Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Franz Kafka’s short story, “In the Penal Settlement”, presents a very interesting, and disturbing, form of punishment. The penal colony punishes and executes its citizens by means of an inhumane device designed by the first “Commandment” of the colony. The prisoner in question is strapped to a bed and another apparatus inscribes the law the man has broken on the man’s body. The man is repeatedly flipped over so the apparatus can write on both sides of the body numerous times. According to the officer who runs the machine, it usually takes a man twelve hours to die from this inhumane torture. In this day and age, this type of torture seems to be “cruel and unusual punishment”. However, as we shall see, what Nietzsche, in his book On the Genealogy of Morals, and Foucault, in his book Discipline and Punish, have to say about punishment in general can be directly related to this story and, in a way, seem to justify the punishment.
In the second essay of his book, On the Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche attempts to discover how humans developed the idea of a conscience, and in particular the idea of a bad conscience. However, Nietzsche ends up talking a great deal about punishment. What he has to say is interesting but becomes even more interesting when contrasted with Kafka’s story.
In section three of the essay, Nietzsche says many relevant things in terms of Kafka’s story. In terms of why punishment is so harsh Nietzsche says,
there was nothing more fearful and
uncanny in the whole prehistory of
man than his mnemotechnics. ‘If
something is to stay in the memory
it must be burned in: only that
which never ceases to hurt stays in
the memory’-this is a main clause in
the oldest (unhappily also the most
enduring) psychology on earth (61).
He then goes on to say that
[m]an could never do without blood,
torture, and sacrifices when he felt
the need to create a memory for himself;
the most dreadful sacrifices and
pledges...the most repulsive mutilations
...all this has its origin in the
instinct that realized that pain is
the most powerful aid in mnemonics (61).
These quotes apply to “In the Penal Settlement” in astonishing ways.
One can see that the harshness of the punishment in the penal colony is meant to deter the prisoners from acting out. Inscribing the law on the culprit’s body is an incredibly bloody task. After twelve hours, the body must surely be mutilated beyond recognition. All this blood and gore is there to send a message to the other prisoners. If they act up, this will happen to them. Whenever a prisoner thinks about acting up, he will surely remember what happened to his fellow inmate and think twice before actually doing the act. Hence, what Nietzsche says is right. The bloodier and harsher the punishment, the better it serves as a mnemonic. The harshness of the punishment is therefore justified because it serves as a way of deterring any further occurrences of acting out.
In the following section, section four, Nietzsche says something very interesting about punishment. He says that
[t]hroughout the greater part of
human history punishment was not
imposed because one held the wrong-
doer responsible for his deed, thus
not on the presupposition that only
the guilty one should be punished:
rather, as parents still punish their
children, from anger at some harm or
injury, vented on the one who caused
it-but this anger is held in check and
modified by the idea that every injury
has its equivalent and can actually
be paid back, even if only through the
pain of the culprit (63).
In section 5, Nietzsche says that in ancient Egypt “one could inflict every kind of indignity and torture upon the body” of someone who has caused you some wrong (64). He also says that
in place of a literal compensation
for an injury...a recompense in the
form of a kind of pleasure [is received]
-the pleasure of being allowed to
vent his power freely upon one who
is powerless....The compensation
...consists in a warrant for and
title to cruelty (64-65).
When looking at the specific prisoner who is going to have the punishment afflicted on him in “In the Penal Settlement”, one can see how this quote applies.
The prisoner is being punished because not only was he not doing his duty, he disrespected his superior. This disrespecting obviously brought the superior enough harm to feel that the inmate deserved this harsh of a punishment. The inmate is not necessarily being punished because he has done something wrong but because he has caused his superior some harm. The superior feels that this must be reciprocated. The superior also receives pleasure in seeing the inmate suffer, according to Nietzsche. This pleasure of venting his anger allows him to be cruel to he who did him wrong. This cruelty is manifested in the way the prisoner is tortured in the story. This torture is more cruel than anything ever imagined and apparently the superior feels that it is enough to reciprocate the harm done to him. The harshness of this punishment is justified in this case because it is what the superior feels is necessary. Looking at the situation from the outside, one may not agree with the superior. However, one does not know how much harm the superior felt from the disrespecting, and therefore they cannot judge whether this punishment is too much or not.
Finally, in section 10 of the second essay, Nietzsche says, “[a]s the power and self-confidence of a community increase, the penal law always becomes more moderate; every weakening or imperiling of the former brings with it a restoration of the harsher forms of the latter” (72). This quote does not directly apply to the story but one can infer quite a deal about the penal colony from it.
According to Nietzsche, the penal colony is not very powerful or self-confident. This is because the colony feels the need to use such harsh punishment every time an inmate does not act according to the rules. The leaders of the colony must be quite scared of an uprising, otherwise they would not feel the need to demonstrate what little power they have so harshly. The punishment has once again been justified. Because the leaders of the colony are weak and powerless, they must use excessive force to get the desired behavior out of the inmates. The excessive force also makes it seems like the leaders have power. However, according to Nietzsche, the leaders really do not have much power at all.
Michel Foucault, a Nietzschean philosopher, also wrote a book, Discipline and Punish, which deals with punishment as well. Selective quotes from this book also can be applied to Kafka’s story “In the Penal Settlement”. These quotes also defend the harshness of the punishment.
In the section entitled “The Body of the Condemned”, Foucault talks about punishment inflicted on the body itself. He says, “in our societies, the systems of punishment are to be situated in...the body....it is always the body that is at issue-the body and its forces, their utility and their docility, their distribution and their submission (172). Foucault goes on to say
the power exercised on the body is
conceived...as a strategy; that its
effects are attributed to...dispositions, maneuvers, tactics,
techniques, functionings....this power is not
simply exercised simply as an obligation
or a prohibition on those ‘who do not
have it’; it invests them, is transmitted
by them and through them, it exerts pressure on them... (174).
These quotes are definitely true in respect to “In the Penal Settlement”.
Kafka’s story is centered around the idea of inflicting punishment on the body for crimes committed. The punishment for the crime in this colony is to have the law one broke inscribed on his body. The penal colony tries to make the law one with the body essentially. It tries to ingrain the law into the body. The officer who runs the apparatus that inflicts the punishment does see it as a strategy to make the inmates truly learn the law that they have broken. This is not necessarily a justification for the harshness of the punishment but it is one for the punishment itself.
In the next section entitled “Docile Bodies”, Foucault talks about how a body becomes docile. He says, “[a] body is docile that may be subjected, used, transformed, and improved” (180). Foucault says later on that “discipline produces subjected and practiced bodies, ‘docile bodies’....it dissociates power from the body...[it] turns it into a relation of strict subjection” (182). These two quotes can be indirectly applied to the story at hand.
The penal colony looks to produce docile bodies. With an incredibly tortuous death looming over their heads, one would expect near submission of the inmates. However, in this case it is the possibility of the punishment that subjects the inmates and not the punishment itself. The same desired affect is reached though. One assumes that the penal colony produces docile bodies. This is a justification for the punishment. If the goal of all disciplinary systems is to produce docile bodies, then the penal colony fulfills this goal. The punishment it needs to inflict in order to achieve the goal may be harsher than other disciplinary systems but nevertheless, the goal is accomplished.
Finally, in “The Means of Corrective Training”, Foucault says something very apt to “In the Penal Settlement”. He says, “[a]t the heart of all disciplinary systems functions a small penal mechanism. It enjoys a kind of judicial privilege with its own laws, its specific offenses, its particular forms of judgment” (193). This quote perfectly describes the penal colony.
The penal colony enjoys many judicial privileges. When an inmate has a charge brought up against him, no trial is held and the man may not defend himself in any way. The only person questioned is the victim himself. The officer in charge of the apparatus then usually finds the inmate guilty. The reason for being subjected to the apparatus is never explained to the inmate. He is simply executed slowly and painfully. Anywhere outside of the penal colony, this procedure reeks of injustice. However, as Foucault as noticed, a disciplinary system always enjoys these special privileges. This again is not a clear justification for the punishment in “In the Penal Settlement” but it does help to clarify why things happen the way they do.
In conclusion, Kafka’s story “In the Penal Settlement” presents a very disturbing form of punishment, especially if one is American. However, by analyzing works by Nietzsche and Foucault, one can see how such a punishment could be necessary. Because we live in a day and age where American values seem to rule all, this punishment seems absurd. Neither Nietzsche nor Foucault are American and hence they do not necessarily believe that punishment should not be “cruel and unusual” is an absolute truth. This shows rather clearly that the American way of life is not believed by all nor should it be. Once and a while, it is good to see things from another’s point of view and this is one of those times.
Works Cited
Foucault, Michel. Excerpts from Discipline and Punish.
Kafka, Franz. In the Penal Settlement. London: Secker and Warburg, 1973.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Genealogy of Morals. New York: Random House, Inc., 1967.
© May 10, 2000
Go back to papers
Go back to Skidmore
Go back home
This page hosted by 
Get your own Free Home Page
