Thanks so much for sharing this. I thought I would share my notes as a thank-you Foucault was concerned with what was going on in prisons, but wanting those working and living inside of them to make the change. Foucault refuses to be a prophet, saying what you should and shouldn’t do and what is good and what is bad, but to tell people what has happening throughout history, in order for them to wage a battle or enable those who want to use that information to make a change to do just that. He believes that those directly involved with institutions, particularly institutions of power, should be the ones to change them. Foucault addresses problems but does not seek to resolve them, nor does he seek to be someone speaking for others like for example the mentally ill, or the prisoner. He saw his role as a collector and distributor of information rather than a revolutionary: it was not for him to say what was right and what was wrong. Foucault has a historical approach, but he talks about the body, particularly the manipulation of the body, not the physical beating of the body, as a modern phenomenon. This comparison to the past and the future is Foucault’s way of de-stabilising structures that we see or have seen as ‘just the way we do things’. He wants to break down the idea of ‘norms’ and ‘tradition’ in order to seek change within society. This is the idea that all things are mobile, flexible and therefore adapted to change. The power and knowledge connection. Power, for Foucault, is specific, we often think power has a hierarchy, but he sees power as a relationship that can be reserves; one can influence the other. Foucault’s version of power is one that it is a network of relations, constantly in tension -this relationship can be fluid. It can sometimes be unclear who has power over the other but ultimately you cannot escape all power relations. According to Foucault, everybody has a relative amount of power, we are always therefore, on one side of the power relationship or the other, so there is no hierarchy of power. Truth and knowledge are linked to power in a reciprocal relationship. Power and knowledge imply knowledge. Often people can covey truths because of their position of power. The scientific method seems like the truth, but there has been times in history when the scientific method has been flawed like for example when science believed that the earth was at the centre of the solar system, or when they believed it what flat. What these changes demonstrate is that there can be change in the power influencing truth, it is important to ask questions about how truth or knowledge is delivered: who is this benefitting? Who brought about these changes? What counts as knowledge and facts are not always true, yet they effect how we act. Resistance There is no power relationship without resistance; a way out, or flight. We always have the possibility of changing a power relationship. We cannot escape all relations of power acting on us, but we can adapt to them or tackle one at a time; changing and challenging a power imbalance. Foucault does not tell anyone how to resist, but encourages a weakening before freedom is enabled. Freedom does not mean getting rid of all restrictions, it is about remaking ourselves in the best way that we can under the constraints of power. Freedom, per Foucault, is endless questioning; one by one. Punishment There are 2 situations of punishment that Foucault refers to in his book; one, the prison school under timetabled control and two, the execution of a convicted terrorist and the spectacle to which that has become. The text begins in such a way, seemingly to show the difference between practices of punishment from then and now. Again, this is Foucault reworking, de-railing almost, our ideas of tradition and how what seemed ‘normal’ in the 16th century, was perceived inhumane or ineffective by the 17th century. Perhaps, some may see it scarier to live in the now, under timetable, under surveillance even though you may not even be a convicted felon, than living in a world where only a select few are subject to sovereign power. It leaves us to question, and this is very evocative of Foucault’s work: are we better off now?... Not necessarily. We might think we treat people more humanely now, but Foucault seeks to de-rail this idea. Torture, used to be a spectre, now it has gone underground. There is now an emphasis on the soul rather than the body -but he breaks this down and at times suggests that this is still the body, just a different part of the body. Rather we can say, that instead of just physical punishment being exercised on the body, there is damage to the soul, the heart, thoughts, will inclinations, which can be seen as even more insidious. Foucault says that we look at the criminal as someone who not only has done ‘wrong’ but also has a ‘wrong’ mind -a ‘wrong’ set of desires and inclination. We have created a whole discourse, arguably even subject matters around this notion of putting people ‘other’ to us, into boxes. What is visible in today’s order is the investigation and the trial, but what is invisible is the punishment. In old order, particularly in France, the whole criminal proceeding was kept invisible and it was the punishment that was visible. The punishment has to be the spectacle to display the power of the sovereign, the government, the king, the queen, showing it as a visible force and there were markers of this; soldiers, the execution taking place on a stage even. There was resistance to the public execution-the prisoner could do a speech and these often got passed around the crowd: these people, has they not repented their crimes, were public heroes for not bowing down to power. The unity of the power and the prisoner outgrew the power of the sovereign so this means of punishment died out, because it wasn’t doing what is was supposed to do. So it’s probably not exclusively true to say that this means of exerting power was broken down because it was inhuman, but also because it was ineffective. Disciplinary power in the 17th and 18th century involves docility utility; making individuals compliant and useful, making the body more obedient, while improving efficiency. Disciplinary power focused on the detail; the smallest fragments; space, time, the body. Space The panopticon splits building into fragments so that they too can be seen at all times, this prevents resistance as well as increasing productivity and also visibility. Establishing a presence, observing absences, to know where and how to locate individuals, to set up useful communications, to interrupt others, to be able, at each moment, to supervise the conduct of each individual, to assess it, to judge it, to calculate its qualities and its merits. This is seen is schools through the use of seating plans, or in offices through the use of cubicles, and in prisons, where the front of the cell can be seen into. Time Time is broken up into smaller and smaller pieces, counting in quarter hours, in minutes, in seconds. This is seen in the timetable, the clocking in sheet. Each action is broken down into individual elements; the positioning of feet in the army march -each limb is assigned a different direction, each movement has a different direction. Time seeks to penetrate the body and therefore so does power. It is about extracting use from every moment. The examination The examination is not just a class examination; they can be done in the work place, the school, the prison, the psychiatrists office. What draws all these types of examinations together is the idea that they will all seek to discipline you, to classify you, to qualify, and to judge you. The examination can both reward to punish you by giving you a label (a grade A student, the trouble-maker, the problem student etc.) the examination creates a type of person. The examination combines normalising judgement and hierarchical surveillance. Normalising judgement is taking on norms for people to reach and ranking people from the norm. This rank classifies but also acts as a reward or a punishment, which is clear in an educational context. Hierarchical surveillance means not just one person observing from ‘above’, but middle managers, teaching assistants, other children in class. We are making individuals by using the examination in such a way. The individual is fabricated by disciplinary power. The examination is the pinning down of an individual or a role portrayed in a certain way against a rank. The panopticon The panopticon summarises as well as portrays the ideas behind the examination, hierarchical surveillance, space and time. Panopticism does not always exist to portray the architectural design of Jeremy Benthan’s prison, but the design has been transferred to schools, hospitals and factories. Panopticism not exclusive to architecture either -it is important to think of the internet here. Panopticism is evocative of the idea of vision -what matters in the panopticon is not what you can see, but who is seeing you, or who you think might be seeing you. All that matters is that people are aware they are being watched, and they act according to this. What is insidious about this is the idea that people will begin to act under power themselves, without being told to do so, acting under self-discipline, not the discipline of others; enforcing power over themselves.

I love these kind of free lectures

Madam, for me, your lectur is precious one.Your critical philosophical exploration,interpretation, interaction on criminology, public torture, punishment, sovereign power and various powers exposed by Foucault "Discipline and punish word by words,page by pages chronologically is inspired and will be useful for further reading and research. Thanks madam.

Thank you Prof. Hendricks for this brilliant introduction. It really helps me to understand. You said to your students that you will discuss elaborately in seminar. I request you to upload more detailed lectures in each topic, if it is possible for you. We need more world class lecture from you. Thanks again. -Santanu

I recently started reading the book and was kinda confused by some parts. This lecture helped me soooo much to get an idea of the whole book. THANKS A LOT!

A really amazing job with great depth of the implications and context of Foucault.

Thank you so much for this lecture! I've been trying to "get" Foucault for quite some years actually. Returning to texts but never really feeling like I got the point. Especially the comments about the interviews with Foucault in which he made clear his purpose was to "make things more fragile" and let other people decide for themselves what reforms to push for was extremely helpful.

Excellent Lecture! Very thought provoking!

Thank you! It's very clear and coherent. Helps me a lot.

Very Good Indeed! Thank you for sharing your presentation along with lecture.

Thanks. A great introductory lecture for the beginners.

Thank you very much for this great lecture and upload!

Great presentation! Very insightful!

Excellent!

Very useful lecture. Thank you…

Thank you. It helps me a lot.

Wish these were in stereo

great!

Thank you!

Christina Hendricks you're a fantastic teacher. I loved your lecture!

This is super helpful ❤❤❤! The teachers at my university didn't help me understand this book at all!

Great Lecture but it would really be nice if the questions were repeated or the speaker(s) has or can get to a mike... I would say we see it in Universities as until COVID we had to physically attend class whether we sat in the same seat or not, roll call(silently) is part of knowing who is or is not attending class...it is everywhere...

Nice lecture, but it would have been nicer if the projections were viewable.

she tickle my left ear

This video was great! Sorry for some of the whack comments on this page, they are on something. Dr. Hendricks is fantastic.

Maybe the word "evaluation" would be sufficient?

Looking at the past as a way to reorder the discourse of history/power retrospectively, that is to perform the 'Hegelian' retrospective act to see the totalism of power along the way to the present.

Well. Unfortunately public executions still exist in some parts of the world.

Was this shot in a prison?

I don’t think the camera ought to be positioned so far in the back of the room. It appears as if this room is a prison cell, and she is a prisoner.

Foucault was a supporter of Khomeini and the radical religious right wing in Iran during the 1979 revolution. If you find this man's ideas appealing, please carefully examine his stance during the Iranian revolution and really start to rethink the idea that Foucault was an advocate for forward thinking and expanding of discourse.

Loved it! #Foucault is one of my favorite intellectuals. Bravo! #Geniusiscommon #Genius www.geniusiscommon.com

self-referring inconsistency

Society is a prison. The myth of progress is just that, a myth.

The idea that public executions "died out" because after thousands of years of success they suddenly became less powerful is absurd. What changed? Because it wasn't that legends and heros were made of those obstinate enough to die with prideful benedictions. There was nothing new about that. There is no correlation with public execution declining and brazen resistance increasing; both existed for millenia together. What changed was the decline of religion and rise of rationalism and humanism, which, for the first time, gave resistance a widespread philosophical and ideological foundation.

🙄

getting knowledge from a loquacious academic is like getting drunk on 2% ABV

When she had studied it so much why didn't she learn to pronounce his name correctly

I notice a common tendency with female lecturers is that they constantly draw attention to their own personalities. The lecture is not so much about the material, but rather about HER experience of getting familiar with the material, and her feelings afterwards. I don't see much of analysis or depth. The literature on its own is not much of an interest for her.

FAKE NEWS/FAKE PROFESSOR