Before discussing the story and significant sociological issues, a comment about the content is necessary. There are varying levels of overt physical violence portrayed (youth to youth and staff to youth)...ranging from hits and punches to rape. These scenes are not gratuitous, but rather, are part of the phenomena being presented. Nevertheless, they are disturbing to watch and a word of caution is reasonable. Yet, in some minds it is the psychological and emotional abuse/violence which is just as disturbing as the physical...although a distinction is too often made between them when it comes to "warning" people.

In brief, the story revolves around a youth named Carlin (either last names or 4-digit numbers are used...no first names) who arrives at the facility with two others. Carlin has been sent there because he was involved in an altercation with 2 guards at another facility. One of the other arrivees, Davis, tried to escape from a less-restrictive setting. The third, Angel, is a black youth who had stolen a car...and although he has some attention paid to him because of his skin color, not much else is centered on him. With the primary focus on Carlin, we follow his life as he learns the ropes at this facility...as he experiences the other youth an the "pecking order" in existence...as he reacts and adjusts to his new living arrangements.

Along the way we meet others, both youth and staff, who are integral to the situation. One such youth, Archer, is very different from the others...a kind of "foil" to the more overtly aggressive youth, as well as to the very submissive ones. His intelligence and interests are in stark contrast to the other youth we meet...as are his methods of dealing with the staff and his situation. One gets the impression that Archer's socioeconomic and educational background (i.e. his "class location") is very different from most of the others. His interests include being a vegetarian, an open-atheist (who nonetheless has an interest in religion), philosophy, and literature. We also meet other youth who vary in their "rank" in the system of this facility. Although they are all necessary to the story, other than Davis, who is the victim of the rape, they are fairly interchangeable as "types."

The staff...from the warden (Governor) on down...are clearly depicted from the beginning of the movie when the "intake" interview is conducted for the three new arrivals. Their tone...in relation to the youth, their jobs, themselves, and each other...are clearly portrayed as "less-than-empathetic." While there may be an occasional display of "sympathy" for the youth, this is very much the exception. They clearly have a "job to do" and "someone to answer to" every moment of the day...creating an atmosphere of "control by any means." Their own occupational and personal survival seems to be the point...they are as much "victims" as are the youth they supervise, exploit, abuse, and control. As Archer said to one of them, "we aren't much different in here, you know."

While I won't provide all the details of the story (there is a fairly dramatic ending of sorts), I want to comment on a number of issues and realities which are soicologically significant...and which makes this an excellent movie to show in a Juvenile Delinquency or Juvenile Justice class.

First, why is a 1979 British movie relevant to us today...especially in the United States in the early 21st century? Despite the differences in time and culture, the "paradigm of control" still clearly emerges...providing a common premise for the system portrayed in the movie and the system which largely exists in juvenile correctional facilities today in the USA. Punishment and deprivation are still seen to be the proper and preferred response to delinquents...based upon a "free will" or "rational choice" paradigmatic framework. Although there is a only a bare minimum of "treatment" portrayed in this movie...and although there would appear to be far more "treatment" provided in the US system of today, these two "systems" have far more similarities than differences. The "feel" for the lived-experience in both is very much the same. I say this for two reasons. First, familiarity with the literature covering juvenile corrections indicates concerns for the realities portrayed in this movie...and second, my own experience in both juvenile and adult correctional settings (as a teacher) confirms the "feel" mentioned above...at least for me. Whether juvenile or adult, correctional facilities operate upon similar philosophies of control...despite the attempt to distinquish between them "in words." In short, this movie is relevant today in the USA because not much has changed...paradigmatically or behaviorally, at least.

Second, what follows is a series of observations derived from viewing this movie and from my sociological understanding of the subject matter. Some of these will be declarative, some speculative, and others will be in the form of questions to be discussed. I hope these are informative.



(1) Starting with the "intake interview" the goal of the guards is to "break" the spirit of the individual...creating an "expectation of continuous hassle" every moment of the day.



(2) The existence of a "pecking order" among inmates based on actual violence and the threat of violence...with the approval of the guards ("screws") is very much in evidence...as a means of institutional control.



(3) The inmates are pitted against each other...divide and conquer is alive and well here...as well as a distorted sense of "self-regulatiion" among them.



(4) Fear...from all sides...is omnipresent...keeping everyone on edge and looking over their shoulders.



(5) Yet, there is a "code" anong the inmates..."no ratting" on one another no matter what happens. But even with this, the favored youth provide the "snitching" function necessary (from the guard's point of view) in any type of prison.



(6) If an inmate isn't "tough" or doesn't "act tough"...they will be prey to others who are or who will act that way to survive.



(7) The use of "discretion" by the guards...about anything at anytime...creates an atmosphere of arbitrariness in which all live.



(8) Guards, some...if not most, are willing to be bribed, extorted, paid-off, and manipulated by inmates...and vice-versa...all for control purposes.



(9) There is a ubiquitous contradiction between the "rule of rules" and the "rule-less realities" of everyday life in correctional facilities.



(10) The ultimate irony is...who really runs the place? While the "powerful" and the "powerless" appear well defined...and is in certain ways...the question still emerges...just who controls who?



(11) As Archer himself asked...how does a regime based on deprivation build the kind of "character" which supposedly promotes law-abiding and "productive" citizens? Maybe the question is...what kind of character does a context of deprivation actually build?



(12) Archer seems to be saying that no matter what they do to him, no matter how they force him to "behave"..."its still my life." Why does this rankle the institutional authorities so much? What does his approach represent...how much of it is "real" and how much of it is an act...a coping device? Can he actually "pull it off"?



(13) What does Archer mean when he tells a guard that both of them, the inmates and the guards, are stripped of dignity in here..."we aren't much different in here, you know"?



(14) Archer proposes to have a discussion about "trust" while in a "group treatment" session with the "Matron"...why doesn't anybody...including the Matron herself...have anything to say about it?



(15) What does Mr. Goodyear really mean when he says that if the youth act up...they will "only make things bad for themselves"? What does this reveal about the control approach taken in these institutions?



(16) When fellow inmates don't care, when Administrators don't care, when guards don't care, when supposed-helpers don't care, when outsiders don't care...just where can an youth turn for help?



(17) What did the "collective action" near the end of the movie mean or represent? Are there different "levels of meaning" to this?



(18) Why would you agree or disagree with the observation that..."a punitive system doesn't work"?



(19) Can juvenile correctional facilities like this ever be "reformed"?



(20) Why is "re-formation" of people always an unsuccessful "stop-gap" approach?



In conclusion, this movie will make you think...react...in some way...without a doubt. It is one of only a very small handful of movies made about "juvenile corrections." Why is that, do you think? Finally, and in retrospect, maybe Archer is the main character...or just as "main" as Carlin?

I highly recommend this movie.

David H. Kessel