Legibility: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
:—{{author|James C. Scott}}, {{br|Seeing Like a State}}}}
:—{{author|James C. Scott}}, {{br|Seeing Like a State}}}}


In the ''Times'' of 19 January 2021 there were reports of schools identifying unruly pupils and taking them out on long walks (cunningly branded as “alternative PE”) while the OFSTED inspectors are in, or — worse —locking them in squash courts for the duration of the OFSTED site visit. Now leaving aside for a moment that in the JC’s day we unruly ones used to get taken to the squash courts to be ''caned'', so the modern-day unruly should thank their lucky stars —this strikes as as an interesting, and inevitable consequence of the OFSTED inspection regime in the first place.
In the ''Times'' of 19 January 2021 there were reports of schools, ahead of OFSTED inspections, identifying unruly pupils and taking them out on long walks (cunningly branded as “alternative PE”) or, what is regarded as worse, locking them in the squash courts for the duration of the OFSTED site visit. Now leaving aside for a moment that in the [[JC]]’s day we unruly ones were escorted to the squash courts to be ''caned'', not just locked in — so the modern-day unruly should thank their lucky stars — this strikes us as an interesting, and inevitable consequence of the OFSTED inspection regime in the first place, which is an archetypal attempt at ''legibility''.
 
The dynamics surrounding a given educational institution are surely unique, and complex: a function of geographical, geopolitical, sociological factors. Yet the government has no choice but to measure, compare and rate them on a simplified basis, on irregular short visits.
 
 
 
{{sa}}
{{sa}}
*[[Deep dive]]
*[[Deep dive]]
*{{author|James C. Scott}}’s {{br|Seeing Like a State}}
*{{author|James C. Scott}}’s {{br|Seeing Like a State}}
{{c|management}}
{{c|management}}

Revision as of 15:24, 19 January 2021

JC sounds off on Management™
Index: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Legibility
/ˌlɛdʒɪˈbɪlɪti/ (n.)

I began to see legibility as a central problem in statecraft. The premodern state was, in many crucial respects, par­tially blind; it knew precious little about its subjects, their wealth, their land-holdings and yields, their location, their very identity. It lacked anything like a detailed “map” of its terrain and its people. It lacked, for the most part, a measure, a metric, that would allow it to “trans­late” what it knew into a common standard necessary for a synoptic view. As a result, its interventions were often crude and self-defeating.

James C. Scott, Seeing Like a State

In the Times of 19 January 2021 there were reports of schools, ahead of OFSTED inspections, identifying unruly pupils and taking them out on long walks (cunningly branded as “alternative PE”) or, what is regarded as worse, locking them in the squash courts for the duration of the OFSTED site visit. Now leaving aside for a moment that in the JC’s day we unruly ones were escorted to the squash courts to be caned, not just locked in — so the modern-day unruly should thank their lucky stars — this strikes us as an interesting, and inevitable consequence of the OFSTED inspection regime in the first place, which is an archetypal attempt at legibility.

The dynamics surrounding a given educational institution are surely unique, and complex: a function of geographical, geopolitical, sociological factors. Yet the government has no choice but to measure, compare and rate them on a simplified basis, on irregular short visits.


See also