LEAHY, June. Coping strategies or prisoners in a maximum security prison: minimals, maximals and...

7/26/2019 LEAHY, June. Coping strategies or prisoners in a maximum security prison: minimals, maximals and utilitarians

1/7

Coping Strategies

of Prisoners

a

axitnwn

Security Prison

inimals Opt imals and Utilitarians

JlTNE

P.

LEAHY

niversity ansas

Social

Thought

Research, Vol. 21. No. 1-2

Adaptation, or coping, has historically been an impor tant aspec t

of prison life for students of penal policy. Sociologists. in

particular, following Donald Clemmer, have focused much

of

their attention on the processes of ass imilat ion into the prison

culture. Data

gathered

in a max imum security

population

of a

large

midwestern

prison calls

into

quest ion the sal ience of the

prisonization concept in contemporary prisons. In particular.

the

solidary model, at the heart of the p rison izati on concep t. is

absent and f indings suggest tha t contemporary prisoners, far

from join ing their peers in soliclarity and opposition to the

administration, are overtly self-serving in dealing with prison life.

Enduring odelsof the Prlsonization Concept

Much

of

the study

on

prisoners adaptation to the challenges

of

prison life completed by American socio logists in the past fifty

years has- concentrated on tile social activities of pri soners .

Among the

more

outstanding works are those of Donald

Clemmer (1940); Gresham Sykes {1958); Stanton Wheeler (1961);

Irwin and Cressey (1962); Rose Giallornbardo (1 6); Esther

Heffernan (1972); james B.

Jacobs

(1977); and, Hans Toch (1977,

1992)

The

works

of

these authors certainly do not exhaust the

l itera tur e dea li ng with st ud ies of pri son life, but they are

representative

of

the

type of

emphasi s that generated most

of

those studies. The emphasis is on a description and analysis

of

life

in

pri son in terms of socialization, community,

and

culture.

lA

version of t hi s

paper was presented

a t the Weste rn Soc ia l

Science

Association

Conference in

Albuquerque NM., April

23 26

1997.


2/7

ocial Thought

esearch

In his landmark publication,

h

Prison ommunity Clemmer

descr ibes the process by which prisoners internalize the

prison

culture

an d

coined what is, a rguably, the most widely used

term

in th e sociological literature

on

penology to describe that

process, namely,

prisoniz tion

Prisonization refers to th e

internalization of convict values, att itudes, roles

an d

language.

Since then, p ri sonizauon has

remained

the

dominant

focus in

studies

of

adaptation to prison life.

Following Clemmer, Wheele r (1961) further clarified

the

socia lization process in p ri son wi th his conception of a

shaped

curve of adaptat ionto depict the three important phases

of the inmates prison career.

They

are, the early stage

which

describes the entering

prisoner an d

his proximity to free society;

the midd le phase in

which

prisoners are

conditioned

more

by

the inmate culture;

an d

the late phase in

which

inmates

ar e

nearing the

en d

of their sentences

an d

are most likely to

onform

to staff expectations.

A

major reference point of the prison as a social system is th e

work of Gresham Sykes (1958) in which he analyzes th e

structure of a mens maximum security prison. His study

examined

the attempts

of

pri soners to

come

to terms with

th e

deprivations of prison life

an d discovered

that the s itua tion

of

imprisonment is the source of t he p ri so ne r social system. In

other words, he found that p ri soner s ways

of

dealing with

deprivations is to create a society

of

their

own

for the

distr ibution of scarce resources

an d

the maint enance of soci al

identification

Two informative studies

of women s

prisons

Giallombardo

1966; Heffernan 1972) also look at

th e

inmate social system from

the perspective of the organization of social relationships based

on the differential orienta tion to male an d female roles

in

American society. Rose Giallombardo stresses the importation

of

certain as

peas

of

macro social.

culture into the prison,

particularly

the

way

in

which

nlale

an d

female roles are

defined

an d

ho w

they influence th e definitions

made

by prisoners. Esther

Heffernan stresses the

importance of familying in

the

female prisoners construct organized

pseudo

families in prison.

Both studies project the prison as a microcosm of the

larger-

society.

280

oping Strategies Pirsoners in a Maximum Security Prison

Hans Toch

(1975, 1992) undertook on e

of the largest s tudies

ever

of the st ress

an d

suffering

of

incarcerated

me n a nd w om en

in

which he examines incidents of h u ma n b re ak do w ns in jails

an d

prisons. His study explores the evolution

an d

climax

of

ind iv iduals in crises. His mos t sal ient finding ident ifies social

factors in

breakdowns,

such as the lack of outside

support

systems for prisoners failure to

cope

with prison life.

James B.Jacobs (1977) found ne w patterns of social

organization

within t h e p ri so ne r p op ul at io n w hi ch he att ributed to the rise

of

pri son gangs. In his influent ia l s tudy of Stateville he found

the

s he er n um be rs

an d

solidarity of militant Black gangs

ha d

repl aced tile

old

prisoner subculture,

an d

the pr evai li ng

prisoner/staff relations

were

replaced by gang/staff relations.

Generally, the li terat ure t end s to emphasi ze the

prisonization

concept

in studies of

t he a da pt at io n

processes

of

prisoners as

they face th e challenges

of

prison life. Prisoners are perceived

to

band

together in opposition to the staff because

of

the

power

differential. lnmates are

depicted

as having little

or

no

power

except for that

which

they exercise among themselves, The staff,

especially the line officers, conversely, have virtually total

power

over

the prisoners.

Yet

cont ra ry to widely he ld beliefs

about

prisonization, my research revea led that t he re is only a

small

amount .

of

solidarity

among

prisoners . Prisoners , I discovered,

are leery

of

involvement with anyone inside the prison

an d

strive

to minimize int eract ion with

both

fellow-prisoners

an d

staff.

Toward this

en d

they will try to avo id all s itua tions

w he re t he y

have to take a side with staff

or other

prisoners,

o r o th er w is e

become

involved.

There

are,

of

course, excep tions to

this

practice, e.g.

gang members

and

snitches. Gang

members wh o

fail to support,

or

deviate from, the gang posit ion

do

so at great

personal risk. Snitches are the conduit for inside

information

abou t the inmat e

world

to the CO s.

n

general , however , all

inmates ar e particularly distrustful

of

correctional officers

whom

they view as capricious

an d

strictly custodial , with a few

notable

exceptions.

Th e

ese rch

Research for my study

took

place in the maximum security

section

of

a midwestern state prison that

housed

904 prisoners . I

randomly drew my initial research populat ion of 40 inmates.

an d

a

backup

population of

6

from a list of the maximum securi ty

281


3/7

Social Thought

esearch

pri soners that was supplied to me by prison officials. Nine

inmates of nlY initial population di d not agree to panicipate

an d

they were replaced from my

backup

list. I

went

tllrough th e

prison's orientation program with employees

of

tile prison, after

which

I

was allowed to move about the pri son without an escon .

I was given the use of a private office in the maximum security

area

a nd e ac h

morning as I went

through

security

I picked up

a

personal alarm device that is called a panic button. This

device was issued to prison employees to

summon

help

in

situations where a breach of persona l security was perceived.

My interviews took place

b et w ee n t h e

hours of 7:30

an d

11:00

in

the mornings

an d

12:00 to 2:45 in the afternoons. All

interviewg

were

conducted

in private. Three interviews

took

pl ace in

th e

segregation unit. Tw o

of

these interviewees were in protective

custody,

an d

the thi rd was in admin is tr at ive custody . The latter

was the only prisoner

wh o was

in restraints during the

interviews. My interv iews fol lowed no speci fic format but I

di d

try

to keep the interviews focused

on

t he a reas of activities in

prison. con tacts wi th the ou tside , interpersonal re lat ions,

an d

psychological adjustment to prison life.

From the beginning

of

my interview activit ies a var iety of

prison

constructions were characterized by distinctive responses to

th e

pains

of

imprisonmenr For example , the first two interviewees

were very

depressed an d

seemed

to lack any semblance of self

efficacy. My third interviewee wa s tile complete opposite of th e

first two. He was

upbeat

an d confident, an d very interesting to

talk with. TIle fourth interviewee, likewise,

was

pleasant,

interesting

an d Informative

but not, seemingly, well adjus ted to

prison life. On

nlY second

day, the first interviewee was cautious

dur ing the initial s tages

of

the interview,

bu t

soon

relaxed

an d

the interview proved interesting. Th e remaining interviews

continued along these lines. They

were

either d is tinc tly

depressing, distinctly upbeat,

or somewhere

in between.

t n lysis

~ h e n I finally began work

on

the analysis

of

my data, I was

again r eminded of a variety of p ri son cons tru ct ion s and, in th e

end, coping strategies converged

around

three distinct aggregates

that

I

have named Minimals, Optimals,

an d

Utilitarians.

Twelve

30-6

of the forty

me n

interviewed

were

Minimals.

The

term Minimal, as it is applied here, denotes a self-conception

of

being the refuse

of

society.

Th e

t erm represents a category

of

282

Opi Zg Strategies

irson rs in

a a ximum Security

r son

people

to

whom

constructions of convicts as social outcasts have

been

successfully applied.

Minirnals,

then, reac ted to their s ta tus

as outsiders by bearing the stigma of the convict label

which

acted to isolate them from th e rest

of

society. Consequently, they

ha d few, if any,

family or

friend connections on the outside.

On e

Minimal explained,

Naw,

don t

no

on e

write

to me no r visit.

T h ey mo th e r,

sister)

be

tellin'

me

to call

c au se t he y d on t want

to wri te.

Sometimes

I call. It

d ep en ds h ow

I feel.

There be

times

I

might not

us e

the

phone for two or

three months,

or they'll write an d I

won t

write back for tw o or

three

months. I

don t w ant

to be

bothered, you k no w w ha t

I

mean?

They

appeared

to have

no

strength of purpose, no ambit ion,

n?

plans,

an d

nowhere to go. They had a fatalistic view of

their

lives an d believed that they were destined to be losers

because

everything in life w as s t ac ke d against them A typical e x p r e s s i o ~

of this bel ief was, UI

mean

I ain't never had no breaks as as

the system goes an'

it seems

like they is no way

ou t

for me. In

their construction of reality

nobody

understood them, or

cared

about them. They

w er e p er su ad e d

that even

when t ~ l y ?o

get

ou t

of

prison, it w o ul d n o t be long before they. were

imprisoned

again because, they believed, nobody was

g o l ~ g

to help them

Here's

h ow o ne respondent

described the situation,

Like

they

kick

y ou o ut ta h e re w it h

a h un er t b uc ks . Y ou

can t

even

rent a

motel room

for

t ha t, so

wh at p os i ti o n a re y ou

left

in?

An

if

yo u

find a job,

o ka y, y ou

found a job,

what a

do

about

r en t unt il

you get

a paycheck?

T he p ar ole office

don t care, the

place

in

h er e d on t

care. the

public, sure

as

hell,

don t

care.

Parole

office

don t help

you

here an no w yo u

g ot ta p a y

'urn

twen y

five

bucks

a

month

to be on p a ~ l e So

no w

you

walkin

outta

h er e w it h

seventy five

bucks,

with no

jo b

an

y ou got n o place

ta go. So now,

w ha d a y ou s p os ed

ta

eat?

Where you

s posed ta s leep?

Minimals appeared, in

comparison

to the .other tw o

a g ~ r e g ~ t e s

to have th e least mot ivat ion to do anything about their hves.

They

were

convinced that they could nlake. it

?n

the outside.

In

essence, they accepted the inevitability of rejection

Optirnals,

wh o

comprised 5

12 5k

of tll e 40 interviewees,

were

the

polar

opposites

of

Minimals in many .Important areas.

As

the

term is meant to imply here, Opt imals

s t n v ~ ~

to the t >est they

could be

in terms

of

the ir fitness to parncipate In

mainstream

283


4/7

Social Thought

&

Research

society. They believed that doing something because it was

th e

right thing to

do

according to the values an d norms of the

larger

society, benefited everyone

an d

was, ultimately, in their

ow n

best

interests. Thei r most d is tinguishing character ist ic was that

of

inner-morivauon. On e Optimal explained,

Time is not

somethin that control

you,

yo u

know? ' cause,

yo u

know?

even

they

g ot y ou

body

locked

up

they don t

hav ta

lock you mind up. An' if

yo u

le t em,

you

know? this

place

here

, it

ca n

take

you

life,

you

know? It

could be

really

terrible.

Optirnals enjoyed strong an d consistent family support, such as

letter Writing, family visits, an d occasional financial h el p f ro m

family members, all of

which

were

insrrumental

in helping

them

to maintain a high level

of

self-esteem. Typical responses were,

Compared

to most

people

I

know

I'm blest cause

I

ge t

visits

practically every

w ee k a n that

makes

my time a lot eas ie r.

I l ove get tin ' letters. I

love

to write. I

g et a bo ut

10 le tte rs a

week

I

answer every one of

urn.

In tum, they st rived for personal

an d

situational improvements

that emphasized their desire for proximity to mainstream society.

Those improvements included getting

medium or

minimum

custody level because that would

mean

better quali ty visits. At

the lower cus tody levels pri soners an d their visitors were

all owed to eat out of

doors

on prison

property an d

to eat, picnic

style, with their

ow n

food.

Another

improvement that

Optimals

worked toward was to get a minimum pay job so they could .

earn enough to send money home

in

the interest of their

children on special occasions such as birthdays

an d

Christmas.

They accepted responsibility for th e activities that b ro ug ht t h em

to prison.

On e

prisoner remarked,

I

di d

the c rime by myself; nobody

helped

me to

m ake t ha t

dec is ion. Thi s is the price I

have

to p ay . It's not whether it's

fair

but

that it is the p rice, an d I

m us t p ay it.

They estab li shed routines

an d

a living

standard

that

helped

them steer c lear of trouble. Being religious, for instance , was a

high priority in their lives,

oping Strategies of irsoners in a

ximum

s uruv rison

Everything I involve

myself

in no w is based

on

my faith as a

Muslim.

That

is the

n u mb er o ne

thing

no w which

is

why

it's

so

easy

for

m e not

to

ge t caught up

in

th e

little things,

yo u

know? See,

yo u

gotta

lead

a

good

life

an

the

Koran

tells

yo u

it's

never

too

late,

yo u

know?

Go d

forgives

everyone

they

o nl y a sk a n le ad

a

decent

life. Religion,

yo u

know?,

teaches

yo u ho w

to

do

that,

y ou k no w?

Education, also,

wa s

important

an d

they

w ou ld c on ti nu e to

educate themselves if programs were available. They stayed away

from h oo ch p ri so n- ma de alcohol), drugs, gangs,

an d

close

relationships,

an d

anything else that might

lead n

the

direction

of t roub le wi th other prisoners or prison staff. Optimals would

help others but worked primarily on trying to improve

themselves,

I

won t

say that I won t

help

a person

with

a

problem,

yo u

know?,

bu t

if

I m spendin

my time

of f

into

o t he r p e op l e S

business an their problems,

I

d on t h av e

t ime for myself ,

yo u

know?,

an

I feel t ha t mys el f i s

what

I

go t

to

w o rk w it h in

here,

yo u

know?

They were aware of t he ir surroundings, respectful of self

an d

others,

an d

t ried to follow the rules .

Optimals rejected the convict label by continuing family ties

an d

saw themselves as

r es pe ct ed m em be rs

of society, an d by

conforming to th e norms an d behavior that is expected of that

segment of society. In principle, then, they rejected rejection.

Between these two ext remes,

another

aggregate

e me rg ed t ha t

appeared

hedonistic

an d

self-serving that

I

have

named

Utilitarians. Twenty three of th e 40 respondents (57.5 ) in my

s tudy were Utilitarians. Since looking

ou t

for number

on e

is,

arguably, a highly prior it ized factor in the U.S. as a whole, it is no

surprise that Utilitarians comprised the largest s egment of

my

study population.

Utilitarians assumed that things were right or wrong according to

ho w they made you feel. It di d not occur to them that people

ha d rights that may not

be

violated no matter

ho w

it made

othe rs feel. Thus, Utilitarians, in my s tudy popul at ion, were

concerned

foremost

about

their

ow n

happiness. A

principle

which descr ibed them bes t was What 's in it for me? This wa s

the principle that motivated them to action. Uti litarians

engaged

in active associations with other prisoners but

expected

to gain


5/7

Social Thought Research

more

than

they contributed to those associations. Likewise,

even

though family bonds were weak, they main tain ed contact

be.cause family provided psychological an d material support in

pnson

opportunities

for social reintegra tion after

release

from pnson

Yea, the mail, th e visits, i t makes

me

feel part of somethin yo u

know? n

wh e n

I

get o ut

I

know

I

g o t s om e pl ac e

to

go

w ~ e r e I don t hav ta worty

none

a b o u t w h er e I ca n stay an eat

an

all

that, yo u know? I

g ot m y

family to go to. I don t hav ta

worry bu t

a lo t of o t he r s d o .

People

w ho

don t

have anyone

or anythin yo u give ur n a hundred dollars an they

ain t

gonna g e t a n ywh er e . So they ll have to

go pick

up a gu n at a

pawnshop. They

can t even

go to a

halfway

house unless

on e

w ~ l l a cc ep t y ou . Th at s just it , they re so

overcrowded

on e

will a c ce pt y o u not,

basically

they

just

throw

y ou o ut .

Utilitarians acknowledged that they d id t he crime bu t

denied

full

r e s ~ o n ~ i b ~ l i t y

for it. They looked for ways to t rans fe r b la me f or

their criminal acts,

an d

generally found

th e

sys tem at fault. In

th e

words of

on e

Utilitarian, It's onl y a cr ime because I di d it.

O t h ~ r s

do wo rs e a nd nothing happens to them. They a ls o

dented the negat ive impact of their crimes on society. Ins tead

they. f o u ~ d extenuating circumstances such as their

p a s s i v ~

p a r t l c l p ~ t l o n a m is un de rs ta nd in g a bo u t w ha t really happened

or t h a ~ a business rather than a person that wa s t he target

of

t h ~ f

criminal act which, in their view,

made

i t less of a crime .

Heres h ow o ne respondent pu t it,

If

yo u

go t a dollar an this o th er p er so n g ot three

thousand

I m no t gonna mess with y ou ; y ou re b ar el y m ak in it. I want

this

p er so n w h o s no t gonna

be

deprived

of

everythin

he s

got. That s wh y I d never steal a private car, a lw ay s g et t he ca r

lots.

tr tegies for

mproving oping

of

three

aggregates ha d a particularized approach to

coping W i t h th e challenges of prison life. Overall , there were

eight

major strategies.

On e interviewee ident if ied the first s trategy as, Do your

ow n

time

an d

don t

be

doin

no on e

else's. This

meant

staying

away.

from o t h ~ r s as much as possible, especially

when

they were

expenencing problems or other difficulties that might

lead

to a

286

oping Strategies Pirsoners in a aximum Security Prison

violation of the rules an d t rouble with the adminis trat ion or lead

to difficulties with other prisoners.

2. Staying away from th e correct iona l officers as

much

as

possible, Nearly all o fficer conta ct was seen as

undesirable

whether

confrontational, as in th e case of rules violation, or

non-

confrontational,

such

as friendly interaction. This attitu de

derived from inmates ' construction of the relat ionship between

prisoners

an d

officers as, fundamentally,

on e

in

which

th e

officers di d

no t

trust, and had no respect for th e inmates . By

extension, inmates interpreted friendly advances by officers as

attempts to gain inmate confidence for ulterior motives .

3.

In line with

doing

their ow n time an d staying away from th e

correctional officers whenever possible, a corresponding coping

strategy was to min imize con ta ct with fellow inmat es except,

perhaps, for those wh o belonged to

prison

gangs. By

minimizing contact I imply a reluctance to form solidary

groups for th e

purpose

of developing group policies

an d

procedures

for a systemized

approach

to doing

prison

time.

Th e

prefe rred inter -relat ionship dynamic among the

prisoner

population in my study was on e that was lo w key

an d

was

concentrated, primari ly, in areas dealing with the dis tr ibut ion

of

goods, such as reciprocal borrowing activities, an d personal

security, such as protecting each other's back from sneak attacks.

In this latter activity, th e expectation of the relationship appeared

to be that o ne w ou ld a le rt his contac t of impending danger. It

di d

no t appear

to

include

an agreement to stand by

each

other

in altercations or other confrontational .situauons. Again, though,

gang

members may be

an

exception to this latter point.

In relation to these three strategies, Minimals were the least

involved with others in th e prison an d kep t all in ter ac tion to a

minimum. Optimals were careful not to get too close to anyone

but they w ere n ot afraid to give help to others if they could.

Utilitarians were cautious about get ting involved with others bu t

nude that decis ion on a case by case basis. If it seemed

benefidal to

them

to

ge t

involved, they did so.

4. nemphasis on

doing

prison time one clay at a time.

s

Th e

formation of small cadres of inmate associations

for

commercial purposes an d personal security.

8


6/7

Social Thought

Research

Both of these strategies were considered necessary

and

basic to

survival in prison by all the respondents in my study population.

6.

Employment was an important coping activity for inmates

for

two main reasons. First i t provided income for the acquisition of

some of the necessities of life. For example, coffee, snacks and

cigarettes were not available to many prisoners whose only

income was derived from job earnings . Second, prisoners

who

did not

work

had to remain in their cells during the

work day

time-period. They were not allowed onto the yard, for instance, if

they were not working or engaged in

some other

officially

approved activity. So

much

cell time

would

raise

boredom

to

nearly intolerable levels.

Minimals, however, did the least

amount of work

possible.

Opt imaIs took pr ide in doing a

good

job and

put

their

best

effort

into their work. Utili tarians were interested in getting the

better

jobs such as those requiring out side work, and being around

areas that might offer them oppor tuni ties to get extra mater ia ls

or information.

7. For those who professed religious beliefs, and

turned

to those

beliefs for help with the challenges

and

pains of prison, being

religious was a valuable coping mechanism.

Minimals were the exception because they did not bel ieve that

God, no more than anyone else, would help them. According to

Minimals, there was a God then everything was

predetermined

and

how it is, is how it is. Op timals derived substan ti al

coping

help

from their religious beliefs. Utilitarians

turned

to

their religious beliefs for

help

with an immedia te

concern bu t

did not allow those beliefs to take precedence

ove r their

physical lives.

One

Utilitarian

put

it this way, You got ta live here

an so you gotta take care of that first.

8.

Family

support,

or

the lack of family support , appeared to

be

at the heart of coping strategies.

In situations where family support was strong

and or

consistent

i e

for Optimals and Utilitarians) it provided a sense of identity

that appeared to bridge the gap between prisoners displacement

to the

periphery

of society

and

mainstream society. Family

support also provided a sense

of

securi ty for post-pr ison life

because it as su red prisoners of a p la ce to go for food, shelter,

and compani onshi p upon release from prison. On the

other

hand, the absence of a family support s truc ture isola ted

oping Strategies

of

irsoners in a ximum Security rison

prisoners on the per iphe ry of society and t ended to

anomie idea tions such as those expressed by Minimals n this

study.

CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions that

I

have drawn from my study are that there

was:

1. no solidarity among the inmates

2. no organized opposition to the administration

3.

no organized violence

4. no meaningful rehabilitation taking place

Additionally,

I

found that;

5.

modes of coping

depended

on inmates construction of reality

( thei r wor ld view),

and

there was a concerted effort by all

inmates to confine interac tion with others inside the prison to a

minimum

6.

religion was an impor tant factor in the coping strategies of

some

inmates

7.

families played a central role in prisoners constructions

of

reality

and

in their coping strategies.

Implications

of

th e

Study

The most obvious pract ical implicat ion of this analysis

is that

correctional programs

should

find ways to facilitate offenders

construction of world-views characteristic of the aggregate called

Optimals in this repone This could be .with the

introduction of self-help programs aimed at getting pnsoners to

pay a ttention to

who

they are internally and how to that

knowledge to const ruct a wor ld view that allows for meaningful

ecological interaction.

Several such programs, that have focused on rel igious teaching

and practice, have proved successful (Tone 996; Lozoff 1994;


7/7

Social Thought Research

Hunt 1991). I am not suggesting that religious programs are a

panacea for inner development but t he idea of turning

people

inward to another dimension of their lives is conducive, it seems

to me, to the development of a world-view based on a

perspective of self that has potential for improved self-worth and

greater social interaction. Finally, though by no

means

exhaustively, family interactional therapy might be considered as

a means of maintaining, recreating,

or

creating bonds

between

prisoners

and

their families, since this study reveals that families

playa central role in prisoners construction of reality.

Bibliography

Clemmer, D. 1940. The Prison

Community

New York: Holt,

Rhinehart,

and

Winston.

Giallombardo, Rose

1966.

Society of Women: A

Study

of a

Women s Prison. New York: John Wiley.

Heffernan, Esther

1972.

Making

It in Prison: The Square

the

Cool

and

the

Life. New York: Wiley Interscience.

Hunt, Angela Elwell

1991.

jailhouse Flock: Life Learning

Program

in

Orange County,

FL

Brings Convicts to

God.

Christianity Today

35, 4: 19-20.

Irwin, J.

and

D. Cressey.

1962.

Thieves, Convicts

and

the Inmate

Subculture. Social Problems 10: 142-155.

Jacobs, James B.

1977.

Stateville: The Penitentiary in Mass Society.

Chicago: University

of

Chicago Press.

Lozoff, Bo,

1995.

We re

ll

Doing Time. Durham, NC Human

Kindness Foundation.

Sykes, Gresham M.

1958. The Society of Captives.

Princeton,

NJ

University Press.

Tach, Hans

1992, (1977).

Mosaic ofDespair: Human

Breakdowns

in Prison. New Brunswick, NJ Transaction.

Tone, Ralph D.

1996.

Maximum Security Unlikely Setting for

Modal Church. Christianity Today. September

16: 102-105.

Wheeler, Stanton

1961.

Socialization in Correctional

Communities.

merican

Sociological Review

26: 697-712

290

BOOKS: REVIEWS

AND ESSAYS

L tnoesttssement symbolique. By Pierre Lantz,with Ariane Lantz.

Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1996.

249

pp.

128

FF.

KEVIN ANDERSON

Northern Illinois Uniiersity

Social Thought Research 1998 l/o/. 21 No. 2

Viewed from this side of the Atlantic, French social theory often

appears far more l imi ted in scope than in its. actual

~ ~ f o l d m e n t

on native ground. This is because most Amencans

w n t ~ n g

today

confine their discussions of French theory to structuralists, post

structuralists,

and

postmodernists such as Althusser,

L a ~ a n .

Foucault, Derrida, Baudrillard, Lyotard, Kristeva, or B o ~ r d l e u .

Not only have giant figures of the past on the

~ o r e

humanist

an?

subject-centered side such as Sartre, de Beauvolr,. ~ e r l ~ a u - P o n t ~ .

Goldmann, and Lefebvre faded nearly into oblIVIon. In todays

American discussions,

but

the re is also a tendency to Ign?re even

contemporary French theorists who are q.uite prominent at

home

the ir orienta tion does cannot be fitted Into the post

s t r u c t ~ r l i s t wave. For example, while every utterance of a

Baudrillard no matter

how

idiotic, is rushed into English, a very

w e l l - k n o w ~ theorist

such

as Edgar Morin is little d i s ~ u s s e d or

translated here. The same is true with regard an Important

younger sociologist such as Michael Lowy whose work

on

Marxism, the Frankfurt School,

and

Latin America has

h e l p ~ d

bring about the recent resurgence of interest in Marxism In

France.

Pierre Lantz, a student of Lefebvre, is the author two

e ~ r ~ i e r

books

Valeur et r ichesse

(1977),

a study of Marxian po lit ical

e c o n o ~ y ,

and L Argent mort

1 9 ~ ,

a

~ o r k

in which he

moves toward his present concern

WIth SOCIal

psychology

the symbolic structu res of power. The

~ o l u ~ e un?er

review

here

was wri tten in col labora tion with

hIS

wife, Ariane Lantz.

Both have

been

involved for years

with

anti-racist, labor.

and

democratic movements.

Date post:	13-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	vitor-stegemann-dieter
View:	219 times
Download:	0 times

LEAHY, June. Coping strategies or prisoners in a maximum security prison: minimals, maximals and...

Documents