For six decades, scholars have relied on Erving Goffman’s ( 1961 ) theory of total institutions to understand prison culture. Viewing prisons as total institutions offers insights into role performance and coercive control. However, mounting evidence suggests that prisons are not, in fact, total institutions. In this article, I first trace two credible challenges to the idea of prison as a total institution based on existing data: that prison gates open daily and that prisons operate within a context of overlapping surveillance and punishment supported by broader political and economic interests. Second, I draw on empirical findings from my own yearlong ethnographic study inside one U.S. state women’s prison to illuminate a third challenge to the total institution paradigm. Using religion in prison as a case study, I describe the process of institutional infusion , in which an outside institution proffers attitudes, practices, and resources that individuals may draw on to shape their material and interpretive experiences within a host institution. Prisons are structured to accommodate institutional infusion, further calling their totality into question. I conclude that we can learn far more about the realities and inequalities of the prison experience by viewing prisons as porous institutions.

中文翻译：

---

作为多孔机构的监狱

六十年来，学者们一直依靠 Erving Goffman (1961) 的总体制度理论来理解监狱文化。将监狱视为整体机构可以深入了解角色表现和强制控制。然而，越来越多的证据表明，监狱实际上并不是一个完整的机构。在本文中，我首先根据现有数据追溯将监狱作为一个整体机构的想法所面临的两个可信挑战：监狱大门每天开放，以及监狱在受到更广泛政治和经济利益支持的监视和惩罚重叠的背景下运作。其次，我利用我自己在美国一所州女子监狱中进行的长达一年的民族志研究的实证结果，阐明了对整个制度范式的第三个挑战。以监狱中的宗教为例，我描述了制度注入的过程，在这个过程中，外部机构提供个人可以用来塑造他们在东道机构内的物质和解释经验的态度、做法和资源。监狱的结构是为了适应机构注入，这进一步使它们的整体性受到质疑。我的结论是，通过将监狱视为漏洞百出的机构，我们可以更多地了解监狱经历的现实和不平等。