Punishment and Governance
| Date | 01 December 1998 |
| Author | Barbara Hudson |
| DOI | 10.1177/096466399800700406 |
| Published date | 01 December 1998 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
PUNISHMENT
AND
GOVERNANCE
BARBARA
HUDSON
University
of Northumbria
at
Newcastle,
UK
INTRODUCTION
<
z
HE
RECENT
literature
on
’governmentality’
produced
by
Nikolas
j
Rose
and
other
members
of the
’history
of the
present’
group
is
of
con-
JL.
siderable
interest
to
criminologists,
particularly
those
of
us
who,
like
myself,
take
as
our
topic
the
sociology
of
punishment
and
control.
Too
often,
before
the
availability
of
this
work,
criminologists
have
drawn
almost
exclu-
sively
upon
Foucault’s
work
on
the
development
of
modern
prisons,
Disci-
pline
and
Punish
(1977),
and
so
the
first
contribution
of
the
’governmentality’
analytic
has
been
simply
to
draw
our
attention
to
his
later
work.
This
work,
especially,
for
me,
the
’Two
Lectures’
(Foucault,
1980)
and
the
secondary
literature
prompted
by
it
(Burchell
et
al.,
1991)
has
provided
at
least
partial
answers
to
some
of
the
questions
begged
by
Discipline
and
Punish
about
relationships
between
criminal
justice
and
other
modes
of
control.
It
has
also
assisted
consideration
of
the
applicability
of
Foucauldian
concepts
and
frameworks
to
penal
strategies
in
the
1980s
and
1990s,
a
period
which
seems
to
have
seen
the
demise
of
the
sort
of
ideologies
and
policies
of
punishment
and
control
described
by
Stanley
Cohen
(1979;
1985)
and
others
which
had
appeared
to
fit
so
well
the
disciplinary
modality
outlined
in
Discipline
and
Punish.
This
writing
on
governmentality
has
been
fruitful
for the
reintegration
of
the
sociology
of
punishment
within
the
wider
field
of
control.
Whilst
work
drawing
upon
Discipline
and
Punish
located
state
punishment
as
one
strat-
egy
of
control,
continuous
with
other
strategies,
the
influential
realist
crim-
inology
of
the
late
1980s
separated
crime
from
other
forms
of
deviance,
and
therefore
isolated
punishment
from
other
modes
and
institutions
of
control
(Hudson,
1997).
The
separation
of
crime
and
punishment
from
sociologies
of
deviance
and
control
ran
the
risk
of
re-establishing
the
’legal
syllogism’,
which
from
the
time
of
classical
criminology
until
the
’revisionist’
social
histories
of
punishment
which
became
prominent
in
the
1970s,
had
seen
_
SOCIAL
&
LEGAL
STUDIES
0964
6639
(199812)
7:4
Copyright
@
1998
SAGE
Publications,
London,
Thousand
Oaks,
CA
and
New
Delhi,
Vol.
7(4),
553-559;
006258
553
To continue reading
Request your trial