The surveillance mechanisms used in prisons serve an objective to promote disorderly conduct as a means of organizing and regulating crime control. One of the influences of Bentham’s perception of the Panopticon does not reduce and reconstruct a prisoner’s behaviour through its continuous surveillance. When we look into the similarities and differences between Panopticon and contemporary societies, it is crucial to acknowledge that urban space is more likely being complex than the idea of space under Foucault’s perspective of prisons. Looking at the aspects of cities, civilians are ironically imprisoned but they are not isolated and barricaded, but the opposite: a city is spatial. Looking in opposition, a prison is an extremely standardized space and is not diversified but rather classified with lawbreakers. The surveillance within correctional facilities has different applications to maintain behavioural aspects. Foucault states, “The prison was meant to be an instrument, comparable, with – and no less perfect than the school, the barracks, or the hospital, acting with precision upon its individual subjects. Typically, prisons are functioned with a complex system called the carceral system which challenges to describe the modern prison and its failure. It is urban space regulated with institutionalized administrations which in effort is to reform individuals back to society through rational procedures of prisoner watch. Essentially, this adds up to Foucault’s notion that failure is a crucial aspect of what will keep a prison secured and running. Evidently these the ideas exemplifies communal and anonymous surveillance which ultimately reflects on how individuals of society are to react and behave towards social norms, customs, values that are already established
The surveillance mechanisms used in prisons serve an objective to promote disorderly conduct as a means of organizing and regulating crime control. One of the influences of Bentham’s perception of the Panopticon does not reduce and reconstruct a prisoner’s behaviour through its continuous surveillance. When we look into the similarities and differences between Panopticon and contemporary societies, it is crucial to acknowledge that urban space is more likely being complex than the idea of space under Foucault’s perspective of prisons. Looking at the aspects of cities, civilians are ironically imprisoned but they are not isolated and barricaded, but the opposite: a city is spatial. Looking in opposition, a prison is an extremely standardized space and is not diversified but rather classified with lawbreakers. The surveillance within correctional facilities has different applications to maintain behavioural aspects. Foucault states, “The prison was meant to be an instrument, comparable, with – and no less perfect than the school, the barracks, or the hospital, acting with precision upon its individual subjects. Typically, prisons are functioned with a complex system called the carceral system which challenges to describe the modern prison and its failure. It is urban space regulated with institutionalized administrations which in effort is to reform individuals back to society through rational procedures of prisoner watch. Essentially, this adds up to Foucault’s notion that failure is a crucial aspect of what will keep a prison secured and running. Evidently these the ideas exemplifies communal and anonymous surveillance which ultimately reflects on how individuals of society are to react and behave towards social norms, customs, values that are already established