Discipline and Resistance: A Foucauldian Interpretation of Children’s Subjectivity in Monster
Abstract
As research on subjectivity deepens, the alienation and reconstruction of children’s subjectivity within power structures have become widely discussed in educational and sociocultural contexts. Grounded in Foucault’s theories of discipline and self-technologies, this paper analyzes the process of alienation and reconstruction of children’s subjectivity as depicted in Monster. It argues that when parents and teachers excessively mold children according to stereotypical social norms during education, oppression manifests at linguistic, bodily, and other levels. Coupled with the implicit discipline embedded in spatial structures, this ultimately leads to the dissolution of children’s subjectivity. However, as active agents, children can gradually reconstruct their subjectivity through self-redefinition, discursive resistance, and the creation of heterotopic spaces. By using Monster as a case study to examine issues in children’s education, this paper not only highlights the film’s resonance with real-world social problems, enhancing its thematic interpretation but also expands the application of Foucauldian theories of discipline and self-technologies in film criticism and East Asian educational discourse.
References
- Nolletti, A., Jr. (2012). Koreeda Hirokazu: A director at the crossroads. World Cinema, 2012(1), 4–8.
- Schilling, M. (2012). Interview with Koreeda Hirokazu. World Cinema, 2012(1), 153–159.
- Hanado, T. (2020). Koreeda Hirokazu and contemporary society: Family, social space, and social relations in Koreeda's works. Shimonoseki City University Journal, 64(1), 1–26.
- Itō, H. (n.d.). The function of bathing scenes in Koreeda films: The absence and meaning of bathing scenes in 'Distance'.Human and Environmental Studies, 2016(25), 31-44.
- Gong, X. (2022). Body·subject·power: Gender study of sci-fi films in the post-human context. Audio-Visual, 2022(6), 111–114.
- Yang, J., & Wang, S. (2009). The formation of "underachievers" from a disciplinary perspective: Critique and educational transcendence. Educational Science Research, 2009(9), 9–13.
- Butler, J. (2002). What is Critique? An Essay on Foucault's Virtue. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 30(5-6), 755-768.
- Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books. (Original work published 1975), p. 136.
- Simons, J. (1995). Foucault & the Political.Political Studies, 43(2), 303–315.
- Foucault, M. (1980). The eye of power (C. Gordon, Ed. & Trans.). In C. Gordon (Ed.), *Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972–1977* (pp. 146–165). Pantheon Books. (Original interview published 1977)
- Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory, population (G. Burchell, Trans.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. (Original work published 2004). pp. 194-195.
- Foucault, M. (1997). Power. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Essential works of Michel Foucault, 1954-1984: Vol. 3. Power (R. Hurley et al., Trans.). New York, NY: The New Press. p. 332.
- Wang, M. (2016). Technologies of the self: Selected works of Foucault III. Peking University Press. pp. 118-119.