Punishment, Power, and History
Foucault and Elias
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 7101764 |
|---|---|
| Autores | P Spierenburg (autor correspondente) |
| Ano | 2004 |
| Volume | 28 |
| Fascículo | 4 |
| Páginas | 607-636 |
| Data de publicação | 2004-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Social Science History (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0145-5532 • E-ISSN: 1527-8034 |
| Editora | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1215/01455532-28-4-607 |
| OpenAlex | W4233871447 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 16 |
This article reevaluates the work of Michel Foucault and Norbert Elias, in so far as it relates to criminal justice history. After an examination of the content of Foucault's Surveiller et punir (1975), it discusses Foucault's receptions among criminal justice historians. Some of the latter appear to have attributed views to the French philosopher that are not backed up by his 1975 study. Notably the "revisionist" historians of prisons have done so. As a preliminary conclusion, it is posited that Foucault and Elias have more in common than some scholars, including the author in earlier publications, have argued. They resemble each other to the extent that they both thought it imperative to analyze historical change in order to better understand our own world. Nevertheless, Elias is to be preferred over Foucault when it concerns (1) the pace of historical change and (2) these theorists' conception of power. It is demonstrated that Foucault's notion of an abrupt and total change of the penal system between 1760 and 1840 is incongruent with reality and leads to ad hoc explanations. Rather, a long-term change occurred from about 1600 onward, while several elements of the modern penal system (as claimed by Foucault) did not become visible until after 1840. With respect to the concept of power, Elias and Foucault converge again on one crucial point: the notion of the omnipresence of power. However, whereas Elias defines power as a structural property of every social relationship and acknowledges its two-sidedness, Foucault's concept of power has a more top-down character, and he often depicts power as an external force that people have to accommodate. Although Foucault's notion of the interconnectedness of power and knowledge is valuable, Elias has a more encompassing view of sources of power
Criminology · Physics · Power (physics · Punishment (psychology · Sociology · Thermodynamics · Law in Society and Culture · Psychology · Social Psychology · Sociology and Norbert Elias
The Monopoly of Violence
Hobohemia and the Crucifixion Machine
Machtfigurationen und Herrschaftsprozesse bei Norbert Elias
A figurational approach to understanding school climate and peer harassment
Skabelsen Af Det Moderne Subjekt
Taxation, State Formation, and Governmentality
The power to pardon in late medieval and early modern Europe
The Limits of Culture
Treating claimants like criminals
Foucault’s Bentham
Inexperienced Humanitarians? William Wilberforce, William Pitt, and the Execution Crisis of the 1780s
How to Be(come) the Perfect Inmate? Working the System in the Prison Workhouse at Christianshavn, 1769–1789
A penology for Europe
The politics of environments before the environment
Emotions and power
Norbert Elias e Michel Foucault - apontamentos para uma tematização relacional da noção de poder
| Obras citantes distintas | 16 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 0,84 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2007 - 2023 (17) |
| Velocidade de citação | historical |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 16 |