The “Prison House” and Normalization. Between the Reassertion of Privacy and the Risk of Collectiveness

IF 1.1 0 ARCHITECTURE

Architecture and Culture Pub Date : 2022-09-12 DOI:10.1080/20507828.2022.2106535

S. Puddu

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The principle of “normalization” in penology maintains that the life of people in captivity should resemble as far as possible the positive aspects of “normal” life in free society. To critically understand how the theories and practices of normalization impact our discourses about space within and beyond detention institutions, this essay considers the “prison house,” a genre that includes a range of homely, small-scale carceral facilities. The “prison house” attempts to normalize life, often through a process of “home-ification.” In doing so, it sublimates the notion of privacy – in its double modern connotation, as defined by Robin Evans, of solitude and domesticity – and re-introduces collectiveness as a choreographed practice hailed as a tool for reform and as guarantor of a daily social order. This article asks: does the “prison house” mimic or anticipate how free people live together in the residential architecture of the city?

查看原文本刊更多论文

“监狱”与正常化。隐私权的重申与集体风险之间的关系

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Architecture and Culture ARCHITECTURE-

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Architecture and Culture, the international award winning, peer-reviewed journal of the Architectural Humanities Research Association, investigates the relationship between architecture and the culture that shapes and is shaped by it. Whether culture is understood extensively, as shared experience of everyday life, or in terms of the rules and habits of different disciplinary practices, Architecture and Culture asks how architecture participates in and engages with it – and how both culture and architecture might be reciprocally transformed. Architecture and Culture publishes exploratory research that is purposively imaginative, rigorously speculative, visually and verbally stimulating. From architects, artists and urban designers, film-makers, animators and poets, from historians of culture and architecture, from geographers, anthropologists and other social scientists, from thinkers and writers of all kinds, established and new, it solicits essays, critical reviews, interviews, fictional narratives in both images and words, art and building projects, and design hypotheses. Architecture and Culture aims to promote a conversation between all those who are curious about what architecture might be and what it can do.