Garland, David (1955–)

Sociology of Punishment

Despite Garland's absorbing and significant contributions to the history of criminology, he is best known for his pioneering efforts on the sociology of punishment. In 1999, he became the founding editor of the journal Punishment and Society, which brings together interdisciplinary scholarship on this subject. His own work in this area has influenced a generation of scholars and has expanded the scope of understanding, inquiry, and theoretical interpretation of punishment. According to Garland (1990), the sociology of punishment, “broadly conceived, [is] that body of thought which explores the relations between punishment and society, its purpose being to understand punishment as a social phenomenon and thus trace its role in social life” (p. 14).

Garland (1991) encourages scholars to see punishment as a complex institution and evaluate it by “recognizing the range of its penal and social functions and the nature of its social support” (p. 160). His understanding of an expanded sociology of punishment is most clearly revealed in his 1990 book, Punishment and Modern Society, which has become a core text for graduate and senior-level undergraduate students. In this work, Garland offers a broad sociological description of punishment in contemporary society using the interpretive tools of Karl Marx, Émile Durkheim, Michel Foucault, and Norbert Elias along with several other social theorists. The result is an intricate investigation of punishment in late modern society that attends to the complexity of its development through what Garland calls a multidimensional interpretive approach. This book attempted to “extend and synthesize the range of interpretive material that currently forms the sociology of punishment, and to build up a more complete picture of how punishment might be understood in modern society” (Garland, 1990, p. 16).

Garland does not view “punishment” as a singular entity. Rather, he conceives of it as composed of a complex set of institutions, discourses, societal forces, and interrelated processes. Moreover, he suggests that punishment does not have a single purpose or serve a particular end. It is precisely because of its “stored up” historical meaning and diverse rationales that a multidimensional approach to understanding punishment's meaning, function, and rationale is paramount. To comprehend penality's nature and character at any given time requires one to “explore its many dynamics and forces and build up a complex picture of the circuits of meaning and action within which it… functions” (Garland, 1990, p. 17). Underlying this multifarious approach lies a commitment to discerning “punishment” in a way that exposes its complexity.

...