Here is where Bentham’s Panopticon becomes particularly intriguing (and perhaps becomes a source of deep concern). Bentham notes that there does not ever have to be anyone in the tower! Just the prospect of being observed from the tower would keep the residents vigilant about their own behavior. In essence, the presence of the tower and the inability to observe the observers leads to an internalization of control. One could say that the residents become their own observers and controlled their own behavior. We see something like the Panopticon operating in contemporary organizations that make use of open, module designs. Without any walls, the “boss” can see the work being done by their subordinates and, if their module and desk are properly arranged, their subordinates can’t tell if they are being observed (unless they stand up and walk over toward their supervisors desk—a sure sign of guilt.)
The Salpetriere and Internalization of the Chains
This turning of observation and control from an external source to an internal source was also portrayed quite vividly by the social critic I have already introduced, Michael Foucault. This noted neo-Marxist turns to the dictums offered by the reformers of psychopathic treatment offered at the Salpetriere in France. Every introduction to psychology textbook is required to represent the famous painting in which the chains placed on the inmates of the Salpetriere are being shattered, so that these suffering men and women can become “free.” Envisioned and led by Philip Pinel, this shattering of the chains became iconic in the literature on institutional reform. With more than 10,000 residents, the Salpetriere was home to the mixture of social deviance I described earlier: the “insane”, prostitutes, petty criminals, and those with low IQs, epilepsy or other socially “disturbing” disabilities.
All of this is quite commendable, at one level, as was the “humane” Panopticon described by Bentham. However, Foucault offers a disturbing portray of Pinel’s actual strategy of reform. In Pinel’s own words, the breaking of the chains is accompanied by pronouncements and practices that were intended to internalize the chains. According to Pinel, residents of the Salpetriere could be made to feel shame for the behavior that led them to this institution. With this shame in place, there was no need for external chains. While there was little chance that residents of the Salpetriere would ever see “the light of day” (or true freedom), they could encourage, in alignment with leaders and institutional “therapists”, to create and maintain an environment of decorum and constraint.
