Deleuze and Foucault-hybrid text

The means of correct training-Foucault

I.

The chief of the disciplinary power is to 'train', rather than to select and levy or, no doubt, to train in order to levy and select all the more. It does not link forces together in order to reduce them, it seeks to bind them together in such a way as to multiply and use them. Discipline 'makes' individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects as instruments of it exercise. The exercise of discipline presupposesa mechanism that coerces by mean of observation an apparatus in which the technique make it possible to see induce effects of power, and in which, conversely, the means of correction make those on whom they are applied clearly visible. Slowly, int he course of the classical age, we see the construction of those observatories of human multiplicity for which the history of the sciences has so little good to say. The hospital building was gradually organised as an instrument of medical action: it was allow a better observation of patients, and therefore a better calibration of their treatment; the form of buildings by careful separation of the patients. Similarly, the school was to be a mechanism for training. It was a build as a pedagogical machine. This perfect disciplinary apparatus would make it possible for a single gaze to see everything constantly. In factories disciplinary gaze did, in fact need relays. They pyramid was able to fulfil. more efficiently than circle, two requirements, to be complete enough for an uninterrupted network, consequently the possibility of multiplying its levels, and of distributing. In order to increase its productive function, specify the surveillance and make it functional.

II.

The workshop, the school, the army were subject to a whole micro penalty of time, of activity, of behaviour, of speech, of the body, of sexuality. At the same time, by way of punishment, a whole series of subtle procedures was used from light physical punishment to minor deprivations and petty humiliations. Discipline brought with it a specific way of punishing that was not only a small-scale model of the court. What is specific to the disciplinary penalty is non-observance, that which does not measure ip to rule that departs from it. Disciplinary punishment has the function of reducing gaps. It must therefore be essentially corrective. In discipline, punishment is only one element of double system: gratification-punishment. And it is this system that operates in the process if training and correction. Teachers must avoid as soon as possible the use of punishment, on the contrary, they must endeavour to make rewards more frequent that penalties, they lazy being more encouraged by the desire to be rewarded in the same was as the diligent that by fear of punishment. The punishing, in the regime of disciplinary power is aimed neither expiation, nor even precisely at repression. It brings distinct operations into play: it refers individual actions to a whole that is at once a field of comparison, a space of diffraction and the principle of a rule to be followed. The examination combines the techniques of an observing hierarchy and those of a normalizing gaze, a surveillance that makes it possible to qualify to classify and to punish. It establishes over individuals a visibility through which one differentiates them and judges them. The examination transformed the economy of visibility into exercise of power. Traditionally power was what was see, what was shown and what was manifested and paradoxically, found the principle of its force in the movement by which it deployed that force. The examination, surrounded by all its documentary techniques makes individual a case which at one and same time constitutes an object for a branch of knowledge and a hold for a branch of power.

Postscripts on the Societies of Control- Gilles Deleuze

Gilles Deleuze articulates the way in which we are/were moving from what Michel Foucault described as a Disciplinary Society and toward a Society of Control. Everyone knows that these institutions( school, hospital, army, prison) are finished, whatever the length of their expiration periods. It's only a matter of administering their last rites and of keeping people employed until the installation of the forces knocking at the door. These are the 'societies of control', which are in the process of replacing the disciplinary societies. In disciplinary societies one was always starting again, while in the societies of control one is never finished with anything-corporation, the educational system, the armed services being metastable states coexisting in one and the same modulation, like a universal system of deformation. control is short-term and of rapid rates of turnover, but also continuous and without limit, while discipline was of long duration, infinite and discontinuous. Man is no longer man enclosed, but man in debt. One of the most important question will concern the ineptitude of unions: tied to the whole of their history of struggle against the discipline or within the spaces of enclosure, will they be able to adapt themselves or will they give way to new forms of resistance against the societies of control.