(IN)VISIBILITY 05–14–25 Power and visibility serve as the initial framework for analysing the prison as an object. Michel Foucault interprets visibility as a tool of power, one that enables its operation. 1 In relation to prisons (and other institutions that discipline society), he distinguishes between actual visibility and perceived visibility, and he emphasizes that regardless of the form it takes, constant surveillance affects the psyche and behaviour of those being observed. 2 This text will examine the forms of visibility and invisibility employed by the state’s carceral apparatus to exert its influence – not only within prison buildings.
The abolition of public executions marked the first step in prison reform. Punishment was moved behind high walls, carried out without public presence – silently, under "professional supervision." The invisibility of violence (at that time punishment) gradually became a central element of its legitimacy. It is perhaps in this context that the saying "what the eye doesn't see, the heart doesn't grieve over" remains relevant. Incarceration is made visible to the public only through the justification of the punishment itself; the structural causes that lead to imprisonment (e.g. poverty, racism, lack of access to education – see FAQ for more) are silenced by the system. 3 Prison thus renders invisible the bodies and minds of incarcerated people, their relationships, pasts, and futures. 4
Architectural design plays a material role in the process of (in)visibility within carcerality. A landmark example in this context is Bentham’s Panopticon– a building designed to enable continuous surveillance. This model illustrates how visibility can become a central design parameter in prison architecture. It affirms that the easier it is to control a space – now not only by humans but also by technology – the more effectively the building fulfils its disciplinary function.
(In)visibility also plays a role in the urban analysis of prison sites. The relocation of prisons from city centres to PERIPHERAL AREAS is one of the key strategies of the prison-industrial complex. Prisons no longer serve as deterrent examples embedded within the city; they have become economic entities whose primary objective is profit. As such, the complex has no interest in being "in plain sight" – it hides in the landscape, benefiting from cheaper and more spacious plots beyond city limits, where it need not conform to urban planning regulations. 5
PLACE A CITY PRISON INTO LANDSCAPE
1Michel Foucault, Dohlížet a trestat: kniha o zrodu vězení, Prague 2000, p. 245.
2 See note 1, p. 266.
3 Liat Ben-Moshe, Why Prisons Are Not ‘The New Asylums, Punishment & Society XIX, 2017, no. 3, pp. 272–289.
4 Philip Hancock – Yvonne Jewkes, Architectures of Incarceration: The Spatial Pains of Imprisonment, Punishment & Society XIII, 2011, no. 5, pp. 611–629.
5 Dominique Moran, Carceral Geography: Spaces and Practices of Incarceration, London 2018, p. 59. The removal of prisons from urban space simultaneously reinforces the illusion that the issue of incarceration is isolated from society and managed without the need for its engagement. This makes it easier for the public to ignore how carceral practices extend beyond prison walls (see also PERIMETER WALL). Philosopher Angela Y. Davis points out that by endorsing this strategy, society relinquishes its responsibility to engage with the issue – thereby maintaining a status quo that privileges those not disadvantaged by race, financial status, cis-normativity, and other factors. 6
A similar shift can be observed in the transformation of the prison’s VISUAL LANGUAGE. Ornamental features are receding; prisons have become less prominent, more "inconspicuous." However, the absence of ornamentation does not imply that the space has become freer. On the contrary – control, once symbolically present, has been transformed into a subtler, more diffused, and internalised form. It is all the more effective, insidious, and difficult to challenge precisely because it is less visible. 7
The ambivalence of visibility is also evident in the state’s relationship with unhoused people. Their needs remain invisible to the state, and the entire group is referenced in political discourse merely as a "problem." 8 Anthropologist Luisa T. Schneider, in her study Let Me Take a Vacation in Prison Before the Streets Kill Me!, describes how some unhoused individuals intentionally try to enter the prison system – because only once they are incarcerated, and thus registered as official identities, are they entitled to receive basic living conditions. 9 This mechanism extends beyond homelessness and can be applied more broadly to the invisibility of vulnerable and marginalised populations.
Abolitionist practice is therefore concerned, among other things, with revealing what is considered invisible and questioning what appears self-evident. Making hidden violence visible is one of the first steps toward exposing the structural repression of the state – reproduced through poverty, racism, sexism, colonialism, and other forms of oppression. 10 Further steps include active discussion of alternatives to incarceration, identification of the problems that lead to criminal activity, and the practice of imagination, which allows us to envision a world beyond predefined frameworks. 11
This artistic research into the spatial substance and practices of incarceration shares the goals of prison abolitionism and, through its interventions, exposes how architectural matter and spatial strategies can participate in repression and state violence.PLACE A CITY PRISON INTO LANDSCAPE
6 Angela Y. Davis, Jsou věznice překonané?, Prague 2021, p. 17.
8 Luisa T. Schneider, Let Me Take a Vacation in Prison Before the Streets Kill Me! Rough Sleepers’ Longing for Prison and the Reversal of Less Eligibility in Neoliberal Carceral Continuums, Punishment & Society XXV, 2021, no. 1, pp. 60–79.
9 See note 8.
10 Michelle Brown – Judah Schept, New Abolition, Criminology and a Critical Carceral Studies, Punishment & Society XIX, 2017, no. 4, pp. 440–462.
THEORETICAL TEXT The online archive NOTES ON PRISON forms part of a diploma project undertaken at the Academy of Arts, Architecture and Design in Prague, within Studio Architecture I. The overarching aim of the archive is to present and describe the practices, strategies, and associated architectural matter through which power is exercised within the prison system. These practices and spatial elements are subsequently revealed within different contexts and typologies.
The project’s political dimension contributes to the discourse on prison abolition, while also serving as a professional appeal to the architectural community: to learn to recognise spaces designed for oppression and violence, and to refuse further participation in their production. Instead, it calls for the use of imagination as a design tool, encouraging the creation of a society grounded in care and social equality.
At the top of the webpage, readers will find (1) a list of frequently asked questions related to prison abolition, (2) a glossary of terms, and (3) a manual explaining the structure of the online archive, including its categories, tags, and entries.