Deleuze had recently begun to write on the notion of 'control
societies,' which operate by the constraint of circulation and flow,
rather than the focus on training and inscription so stressed by
Foucault. A control society is a society of the password, not the
prison.
I don't really read this as being opposed to Foucault's writings on
discipline; rather, a refinement. The story of discipline is largely
the story of the 19th and early 20th century. The ability of control
as such to become a primary aspect of society, rather than
discipline, also would seem to depend on the refinement of techniques
of power--not their penetration into society, as if power were apart
>from society, but the invention and development of fragmented,
micro-concepts like niche marketing...
///connor
>
> Okay, I guess my point is this: that I would think the disciplinary
> efficacy of panoptic surveillance in such locations as prisons has been
> decreased due to the fact that we are already such highly disciplined
> creatures. So...I'm not sure that we ought not to be wondering what
> other form of power besides disciplinary power is now being used, i.e.,
> a form of power that we are not aware of. I know Deleuze talks about
> some of this stuff, but I just wondered what others think.
>
> I suppose that I'm concerned that we are now so adept at recognizing
> disciplinary power, thanks largely to Foucault, that those of us "in the
> know" about such things are in danger of thinking we've solved the
> problem of power.
>
> And, being a student of F's, of course that concerns me. We have
> learned to surveil disciplinary power; so no doubt power has morphed.
>
>
> Blaine Rehkopf
> York University
> CANADA
> --
>
_________________________________________________________
E.M. Connor Durflinger Philosopher for Hire
"Have Forestructures, Will Travel"
Reverend, Universal Life Church
bc05319@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx PIC Program at B.U.
_________________________________________________________
societies,' which operate by the constraint of circulation and flow,
rather than the focus on training and inscription so stressed by
Foucault. A control society is a society of the password, not the
prison.
I don't really read this as being opposed to Foucault's writings on
discipline; rather, a refinement. The story of discipline is largely
the story of the 19th and early 20th century. The ability of control
as such to become a primary aspect of society, rather than
discipline, also would seem to depend on the refinement of techniques
of power--not their penetration into society, as if power were apart
>from society, but the invention and development of fragmented,
micro-concepts like niche marketing...
///connor
>
> Okay, I guess my point is this: that I would think the disciplinary
> efficacy of panoptic surveillance in such locations as prisons has been
> decreased due to the fact that we are already such highly disciplined
> creatures. So...I'm not sure that we ought not to be wondering what
> other form of power besides disciplinary power is now being used, i.e.,
> a form of power that we are not aware of. I know Deleuze talks about
> some of this stuff, but I just wondered what others think.
>
> I suppose that I'm concerned that we are now so adept at recognizing
> disciplinary power, thanks largely to Foucault, that those of us "in the
> know" about such things are in danger of thinking we've solved the
> problem of power.
>
> And, being a student of F's, of course that concerns me. We have
> learned to surveil disciplinary power; so no doubt power has morphed.
>
>
> Blaine Rehkopf
> York University
> CANADA
> --
>
_________________________________________________________
E.M. Connor Durflinger Philosopher for Hire
"Have Forestructures, Will Travel"
Reverend, Universal Life Church
bc05319@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx PIC Program at B.U.
_________________________________________________________