Garland, D. (2002). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS CLICK HERE
There are some TERMS from his book that you just need to know. You will want to
have definitions of these:
- penal welfarism
- crime control field
- dualized labor market
- morality of liberal individualism
- preventative partnerships
- punitive segregation
- dependency shifting
- reactionary policies
- responsibilization strategy
- crime of self, crime of other
- the control deficit
- late modernity
- the crime complex - this one is extremely important
1. "'What is the new problem of crime and social order to which
the emerging system of crime control is a response?'"
2. "What is the new strategy of governance of which it forms a part?'"
3. "'What are the new social conditions that helped bring these into being?'"
4. What are the key elements of the new, emergent "reconfigured field of crime control and criminal justice"?
5. How are the older and newer criminologies different?
6. What are the "social forces" of "late modernity"?
7. What is Garland's central thesis? Can you summarize this in your own words in just a few sentences?
Why did penal welfarism lose its hold?
What is the rhetoric of reaction?
How did it come about that the reactionary movement, started in the 1970s, turned out creating results opposite from those initially intended?
Garland argues that two of the "non adaptive" responses to late modernity by the sovereign include denial and acting out. Can you give examples of each? What makes the sociocultural "background" so receptive to these types of responses? Why is it so important NOW that these state interventions be "immediate" and "authoritative"?
What are the "political uses of danger"?
How does Garland's model help us understand why white collar crime and routine crimes like DUI get ignored?
Garland argues that there are two current threads of popular, criminological theorizing; a criminology of the self and a criminology of the other. Describe each of these. In what ways are they contradictory?
How have changes in views about "the victim" played roles in driving current sentencing policies and imprisonment rates and notification policies? Why are "future victims" important?
Garland suggests current state responses have both an instrumental and an expressive intent. Can you give an example of each? Can you explain why the expressive purposes are so important right now?
What explains "the declining influence of social expertise" in setting crime policy?
How have the views (purposes) of prison changed? What functions does it currently serve?
How has the society-offender relationship been altered?
How does a resurgent belief in the classical view of criminal motivation played a role in the reconfigured crime control field?
"Today the practitioners of crime control and criminal justice are required to talk the economic language..." What are the adverse side effects of this "managerial" approach?
Garland argues there are two clashing rationalities at work in the reconfigured crime control field "institutional logic of cost effectiveness" and "sovereign state gestures" including things like the War on Drugs. In what ways are these irreconcilable?
What are the dystopic societal effects of the "new crime control arrangements"?
How has the societal function of prison changed in the last 30 years?