Exceptional areas by uddfederico soriano

19 2014-2015

DPA - DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ETSAM - ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL OF MADRID UPM - TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADRID

Atlas of emulations of the Informal III: Exceptional Areas

Dziga Vertov. “Man with a Movie Camera” 1929.

www.etsamadrid.upm.es www.dpa-etsam.com

9 788494 050299

2014-2015 5th International Design Seminar

5th International Design Seminar:

ATLAS OF EMULATIONS OF THE INFORMAL III: EXCEPTIONAL AREAS. --Technical University of Madrid (Spain). Soongsil University Seoul (South Korea). Polytechnic University of Puerto Rico. --Grupo de Innovación Educativa: Dispositivos Aglutinadores de Proyecto (DIP). --Architectural Design. Course 2014-2015. Fall term. Unit 19 Soriano. --Spanish teachers: Federico Soriano, Pedro Urzáiz, Eva Gil. Spanish assistant teachers: Arantzazu Luzárraga, Jose M. López Ujaque, Borja Lomas, Natalia Matesanz. --Korean assistant teacher: David Cárdenas. Puerto Rican assistant teacher: Carlos Betancourt.

de la cultura contemporánea

Editorial Libro de bolsillo sobre arquitectura. Título: “Atlas of Emulations of the Informal III: Exceptional Areas. Reseach about the teaching Ud 19 Assignment 2014-2015.” Julio 2014. Número fuera de colección. Publicación non-profit de investigación universitaria. 10 euros, 7 pounds, 14$ USA.

Esta publicación forma parte de los trabajos realizados dentro del grupo de investigación PRoLAB_ Laboratorio de Investigación del Proyecto Contemporáneo, línea de investigación “Atlas”.

Esta publicación posee el sello “I”. Director Fisuras. Fisuras Director.

Federico Soriano.

Editores de este número. Editors for this issue.

Federico Soriano. Pedro Urzáiz. Eva Gil.

Redactores. Editorial advisers.

Dolores Palacios. Jose M. López Ujaque. Borja Lomas. Natalia Matesanz.

Diseño gráfico. Graphic Design.

Jose M. López Ujaque. Borja Lomas.

Imprenta. Printer: Deca Quattro Servicios Gráficos S.L.L. Avenida de los Pirineos 7, Oficina B 5 28703 San Sebastián de los Reyes Tel: 917 04 59 38 Distribución, suscripciones. Distribution, subscriptions: Revista Fisuras Avenida de Levante, 41 28016 Madrid Tel/Fax: 0034 91 519 21 56 fisuras@fisuras.es Depósito legal M-22020-2014 ISBN 978-84-940502-9-9

Atlas of emulations of the Informal III: Exceptional Areas

Index Course Control areas Trick programs Shopping malls References Contract sample Texts Bibliography /// Unusual Atlas of construction details

* Title of a previous book with additional information needed to join this course.

3 5 11 103 109 133 151 155 179 *

Course

Exceptional Areas There are some spatial experiences where the program creates such an intensity of use that architectural conditions feel stolen by the elements that comprise it. Surveillance and control programs, where conditions of use oppress us psychologically so that we can neither experience, nor feel spatialities; those where furniture, technology, flows, controllers or the repayment of our personality -through the reordering of our body, clothing or property- distract us to no architectural introspection. In short, those programs, due to their psychoprogramatic conditions, unbalance in a high percentage the possession difference between architectural elements and conditions. These programs are not the only ones that create these imbalances. This situation can also be obtained through an on purpose manipulation of the space, using elements or vice versa, through the sole appearence of imposed architectural conditions. We, the people involved in this project, are interested in areas influenced by psychoprograms, related to control and security conditions. These psychoprograms define exceptional areas; those where we suffer and do not experience; those that we are forced to serve and do not give us anything back; those which intimidate and do not dignify us; those that make us fear and not think. Those areas are shown with spontaneity of power and we use them as leisure when we travel by land, sea or air and when we walk into corporative or institutional buildings; those that remind us that we are being watched. There are also other exceptional areas -we shall not mislead ourselvesand these happen to be the opposite to the ones mentioned above. Those where the reading of architectural conditions rule the possession of architectural elements, but nowadays these areas are not presented intentionally. It will come a time when figurative architecture regains its prominence. We will work on these exceptional areas, we will define their only real data, their perimeter and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;anthropologicalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; data. Their surface, number of operators and users, noise, transparency, height, etc... We will produce diagrams...

We will define an architectural program: a ‘mall’, which will start from its most realistic formalization, the one that bounds its program, the plan. We will also have the collaboration of supplementary programs; on the one hand those named ‘trick programs’ and on the other some programs defined only by their percentage of implantation in the mall. With the help of our perimeters and ‘anthropological’ conditions -in this case they will be fifteen-, the ‘specific’ plans -also fifteen- and ‘supplementary’ programs added to the ‘mall’ program, we will produce a plan, a section and a model in our historical format: A0. In addition, following our trajectory in recent years, these projects will be carried on by teams of several students comprised by a student from the ETSAM and other/s from abroad. This year we intend to work with a school from Puerto Rico and another one from Seoul. This way we will explore new ways of working hand in hand with foreign teammates, ways of working, and academic standards of other schools all around the world. For level 8 students, the project will also serve to engage with this project in the second semester in other technical subjects, incorporating to their project the structures, facilities and building systems. This semester will therefore be comprised by a single project, based on a book that will contain any concerns, questions and data for the course.

Instructions During this semester students from different Universities will work together, creating teams with people who do not know each other: These teams will work on “Exceptional areas” and Shopping malls. Our working method will produce fast architectural designs and will look for quick results. We want to work focusing on dispersion, interactions between individuals and proposing a different working method, placing every student out of his/her safety area (spaces that they know perfectly and they are fluent in). During this semester we will work in several formats: we will alternate working digitally: vídeos, digital presentations, social networks, NTICs, live streaming lectures, MOOC - every team should redefine their architectural design to those formats) and analogue format: A1 and A0 printing, A1 models, collage… Every team will develop a project of a control area of 500 m2. First of all, during our first week of collaboration, every team will sign a contract between members, setting clauses and content of their relationship. Teams could look up to an example, present in this book. We will communicate to each other through different channels. Facebook will be our common point: There will be available a Facebook group for all the students. During our first month, every team will choose one shopping mall from the semester book and will produce functional flow diagrams based on its floorplan. Afterwards, on one hand every team will choose one control area from this book: with one perimeter, a list of parameters, some references and a link to one page of the book “Unusual Atlas of construction details”; on the other hand, also they will choose one trick program from the list. This trick program will be the function which will support and be mixed with its chosen control area, in a 25% percentage of those 500 m2. To develop its design, every team will keep in mind several aspects: the shopping mall floorplan and diagram, the trick program, the list of parameters and all the references of controlled areas that every team will consider.

After this first month every team will do a submission: a floorplan in A1, a digital file of their proposal. This submission will be 40% of their semester grade. After working one month on every proposal, teams will negotiate between them. There will be some activities in every University focusing on negotiations: Speed Dating negotiation sessions, round table classes, etc. Teams which will be working on the same shopping mall, will negotiate between each other, trying to find ways of occupying each floorplan and hybrid their trick programs, etc. For our final semester deadline (ETSA Madrid) every student will submit: A0 floorplan of his/her proposal, A0 section, A1 model and A6 booklet. This submission will be extremely constructively developed (we will coordinate with different subjects as: installation project, structure projects for Spring semester). This submission will be analogue and digital (every student will entry a CD/DVD with his/her final submission). This second and final submission will be 80% of their semester assessment (50% graphic documents and 30% A1 model).

Control areas

ATL

PARAMETERS Flow Checkpoints workers Perimeter permeability Perimeter transparency Roof occupation Energy needs Decibel level Artificial illumination Indoor / outdoor temperature gap Indoor / outdoor humidity gap Transit time

= = = = = = = = = = =

258.715 people/day 80 people 45 % 62 % 50 % 94.430.785 KW 70 dB 64 % 18,20 ยบC 1,70 mm 48 minutes

ATL

BOG

= = = = = = = = = = =

68.519 people/day 16 people 62 % 36 % 0% 25.009.483 KW 60 dB 38 % 12,05 ยบC 8,35 mm 35 minutes

BOG

BSB

= = = = = = = = = = =

42.973 people/day 24 people 74 % 48 % 0% 15.685.045 KW 60 dB 39 % 5,25 ยบC 3,15 mm 40 minutes

BSB

CAI

= = = = = = = = = = =

40.536 people/day 64 people 36 % 25 % 10 % 14.795.500 KW 90 dB 27 % 9,35 ยบC -6,15 mm 43 minutes

CAI

CDG

= = = = = = = = = = =

170.008 people/day 128 people 52 % 71 % 20 % 62.052.917 KW 60 dB 73 % 20,05 ยบC 3,00 mm 42 minutes

CDG

CGH

= = = = = = = = = = =

88.980 people/day 32 people 64 % 52 % 50 % 32.477.646 KW 60â&#x20AC;&#x2122; dB 48 % -0,95 ÂşC 1,70 mm 46 minutes

CGH

DEL

= = = = = = = = = = =

94.160 people/day 64 people 75 % 20 % 70 % 34.368.411 KW 40 dB 33 % -9,95 ยบC 8,55 mm 29 minutes

DEL

DME

= = = = = = = = = = =

84.288 people/day 64 people 37 % 55 % 10 % 30.765.078 KW 60 dB 89 % 21,20 ยบC 10,00 mm 41 minutes

DME

DXB

= = = = = = = = = = =

182.004 people/day 128 people 25 % 14 % 20 % 66.431.533 KW 70 dB 43 % 8,97 ยบC -9,65 mm 48 minutes

DXB

HEL

= = = = = = = = = = =

41.860 people/day 84 people 65 % 85 % 50 % 15.279.043 KW 60 dB 98 % 24,75 ยบC 5,90 mm 62 minutes

HEL

HKG

= = = = = = = = = = =

163.313 people/day 128 people 73 % 92 % 40 % 59.609.414 KW 70 dB 66 % 7,05 ยบC -6,45 mm 47 minutes

HKG

HTI

= = = = = = = = = = =

1.254 people/day 4 people 90 % 56 % 10 % 457.641 KW 40 dB 13 % 4,15 ยบC 0,2 mm 30 minutes

HTI

IST

= = = = = = = = = = =

33.861 people/day 48 people 47 % 37 % 10 % 12.359.428 KW 60 dB 42 % 1,00 ยบC -0,45 mm 42 minutes

IST

JFK

= = = = = = = = = = =

138.118 people/day 140 people 23 % 79 % 40 % 50.413.204 KW 50 dB 73 % 23,15 ยบC -1,00 mm 73 minutes

JFK

LHR

= = = = = = = = = = =

198.269 people/day 120 people 38 % 95 % 35 % 72.368.030 KW 60 dB 81 % 18,20 ยบC 4,00 mm 52 minutes

LHR

100

LHR

101

Trick programs

103

1. Nursery school for 10 children. 2. Multidenominational chapel for 2 people. 3. Public showers for 6 people. 4. Domestic garbage classification center. 5. Forgery documents studio. 6. Jewellerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s and engraving studio. 7. Tematic bar. 8. Pet shop. 9. Funeral home. 10. Abortion clinic. 11. Zoo. 12. Napping place for 5 people. 13. Aquarium. 14. Casino for 6 people. 15. Massage boxes. 16. TV set. 17. Call box. 18. Hard sexplace. 19. Stateless center. 20. Imprisonment center. 21. Testing products center for 4 people. 22. Printing house. 23. Quarantine area. 24. Bank. 25. Quick divorce center. 26. Adult ball pond (leisure park). 27. Seniorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s daycare. 28. Souvenir shop. 29. Smoking area. 30. Short film cinema.

105

25%

Trick program

15%

Systems

25%

Waiting area

10%

Sales area

25%

Checkpoint

107

Shopping malls

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

References

133

Aram Bartholl. “15 Seconds of Fame” 2010.

135

Lauren O’Neill. “Holding Pattern.WLG”.

136

Leonardo Selvaggio. “URME Surveillance” 2014.

137

Checkpoint Charlie Sign. East Berlin.

138

Proyecto Colectivo (Miguel Braceli and Maria Egea) “Traslaciones” 2014.

139

RAF Nocturnal Bombing. Brest, France. 1941.

140

Omer Fast. “5000 feet is the best” 2011.

141

Isadora Willson. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Estado de Vigilanciaâ&#x20AC;? 2005.

142

Ryu HoYeol. “Flughafen” 2005.

143

Marina Abramovic and Ulay. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Imponderabiliaâ&#x20AC;? 1977.

144

Lilly McElroy. “The Square (after Roberto Lopardo)” 2004.

145

Boeing Manufacturing Plant during WWII. Seattle, EEUU.

146

Facebook Facial Recognition. 2014.

147

Milan Knizak. “Stone Ceremony” 1971.

148

Cuco Suárez. “Sospechosos” 2012.

149

Contract sample

151

Contract sample by Elena Juarros, made during the course 2013-2014 first term

153

Texts

155

The mesh of power Michel FOUCAULT

This lecture was delivered by Michel Foucault in 1976 at the invitation of the Philosophy department of the Federal University of Bahia in Salvador, Brazil. It was originally published in two parts, translated into Portuguese for issue 4 of the journal Barbárie in 1981 and issue 5 in 1982 respectively. The lecture is reproduced in its entirety in Michel Foucault, Dits et écrits, vol II, eds. Daniel Defert, François Ewald and Jacques Lagange (Paris: Éditions Gallimard, 2001), 1001-1020. We will attempt to pro ceed towards an analy sis of the con cept of power. I am not the first, far from it, to attempt to skirt around the Freudian schema that pits instinct against sup pres sion [répres sion], instinct against culture. Many decades ago, an entire school of psy cho an a lysts tried to mod ify and develop this Freudian schema of instinct ver sus cul ture, and of instinct ver sus sup pres sion – I am refer ring to psychoanalysts in the Eng lish as well as the French lan guage, like Melanie Klein, Win ni cott, and Lacan, who have tried to show that sup pres sion, far from being a sec ondary, ulte rior, or later mech a nism, which would attempt to con trol a given or nat ural play of instinct, con sti tutes a part of the mech a nism of instinct, or, more or less, of the process through which the sex ual instinct [l’instinct sex uel] is devel oped, unfolded and con sti tuted as drive [pul sion]. The Freudian con cept of Trieb need not be inter preted as a sim ple natural given, a nat ural bio log i cal mech a nism upon which sup pres sion would come to posit its law of pro hi bi tion, but rather, accord ing to the psycho an a lysts, as some thing which is already pro foundly pen e trated by sup pres sion. Need, cas tra tion, lack, pro hi bi tion and the law are already ele ments through which desire has been con sti tuted as sex ual desire, and this implies a trans for ma tion of the orig i nal notion of sex ual instinct, such as Freud had con ceived of it at the end of the 19th cen tury. It is then nec es sary to think instinct not as a nat ural given, but as already a devel op ment, as already being a com plex play between the body and

156

the law, between the body and the cul tural mech a nisms that assure the con trol of persons. I there fore believe that the psy cho an a lysts have con sid er ably dis placed the point in ques tion, by bring ing to light a new idea of instinct, or, in any case, a new con cep tion of instinct, drive and desire. Nev er the less, what trou bles me, or at least what seems insuf fi cient to me, is that, in this revi sion pro posed by psy cho an a lysts, they have per haps altered the con cept of desire, but they have in no way altered our con cept of power. In their work, they still con tinue to regard the sig ni fied of power, the central point, that in which power con sists, as pro hi bi tion, law, the act of say ing no, and above all, the fig ure or expres sion: “You must not.” Power is essen tially those who say, “You must not.” It appears to me that this is a totally insuf fi cient con cep tu al iza tion – and I will speak about this later – a juridi cal idea, a for mal idea of power, and it is nec es sary to elab o rate a dif fer ent idea of power that will, no doubt, per mit us to bet ter under stand the rela tions estab lished between power and sex u al ity in our West ern societies. I am going to attempt to develop – or bet ter, indi cate the direc tion in which we will be able to develop – an analy sis of power that would not sim ply be a neg a tive, juridi cal idea of power, but rather, the idea of a tech nol ogy of power. We fre quently find among the psy cho an a lysts, psy chol o gists and sociolo gists this idea accord ing to which power is essen tially rule, law, pro hi bi tion, that which marks the limit between the per mit ted and the for bid den. I believe that this con cep tion, gen er ally under stood to be devel oped by eth nol ogy at the end of the 19th cen tury, was inci sively for mu lated. Eth nol ogy always tried to view sys tems of power in soci eties dif fer ent from ours as being sys tems of rules. And we our selves, when we try to reflect upon our soci ety, on the man ner in which power is exer cised here, we essen tially con struct this analy sis from a juridi cal idea: where

157

is power, who holds power, what are the rules gov ern ing [les règles qui régis sent] power, what is the sys tem of law that power estab lishes within the social body. Thus, we always per form, for our soci ety, a juridi cal soci ol ogy of power, and, when we study soci eties dif fer ent from ours, we per form an ethnology that is essen tially an eth nol ogy of the rule, an eth nol ogy of pro hi bi tion. For exam ple, look at the eth no log i cal stud ies from Durkheim to Lévi-Strauss. What was the prob lem that always reap peared, that was per pet u ally re-elaborated? The prob lem of pro hi bi tion, essen tially the pro hi bi tion of incest. And, from this matrix, from this ker nel that would be the pro hi bi tion of incest, one attempted to under stand the gen eral func tion ing of the sys tem. And we had to wait until recent years to see new points of view appear about power, that is, either a strictly Marx ist point of view or a point of view more dis tant from clas si cal Marx ism. In any case, we see since the appear ance, with the work of Clas tres, for exam ple, a whole new con cep tu al iza tion of power as tech nol ogy, which attempts to free itself from the pre vail ing one, from this priv i leg ing of rule and pro hi bi tion, which had basi cally reigned over eth nol ogy from Durkheim to Lévi-Strauss. In any case, the ques tion that I would like to pose is the fol low ing: how is it that our soci ety, West ern soci ety in gen eral, has con ceived of power in such a restric tive, impov er ished and neg a tive way? Why do we always con ceive of power as law and pro hi bi tion, why this priv i lege? Of course, we could say that all this is due to the influ ence of Kant, to the idea accord ing to which, in the final instance, the moral law, the “you must not,” the oppo si tion “you must” / “you must not” is, in fact, the matrix of every reg u la tion of human con duct. But, to speak frankly, explain ing this with recourse to the influ ence of Kant is, of course, totally insufficient. The prob lem is to know whether Kant had such an influ ence, and why what influ ence he had could be so strong. Why did Durkheim, a philosopher with vague social ist ten den cies at the start of the Third French Republic, rely upon Kant in this fash ion when per form ing an

158

analy sis of the mechanism of power in society? I believe that we can crudely ana lyze the rea son in the fol low ing terms: basi cally, in the West, the great sys tems estab lished since the Mid dle Ages had been devel oped through the increase in monar chi cal power, at the expense of power, or bet ter, of feu dal pow ers. Now, in this battle between feu dal pow ers and monar chi cal power, right [le droit] was always the instru ment of monar chi cal power against the insti tu tions, customs, pre scrip tions [régle ments] and forms of bond and belong ing char ac teristic of feu dal soci ety. I’ll sim ply give you two exam ples of this bat tle. On the one hand, monar chi cal power devel oped in the West by, in large part, rely ing upon juridi cal insti tu tions and by devel op ing these insti tu tions; through civil war, a sys tem of courts sup planted the old solution of pri vate dis putes. In fact, the laws estab lished by these courts gave monar chi cal power itself the abil ity to resolve dis putes between indi viduals. In the same man ner, Roman law, which reap peared in the West in the 13th and 14th cen turies, was a for mi da ble instru ment in the hands of the monar chy for suc ceed ing in delim it ing the forms and mecha nisms of its own power, at the expense of feu dal power. In other words, the growth of the State in Europe was par tially assured by, or in any case was used as an instru ment in, the devel op ment of juridical thought.Monarchical power, the power of the State was essen tially represented as right [le droit]. And yet, as it hap pened, while the bour geoisie was largely prof it ing from the devel op ment of royal power and the diminu tion and regression of feudal power, it also had, on the other hand, every inter est in developing a sys tem of rights that would per mit it to give form to eco nomic exchanges that assured its own social devel op ment. The result being that the vocab u lary and form of rights was the sys tem of rep re sen ta tion of power com mon to the bour geoisie and the monar chy. The bour geoisie and the monar chy suc ceeded lit tle by lit tle at estab lish ing, from the end of the Mid dle Ages up to the 18th cen tury, a form of power rep re sent ing itself as lan guage, a form of power which gave itself – as dis course – the

159

vocab u lary of rights. And, when the bour geoisie had finally dis posed of monar chi cal power, it did so pre cisely by using this juridi cal dis course – which had more or less been that of the monar chy – which the it turned against the monar chy itself. To sim ply give one exam ple: Rousseau, when he for mu lated his theory of the State, attempted to show how a sov er eign – but a col lec tive sovereign, a sov er eign as social body, or bet ter still, a social body as sov er eign – is born out of the trans fer of indi vid ual rights, the alien ation of these rights and the pos ing of laws of pro hi bi tion that each indi vid ual must rec ognize, because it is he him self who has imposed the law, to the extent that he is a mem ber of the sov er eign, to the extent that he is himself a sov ereign. Accord ingly, the the o ret i cal mech a nism through which the cri tique of the monar chi cal insti tu tion was made, this the oretical instrument was the instru ment of rights, which had been estab lished by the monar chy itself. In other words, the West never had another sys tem of rep re sen ta tion, expres sion or analy sis of power aside from that of rights, the sys tem of law. In the final analy sis, I believe that is ulti mately the rea son for which we have not had, until very recently, other pos sibilities for analyzing power, except in using these ele men tary, fun da men tal, etc. ideas which are those of law, rule, sov er eign, com mis sion, etc. I believe that we must now free our selves from this juridi cal con cep tion of power – this con ception of power derived from the law and sov er eign, from the rule and pro hi bi tion – if we wish to pro ceed towards an analy sis of the real function ing of power, rather than its mere representation. How may we attempt to ana lyze power in its pos i tive mech a nisms? It appears to me that we may find, in a cer tain num ber of texts, the fundamen tal ele ments for an analy sis of this type. We may per haps find them in Ben tham, an Eng lish philoso pher from the end of the 18th and begin ning of the 19th cen tury, who was basi cally the great the o reti cian of bour geois power, and we may of course also find these ele ments in Marx, essen tially in the sec ond vol ume of Cap i tal. It’s here, I think, that we may find some ele ments that I will use for the analy sis of power in its

160

pos i tive mechanisms. First, what we may find in the sec ond vol ume of Cap i tal is that one power does not exist, but many pow ers. Pow ers, this means forms of domination, forms of sub ju ga tion that func tion locally, for exam ple in the work shop, in the army, on a slave plan ta tion or where there are subservient rela tions. These are all local and regional forms of power, which have their own mode of func tion ing, their own pro ce dure and technique. All these forms of power are het ero ge neous. We may not, there fore, speak of power if we wish to con struct an analy sis of power, but we must speak of pow ers and attempt to local ize them in their his toric and geo graphic specificity. A soci ety is not a uni tary body, in which one and only one power is exercised. Soci ety is in real ity the jux ta po si tion, the link, the coordination and also the hier ar chy of dif fer ent pow ers that nev er the less remain in their speci ficity. Marx places great empha sis, for exam ple, on the simultaneously spe cific and rel a tively autonomous – in some sense imper vi ous – char ac ter of the de facto power the boss exer cises in a work shop, com pared to the juridi cal kind of power that exists in the rest of soci ety. Thus, the exis tence of regions of power. Soci ety is an archipelago of dif fer ent powers. Sec ond, it appears that these pow ers can not and must not sim ply be under stood as the deriva tion, the con se quence of some kind of overriding power that would be pri mary. The schema of the jurists, whether those of Grotius, Pufendorf, or Rousseau, amounts to say ing: “In the begin ning, there was no soci ety, and then soci ety appeared when a cen tral point of sov er eignty appeared to orga nize the social body, which then per mit ted a whole series of local and regional pow ers”; implic itly, Marx does not rec og nize this schema. He shows, on the con trary, how, start ing from the ini tial and prim i tive exis tence of these small regions of power – like prop erty, slav ery, work shop, and also the army – lit tle by lit tle, the great State appa ra tuses were able to form. State unity is basi cally sec ondary in rela tion to these regional and spe cific pow ers; these lat ter come first.

161

Third, these spe cific regional pow ers have absolutely no ancient [primordial] func tion of pro hibit ing, pre vent ing, say ing “you must not.” The orig i nal, essen tial and per ma nent func tion of these local and regional pow ers is, in real ity, being pro duc ers of the effi ciency and skill of the pro duc ers of a prod uct. Marx, for exam ple, has superb analy ses of the prob lem of dis ci pline in the army and work shops. The analy sis I’m about to make of dis ci pline in the army is not in Marx, but no mat ter: What happened in the army from the end of the 16th and the begin ning of the 17th cen tury prac ti cally right up to the end of the 18th cen tury? An enormous trans for ma tion in an army that had hith erto been essentially con sti tuted of small units of rel a tively inter change able individ u als, organized around one com man der. These small units were replaced by a great pyra mi dal unit, with a whole series of inter me di ate com manding offi cers, of non-commissioned offi cers and tech ni cians too, essen tially because a tech ni cal dis cov ery had been made: the gun with comparatively rapid and cal i brated fire. From this moment for ward, one could no longer deal with the army – it was dan ger ous to oper ate it – under the plan of small iso lated units, composed of inter change able ele ments. It was nec es sary, so that the army could be effec tive, so that one could use the guns in the best possible man ner, that each indi vid ual be well trained to occupy a deter mined posi tion on an agreed upon front, to be deployed at the same moment, accord ing to a line that must not be bro ken, etc. The whole prob lem of dis ci pline implied a new tech nique of power with noncommissioned offi cers, a whole hier ar chy of non-commissioned officers, junior offi cers, and senior offi cers. And it was in this way that the army could be dealt with as a very com plex hier ar chi cal unit, by ensuring the max i mal per for mance of whole deploy ment accord ing to the specificity of the posi tion and role of each person. There was a very supe rior mil i tary per for mance thanks to a new practice of power, whose func tion was absolutely not that of pro hibiting something. Of course, the new prac tice of power came to pro hibit this

162

or that thing; nev er the less, the goal was absolutely not say ing, “you must not,” but rather essen tially obtain ing a bet ter per for mance, a better produc tion and a bet ter pro duc tiv ity in the army. The army as production of dead bod ies, this was per fected, or bet ter still, this was what was assured by this new tech nique of power. This was absolutely not prohi bi tion. We could say the same thing of the dis ci pline in work shops, which began to take shape in the 17th and 18th cen turieswhen the small work shops of a cor po rate type were replaced by large work shops and an entire series of work ers – hun dreds of work ers – it was nec es sary to both mon i tor [surveiller] and coor di nate move ments, with the divi sion of labor. The divi sion of labor was, at the same time, the rea son it was oblig a tory to invent this new dis ci pline of the work shop, but, inversely, we could say that the dis ci pline of the work shop was the con di tion of pos si bil ity for achiev ing a divi sion of labor. With out this dis ci pline of the work shop, which is to say, with out hier ar chy, with out sur veil lance, with out the appear ance of fore men, with out the timed con trol of move ments, it would not have been pos si ble to achieve a divi sion of labor. Finally, the fourth impor tant idea: these mech a nisms of power, these proce dures of power, it’s nec es sary to regard them as tech niques, which is to say as pro ce dures that were invented, per fected, that were unceasingly devel oped. There is a ver i ta ble tech nol ogy of power, or better still, of pow ers, which have their own his tory. Here, once again, we can eas ily find between the lines of the sec ond vol ume of Cap i tal an analy sis, or at least the out line of an analy sis, which would be the his tory of the tech nol ogy of power, such as it was exer cised in the workhouses and fac to ries. I will there fore fol low these essen tial indi ca tions and I will attempt, with regard to sex u al ity, not to con ceive of power from the juridical point of view, but from the technological. It appears to me, in fact, that if we ana lyze power by priv i leg ing the State appa ra tus, if we ana lyze power by regard ing it as a mech a nism of preserva tion, if we regard power as a juridi cal super struc ture, we will basi cally do no more than take up the clas si cal theme of bourgeois

163

thought, for it essen tially con ceives of power as a juridi cal fact. To privilege the State appa ra tus, the func tion of preser va tion, the juridi cal super struc ture, is, basi cally, to “Rousseauify” Marx. It rein scribes Marx in the bour geois and juridi cal the ory of power. It is not sur pris ing that this sup pos edly Marx ist con cep tion of power as State appa ra tus, as instance of preser va tion, as juridi cal super struc ture, is essen tially found in European Social Democ racy of the end of the 19th cen tury, when the prob lem was pre cisely that of know ing how to make Marx work inside a juridi cal sys tem, which was that of the bour geoisie. So, what I would like to do, in tak ing up what can be found in the sec ond vol ume of Cap i tal, and in mov ing away from all that was added, rewrit ten after wards on the priv i leges of the State appa ra tus, power’s func tion of repro duc tion, the char ac ter is tics of the juridi cal super struc ture, is to attempt to see how it is pos si ble to do a his tory of pow ers in the West, and essen tially of powers inas much as they are invested in sexuality. Thus, from this method olog i cal prin ci ple, how can we do a his tory of the mech a nisms of power with regards to sex u al ity? I believe that, in a very schematic man ner, we could say the fol low ing: the sys tem of power that the monar chy had suc ceeded in orga niz ing from the end of the Middle Ages pre sented two major incon ve niences for the devel opment of capitalism. First, polit i cal power, as it was exer cised within the social body, was a very dis con tin u ous power. The mesh of the net was too large, and an almost infi nite num ber of things, ele ments, con ducts, and processes escaped the con trol of power. If we take for exam ple a precise point – the impor tance of smug gling in all of Europe up until the end of the 18th cen tury – we would observe a very impor tant eco nomic flow, almost as impor tant as the other, a flow which entirely escaped power. And it was, more over, one of the con di tions for the exis tence of men; if there had not been mar itime piracy, com merce would not have functioned, and men would not have been able to live. In other words, ille gal ity was one of the very pre con di tions of life, but it sig ni fied at the same time that there were cer tain things which escaped power, and over which power did not have con trol. Con se quently, eco nomic processes, diverse mech a nisms,

164

which in a cer tain way remained out side con trol, required the establish ment of a con tin u ous, minute power, in a cer tain atom iz ing fash ion; from a lacu nal, global power to a con tin u ous, atomic, and indi vid u al iz ing power: that every one, each indi vid ual in and of himself, in his body, in his movements, could be con trolled, in the place of total and mass controls. The sec ond great incon ve nience to the mech a nisms of power, such as they func tioned in the monar chy, is that they were exces sively costly. And they were costly pre cisely because the func tion of power – that which con sisted power – was essen tially the power to levy, to have the right and the force to col lect some thing – a tax, a tithe wher ever the clergy was con cerned – from the har vests that were made: the com pulsory collection of this or that per cent age for the mas ter, for royal power, for the clergy. Power was then essen tially tax col lec tor and preda tor. In this way, it always per formed an eco nomic sub trac tion, and, by con sequence, far from favor ing and stim u lat ing eco nomic flow, monar chi cal power was per pet u ally its obsta cle and its restraint. Hence this sec ond pre oc cupation, this sec ond neces sity: find ing a power mech a nism such that, at the same time that it con trolled things and per sons right down to the most minute detail, it would nei ther be expen sive nor essen tially preda tory on soci ety, that it would, on the con trary, be exer cised through the eco nomic processes themselves. With these two objec tives, I believe that we can roughly grasp the great tech no log i cal muta tion of power in the West. We have the habit – once again accord ing to the spirit of an ever so lim ited Marx ism – of say ing that the great inven tion was, as every one knows, the steam engine, or at least inven tions of this sort. It is true, this was very impor tant, but there was an entire series of other tech no log i cal inven tions just as important as this one and which were, in the last instance, the con di tion of possibility for the func tion ing of the oth ers. Thus it was in polit i cal tech nol ogy; there was an inven tion at the level of forms of power through out the 17th and 18th cen turies. Con se quently, we must not only make a his tory of industrial tech niques, but also that of polit i cal tech niques, and I believe that we may group the inven tions of polit i cal tech nol ogy under two great

165

chap ters, and for these inven tions we must credit, above all, the 17th and 18th cen turies. I will group these polit i cal tech nolo gies under two great chap ter head ings because it appears to me that they were developed in two dif fer ent direc tions. On the one hand, there was this tech nology that I will call “dis ci pline.” Dis ci pline is basi cally the mechanism of power by which we come to exert con trol in the social body right down to the finest ele ments, by which we suc ceed in grab bing hold of the social atoms them selves, which is to say indi vid u als. Tech niques for the individualization of power. How to mon i tor [sur veiller] some one, how to con trol his con duct, his behav ior, his apti tudes, how to inten sify his perfor mance, mul ti ply his capac i ties, how to put him in a place where he will be most use ful: this is what I mean by discipline. A moment ago, I cited for you the exam ple of dis ci pline in the army. It is an impor tant exam ple because it was truly the site where the great discov ery of dis ci pline was made and devel oped in the first place. Linked then to this other inven tion of a techno-industrial sort that was the invention of the gun with a com par a tively rapid fire. Basi cally from this moment on, we can say the fol low ing: the sol dier was no longer inter change able, was no longer pure and sim ple can non fod der [chair à canon] – a sim ple indi vid ual capa ble of doing harm. To be a good sol dier, he needed to know how to shoot; there fore he had to undergo a process of appren tice ship. It was nec es sary that the sol dier equally know how to move, that he know how to coor di nate his move ments with those of other sol diers, in sum: the sol dier became some thing skill ful. Ergo, some thing valu able [precieux]. And the more valu able he was, the more he had to be preserved; the more he had to be pre served, the more necessary it became to teach him the tech niques capa ble of saving his life in battle, and the more tech niques he was taught, the longer this appren ticeship, the more valu able he became. And sud denly, you have a kind of rapid devel op ment of these mil i tary tech niques of train ing [dressage], culminat ing in the famous Pruss ian army of Fred eric II, which spent most of its time doing exer cises. The Pruss ian army, the model of Pruss ian disci pline, is pre cisely the per fec tion, the max i mal inten sity of

166

this cor po real dis ci pline [dis ci pline cor porelle] of the sol dier, which was, to a cer tain extent, the model for other disciplines. Another instance where we see this new dis ci pli nary tech nol ogy appearing is edu ca tion. It is first in sec ondary schools and then in primary schools where we see these dis ci pli nary meth ods appear ing in which indi viduals are indi vid u al ized within a mul ti plic ity. The sec ondary school brings together dozens, hun dreds and some times thou sands of high school ers and school child ren, and it then became an issue of exercising a power over them that would rightly be much less expensive than the power of the tutor and that could only exist between pupil and master. Here we have one mas ter for dozens of dis ci ples; it was necessary, however, despite this mul ti plic ity of pupils, to achieve an indi vidu al iza tion of power, a per ma nent con trol, a sur veil lance of every moment. Hence the appear ance of the fig ure well known to all those who attended sec ondary school, the mon i tor [le sur veil lant], who, in the pyra mid, cor re sponds to the non-commissioned offi cer in the army; also the appear ance of quanti ta tive grades, the appear ance of exams, the appear ance of compe ti tion, and the pos si bil ity, by con se quence, of classi fy ing indi vid u als in such a man ner that each one would be pre cisely in his place, under the gaze of the teacher, or in the qual i fi ca tion and judg ment that we make of each indi vid ual pupil. See, for exam ple, how you are seated in rows in front of me. It’s a position that per haps appears nat ural to you, but it is impor tant to recall, how ever, that this is a rel a tively recent devel op ment in the his tory of civi liza tion, and that it is pos si ble, at the start of the 19th cen tury, to find schools where the pupils are assem bled in a stand ing crowd, around a pro fes sor who instructs them. And this of course implies that the pro fes sor could not effec tively or indi vid u ally mon i tor them: there is a crowd of stu dents and, then, a pro fes sor. Cur rently, you are arranged in rows so that the gaze of the pro fes sor can indi vid u al ize each of you, so he or she can call your name to know if you are present, what you’re doing, if you’re dream ing, if you’re yawn ing… These are banal i ties, but very impor tant

167

banal i ties, for finally, at the level of a whole series of exer cises of power, it was through these lit tle tech niques that these new mech a nisms were able to take over, were able to oper ate. That which hap pened in the army and in sec ondary schools may be equally observed in the work houses through out the 19th cen tury. This is what I will name the indi vid u al iz ing tech nol ogy of power, a tech nol ogy that basi cally tar gets indi vid u als right down to their bod ies, their behav iors; it is grosso modo a kind of polit i cal anatomy, an anatomo-politics, an anatomy that tar gets indi vid u als to the point of anat o miz ing them. As I have indi cated above, we have a fam ily of tech nolo gies of power that appeared in the 17th and 18th cen turies; we have another fam ily of technolo gies of power which appeared a bit later, dur ing the sec ond half of the 18th cen tury, and which was devel oped (we must say that the for mer, to the shame of France, was above all devel oped in France and Germany) above all in Eng land: tech nolo gies that do not tar get individuals as such, but which, on the con trary, tar get the pop u la tion. In other words, the 18th cen tury dis cov ered this cap i tal thing: power is not sim ply exercised upon sub jects; this idea was the fun da men tal thesis of the monar chy, according to which there was the sov er eign and the subjects. It was dis cov ered that power is exer cised over the popula tion. And what does pop u la tion mean? Pop u la tion does not simply mean a large group of humans, but liv ing beings tra versed, ordered and governed [régis] by bio log i cal processes and laws. A pop u la tion has a birthrate and a death rate; a pop u la tion has a gen er a tional curve [une courbe d’âge], a life table [une pyra mide d’âge], mor bid ity, a gen eral state of health, a popula tion might per ish or might, on the con trary, increase. Now all of this begins to be dis cov ered in the 18th cen tury. We can therefore glimpse that the rela tion of power with the sub ject or, bet ter still, with the indi vid ual, need not sim ply be this form of depen dency [sujé tion] that per mits power to levy goods, wealth, and pos si bly body and blood from the sub ject, but, rather, power must be exer cised over indi vid u als

168

inso far as they con sti tute a kind of bio log i cal entity that must be taken into con sid er a tion if we actu ally want to use this pop u la tion as a machine for pro duc ing, for pro duc ing wealth and goods, for pro duc ing other individ u als. The dis cov ery of the pop u la tion is, along with the discovery of the indi vid ual and the train able body, the other great tech nological core around which the polit i cal prac tices of the West transformed themselves. We invented in that case what I will call, in opposi tion to the anatomopolitics I men tioned a moment ago, bio-politics. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s at this point that we observe the emer gence of problems like those of hous ing, of qual ity of life in the city, of pub lic hygiene, of the mod i fi cation of the ratio between birth rate and mor tal ity. At this time the prob lem appears of know ing how to cajole peo ple to pro duce more babies, or in any case, how we can reg u late the pop u la tion flow, how we can also reg u late the growth rate of the pop u la tion, and migra tion too. And from this moment on, a whole series of obser va tional techniques, includ ing sta tis tics, of course, but also all the great admin is tra tive, economic, and polit i cal organs, are given the duty of reg u lat ing the popu la tion. There were two great rev o lu tions in the tech nol ogy of power: the dis cov ery of dis ci pline and the dis cov ery of reg u la tion, the improve ment of anatomo-politics and the improve ment of bio-politics. Life now becomes, begin ning in the 18th cen tury, an object of power. Life and the body. Pre vi ously, there had only been sub jects, juridi cal subjects from whom we could col lect goods, and life too, more over. Now, there are bod ies and pop u la tions. Power becomes mate ri al ist. It ceases to be essen tially juridi cal. It has to deal with real things [des choses rĂŠelles], which are bod ies and life. Life enters the field of power: a major transforma tion [muta tion cap i tale], doubt less one of the most impor tant, in the his tory of human soci eties; and we can clearly see how sex [le sexe] could become, from this moment for ward, which is to say precisely from the 18th cen tury, an absolutely cap i tal com po nent; for, basi cally, sex is sit u ated very pre cisely at the point of artic u la tion between the individual dis ci plines of the body and the reg u la tions of popu la tion. Sex is that through which one can assure the sur veil lance

169

of indi vid u als, and we under stand why in the 18th cen tury, and pre cisely in sec ondary schools, ado les cent sex u al ity became a med ical prob lem, a moral problem, nearly a polit i cal prob lem of the high est impor tance, because, through – and under the pre text of – this con trol of sex u al ity, one could mon i tor high school ers, ado les cents, over the course of their lives, at each instant, even dur ing their sleep. Sex will therefore become an instrument of “dis ci pli nar iza tion,” it will be one of the essential elements of this anatomo-politics of which I spoke; but also, on the other hand, it is sex that assures the repro duc tion of pop u la tions, it is with sex, with a politics of sex that we are able to change the rela tion between birthrate and mortal ity; in any case, the pol i tics of sex will install itself within this whole pol i tics of life that will become so impor tant in the 19th cen tury. Sex is the lever between anatomo-politics and bio-politics; it is at the junc ture of dis ci plines and reg u la tions, and it is in this func tion that it became, at the end of the 19th cen tury, a polit i cal com po nent of the utmost impor tance for mak ing soci ety into a machine of production.

170

Postscript on the Societies of Control Gilles DELEUZE

October, Vol. 59. (Winter, 1992), pp. 3-7. 1. Historical. Foucault located the disciplinary societies in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; they reach their height at the outset of the twentieth. They initiate the organization of vast spaces of enclosure. The individual never ceases passing from one closed environment to another, each having its own laws: first, the family; then the school (“you are no longer in your family”); then the barracks (“you are no longer at school”); then the factory; from time to time the hospital; possibly the prison, the preeminent instance of the enclosed environment. It’s the prison that serves as the analogical model: at the sight of some laborers, the heroine of Rossellini’s Europa ‘51 could exclaim, “I thought I was seeing convicts.” Foucault has brilliantly analyzed the ideal project of these environments of enclosure, particularly visible within the factory: to concentrate; to distribute in space; to order in time; to compose a productive force within the dimension of space-time whose effect will be greater than the sum of its component forces. But what Foucault recognized as well was the transience of this model: it succeeded that of the societies of sovereignty, the goal and functions of which were something quite different (to tax rather than to organize production, to rule on death rather than to administer life); the transition took place over time, and Napoleon seemed to effect the large-scale conversion from one society to the other. But in their turn the disciplines underwent a crisis to the benefit of new forces that were gradually instituted and which accelerated after World War II: a disciplinary society was what we already no longer were, what we had ceased to be.

171

We are in a generalized crisis in relation to all the environments of enclosure -prison, hospital, factory, school, family. The family is an “interior,” in crisis like all other interiors- scholarly, professional, etc. The administrations in charge never cease announcing supposedly necessary reforms: to reform schools, to reform industries, hospitals, the armed forces, prisons. But everyone knows that these institutions 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 new forces knocking at the door. These are the societies of control, which are in the process of replacing the disciplinary societies. “Control” is the name Burroughs proposes as a term for the new monster, one that Foucault recognizes as our immediate future. Paul Virilio also is continually analyzing the ultrarapid forms of free-floating control that re placed the old disciplines operating in the time frame of a closed system. There is no need here to invoke the extraordinary pharmaceutical productions, the molecular engineering, the genetic manipulations, although these are slated to enter into the new process. There is no need to ask which is the toughest or most tolerable regime, for it’s within each of them that liberating and enslaving forces confront one another. For example, in the crisis of the hospital as environment of enclosure, neighborhood clinics, hospices, and day care could at first express new freedom, but they could participate as well in mechanisms of control that are equal to the harshest of confinements. There is no need to fear or hope, but only to look for new weapons. 2. Logic. The different internments or spaces of enclosure through which the individual passes are independent variables: each time one is supposed to start from zero, and although a common language for all these places exists, it is analogical. On the other hand, the different control mechanisms are inseparable variations, forming a system of variable geometry the language of which is numerical (which doesn’t necessarily mean binary). Enclosures are molds, distinct castings, but controls are a modulation, like a self-deforming cast that will continuously change from

172

one moment to the other, or like a sieve whose mesh will transmute from point to point. This is obvious in the matter of salaries: the factory was a body that contained its internal forces at a level of equilibrium, the highest possible in terms of production, the lowest possible in terms of wages; but in a society of control, the corporation has replaced

the factory, and the

corporation is a spirit, a gas. Of course the factory was already familiar with the system of bonuses, but the corporation works more deeply to impose a modulation of each salary, in states of perpetual metastability that operate through challenges, contests, and highly comic group sessions. If the most idiotic television game shows are so successful, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s because they express the corporate situation with great precision. The factory constituted individuals as a single body to the double advantage of the boss who surveyed each element within the mass and the unions who mobilized a mass resistance; but the corporation constantly presents the brashest rivalry as a healthy form of emulation, an excellent motivational force that opposes individuals against one another and runs through each, dividing each within. The modulating principle of â&#x20AC;&#x153;salary according to meritâ&#x20AC;? has not failed to tempt national education itself. Indeed, just as the corporation replaces the factory, perpetual training tends to replace the school, and continuous control to replace the examination. Which is the surest way of delivering the school over to the corporation. In the disciplinary societies one was always starting again (from school to the barracks, from the barracks to the factory), while in the societies of control one is never finished with anything- the corporation, the educational system, the armed services being metastable states coexisting in one and the same modulation, like a universal system of deformation. In The Trial, Kafka, who had already placed himself at the pivotal point between two types of social formation, described the most fearsome of juridical forms. The apparent acquittal of the disciplinary societies (between two incarcerations); and the limitless postponements of the societies of control (in continuous variation) are

173

two very different modes of juridical life, and if our law is hesitant, itself in crisis, it’s because we are leaving one in order to enter into the other. The disciplinary societies have two poles: the signature that designates the individual, and the number or administrative numeration that indicates his or her position within a mass. This is because the disciplines never saw any incompatibility between these two, and because at the same time power individualizes and masses together, that is, constitutes those over whom it exercises power into a body and molds the individuality of each member of that body. (Foucault saw the origin of this double charge in the pastoral power of the priest- the flock and each of its animals -but civil power moves in turn and by other means to make itself lay “priest.”) In the societies of control, on the other hand, what is important is no longer either a signature or a number, but a code: the code is a password, while on the other hand the disciplinary societies are regulated by watchwords (as much from the point of view of integration as from that of resistance). The numerical language of control is made of codes that mark access to information, or reject it. We no longer find ourselves dealing with the mass/individual pair. Individuals have become “dividuals,” and masses, samples, data, markets, or “banks.” Perhaps it is money that expresses the distinction between the two societies best, since discipline always referred back to minted money that locks gold in as numerical standard, while control relates to floating rates of exchange, modulated according to a rate established by a set of standard currencies. The old monetary mole is the animal of the spaces of enclosure, but the serpent is that of the societies of control. We have passed from one animal to the other, from the mole to the serpent, in the system under which we live, but also in our manner of living and in our relations with others. The disciplinary man was a discontinuous producer of energy, but the man of control is undulatory, in orbit, in a continuous network. Everywhere surfing has already replaced the older sports. Types of machines are easily matched with each type of society -not that machines are determining, but because they express those social forms capable of generating them and using them. The old societies

174

of sovereignty made use of simple machines- levers, pulleys, clocks; but the recent disciplinary societies equipped themselves with machines involving energy, with the passive danger of entropy and the active danger of sabotage; the societies of control operate with machines of a third type, computers, whose passive danger is jamming and whose active one is piracy and the introduction of viruses. This technological evolution must be, even more profoundly, a mutation of capitalism, an already well-known or familiar mutation that can be summed up as follows: nineteenth century capitalism is a capitalism of concentration, for production and for property. It therefore erects the factory as a space of enclosure, the capitalist being the owner of the meaos of production but also, progressively, the owner of other spaces conceived through analogy (the worker’s familial house, the school). As for markets, they are conquered sometimes by specialization, some times by colonization, sometimes by lowering the costs of production. But, in the present situation, capitalism is no longer involved in production, which it often relegates to the Third World, even for the complex forms of textiles, metallurgy, or oil production. It’s a capitalism of higher-order production. It no longer buys raw materials and no longer sells the finished products: it buys the finished products or assembles parts. What it wants to sell is services and what it wants to huy is stocks. This is no longer a capitalism for production but for the product, which is to say, for being sold or marketed. Thus it is essentially dispersive, and the factory has given way to the corporation. The family, the school, the army, the factory are no longer the distinct analogical spaces that converge towards an ownerstate or private power- but coded figures deformable and transformableor a single corporation that now has only stockholders. Even art has left the spaces of enclosure in order to enter into the open circuits of the bank. The conquests of the market are made by grabbing control and no longer by disciplinary training, by fixing the exchange rate much more than by lowering costs, by transformation of the product more than by specialization of production. Corruption thereby gains a new power. Marketing has become the center or the “soul” of the corporation. We are taught that corporations have a soul, which is the most terrifying news

175

in the world. The operation of markets is now the instrument of social control and forms the impudent breed of our masters. Control is shortterm 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. It is true that capitalism has retained as a constant the extreme poverty of three quarters of humanity, too poor for debt, too numerous for confinement: control will not only have to deal with erosions of frontiers but with the explosions within shanty towns or ghettos. 3. Program. The conception of a control mechanism, giving the position of any element within an open environment at any given instant (whether animal in a reserve or human in a corporation, as with an electronic collar), is not necessarily one of science fiction. Félix Guattari has imagined a city where one would be able to leave one’s apartment, one’s street, one’s neighborhood, thanks to one’s (dividual) electronic card that raises a given barrier; but the card could just as easily be rejected on a given day or between certain hours; what counts is not the barrier but the computer that tracks each person’s position -licit or illicit- and effects a universal modulation. The socio-technological study of the mechanisms of control, grasped at their inception, would have to be categorical and to describe what is already in the process of substitution for the disciplinary sites of enclosure, whose crisis is everywhere proclaimed. It may

be that

older methods, borrowed from the former societies of sovereignty, will return to the fore, but with the necessary modifications. What counts is that we are at the beginning of something. In the prison system: the attempt to find penalties of “substitution,” at least for petty crimes, and the use of electronic collars that force the convicted person to stay at home during certain hours. For the school system: continuous forms of control, and the effect on the school of perpetual training, the corresponding abandonment of all university research, the introduction

176

of the “corporation” at all levels of schooling. For the hospital system: the new medicine “without doctor or patient” that singles out potential sick people and subjects at risk, which in no way attests to individuation- as they say-but substitutes for the individual or numerical body the code of a “dividual” material to be controlled. In the corporate system: new ways of handling money, profits, and humans that no longer pass through the old factory form. These are very small examples, but ones that will allow for better understanding of what is meant by the crisis of the institutions, which is to say, the progressive and dispersed installation of a new system of domi nation. One of the most important questions will concern the ineptitude of the unions: tied to the whole of their history of struggle against the disciplines 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? Can we already grasp the rough outlines of these coming forms, capable of threatening thejoys of marketing? Many young people strangely boast of being “motivated”; they re-request apprenticeships and permanent training. It’s up to them to discover what they’re being made to serve, just as their elders discovered, not without difficulty, the telos of the disciplines. The coils of a serpent are even more complex than the burrows of a molehill.

177

Bibliography

179

ALBRECHT, Donald. Now Boarding: Fentress Airports and the Architecture of Flight. Scala Arts Publishers, 2012. BROTO, Carles. Centros comerciales. Structure, 2005. CHUNG, Judy; INABA, Jeffrey; LEONG, Sze Tsung. Harvard Design School Guide to Shopping. Taschen, 2002. FULLER, Gillian; HARLEY, Ross. Aviopolis: A Book About Airports. Black Dog Publishing, 2005. GIL, Eva; SORIANO, Federico; URZÁIZ, Pedro. Atlas of emulations of the Informal II: From Planimetric to Holographic. Ud 19 Assignment 2013-2014. Fisuras, 2013. OCW ( Open Course Ware) . UD Soriano Proyectos Arquitectónicos 2012-13. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid . http://ocw. upm.es/proyectos-arquitectonicos/Architectural-Design-UD Soriano-2012-13 SORIANO, Federico; URZÁIZ, Pedro. Unusual Atlas of Constructiton Details. UD 19 Assignment 2013-2014 . Fisuras , 2013. SORIANO, Federico; URZÁIZ, Pedro. Atlas of emulations of the Informal I: Favelas. Ud 19 Assignment 2013-2014 . Fisuras, 2013. SORIANO, Federico; URZÁIZ, Pedro. Pop Up Ud 23 Statement 2012-2013. Fisuras, 2013.

181

19 2014-2015

DPA - DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ETSAM - ARCHITECTURE SCHOOL OF MADRID UPM - TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADRID

Atlas of emulations of the Informal III: Exceptional Areas

Dziga Vertov. “Man with a Movie Camera” 1929.

www.etsamadrid.upm.es www.dpa-etsam.com

9 788494 050299

2014-2015 5th International Design Seminar