tO
a n
arch
itectu
re
u R
o f
MAR 2 61991
r
econflict
i n c a r c e r a t i o n
Dedicated to Mom, Dad, Heather, and Wendy, with love.
Special thanks to Fernando Domeyko, Senior Lecturer in Architecture, for serving as advisor,
and to Ann Pendleton-Jullian, Associate Professor of Architecture,
and Standford Anderson, Head of the Department of Architecture,
for serving as readers to this thesis.
fig. 3a: final model
e 17 -. 8
Culture/Conflict/Colors: An Architecture of Incarcer tion
by Robert Matthew Noblett
Cameron's [Missouri]prison, its second, will open in February,
tucked out of sight, just off the main road to town, near a Wal-Mart.
With its cluster of rambling, green roofed buildings, it resembles a junior
college more than the maximum-security prison that it is. Gone are the
traditionalfortress-likestone walls and guard towers. In their place will
be a lethal electricfence and motion detectors.
-The
Boston Sunday Globe
October 13, 1996
Crime-fighting has become one of the fastest growing
industries in the United States. Consequently, the construction
of facilities which serve as the end-product of that fight, prisons,
has become one of the nation's fastest growing industries as well.
The architecture of those facilities, which logically would fall
somewhere in the middle, has yet to catch up.
The intention of this project is to begin to explore the
possibility for architecture within the context of the prison. It
investigates ideas of space-making within a building which
combines programmatic complexity with a requirement for
security and control. It addresses notions of individual versus
collective within the culture of the prison. It questions the
relationship of the public to the imprisoned, of outside to inside.
Submitted to the Department of Architecture in partial
fulfillment of the requirementsfor the degree Master of Architecture at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology - February 1997.
thesis advisor: Fernando Domeyko, senior lecturer of architecture
Acknowledgments
0
-E
final model
fig. 7a:
6-7
-I
Cb
II
0
r~)
Author's note
of office-building style spaces that simply fulfill a programmatic
requirement. Lastly, a preoccupation with the wall, its possibilities and implications, found itself in this project, something
unavoidable in a discussion of the prison.
000
-site plan courtesy City of Boston, Massachusetts.
The project is situated in Boston, Massachusetts at the confluence
of the Longfellow Bridge, Cambridge Street, Charles Street, and
Storrow Memorial Drive, at the end of the northern side of
Canibridge Street.
20t 'RJ
v-4
The site, mea
the north-so
General Hos
wraps up to
These two si
chamfered s
station. A si
both the east
northern and
scale of move
The northeas
of the hospit
for the purposes of this project was erased. Less than one mile north along the
river is the location of the recently constructed Suffolk County Jail, the
replacement facility for the Charles Street Jail.
-L
Lert -Bu
Program
0
0c
.UJ
1. Inmate Housing:
(200) cells
common spaces
showers
housing offices
multi-use spaces
segregated/difficult
inmate housing
5. Recreation
outdoor recreation
indoor recreation
canteen
storage
2. Dining Service:
kitchen
dining space
storage
6. Visitation
common visitation
private visitation
3. Medical Facilities
administration
diagnostic
pharmacy
outpatient
dental
storage
inpatient care
mental health
7. Administration
offices
conference room
hearing room
control center
4. Education
classrooms
library
workshops
8. Chapel
O
This project is best understood as the
gathering up of several strands of
thought concerning the manner in
w
.itecture
for
man body.
es mn
problem can
ason that
of approach,
ng of the
yand the
h springs up
orn here that
a desire to
ee
mena which
pe, to begin
to
'to the
there exists
relationinhabitants
culture that
ething that
earchers
ly has been
and women
large groups
origins of
the contemporary situation lie in the
seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. The trends leading up to the
fig. 15b:
cell model
U
twentieth century prison have been
examined in depth by the likes of Sir
Robin Evans in The Fabricationof
itectire 1750-
lish Prison
aelIgnatieff in A Just
18
re of Pain: The Penitentiary in the
ustrial R volution 1750-1850, and by
Michelfoufault in Diine
Punish: T
and
Birth of the Prison. These
s outite the origins of punishment
and trace the eventual aceptance and
evolution of the prison.
heshift
desribes
in p
hment away
and punishment of
bedyto'+e c
tel this o the
emin
ntr
oucault
ent of the
ild and p
trfro
IO
4
n be
ngein 1791 of
P. taicon, both as
f ti ideal
mo
con
t
deeply robted in a
d surveillance
Fou
t sees it, thes
stage or tlhstead
*
n as well as a
~% tio of t.
ts set the
dpment of the
ough the
nineteen
ntiet
methods oa
ciety. As
e
rfd d
enturies. As
became
so too was
're
S$a'ped
o
ulture within.
Although researchers felt that
up through very recently a prison
culture was identifiable and indeed
necessary to the operation of such an
0o
institution, the contemporary condition has cast doubts over this nature of
rison
Yer and
r
v oler offenders
vre
y m
ave aisru
h sqC
ulture an 4
respect of
e senior
or O ffenders,
4n
nsel
of this
etman for
co
owtho
stering the
is unclear
p
whether the
pnson gngs have their
minsUthe t c
an
o prevalent
i cities or in
najr
cu5tu
divisions within
prion
seems clear is
e more or
that th tr
less "tu
culture
one Ose
1 g
qI te
e prison to
at
frontational
has
he face of
Arcing those
nsi
tion and
v
h
n to reevaluate
ac by which
df
c era
offC
r
.unt,
1993).
thre extends
T
mate culture
th
t
c&lu
1e role of the
prison official as part of prison culture
as a whole. Because, as Sykes and
Messinger point out, "the conditions of
Z
-o
0
E
fig. 19b
fig. 19c
fig. 19d: study models
custody involve profound attacks on
the prisoner's self-image or sense of
personal worth," the desire or need to
-worth has
e to the
ich the roles
n this system
of one'e
kes, 1960,
r write that
rs moves m
as demanded
itcy
rte of
pains
niso
eess severe... A
ovides the
I group with
ch
w
h,
ir
self and
iu
n his struggles
his condemniers. (Sykes, 1960,
16). nit toreiteing
D
niddle wof
thsin n
'ofthe
riso
his
the
thewas
oppiro
posed to the stablishment
*on of
osition to t
.iimi/herself
cutueof
e~ffM
Any
rticipate mn
>lishment
d entirely
r fellow
rom- the
opportunity to be reinvested with a
sense of worth. Despite the opposition
of the inmate culture to the establish-
a)
0
N
>
}
fig. 21b
fig. 21C
fig. 21d: study models
ment of officials in the prison, it was
this unification of the prisoners within
this culture which led to relative
By avoiding
cials of the
ble to secure
cy to their
status quo
mnmate
chieving this
d seem that
.ff
ngs in the
k
IS,
es the unity
ey are placed
er, placing
t
n he ovea sche
Yt
ary element
tis
reduced to
nolence
Compoundw
Yng'
n
di. be
e
tuency
tig from
e
:dade
m
of
t
real or
oyalty to the
,but
so
tygangs
3ilyndgFranteed.
gh "iW reiaididivided as to
what this new incarnation of prison
culture means to the operation of these
institutions, it seems clear that it has led
MV
N
CN
fig. 23a: final model
view ofpublic entry from east end of open space "inside" the prison
to increased violence and deep-seeded
uncertainty among both prisoners and
prison officials alike. The widely held
n.,-.
.o . presence of
tion, but
presence of
th one
asier to
maintain that
ne another
se they don't
v-tofight wit
nt, 1993).
e guards
Architituially,'the project is about the
y hich one goes a out construetmng space whigh'oranizes the
*fulture. This implies undereractipp 4f the internal
stan~if5
,n
pris
culi
Mswellie spee of the
vidual
impacts;i~e
owd"th
peiohe
turn
building
in ters. of rdfigtaitionally
architecture
of the prison. It quickly became clear
that there are essentially two stategies
operating within the project. The first
.n
N
--
-121
3
4
L
5
iL
L
10
1. recreation
2. workshop/
machine shop
3. works ho p/
storage
4. laundry/
storage
5. vehicle sally port
6. public lobby
7. open space
8. administration
9. education
10. chapel support spaces
11. service entrance
:
8R
9A
---
fig. 5a:ground level plan
77N
2-
fig. 27a: transverse building section
strategy began with the study of the
ao
cell, at the scale of the individual as
well as of several individual cells
I g advantage
ofspat4I opportaftitie
'
eths
Jagely it
oode
hc h
of the way i
bcteiatially related
exp
by involves
the
otioe
element
olte ands
ne
thie, O~ca
knwhicht
sy h laer~
tIp
I
inside frof 'outside
asthtwi
tliegnate
thr,
ht Whi
IPA
has become
the
hhseparates
recognized by
olds him-i
aartfroerstood
by
ely contains
irnan fw
~
panding the
ight, and
lending to the institution a sense of
permanence. My models of the wall as
fig 28b: south elevation study
it related to this project were always
I
17. counseling rooms
18. common visitation
19. medical facilities/pharmacy
20. long-term property storage
21. prisoner intake
22. warden's apartment
23. classrooms
fig. 29b: third level plan
11. private visitation
12.
open to below
13. guard changing area
14. guard dining and lounge
15. administration
16. education
fig. 29a: second level plan
11A
l
fig. 31a: longitudinal building section
interested in the wall as something very
free in its ability to wrap the building,
yet suggest that the condition of being
-..-.
17
.-
f"-
t so much a
s
terior but a
-11wall
you
is the
p int 6project
o strategies.
u
ersion, cells
s round three
c
ce, served by
urth side.
6
acent cell
larger spatial
anization of
ground
spatia strategy
oundary condition of the
bu
i cr
al
9
stan
45 to undere f utopian
osi .building's
t cit
'te-
n, that is
On the wall.
bt
een
ch conceptue two
strategies becomes the circulation of
the building. The traditionally
fig 32b: west elevation study
centralized position of the guards is
24. kitchen
25.
double bunk cells
26. dining hall
27.
chapel
28. roof garden
29.
library
fig. 33a: fourth level plan
here moved to the perimeter of the
building, literally inverting the Panoptic ideal. It wraps the collection of cell
buildig
rmovemen
e of the
blocks, an
the various levels
fpriso
ft eulding.
oQtermost layer
tion
contro
M ighou
means
maller
exerts specific
e building by
fingers-of circulation
nove frornihe oter layer into
the hea
th41h
ding. The place-
mFent
bl s sets up the
greater pattern of circ ation around
the eRU
as movement
i
between
cks.
in turn
liberates the
rior w
f the
buildingi from responsibili
as a
physical barrier, allowing it to define
ns
d )
ot
aye
W
:ely
ove
e
eas a Viction of its
iin "ayer. The
rA
ing. As one
ro
m
mbrid
psace,
ii
Cr
On experiences
fh
t
o
s it turns
ce
A
0
treet toward
the library.
is exposed
inthe "int
o
'Pen space,
where one is literally within the prison
fig 34b: cell block - final model
wall.
The intention of the facades
LA
E
31
32L33
30. single bunk cells
31. open to chapel below
32. open to library below
33. upper library facilities
fig. 35a: fifth level plan
of the building is to suggest this
liberation of the prison wall by
articulating its lightness and allowing a
g .interior
of
iterally hung
rete slabs
ground.
are made
f reducing
surface area,
1eb~
ou
on of the
.,f It investi-
nes of moving
-d
and of
uestioning
or "outside"
the various
two levels in
in o rows of
hese blocks
e open space
llc
exf
the
soutnern
northeast.
above the
er datum of
the building and to create space below
for the other programmatic elements of
the building. The cells are located at
fig. 37a:
final model
view into public lobby from "inside" open space
36- 37
the uppermost layer of the building,
each with a window to the sky and
organized around the large spaces
r
p
C
he building.
de" of
builA4
ily to the
sky
comes a layer
media.
ground,
allowi
t
annected at
once
e at tfsame time
etaced in an independent floating
"city.
*arc
cell per teI
ext
and
or
ce1bock contains 18
onl he
v'vhic
space
into
the
sices of an
rings light, air,
b
,ihg.
These
# light ells penetrate thrgh the entire
section of tie buildingllowing the
e
r's
e bilding to be
both lit from above, an connected to
ground and sky. On the fourth side of
the open space are the collective
activities, which consists of a double
height day room, exercise facilities, and
showers. Cells on the lower level of
the cell block are double bunk units,
and are four feet greate in length than
1
those above. This ltdvs for the
placement of a window at the end of
the cell, bringing in light and creating a
fig 34b: north elevation study
view to the sky. Upper level cells are
ON
0f
fig. 39a: final model
view from library to public lobby across open space
smaller, single bunk units also with an
opening at the top of the cell. Circulation within the cell block is maintained
etween the
ister style.
in constant
and sky,
to their
tio
intense
tal layers of
e
nish the
bu
aditional
S ig I
a
n environ-
wee thegoned body is not
ith the confined
ties.for co
ing and
eve of the
iIo
end ofthe
blca
bidn'These are; lctd
proimty
ohecel
smberso
in close
tofcilitate
general
rsiipoulation as well1 as to
faciliae cl
opulato
ltigof th entire
Cr
ree times per
these and
ther facilities wi
me
o
uilding is by
link all five
levels of the building, and ensure the
secure movement of groups of prisoners by a limited number of guards.
fig. 41a:
final model
view from space in north-east cornerof site toward chapel
40-
41
Additionally, two banks of elevators
located at either end of the central
zone of circulation allow for transpordisabl - . . -
tati
Be:
r lt inmates.
cells are the
ig centers for
'd
one
e offices,
ent cells, and
pharmaceutical storae
a'd distribu-
tion. There is a secure area consisting
of group visitation roois which is
accessed by the visitors from below via
a ramp connecting the entry lobby
with the two levels of visitation spaces
The easend
-
e-
e
is level is the
hich newly
hit up via
ally port
ed for stay at
s in the
a
ed here
d booking,
rooms. A
storage of
inmates
pe
to the
h9
own ismore
of a mezzanine level, occupying only
the two eastern bays of the building's
northern half. This part houses the
fig. 43a: final model
viewfrom administration toward "inside" open space and chapel
private facilities for the guards including changing and showering areas,
dining and kitchen facilities. This area
tors entered
orthern
ate vistitation
,1tat10n
level. The
d level is
reational
or the
five foot tall
interior
b-of supportu activities.
le space
inery and
degallery
e fee spaces for
and the
py this level.
erior space is
lobby space,
tive spaces
er recreation
of the
program including the chapel and its
support spaces, and the library and its
supporting educational facilities begin
fig. 45a:
final model
44- 45
to move outside of the main body of
the building to occupy the prominent
Cambride Street part of the site. They
old back on
h the
strative
building's
rt of the site.
ally to
he northern
suggesting at
et edge is
on
uilt and points where spatial cuts into
xist. Prisoners also begin to
c4
te site in a different way,
rem
of the wall while
mo
building.
'O he ert of the
The conclusions of this thesis as
represented in the final
presentation are
reconciliation of ideafwhich were
bdational tthe
project, as well as
hich arose dur
guh the
ofth
the process of
jecita.
The
1, the
d issues related
nature of the
prison itself seemed to drive the project
at various points in time. However, the
establishment of the cells as the most
fig. 47a: final model
important element of the program
coupled with a concern for their
spatiality was the point of departure for
onsistent
seems crucial
the develop-
s the
ot only
cdupled with
fe which
An approach
these aspects of
e
,for
Ar'lultear.t
te
oportunities
pate
Bibliography
Brenner, Douglas et al. "Jails and Prisons." Architectural
Record. March 1983. 171(3). p 81-99.
Borland, John et al. "The Irish in Prison: A Tighter Nick for
the 'Micks'?" The British journal of Sociology. 1995.
46(3). p 371-394.
Camhi, Morrie. The Prison Experience. Charles E. Tuttle:
Rutland, 1989.
Cloward, Richard, A. et al. Theoretical Studies in the Social
Organization of the Prison. Social Science
Research Council: New York, 1960.
Courtney, Marian. "New Jersey State Prison." Metropolis. JanFeb 1992. 11(6). p 21-22,24-26.
Dickens, McConville, and Fairweather. Penal Policy and Prison
Architecture. Barry Rose: Great Britain, 1978.
'U-
Evans, Robin. The Fabrication of Virtue: English Prison
. Cambridge University Press:
trit-Mi .
----
hrrellh"
nis -
of the
Pison. Pantheof: Nw.
fig. 49a: final model
Ln
Hall Douglas, K. et al. In Prison. Henry Holt: New York,
1988.
Howard, Roberta. Designs for Contemporary Correctional
Facilities. Capitol: Maryland, 1985.
Hunt, Geoffrey et al. "Changes in Prison Culture: Prison Gangs
and the Case of the Pepsi Generation." Social
Problems. August 1993. 40(3). p 398-409.
Ignatieff, Michael. A just Measure of Pain: The Penitentiary in
the Industrial Revolution 1750-1850. Columbia
University: New York, 1980.
Jenkins, Joylon. "The Hard Cell." New Statesman & Society.
March 19, 1993. 6(244). p 18-20.
Johnston, Norman, et al. Crucible of Good Intentions.
Philadelphia Museum of Art: Philadelphia, 1994.
Johnston, Nonnan. The Human Cage: A Brief History of
Prison Architecture. Walker: Philadelphia, 1994.
Koolhaas, Rem and Ma u,~Brucee.
Y rk, 1995.
Lyon Dan
~
Conversations with the Dead. Holt, Rinehart, and
w YQrk, 1988.
I 11V
mL
:M-EXC Monaei
.....-..
.....
m
fig. 51a: final model
(N
Mote, Gary et al. Design Guide for Secure Adult Correctional
Facilities. American Correctional Association: College
Park, 1983.
"Nailing the Screws." The Economist. May 16, 1992. 323(7759).
p 79.
Noel, Elizabeth. "The Worst Day of the Year." The Spectator.
1995. 275(8736). p 12.
"Prisons Generating Big Interest in Small Towns." Boston
Globe. 13 October 1996. All.
Spens, Iona et al. The Architecture of Incarceration. St. Martin's:
New York, 1994.
Toch, Hans. Living in Prison: The Ecolog of Survival. The
Free Press: New York, 1977.
Worth, Robert. "A Model Prison." The Atlantic. 1995. 276(5).
p 38-44.