fuente: http://thefunambulist.net/2013/04/05/weaponized-architecture-the-eastern-state-penitentiary-panopticon-the-materialization-of-the-diagram-and-its-fallibility/
  
The panopticon in its totality / assembled photographs by Léopold Lambert 
The former Eastern State Penitentiary
 in Philadelphia. The building is particular as it was one of the first 
prisons to implement the panopticon scheme invented by Jeremy Bentham in
 the late 18th century. This scheme is not fully applied as what is 
actually visible from the center of the building are the ten alleys and 
not the cells themselves; however, the centralization and totalization 
of surveillance is manifested here and were probably operative to a 
great extent. The prison was operative between 1829 and 1971 and along 
the years, some additional branches were even incorporated to the 
original layout, bringing the amount of visible alleys to twelve (two of
 them can be watched thanks to mirrors). The small montage above 
corresponds to a 360-degree view from the center of the building.
I often argues that Michel Foucault, who 
contributed to made the panopticon well known, paradoxically never 
thought in terms of architecture as, when he was writing or talking about architecture, what he was 
really doing was to speak only of diagrams (we could say the architect’s
 plan). What is true nevertheless, is that such a diagrammatically based
 architecture definitely tends to reinforce the machinic functioning of 
this building in the way it absolutely controls the bodies (that is the 
definition of a prison). If we remain at the diagrammatic level, there 
is no escape from this systematic operation; if we explore the 
physicality of architecture however, the means of escapibility 
correspond to the ability of a body to use the fallibility of 
architecture in its physicality (there no fallibility at the 
diagrammatic level). Here is one example: In 1945, two inmates of the 
Eastern State Penitentiary dug a hundred feet long tunnel and escaped from the prison’s periphery.
Architecture is certainly what implements
 the diagram on the bodies who cannot develop enough energy to 
“vanquish” the matter and therefore have to be contained by it. 
Nevertheless, architecture is also what makes the diagram fallible as it
 inscribes the latter within the “eroding” characteristic of reality 
which makes the matter vulnerable to a repetitive long term force that 
ultimately allows its disaggregation and therefore the obsolescence of 
its power on the bodies. In that case, the force of the diagram is 
vanquished by what I like to call the “folds of the matter” i.e. the 
characteristics of the material world that the diagram did not integrate
 within its scheme of control. As architects, we might want to study 
what would be voluntarily integrated folds in our diagrams/plans in 
order for the bodies that are subjected to them to find their own 
escapibility from the power of our schemes.









