User:Mathijs van Oosterhoudt/rwrm/anot

Annotation of;

Michel Foucault – Discipline and Punish

2. The means of correct training

Walhausen explains strict discipline as an art of training; the disciplinary power is to train. Instead of treating a mass of people all the same, discipline looks at each person differently, it 'makes' individuals. The success of this disciplinary power is partially due to it's simple instruments; hierarchical observation, normalizing judgment and the examination.

Hierarchical observation

Before exercising discipline comes discipline through observation; in an ideal situation all power would be conveyed through observation. This influences architecture in that it is not solely build to be seen, but is build to allow such observation, where one person would theoretically be able to see everything inside said architecture, one gaze to discipline its subjects. It is both indiscreet as the supervision is always present, as it is discreet that it's discipline comes through complete silence.

Normalizing judgment

All disciplinary systems have at heart a mechanism of punishment; each has it's own form of offenses, laws and judgment. Many small means of punishment are used to make any behavior different from the wanted behavior known as the incorrect behavior. While defined by a set of rules or law, it is also defined by observation, what is natural. Next to physical punishment is the better way of doing so, by extra or repetitive training, turning mistakes or faults into further progression, thereby fixing their faults. Direct punishment however is only half of the disciplinary system, of which the other half is rewarding correct behavior, more so then punishment. Preferably one rewards good work before needing to use punishment. By setting a high (good behavior) and low (bad behavior) one can rank or grade it's subject on their behavior, which works as a stimulation for improvement and further training, and at the same time makes the opposite unappealing to the subject.

The examination

The examination is the combination of the both, using observation to grade or rank the behaviour and punish when required; the examination is a ceremony of power. It is a visible form and exercise of power, whereas disciplinary power is one exercised through invisibility. In discipline, it is the subject which is seen, which allows it's power to remain in control. The examination rather, objectifies it's subjects through ranks and grades, a strict imposition of it's power. This allows for the subject to be analyzed as an object, as a feature set, yet let the subject remain an individual for itself.

Foucault concludes by saying we should not look at power in negative terms such as censorship, repression and so forth, but what it produces, reality, a domain of objects and rituals of truth, from which one can gain knowledge in it's production.

Annotation of;

Jos de Mul - The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Recombination

In 1936 Walter Benjamin wrote about how the age of mechanical reproduction affected art as a whole, and introduces the term aura to discuss a work. A work made before the mechanical reproduction has a specific aura, the work can only exist in the now, at one place, at one time. It is therefor not only art, but also a physical art-piece.

The invention of the tools of reproduction made it easy to reproduce works, of which not one original existed, but which existed in a lot of places at the same time, which thereby loses it's aura as one specific piece, whilst on the other side making it more accessible to the public.

In 2009 Jos de Mul talks about how the new ways of using media and digital technologies influence this aura. Although art is still being reproduced to large extends, it does so in a different way. He talks about how digital works always come back to databases, and comes down to the four basic operations of a computer; Add, Browse, Change and Destroy; The ABCD of computing.

The difference this makes is the endless possibilities this offers. With the digital reproduction each copy becomes unique in it's own way, due to the endless combinations and re-combinations of the piece. De Mul therefor believes that the aura as described by Walter Benjamin has re-entered the work due to these new techniques.