Panopticism and Perception
Butler starts by saying that bodies, although vulnerable, can be seen as aggressors – using the case of Rodney King and the jury reading his body as threatening, even though he was the one being brutally beaten. Further reading suggests that the beating was justifiable in the eyes of the jury who stated that King had threatened the police and therefor received justifiable punishment – because racism is not an apparent factor in this. What is seen is not necessarily the truth. Butler seems to be getting at the fact that the seen is not visible. Things are being read rather than seen, which in this context is racism and black male violence and the potentiality for misconduct. The expectation of violence exists due to historical factors that are taken into account e.g., racism/racial prejudices (although many may not read it as such). I’m more interested here in context as well — what is the context in which these bodies are being read aside from racism or past presumptions?
Foucault mentions the dichotomy that exists between the leper and the plague victim in relation to the panopticon and surveillance. Suggesting that the lepers were too concerned with exiling one another while the plague victim was meticulous to separate people into groups based on their disease or lack there of – they were too concerned with differentiation. The idea here is the power over the people – the community or self-preservation through discipline. Here I’m more interested in this idea of the panopticon as cure – constant surveillance as a way to undo illness.
Definition (cont’d)
Seeing: To have perceptions or identifications (whether true or false) read onto the body, multiple bodies, or things.
Visible/Visibility: A body is made visible when it can have social or spatial constructions read onto it by those seeing them.