-ins, passwords for the hole in the wall. I think this might help to context my unease and to demonstrate to myself just how deep the culture of observation has gone. But what about the low-earth orbit satellites, the unobserved observers. What about my sense of needing permission to photgraph these kinds of street furniture? What about my lurking sense of fear that I am doing something wrong? How to explore these ill-perceived sense of consciousness?
I found the image above of this 'all-seeing' piece of architecture on WIKIpedia. Foucault notes that the prisoners are in individual cells around the edge of the structure and the warden is housed in the central observation post. In this configuration the prisoner "is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication" (Foucault 1977:200). According to Foucault's account the major effect of the Panopticon is "to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power". Basically, they act to discipline themselves!
Arguably, the most contention thing that Foucault argues about the Panopticon is that it is not just a pile of bricks and mortar. It is a "generalizable model of functioning; a way of defining power relations in terms of the everyday life of men" ( Foucault 1977:205). As I understand this, it means that we are all disciplined through the metaphorical equivalents of the panopticon. Basically, we are self-normalizing and conform to ill-perceived social norms because of an internalized sense of being constantly watched by others.
I think this argument is important for any work of art that makes use of detection or surveillance technology because there is a need to acknowledge that the sense of being under surveillance does not end with the direct observations being undertaken through the apparatus of the work. These effects carry on outside of the work in the internalized prohibitions of society. It raises ethical issues about constructing panoptic spaces that observe the actions of the participants engaging with the work.
These issues, in turn, raise issues for this research project. Primarily, what is the role of this work? What is it intending to do (if indeed I can talk about intention in this convoluted context) with this technology?
I guess I am saying that I am keen to move away from merely deploying the technology as a novelty or curiosity. I am beginning to ask myself - How does the work relate to the technology it deploys? Does it serve as warning about effects of the particular technology. A Cassandra wailing about doom in the face of a world that is not listening? Or is it more like an engagement with the pre-existing issue of the role played by surveillance in ordering and disciplining our societies.
I came to these technologies from my work with Mikhail Bakhtin. I had argued in that work that the addressivity of certain examples of computer-mediated textual art help foster a valuable self-consciousness about participating in the act of meaning-making. I had a rather agnostic view of technology in that work. I did not make a techno-utopian argument but I tended to sound a cautious but optimistic note about these works of art. I am now feeling less optimistic and less confident about deploying these technologies. I am keen not to turn into a luddite but instead to come up with a more nuanced response to encountering surveillance technologies.
I find myself encountering fundamental questions in response to this pessimistic view of observation and control which I need to explore further. One task that I have set myself is to try and photograph all the apparatus of surveillance on my route into my office. I am thinking about traffic cameras, CCTV cameras, automatic door sensors, computer log-ins, passwords for the hole in the wall. I think this might help to context my unease and to demonstrate to myself just how deep the culture of observation has gone. But what about the low-earth orbit satellites, the unobserved observers. What about my sense of needing permission to photgraph these kinds of street furniture? What about my lurking sense of fear that I am doing something wrong? How to explore these ill-perceived sense of consciousness?
posted by jumping jack at 7:41 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home