Michel Foucault, in his essay "Docile Bodies", and the accompanying "The Means of Correct Training" and "Panopticism", examines the eighteenth-century society in its relation to control and discipline of citizens. Gilles Deleuze follows the "Docile Bodies" in an attempt to situate contemporary society in comparison to Foucault's eighteenth-century model. He concludes that our society is no longer driven by discipline, but by a fluid system of control. While the 'discipline' model is very strict in its formation, especially in its attention to minute detail, Deleuze’s “control” model is less rigid and more adaptive towards changes in contemporary society. However, both are a result of de-humanizing objectification that is the focus of the “Docile Bodies”. According to Foucault, the docility is a result of a strict system of discipline that breaks down the relationship between humans and their bodies, making the bodies a property of the state which is controlling them. As this process runs through all levels of society, and its attention to detail is so meticulous, it is able to shape the docile citizens from their youth onwards with great precision. Resembling a military camp or a perfectly-designed machine, the rigidity of the structure coerces the objectified bodies to do exactly as it pleases, or suffer strict punishment for deviating from the norm.
Our group discussion focused on situating Foucault’s ideas in relation to new media and the overall framework of this course. An interesting contrast was mentioned in the relationship between yogic teachings and Foucault’s docility. The focus of yogic teachings locates one’s body, emotions, thoughts, and the mind in constant interrelated state. The ultimate goal of yoga, therefore, is self-discipline of one’s own body in order to control one’s own mind, and eventually in harnessing its full power within. Docility and state discipline does the exact opposite of this process, taking the body away from the individual and controlling it through an organized system. As a result, the mind is also coerced into subjugation to the same powers. In that sense, the system of “control” that Deleuze proposes is a natural progression of the system of discipline, to adapt to a more fluid society and to discipline the mind and the body on a more flexible level. New means of discipline in their contemporary fluidity, just as in Foucault’s argument, are a result of new inventions, while even further inventions come out of the resulting forms of discipline.
The relationship between inventions and control led us to analyze the role of the internet in this model. While it appears to give more freedom to the individual in terms of expression, it can also be argued to be a contributing factor to the overall docility. What is the purpose of the internet in a society of control?
Does the internet function as an outlet of free expression and democratic action, or is it a more subtle way to pin down the individuals to their homes, fragmenting their bodies even more, and giving them a place to passively vent instead of acting on their beliefs?
No comments:
Post a Comment