In Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison by Michel Foucault, the author delights in accounts of past penal methods involving the brutal torture of the convicted criminal as a popular public spectacle. . He subtly denounces the rigid but humane schedules applied to contemporary imprisonment and the growing distance between the judicial system and the punishment of prisoners. On the face of it, Foucault's concern about a system in which criminal justice takes place primarily behind closed doors makes sense. Wouldn't it be effective to frighten potential criminals into justice with horrific public scenes of pain and slow death of local criminals? However, upon careful examination, there are a multitude of flaws in Foucault's sentiments. I believe that the theatrical methods of the past do not constitute an effective penal measure because they transformed criminal punishment into a matter of celebration. The scenes of blood and carnage were seen by all, and Foucault ignores the fact that the bodily consequences were often far more despicable than the initial crime committed. Criminals do not deserve to take center stage in society. Instead of being dehumanized, they should be accessible to ordinary people so that we can imagine their own aversion to such a situation. Although I agree with Foucault that a visual component can have a great effect on people, this aspect should take the form of in-depth education in a class like this, as opposed to a common spectacle associated with excitement and rejoicing. Discipline & Punish analyzes the evolution of criminal consequences by criticizing a system less perceptible to the public and paying very little attention to alternative methods of viewing criminal justice solutions such as education for the well-being of the community. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay First, it should be recognized that the types of harsh corporal punishment that Foucault does not necessarily advocate, but uses as an example of appropriate and effective spectacle, often result in death or at the very least harm bodily injuries and deformities, such as the case of Damiens where “the flesh will be torn from her breasts, her arms, her thighs and her calves with red-hot pincers […] and, in the places where the flesh will be torn , molten lead, boiling oil, burning resin, wax and sulfur melted together were poured, then his body was dragged and quartered by four horses and his limbs and body consumed by fire” (3) This is the type of solution he deems necessary to properly create “the dark feast of punishment” (8), and it is also very permanent. Although it was never explicitly stated in the first chapter of his work, Foucault, through his tolerance of spectacular punishments, assumes either that the justice system is completely beyond reproach, or that if someone were sentenced to wrong, his undeserved torture would be acceptable for the higher purpose of justice. set an example for the public. The prospect of mistakenly convicting an honest citizen and subjecting him to such irreversible horrors is enough to make this penal method unacceptable. Also regarding the judicial system, Foucault has contradictory remarks about how the modern public perceives the judiciary after penal reform, which he calls "the great 'scandal' for traditional justice" (7). He believes that the haste, intimacy and almost clinical manner of contemporary executions.