The Prison Panopticon: Foucault, the Carceral Eye, and the Incarcerated Author

“I now fully comprehend that we truly do live in a society that has for centuries practiced not only enslavement of the physical body but also enslavement of our minds and very souls.” Arthur Bell, “Dark Testament of Reflection”

In his compelling reflection on his life behind bars, Arthur Bell recognizes, through lived experience, what the French philosopher Michel Foucault theorized almost half a century ago in his landmark 1975 study Discipline and Punish: the panoptical structure of incarceration that has positioned him as “yet another systemic victim.”

Foucault’s ideas about the disciplinary power of the gaze derived from his consideration of the panopticon, an eighteenth century structure of surveillance that allowed one guard to watch many prisoners without being seen. Foucault elaborated upon the psychological effects of the panopticon, arguing that it leads prisoners to internalize an authoritative gaze.  Foucault notes the many ways in which a panoptical effect can be reproduced, serving as a highly effective form of social power. Because it is impossible to know when they are being observed, those subjected to the panoptic gaze will always believe themselves to be watched – regardless of an authority figures’ presence. 

The panoptical nature of incarceration’s constant state of (either actual or perceived) surveillance strips those who are imprisoned of what limited freedom they have left – including, as Bell reminds us, the exercise of free thought. Thus, Bell’s feelings of enslavement are contextualized. If neither his “physical body” nor his mind or his “very soul” are free from a governmental grasp, then he is entirely dehumanized; both his individuality and autonomy are lost to a system in which he is merely one of many. 

Yet, in its deceitful and subtle power, the carceral panopticon expands beyond the surveillance and control of individuals. It also functions as “a disciplinary technique to rank, order, and normalize individuals.” One may question: by what system are the imprisoned ranked? Studying the racial identities of those most frequently impacted by carcerality provides some insight. 

According to a 2022 PEW research study, “Black people were admitted at four times the rate of White people on average in 2022” and “young Black adults were admitted to jail at rates three to eight times those for White and Hispanic people in the same age group.” If subjugation to an incessant surveilling gaze suggests that the observed cannot be trusted with any degree of freedom, then the disproportionate number of people of color impacted by carcerality (and thus, subjected to this controlling gaze) feels strategic, hearkening back to the notion of slavery that Bell presents. 

The overrepresentation of African Americans in carceral settings sends an indirect message that, on account of their racial identity, the members of this group are inherently untrustworthy and must be controlled. Apologists for slavery made very similar arguments. Thus, Bell illuminates the deep historical roots of the racist structures embedded in our justice system. 

Unfortunately, this truth is one that many incarcerated individuals know all to well. Michael Issac Bethel offers similar insight in his piece “The Heart is never in Question.” He writes, “We must conclude that we are something innate, something Outside” (Line 2). Bethel’s deliberate use of “we” distinguishes both himself and those in his community as separate from their oppressors, existing “Outside” of a privileged group. While one racial group is not innately superior to another, the systemic targeting of people of color by all branches of the criminal justice system in the United States has constructed a hierarchy that powerfully conveys and repeatedly reinforces this message.

Bethel’s illumination of such racial inequity is enhanced by his word choice of “something” rather than someone to refer to his own community (and by extension, himself); he reflects the power of the panoptic gaze of the oppressor to penetrate into the minds of the oppressed, prompting feelings of otherness and dehumanization. 

Furthermore, Bethel’s use of “must” points toward the lack of choice or agency, that the imprisoned individual is afforded within the carceral system; they “must” follow their predetermined path. However, the writings of Bell and Bethel defy such nihilism. Their will to create challenges the model of absolute power that carcerality would otherwise uphold. Bethel concludes his poem and leaves his audience with the thought “To be continued…” (Line 13) thus conveying  the strength of the hearts and minds of incarcerated writers, as they continue to push back against a system designed to control them..

 

Sources:

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1301673.pdf 

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2023/05/racial-disparities-persist-in-many-us-jails 

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *