As I continue research for my next project, a feature, I found myself with an interesting comparison - or rather, an intellectual link.
That is between Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish and Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History podcast, specifically Painfotainment (a standalone episode). Foucault is ground zero for modern historical philosophy — or as I understand it to be called, “history of ideas”. Among his many explorations, Foucault analyzes the penal system across European history (especially delving into the moments of the extreme - torture and executions). As he does this, he revisits the codes and rationale for why they did things the way they did - how it evolved to what is it now - and why we’re not necessarily better off. It seems like that is the point behind working at the History of Ideas - to see if ideas in human society, and how those ideas change society, are really evolving or perhaps following a different trajectory. As Foucault intends, I believe, he just wants us to look at history’s rationales in every possible light and apply those lessons to our future.
Meanwhile, Carlin - who I’m a longtime fan of - seems to play the emotional counterpart to Foucault’s intellectual arguments. By that I mean, he revisits history and recreates it in such a way - as a storyteller for the audience - that they can understand the emotional and reactions and mindset of a certain people in a certain moment in history. It is really an incredible effect - how he sets up the relevant context for a historical situation (the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, attending a show at the Coliseum in ancient Rome, etc.) — and then links every bit of context to the potential inner thoughts of the people who allowed/participated/were affected by said historical event. He does this in contemporary terms, “it’d be as if X Y Z happened to you.” It makes for a thrilling sort of adventure ride through history, and more importantly - illuminates how and why people did the things they did in history. Where their ideas came into play, and how.
Ultimately, I think Carlin is continuing in Foucault’s footsteps. And this becomes a concrete connection between the two specific works I cited above. Carlin does a concise yet sweeping history of public executions and torture — trying to figure out why it was such a constant across societies in history up until modern times, and do those urges still live within us today? And at the outset, he cites Discipline and Punish - even referencing the same infamous example that Foucault does, the execution of Robert-Francois Damiens. Foucault tries to understand the ideals and rules of society that led to such a gruesome climax, how there might be instances of logic to learn from one way or the other — while Carlin works to understand what the people in the crowd, the prisoner, the executioner thought and felt as these rules were put into place. Carlin and Foucault go together wonderfully I think, though their subject matter is less wonderful - the full-bodied illumination that comes as a result of their combination is worth it.