This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
Discipline and Punish is within the scope of WikiProject Mass surveillance, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of mass surveillance and mass surveillance-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.Mass surveillanceWikipedia:WikiProject Mass surveillanceTemplate:WikiProject Mass surveillanceMass surveillance articles
I've cleaned up the discipline section. It contained two major flaws: 1) an introduction which was essentially a redundant statement of the main themes of the book, 2) a concluding paragraph that appeared to be somewhat irrelevant to the article, and frankly, a personal opinion (it argued that the power relations between the genders in the US are undergoing a substantive change). I also tried to provide a bit more of a lead in to the quote that has been included. I think that the section reads fairly well now, though it is perhaps a bit long. If anyone sees a way to pair it down while retaining the important information that would be great! Tyrell turing 23:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow, this article should mention this. Why is it that this title was translated to Discipline and Punish and not Monitor and Punish? Kingturtle = (talk) 17:19, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is a lengthy translator's note at the beginning, at least in my copy, more or less apologizing for the inadequacy of the translation. Surveiller was the word chosen by Bentham's French translator for what he wrote as "inspect" ... and that word has no exact translation into English. Foucault himself apparently suggested the use of "discipline" (I'm sure that had nothing to do with his long nights at S&M bars during that time). Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to delete this series of recent, unsourced additions [1] by Valery Staricov due to the fact that they seem a bit unintelligible and I think they've disimproved the article. Normally I'd be inclined to copy-edit the material and there is some good content there, but it would take a bit of work to sort out. Perhaps it could be copied to the talk page until other editors get a chance to work through it? FiachraByrne (talk) 22:11, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To delete is your right. These my additions are a translation of my article in the Russian Wikipedia about Foucault's book.
There is an interesting problem in my additions. Need it cancel сapital punishment completely today or need it keep theсapital punishment for terrorists and maniacs? Can it overcome shortcomings of modern imprisonment in principle? Foucault's merit consists that Foucault put these problems. Valery Staricov (talk) 15:10, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Valery. I checked out your article in the Russian Wikipedia using the (inadequate) Google Translation service. So far as I can tell, it looks like a very good article. The main problem with your addition to this article, however, is your level of English. Perhaps a Russian-language editor like Psychiatrick could assist you in translating material? Psychiatrick is also interested in the history of institutions so they might be willing to help. Otherwise, I'd argue that you should post article content on the talk page first and we could then try and copy-edit it and make sure its properly sourced to an English-language version of Discipline and Punish before adding it to the article?
Would you object if I moved your recent article additions to this talk page so that we could then improve them a little before re-adding them to the article? FiachraByrne (talk) 16:28, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to any your conditions to protect from removal my additions to the article "Discipline and Punish". Must I write the letter to the participant of Psychiatrick with a request to improve my additions? Or
Are you going to agree with Psychiatrick about that?
I translate from Russian into English badly. As I learned English with help of dictionaries and textbooks only 40 years old. I didn't talk to the American or the Englishman never. It is my big problem. I look for the qualified translator for my articles long ago. I have 17 articles in the Russian Wikipedia. I want to translate and to place them to English Wikipedia. I translated and placed in English Wikipedia 7 articles already from which editors deleted 3 articles because of bad quality of my translation.Valery Staricov (talk) 15:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you've already posted on Psychiatrick's talk-page and, if he's inclined, he may post here. I'm not a "moderator" or anything, by the way, just another editor like yourself. Did you ask for help at the Russia project page? There might be some people there willing to help you with translation. OK. I'm going to move your recent additions to the talk page and, we can work them up a bit over the next while and then add them back to the article. FiachraByrne (talk) 16:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I grant to you the right to change my text thus as you will consider the necessary. You can ask me questions that to specify not clear for you places in my text. I asked Psychiatrick and other participants in English Wikipedia and Russian Wikipedia to help me with a translation of my articles from Russian into English, but I didn't receive the answer or I was refused. Therefore I was compelled to do my texts in Russian simple, clear and laconic. It is easy to translate such my texts from Russian into English.Valery Staricov (talk) 13:02, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Prisons in modern understanding appeared three quarters of the century later of this execution, and the daily routine was made in prison for juvenile prisoners already. Juvenile prisoners were obliged to work 9 hours in the workshops each day, to study 2 hours at prison school each day. So, the public execution was added with imprisonment and a prison’s daily routine in Europe and USA. The public execution and imprisonment became different types of punishment.
Prison was earlier as place where investigator and executioner interrogated and tortured by criminal man, and then criminal man waited of execution in prison. Prison became place of a life and work for the prisoner according to the strict schedule after prison reform. Prison became place where prisoner carried out a long imprisonment term. These punishments in form of different imprisonment term began to be applied for different types of a crime and for different types of criminal men. This prison reform was carried out for period slightly less 1 century. The new codes were made during this time: in Russia – in 1769, in Prussia – in 1780, in Pennsylvania and Tuscany – in 1786, in Austria – 1788, in France – in 1791, 1808 . This new codes provided a new type of punishment.
The essence of prison reform since the end of 18 century before the beginning of 19 century was reduced to the following
Chain Gang Street Sweepers, 1909
• Public executions and tortures were cancelled,
• Accurate codes, uniform rules of legal proceedings, jury were entered,
• Sentences (law) to different imprisonment terms in depending of weight of a crime were entered. Only the whip and birching were remained in Russia, Austria and Prussia still some time.
• Human branding on a face or a shoulder of the criminal man had disappeared. The body as a target of punishments disappeared.
• The public repentance and pillory was cancelled.
• Use of prisoners at public works – under repair of roads were cancelled.
Prisoners were chained in shackles and iron collars. These prisoners answered with curses in reply to contempt in side of crowd.
• Columns of the prisoners chained in a chain were cancelled in France. These columns were stretched on roads of all country to the ports of Brest and Toulon. The caravans of the prisoners chained by one general chain were a tradition which is going back to an era of slaves on galleys. Security guards began to transport by prisoners in decent black prison vans. This van was prison on wheels. Punishment ceased to be theater, ritual and a show for gapers gradually.
The reasons of cancellation of public executions
• Execution surpassed a crime in barbarity sometimes.
• The execution accustomed by audience to cruelty whereas punishment had to disaccustom from cruelty.
• Execution equated the executioner with the criminal man, and judges – with murderers.
• Execution caused admiration and sympathy to executed criminal man instead of contempt and hatred.
Conclusion: punishment becomes the most hidden part of criminal procedure today gradually. Efficiency of punishment is defined by its inevitability, instead of spectacular influence.
Courts began to apply in Modern history such punishment as imprisonment, forced hard labor, penal servitude, a ban on residence in certain places, expulsion instead of tortures and executions. Intolerable corporal pain isn't connected any more with criminal punishment already. Whole army of supervisors, prison doctors and priests comes on change to the executioner as to the specialist in causing pain.
Shortcomings of modern imprisonment
• Modern imprisonment doesn't influence to public.
• Modern imprisonment doesn't take into account by specifics of a crime.
• Modern imprisonment costs too expensive for government.
• The modern imprisonment increases idleness of prisoners. Modern imprisonment multiplies defects of prisoners.
Possibility of the round-the-clock supervision of prisoners is a main goal of construction of prison “Panopticon” according to the plan of Jeremy Bentham. T his prison represents the round or crosswise building, for example, the prison "Crosses" in Sankt Petersburg represents some crosswise buildings. The central tower is in the center of such building, where the prison’s supervisor settles down. The prison’s supervisor has opportunity to observe through wide windows the life of prisoners in prison’s cells. This cells settle down on a building circle as in an aquarium or a zoo. Only one prisoner has to sit in each cell that to avoid bad influence from prisoners at each other. Walls between cells prevent to communication between prisoners. Therefore there is no danger of plot, planning of collective escape and planning of new crimes. This design of the building of prison is opposite to the principle of a dungeon.
Constant supervision prevent from necessity to apply corporal punishments too.
There were discussions about opportunity to pay work of prisoners and possibilities of the prisoner to refuse from some types of works and to organize a strike.
Arguments of opponents of prison reform and replacement of executions and tortures by imprisonment
• Criminal men plan in prison the future crimes, the organization of escapes from prison and collective prison’s revolts.
• The prison organizes training of inexperienced criminal men to thieves' professions. The prison organizes transformation inexperienced criminal men into professional criminals.
• Prisons don't reduce a crime rate. It is possible to expand of prisons, transform of prisons, increase their quantity, but the number of crimes and criminal men remains stable or increases.
• The prison generates recidivists. The overwhelming number of prisoners – is those who leave imprisonment not for the first time. Existence in prison is way of life of recidivists. Recidivists get used not to care about food and the dwelling, about job searches and livelihood in prison.
• The prison makes everything new and new criminal men, instead of corrects them irrespective of, whether they sit in solitary cells or they perform work useless for them. 30-40 supervisors can keep own safety and control over 1000-1500 prisoners in prison only relying on informers.
• The prison organizes criminal community, hierarchy in this community. The prison gives a thieves' profession and learns to be the informer. After release from prison criminal men appear in conditions which doom them to crime repetition. Prisoners lose a residence during the imprisonment and prisoners become homeless tramps after an exit from prison.
• Imprisonment dooms a family of the criminal man to poverty after imprisonment of the only supporter. As a result the son of the thief becomes the thief frequently too. It leads to new crimes eventually.
Thanks Valery. Can I first ask you if all of the above text can be sourced to Discipline and Punish? FiachraByrne (talk) 13:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, all of the above text can be sourced to Discipline and Punish.I pointed out pages of quotes from the Russian edition of this book of Foucault
Фуко Мишель Надзирать и наказывать. Рождение тюрьмы. Москва. 1999.
You can look at these references in my article in the Russian Wikipedia.Valery Staricov (talk) 16:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A criticisms section could be helpful especially how Foucault self critiques his own work in a later book. Taylmatt (talk) 20:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This article is very well-written, and it helped me better understand the argument being made by Foucault. The only critique that I recognized when reading the article was its heavy reliance on speculative data/understanding. The author/s often cite the correct passages to show what Foucault was saying, and as a laymen unfamiliar with Discipline and Punish, as well as other books written by Foucault, it gives a great glimpse into the crux of the books. However, the author/s often suggest what Foucault means, and extract exact passages from the books. As the laymen in this case, it is difficult to decipher the true meaning outside of playing "telephone". All of the citations come straight from the texts, which exemplifies that citing isn't an issue. Simply, getting to understand the full meaning of the author, Foucault. Outside of that, beautifully written. Pseymour24 (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC) Paul Seymour[reply]
The viewpoint on the punishment section, in comparison to the other sections, seems underrepresented. Taylmatt (talk) 20:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a translation of "Surveiller et punir" that equates to Crime and Punishment? I have been told that the title of Foucalt's famous work is known by that title. Should it appear on the disambiguation page? If you google search Foucalt Crime and Punishment you end up on that page.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think the person who told you that was confusing this book with Dostojevsky's. The only alternative title I know of is "Birth of the Prison".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 17:05, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with the work, but from a quick look at the fr.wp article (fr:Surveiller et punir), I would translate surveiller as supervise, oversee, or monitor, not discipline. Erictalk 17:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but this is a book that has been published in several English language editions all of which are under the title "Discipline and Punish".·maunus · snunɐɯ· 18:24, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter how you would choose to literally translate the original French title. It matters what title was actually used for the actual English translations that actually exist. And the title of a translated work does not have to be a literal translation of its original foreign-language title, either, as Blue Is the Warmest Colour (original title La Vie d'Adèle) could tell you. Bearcat (talk) 19:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Maunus is correct. I have the book and have read it also, and it was published in English as "Discipline and Punish." "Crime and Punishment" is the English title of the Dostoyevski novel. warshy(¥¥) 18:52, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard it translated as Crime and Punishment, either. The Sheridan translation includes a translator's note in the beginning that addresses this specifically. Here is the first of the three paragraphs:
Any closer translation of the French title of this book, Surveiller et punir, has proved unsatisfactory on various counts. To begin with, Foucault uses the infinitive, which, as here, may have the effect of an 'impersonal imperative'. Such a nuance is denied us in English. More seriously the verb surveiller has no adequate English equivalent. Our noun 'surveillance' has an altogether too restricted and technical use. Jeremy Bentham used the term 'inspect' - which Foucault translates as surveiller - but the range of connotations does not correspond. 'Supervise' is perhaps closest of all, but again the word has different associations. 'Observe' is rather too neutral, though Foucault is aware of the aggression involved in any one-sided observation. In the end Foucault himself suggestedDiscipline and Punish, which relates closely to the book's structure.
Thanks for the info. Amusing to see a translator claim that the nuance of that verb form can't be expressed in English. The French punir can be translated into English as either punish, to punish, or punishing, depending on context; so, as is often the case, English is less ambiguous. I'm not calling for a change to the accepted English version of this book's title, but I would say that Foucault made an error if he really put forth the notion that the English translation of Surveiller et punir would be <Synonym for "punish"> and Punish. Erictalk 03:47, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is a very silly thing to say. Especially if you haven't read the book. Discipline is a central concept in it, as is surveillance.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 05:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not silly. As I mention above, I'm going by the words in the title, which do not translate to "Discipline and Punish", no matter who says they do, and no matter how long they've said it. But I don't care; I was just trying to lend some translation expertise in case it might help. Erictalk 12:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I havw never heard of an expert translator who would call the authors own decision to translate the title of their work in a specific way "an error" or insist that the most literal translation is necessarily the most correct. Also "discipline" is not a synonym of "punish", particularly not in the sense the book gives to the word discipline.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 13:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nor have you seen me insisting that literal translations are necessarily the most correct. And discipline, used as a verb, most certainly does have among its meanings to punish, as you can see in multiple reference sources, among them Collins thesaurus and AHD. It may well be that the English title Discipline and Punish goes well with the theme of the book, but discipline is not a translation of surveiller. Erictalk 18:40, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe you should make your own translation, using the principle of seeing two words as synonyms if their ranges of meaning overlap. That would be a very novel approach to literary translation. And yes you are exactly insisting that only a literal translation is correct, and in doing so you are contradicting both the professional translator and the author which is as I insist "silly" putting it mild.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 19:19, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Get back to me when you've had a few more English lessons. Then it'll be a more fair match to determine who's silly. Erictalk 22:59, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
To get back to the question, I could support adding to the Crime and Punishment (disambiguation) page if a translation had ever been published under that title but I can't see that it has. Incidentally it shocked me how bad the article is. Mcewan (talk) 19:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There is no basis for such a disambiguation page. And yes, the article is bad.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 19:23, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well the page exists and it existence seems justifiable to me; its inclusion of this page would not (unless a so-named translation exists). Mcewan (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What's needed here is not a debate about how the original French title can or can't literally be translated into English — we title our articles about books with the titles that the books were actually published under in reality, not with original research translations. If some evidence can be found that Foucault's book has actually been referred to as "Crime and Punishment" by some reliable sources, then it would certainly warrant listing on the dab page — but the mere fact that it's theoretically possible to translate the book's original French title into "Crime and Punishment" is not in and of itself enough to justify listing it there, absent reliable evidence that any significant number of people have ever actually referred to the book by that title. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Discipline and Punish. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
