In view of the current disclosure of torture in war prisons in Iraq, but also through the disclosure of mistreatment in the Brandenburg an der Havel prison, it becomes clear how explosive the concept of total institutions still is more than forty years after its publication by Goffman.
In his work Asyle, first published in 1961, Erving Goffman (1922-1982) summarizes in four essays his many years of sociological studies on the inmates of psychiatric clinics. From 1954 to 1957, Goffman was a visiting professor at the National Institute of Mental Health in Bethesda, Maryland. During this time he spent over a year doing field studies at St. Elizabeth's Hospital (Washington D.C.), which then had about 7,000 inmates. Goffman's own experiences in dealing directly with the inmates of St. Elizabeth's Hospital are included in the book as well as countless descriptions of other well-known and lesser-known authors (e.g. George Orwell, Herman Melville), who spent some years of their lives in prison, in the monastery, in the boarding school, in an orphanage, in the military or in similar institutions.
Goffman first encountered the term total institution in a 1952 graduate seminar on institutions. Coined by Everett Hughes, the term must have intrigued Goffman from the start. Burns writes: "It is clear from Goffman's course notes (he gave me a copy of them) that is must have been a remarkable teaching enterprise - enlivened with allusions, encyclopedic in is coverage, and radically critical and innovative in is approach." . But while Goffman thought of the term social institution in a way that differed from Hughes', he adopted the term total institution in Hughes' sense. For Hughes, these were "social institutions which were much more shut off from the outside world" - he cites nunneries as an example - Goffman accordingly relates his observations to "the situation of those 'extruded' from society'.
In this work, the aim is first to present Goffman's concept of total institutions and to go into the points of view of the inmates, the staff and the points of contact of both groups. Subsequently, the concept should be examined and assessed with regard to its possible application and possibilities should be found to further differentiate the concept.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The concept of total institutions
2.1 Goffman: On the characteristics of total institutions
2.2 Assessment of the concept
3. Concluding remark
4. Bibliography
Objectives and Research Themes
This academic paper examines Erving Goffman’s sociological concept of "total institutions," analyzing how these environments systematically restructure the identities of their occupants and the dynamics between inmates and staff. The central research question explores the characteristics of these institutions, the mechanisms of control employed by staff, the adaptation strategies of inmates, and a critical evaluation of the concept's scope and applicability in broader sociological contexts.
- The theoretical definition and core characteristics of total institutions.
- The impact of institutionalization on individual identity and role-playing.
- Power dynamics and the "engagement cycle" between staff and inmates.
- Critical refinement of Goffman's classification using variables like openness and purpose.
- The differentiation between closed institutions (prisons/asylums) and other total settings.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1.1 definition
Right at the beginning of his introduction, Goffman puts his definition by beginning:
"A total institution can be considered the home and workplace of a multitude define similarly placed individuals that are for a longer period of time from the rest Society are cut off and with each other a closed, formal to lead a regimented life." (p. 11).
He distinguishes five different groups of total institutions. First of all, those who serve as dependent and harmless people for the care of people, such as homes for the blind or old people." In addition, care institutions for people who are believed to be incapable of caring for themselves and pose an unintended threat to society. These include tuberculosis sanatoriums or insane asylums. He subdivides prisons, prisoner of war and concentration camps into the group of total institutionswhich serve to protect the Community from danger. The well-being of persons separated in this way is at most an indirect end. Another group is formed by institutions for the purpose of improving the performance of certain tasks, such as barracks, ships, boarding schools, labour camps, large manor houses, etc. And finally, he mentions mostly religious institutions that serve as a refuge from the world, such as monasteries or abbeys. (Cf. Goffman, 1973, p. 16). Although Goffman confesses that not all total institutions are equally all-encompassing (cf. p. 15), but by making use of the method of ideal types (cf. p. 17, and Burns, 1992, p. 144), he determines as a central feature of all total institutionsthat the separation of sleeping place, workplace and leisure time, which is fundamental for modern society, is abolished.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: This chapter provides the context for Goffman’s work, tracing the historical background of his research on psychiatric hospitals and the origins of the term "total institution."
2. The concept of total institutions: This main section details Goffman's definitions, the sociological division between staff and inmates, the impact on individual identity, and a critical assessment of the theory's generalizability.
3. Concluding remark: This chapter synthesizes the findings, suggesting that Goffman’s concept is most precise when limited to closed environments like prisons and psychiatric wards rather than broader institutional types.
4. Bibliography: Lists the primary literature by Goffman and relevant secondary sources used to frame the analysis.
Keywords
Total institutions, Erving Goffman, Sociology, Institutionalization, Inmates, Staff, Identity, Social control, Regimentation, Role distance, Privilege system, Moral career, Closed institutions, Social interaction, Hierarchy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper focuses on Erving Goffman’s sociological analysis of "total institutions," specifically investigating how these enclosed environments function to regulate daily life and transform the individuals within them.
What are the primary themes discussed?
Key themes include the structural definition of total institutions, the power relationship between staff and inmates, the loss of personal autonomy, and the use of the "privilege system" to reshape inmate identity.
What is the main research goal?
The goal is to explain the mechanics of total institutions as presented by Goffman and to critically evaluate the theory’s application, identifying how the concept can be refined for higher analytical accuracy.
Which methodology is applied in this work?
The paper utilizes a qualitative, secondary analysis of Goffman’s seminal work "Asylums," supported by critical perspectives from scholars like Christie Davies to assess the validity and scope of the model.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main section covers the defining characteristics of total institutions, the experience of occupants, the specific roles and perspectives of the staff, and points of contact between the two groups, such as institutional ceremonies.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include total institutions, social control, institutionalization, identity, privilege system, and moral career.
How does the author view the "privilege system"?
The author describes the privilege system as the primary framework through which an institution exerts control, providing a structured set of rules and rewards that forces the reorganization of an inmate's self.
Why does the paper suggest limiting the definition of total institutions?
The paper argues that by limiting the definition to closed, coercive institutions like prisons and asylums, the theory gains higher validity and precision, avoiding the inaccuracies that occur when applying it to more open or voluntary organizations.
- Quote paper
- Verena Stockmair (Author), 2004, Erving Goffman. Concept of total institutions, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/1177147
