Constituents of Power’s exercise in The miracle of Cell 7 and A Lesson of Love

Constituintes do Exercício do Poder em Milagre na Cela 7 e Uma Lição de Amor

Nildes Raimunda Pitombo Leite, Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0802-9628; Universidade Federal de São Paulo - USP - São Paulo - SP – Brasil. E-mail: nildespitombo53@gmail.com
Juliana Correia da Silva, Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4378-2378; Autônoma. E-mail: juliana.correia.s@outlook.com

Back to Index

Resumo

Tendo como objeto de estudo os mecanismos e as fontes de poder e, como lócus os filmes ‘Milagre na Cela 7’ e ‘Uma Lição de Amor’, este artigo foi elaborado a partir de escolhas de aforismos categorizados que, se configuram para Abbagnano (2003) como proposições sucintas que exprimem uma verdade, uma regra ou uma máxima, com o objetivo primordial de investigar as partes constituintes do exercício do poder, em ambos os filmes. Para a escolha de tais aforismos, essencialmente buscou-se respaldo em Foucault (1981; 1987; 2006), dentre outros estudiosos, sob as perspectivas da análise fílmica de (Champoux, 1999; Huczynski & Buchanan, 2004; Napolitano, 2013), bem como sob os referenciais acerca de utilização de filmes como lócus de pesquisa de (Denzin, 2004; Flick, von Kardoff & Steinke, 2004; Leite, et. al., 2021). Os resultados apontaram que em todas as partes constituintes do exercício do poder observou-se a preponderância do poder impessoal e arbitrário. Por outro lado, os protagonistas de ambos os lócus deste estudo observacional em análise fílmica obtiveram os resultados reais de justiça, tão somente por intervenção do poder pessoal de quem pôde exercê-lo livremente, uma vez que, por interferência do poder impessoal e arbitrário, ambos receberam arbítrios injustos, desarrazoados, contestáveis, viciados e ilegítimos até.

Palavras-chave: constituintes do exercício do poder; poder; autoridade e autoritarismo; estudo observacional em análise fílmica.

Abstract

The object of this study is the mechanisms and sources of power and its locus are the movies ‘The miracle of Cell 7' and 'A Lesson of Love'. This article was elaborated from choices of categorized aphorisms that are configured for Abbagnano (2003) as succinct propositions that express truth, a rule, or a maxim, with the primary objective of investigating the constituent parts of the exercise of power in both films. The choice of these aphorisms was based essentially in Foucault’s studies (1981; 1987; 2006), among other scholars, under the perspectives of filmic analysis (Champoux, 1999; Huczynski & Buchanan, 2004; Napolitano, 2013), as well as under the references about the use of films as a research locus (Denzin, 2004; Flick, von Kardoff & Steinke, 2004; Leite, et. al., 2021). The results pointed out that in all constituent parts of the exercise of power the preponderance of impersonal and arbitrary power was observed. On the other hand, the protagonists of both loci of this observational study in filmic analysis obtained the real results of justice, only through the intervention of the personal power of those who could exercise it freely, since, through the interference of the impersonal and arbitrary power, both received unjust, unreasonable, contestable, vitiated, and even illegitimate arbiteries.

Keywords: constituent of power’s exercise; power; authority and authoritarianism; observational study in film analysis.

INTRODUCTION 

“Power can only be understood in a pluridimensional approach that articulates the psychological, the political, the economic, and the ideological” (Pagès, Bonetti, Gaulejac and Descendre, 2006, p. 208). This article follows this perspective through an observational study in film analysis.

 In Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ Memo, Ova's father, a person with an  intellectual/cognitive disability, is kind, known and loved by everyone in the small village of Turkey. He takes care of Ova with her grandmother’s assistance, Fátima, a resigned, generous, attentive lady. His relationship with his daughter is considered extraordinary and, with his grandmother, respectful and humane. He is the victim of the furious and arbitrary authoritarianism of an army lieutenant colonel who, without any investigations, orders his capture and prison to await the execution of the death penalty. Memo gets help from his cellmates, who learn to understand and admire his willpower by observing him in daily interaction, especially, with his daughter when she visits him.

In Locus 2 'I am Sam', Sam, Lucy's father, a person with an  intellectual/cognitive disability, sensitive, loving, careful and affable, whose relationship with his daughter is harmonious, happy, human and beautiful. He takes care of Lucy with the support of his neighbor Annie and her special friends, all with some intellectual/cognitive or physical disability and they are all willing to help. Sam is a victim of insensitivity/inhumanity by a social worker from the Child Protection Service – Margaret Calgrove – who, without any follow-up in this relationship, files a lawsuit for the loss of custody of the girl, judging her intellectual condition superior to that of her father, therefore, who needs to be in an orphanage, awaiting adoption. Sam has the defense of lawyer Rita, who learns to recognize her power.

Meanwhile, to understand the reality of both protagonists, it is necessary to understand what intellectual/cognitive disability is, introducing what is explained by Souza and Gomes (2015, pp. 107-112): (1) studied scientifically through the Neurosciences “[...] the human brain is a complex organ, responsible for coordinating much information coming from the senses, the immune system and also emotions”. (2) “[...] intellectual deficit is characterized by a functioning of the intellect below the average people”. 

Remembering Galbraith (1986, p. 138), “power surpassed the intellectual reach of the non-participant and, therefore, his capacity to intervene effectively”, justifying himself with such an idea, the basic theoretical structure, as well as the choice of both loci. Moreover, Srour (2005, p. 169) stated that “speaking of power is to speak of a relationship of forces, even if asymmetrical. No agent is deprived of some portion of power. Even those who occupy a subordinate position always have some counterpower [...]”.

This study was developed with the primary objective of investigating the constituent parts of the exercise of power in films, also from the auxiliary actions of mapping these parts in the literature, identifying them in these films, separately, and analyzing common points of such identified parts in each film, thus responding to the question: how are the constituent parts of the exercise of power shown in loci films?

2 BRIEF THEORETICAL FOUNDATION

According to Foucault (1981, p. 298), “[...] the material unit constituted by the arrangement of sounds, syllables and words is not governed by the pure and simple combination of elements of representation. Its principles differ in different languages: grammatical composition has regularities that are not transparent to the meaning of speech”. Thus, before starting this topic, it is necessary to unravel the meanings of words presented recurrently, given that the locus showed actions that denote grammatical relationships between synonyms and antonyms, in dealing with the characters.

Regarding power associated with authority, synonyms are command, control, domain, arbitration and, antonyms, submission, subordination. Concerning the authority, right or power to order, decide, and be obeyed. Abbagnano (2003, p. 98) defined it as “[...] any power to control opinions and individual or collective behavior, to whomever this power belongs”. Authoritarianism is based on the imposition of authority, therefore, autocracy, arbitrariness, despotism, oppression, tyranny, arrogance. When referring to ability, power means ability, competence, faculty, aptitude or, incapacity, incompetence. About force or, aggressive, brute action, violence, it means power, energy, vigor, expressing authority, and dominion. Capacity or capable condition, an individual's physical/mental ability, aptitude and expertise. Linked to the laws, capacity means norm, compliance, conditioning, restriction, fulfillment, subjection, and subordination. 

A brief compilation about power is necessary, including aphorisms or, for Abbagnano (2003), succinct propositions that express a truth, rule or maxim, considered more general. (1) Carvalho e Vieira (2007, p. 3), “the concept of power is so broad that it can be used both to designate social phenomena, related to the action of the social actor or to the social practice of man, as well as physical phenomena [...]”. (2) Srour (2005, p. 167), “[...] power is a social relationship [...]: it articulates agents with different, often conflicting interests [...]”. (3) Bertero (1989, p. 31), “power in different social systems and subsystems has its sources in different agents, who, in turn, establish multiple relationships among themselves”. (4) Carvalho and Vieira (2007, p. 25), “the literature on power within organizations has developed outside of political science, and the consequence has been the uncritical application of the concept of power”. (5) Galbraith (1986, p. 186) and, who can also allow himself to be remembered today, “power is a compulsive theme today, not necessarily because it is exercised more effectively than before, but because infinitely more people now they have access to the reality of power, or more importantly, to the illusion of its exercise”. These five more general aphorisms converge to facilitate the conceptual understanding of power, albeit incipient, about disseminating a single way of using it.

Additionally, stated Rogers (1989, pp.194-195), “there are two opposite ways of using power [...] by self-discipline taking the place of external discipline – personal power [...] arbitrary impersonal power, which does not try to investigate, discover the facts [...]”. From here, other aphorisms cataloged by the objective of this study will serve as a basis for its theoretical and analytical developments, as well as organize, in the form of categorization, this brief foundation and, subsequently, presentation, data analysis and discussion of results.

Related to the instrumentalization of power, the following stand out. (1) Carvalho and Vieira (2007, p. 50), “for Foucault, power is not able to promote and exploit spurious knowledge, but the rational exercise of power tends to make use full of knowledge capable of maximum instrumental effectiveness”. (2) Galbraith (1986, pp. 5-6), there are three names established for the instrumentation of the exercise of power: (a) condign; (b) compensatory; (c) conditioned. (a) “obtain submission by inflicting or threatening suitably adverse consequences; (b), in contrast, earns submission by offering a positive reward – providing something of value to the individual who thus submits [...]; (c) is exercised by changing a conviction, a belief”. (3) Foucault (2006, p.160), “the sole function of power is not to reproduce production relations. The networks of domination and the circuits of exploitation rediscover, support and interfere with each other, but they do not coincide”. Using its three aphorisms, this categorization clarifies the complexity of this instrumentalization, clearly based on the impersonal and arbitrary exercise.

Applicable to the exercise of power: (1) Foucault (2006, p.75), “[...] it would be necessary to know to what extent power is exercised, through which relays and even what often tiny instances, of control, surveillance, prohibitions, coercions. Where there is power, it is exercised [...]”. (2) Galbraith (1986, p. 25), “while condign and compensatory power is visible and objective, conditioned power, in contrast, is subjective”. (3) Foucault (2006, p.183), “power works and is exercised in a network”. (4) Pagès et. al. (1986, p. 98), “power is not located only in the relations between shareholders and workers, between general management and administrators and their subordinates, but is rooted in the daily practice of the organization”. (5) Galbraith (1986, p. 69), “an organization that has access to property and personality in the form of leadership acquires power from that association. Moreover, if it has free access to the whole range of condign, compensatory and conditioned powers, it will greatly increase its strength”. (6) Bertero (2006, p. 38), “power, before which any analysis is always ambivalent, also has the connotation of social and organizational status”. This categorization, through the intervention of its six aphorisms, translates the need to understand the exercise of power itself, perhaps inserting the possibility of understanding personal power.

Associated with mechanisms and sources of power, there are: (1) Foucault (2006, p.141), “in general, the mechanisms of power have never been studied in history. People who held power were studied”. (2) Galbraith (1986, pp. 6-7), three sources of power are exposed. Personality (leadership), “[...] primarily associated with conditioned power – the ability to persuade or generate beliefs”. Property (wealth), whose “main association is with countervailing power”. Organization, “the most important source of power in modern societies, primarily linked to conditioned power [...]” and [...] there are numerous combinations between sources of power and related instruments”. (3) Bertero (2006, p. 35), “power can also be seen as an element endowed with energy: therefore it has the attribute of molding and transforming organizations”. (4) Foucault (1987, p. 174), “[...] the establishments of disciplines multiply, their mechanisms have a certain tendency to deinstitutionalize themselves, to leave the closed fortresses where they functioned and to circulate in a “free” state [...]”. Through its four aphorisms, this categorization invites the need to study it in depth, continuing what had been put on the agenda and, who knows, adding other possibilities.

Concerning the costs of exercising power, the following are placed. (1) Foucault (2006, p. 217), “power, in fact, is not exercised without costing something”. (2) Galbraith (1986, p.13), “[...] power, per se, is not a subject worthy of indignation. The exercise of power, the submission of some to the will of others, is inevitable in modern society [...]”. (3) Carvalho and Vieira (2007, p. 9), “power as control is particularly important for organizational analysis to the extent that, in bureaucratic organizations, control is exercised through regulations, norms and formal communication, elements- power structure key”. (4) Foucault (2006, p.14), “it is not a question of freeing the truth from any system of power – which would be chimerical insofar as truth itself is power – but of detaching the power of truth from the forms of hegemony (social, economic, cultural) within which it functions [...]”. (5) Foucault (1987, pp. 152-153) “the art of punishing, in the regime of disciplinary power, aims neither at expiation, nor even exactly at repression [...] the perpetual penalty that crosses all points and it controls every instant of disciplinary institutions [...] disciplinary devices produced a “norm penalty” [...]”. (6) Galbraith (1986, p. 88), “the dialectic of power is not free from complications and the same goes for the process by which it is regulated and controlled”. (7) Rogers (1989, p.195), “the politics of power and control can be devastating [...]”.Under its seven aphorisms, this categorization reveals the damage caused by the asymmetry arising from the exercise of impersonal and arbitrary power, perhaps instigating reflections.

Regarding the disciplinary elements of the exercise of power, there are. (1) Foucault (2006, p. 107), “discipline is the set of techniques by which power systems will target and result in individuals and their singularities”. (2) Motta (1986, p.76), “disciplinary power is an essential element in the type of organization that bureaucracy as a social group made to prevail under capitalism, initially at the service of the bourgeoisie and, later, at its own service”. (3) Srour (2005, pp. 167-168), “[...] command is the operational face of power, it is a power attributed by its holders to agents who will apply imperative decisions [...]”. (4) Foucault (1987, p. 154), the power of regulation “obliges homogeneity [...] it is understood that the power of the norm works easily within a system of formal equality, because within a homogeneity that is the rule, he introduces, as a useful imperative and result of a measure, all the gradation of individual differences”. (5) Foucault (1987, p.143), the success of disciplinary power “is undoubtedly due to the use of simple instruments: a hierarchical view, normalizing sanctions and their combination in a procedure that is specific to it, the examination”. (6) Foucault (1987, p. 154), the exam “is highly ritualized [...] at the heart of disciplinary processes, it manifests the subjection of those who are perceived as objects and the objectification of those who subject themselves”. (7) Foucault (1987, p. 177), “the “discipline” cannot be identified with an institution or with a type of apparatus, as it is a type of power, a modality for exercising it, which includes a whole set of instruments, procedural techniques, levels of application, targets [...]”. This categorization deciphers, through its seven aphorisms, the discipline emanating from systems external to the individual subjected to it, perhaps waiting for the time to open up spaces for reflection on self-discipline genuinely.

In addition to these five categorizations, pertinent to the prison system, there are. (1) Motta (1986, p.76), “the prison is the bureaucratic organization that took the technology of disciplinary power further, through the organization of space, control of time, surveillance and continuous examination [...]”. (2) Foucault (1987, pp.198-199) states the prison: “is not interrupted, unless after its task is completely completed [...], it gives an almost total power over the detainees [...] its mode of action is the coercion of a total education [...]”. (3) Foucault (1987, p. 214), “this darkest region of the apparatus of justice is the place where the power to punish, which no longer dares to exercise itself with its face uncovered, silently organizes a field of objectivity in which the punishment will be able to work in full light as a therapy and the sentence is inscribed among the discourses of knowledge”. (4) Foucault (1987, p. 251), “in its concentrated or disseminated forms, with its systems of insertion, distribution, surveillance, observation, was the great support, in modern society, of the normalizing power”. (5) Foucault (1987, p.176), “to exercise police power, one must acquire the instrument for permanent, exhaustive, omnipresent surveillance, capable of making everything visible, but conditioned to becoming itself invisible”. Through what has been shown here, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ can be observed and analyzed more marked, delimited and in-depth way.

Related to the custody, guardianship, curatorship and adoption system, (1) Araújo and Aiello (2012, p.752): “maternity and paternity of people with intellectual disabilities can still be the target of prejudices, controversies and value judgments [...] are seen as incapable of raising their children, providing them with inadequate care, abusing, mistreating and/or neglecting them”. It is necessary to ensure the right to maternity/paternity is exercised with minimal adequacy. Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’ can be verified and investigated in a more traditional, demarcated and in-depth way.

Galbraith (1986, p.191) expressed that “power is also spread today by its dialectic [...] Those who once accepted compulsion now organize themselves automatically to put up resistance”. Therefore, it essential to pay attention to the understanding of its intricacy and to the pertinence of its endless self-examination exercise. Furthermore, it is contextualized that the structure of this foundation was planned to facilitate the discussion between the chosen authors for each categorization.

3 METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE STUDY

This study contemplates an observational study in film analysis, characterized by Leite, et al. (2021) and Leite e Leite (2007), inserted in the qualitative approach, through the conceptions of Severino (2016), Loizos (2011), Vergara (2010) and Gil (2009), in which both loci portray sensitive themes, subject to reflection on contextual meanings and attitudes, based on Flick, von Kardorff and Steinke (2004) and Cooper and Schindler (2016).

Regarding the perspectives for the use of films, they are contemplated here once considered as a research strategy, an observational study in film analysis: (1) metaphor, creation of metaphorical images of theories and abstract concepts; (2) meanings, means of giving meaning to theories/concepts, through visual effects, both by Champoux (1999); (3) narrative, way of exploring controversial themes; (4) form of vision, reflections of reality, both by Huczynski and Buchanan (2004); (5) content (Napolitano, 2013), generative text, based on questions and themes raised by the films.

These loci ‘The Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ (2019) and 'I am Sam' (2001) were analyzed based on Leite, et al. (2021). When dealing with the deduction-induction dialectic Pagès, et al. (2006, p.194) argued that: “[...] research is built effectively, on the one hand, through a permanent tension between one or more important theoretical requirements, the need for integration and theoretical systematization, and, on the other hand, the recognition of the impossibility of reaching a perfect systematization and closure”. Under this argumentative basis, the locus was used, supported by a qualitative, descriptive, inductive, interpretive and reflective research strategy, in its methodological aspects.

Considering the research point of view, it is elucidated that the convenience and advantages of using films in this approach were highlighted by Cooper and Schindler (2016), Bauer and Gaskell (2011), Banks (2009), Denzin and Lincoln (2006), Denzin (2004), Huczynski and Buchanan (2004), Flick, von Kardoff and Steinke (2004) and Champoux (1999). Furthermore, for the phenomenon studied, the following are considered: Silva (2010), Vergara (2010), Gil (2009) and Chizzotti (2008). The phenomenological method was based on Triviños (2013), Boava and Macedo (2011), Creswell (2007), Boeira and Vieira (2006), Godoi and Balsani (2006) and Moreira (2004).

These loci provided the opportunity to observe each scene repeatedly and keep the record of each one's data coherent, separately. As for the collection, such data were obtained through indirect and non-participant observation, according to Flick, von Kardorff and Steinke (2004). The use of the observation protocol in film analysis, created by Leite and Leite (2012) was made in line with the defense and reinforcement of protocols by Cooper and Schindler (2016), Yin (2010), Gil (2009), Flick, von Kardoff and Steinke (2004).

The records in this protocol contemplated main characters, focus of observation, filmic, verbal and non-verbal languages, music, colors, environment and ambience, presented in each scene of both films. These points are considered to correspond to the multiple sources of evidence of a study developed from the perspective of research strategy including film as a locus, based on Denzin and Lincoln (2006), Flick, von Kardorff and Steinke (2004), Huczynski and Buchanan (2004).

Regarding the operationalization for analysis, these films, respectively with 132/132 minutes of duration, were watched 3/3 times, entirely and uninterruptedly, aiming at choosing, confirming these loci and reviewing the microanalyses, totaling 1,056 minutes. Concerning only the microanalyses, interruptions/repetitions for observations totaled 792 and 756 minutes, totaling over 1,548 minutes spent on observations/microanalyses. This observational study was operationally developed with a total of 2,604 minutes. Corresponding to the analyses, they were carried out using two strategies: (1) reasoning of the presented theoretical propositions, based on Yin (2010) and (2) Vergara (2010), including the ability of the 'researcher/author' to reflect on the conditions under which the data interpretation process is constructed.

The observational study in film analysis, in Brazil, both in the academy and in the scientific literature, has been made possible by works in recent years, among others, developed by (1) Davel, Vergara and Ghadiri (2007), immersed in the viability of lived experiences in the teaching of Administration, with the use of art. (2) Leite and Leite (2007), focused as an application of this study, portraying an analysis of the behavioral world, in the light of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön's Theory of Action. (3) Matos, Lima and Giesbrecht (2011), highlighted as an observational study in film analysis, focused on power relations that permeate the scientific field. (4) Aoki and Santos (2020), focused on an application of this study, from a metaphor perspective, about the concept of leadership in the organizational context. (5) Milk, et. al. (2021), attentive to awareness and how to use it. In addition, as interpreted by Pagès, et al. (2006, p. 226), “the dependence on the power of science is deeper. It is hidden in his ultimate epistemological postulates, in the guiding hypotheses he makes about the social future [...]”. And inspired by this dependency, the possibilities for expanding observational studies in film analysis in the country remain promising from their diverse perspectives.

4 PRESENTATION, DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Tables 1 and 2 show the characters that are the foci of observation of both loci and their main characteristics, briefly described, aiming to facilitate the reading, without making it essential to watch the films to understand the text.

Table 1 – Focus Characters of Observations of Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’

It should be noted that the scenes selected for analysis/discussions of both films were chosen based on the significance criterion, based on aphorisms and fragments of these scenes, signaled by the initial time’s marking, not arranged, necessarily in chronological order, but consistent with the guiding categorizations, also brought from the brief theoretical foundation.

Table 2 – Focus Characters of Observations of Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’

Agreeing to the instrumentation of power, Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’and, aphorism (1), Carvalho and Vieira (2007, p. 50), that “for Foucault, power is not able to promote and exploit spurious knowledge, but the rational exercise of power tends to make use full of knowledge capable of maximum instrumental effectiveness”.  At 46:42’ Rita read the document received by Sam. It said: “they want you to be evaluated by a psychoanalyst. Today, at three o'clock [...]. You don't have a choice, Sam. Court order”. In Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ and with the aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, pp. 5-6) “[…] the condign power obtain submission by inflicting or threatening suitably adverse consequences [...]”.  At 26:53’ Captain Faruk attacked Memo at the entrance of the prison and was reprimanded by Director Nail, telling him that the responsibility for Memo was now his. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, at 1:11:34’, prosecutor Turner asked Lucy, “isn't it true that deep down you know she needs more than her father can give her?”. Lucy replied, “all it takes is love”.

With with the aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, pp. 5-6), “[…] the compensatory power, in contrast, earns submission by offering a positive reward – providing something of value to the individual who thus submits [...]”. At 1:28:22’, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ Faruk hesitated to investigate the witness, pointed out by Ova and confirmed by Nail, claiming that this would put him in a problematic situation before Aydin, martial law commander, showing a relationship of obedience and focusing on the achieved distinction of ‘captain.’ In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, at 37:38’ Rita says to Sam: “speaking plainly, you can’t afford to hire me”. Sam replied: “[...] has a son, Rita [...] Glenn Harrison Williams. If they took it away from you [...] would you hire the most famous lawyer, you could?”.

Concordant the aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, pp. 5-6), “[…] the conditioned power is exercised by changing a conviction, a belief”, at 1:40:56’, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ Faruk entered the director’s room: “we found him, Nail. He confirmed everything the girl said. Memo is innocent”! In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, at 2:00:43’ Randy looked for Sam, with Lucy in his arms, handing her over and telling him: “she fell asleep in the car [...]. I must apologize to you, Sam, as I had every intention of telling the judge that I could give Lucy all the love she never had. But I can't, because she would be lying [...]”.

In this categorization, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, power was exercised by highlighting the instrumentalization of its exercise in its three names: condign, compensatory and conditioned, Galbraith (1986). Directed to Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, revealing itself concomitant, personal power was present through Rhandy and Sam. In continuity, at 2:00:43’ Randy, heard Sam: “if I tell you a secret, that I can't do it alone, will you tell the judge?” – “No, Sam”. – “[...] because I always wanted Lucy to have a mother [...]. I need help. And not just anyone. And you are the red one in her paintings [...]”.

Congruent with the exercise of power and, with aphorism (1), Foucault (2006, p.75), “[...] it would be necessary to know to what extent power is exercised, through which relays and even what often tiny instances, of control, surveillance, prohibitions, coercions. Where there is power, it is exercised [...]”, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ at 18:41’ Memo was beaten by the guards, coerced into signing his ‘confession’, even saying repeatedly that was not responsible and trying to tell what happened on the rocks where the girl fell. Memo continued to be beaten by Aydin, Seda Altinkaya's father. With the aphorism (3), Foucault (2006, p. 183), “power works and is exercised in a network”, 21:11’ of Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ Memo was taken to prison, in absentia, without the right of defense and being unable to speak with his relatives. The established network – lieutenant colonel/captain/soldiers who led Memo, worked coercively, thus maintaining/exercising power in all these instances. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, at 32:52’, in a hearing, a judge heard: “[...] Mr. Dawson compromises his fatherhood [...] I don't think it it good for the child [...] I order him in custody until the next hearing”. At 1:47:18’, Margaret to Sam and Rita: “It is important that you know that the adoptive family is starting the adoption process. Child Support Services and I agreed to the request”. The sequence of three scenes from Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, simultaneously corroborates aphorisms (1), Foucault (2006, p.75), “[...] it would be necessary to know to what extent power is exercised, through which relays and even what often tiny instances, of control, surveillance, prohibitions, coercions. Where there is power, it is exercised [...]” and (3), Carvalho e Vieira (2007, p.9),  “power as control is particularly important for organizational analysis to the extent that, in bureaucratic organizations, control is exercised through regulations, norms and formal communication, elements-power structure key”. At 44:39’ letter that Memo wrote to Ova was received and torn up by the soldier. At 49:31’ Mine rudely grabbed her arm when she asked for a person in charge and, acrimoniously, she was obliged to hear: “the military are in charge”. At 52:31’guards held Ova, preventing her from talking to Memo through the high prison walls. They were scolded by the director.

In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, with aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, p.25), “while condign and compensatory power is visible and objective, conditioned power, in contrast, is subjective”, at 1:28:44’, Turner, visibly and objectively by condign power, in an attempt to gain Sam's submission by inflicting or threatening suitably adverse consequences asked Sam: “whom do you admire? What father would you like to look like about Lucy?  - "With myself. I want to look like myself.” – Mr. Dawson, has the capacity of a 7-year-old. What makes you think he can be a father? What makes you think he can raise a 7, 10, or 13-year-old? Does he know what that means? That she will be 6 years ahead of you. How are you going to deal with it”? Sam replied, “I've had a lot of time to think about what makes a good father. Perseverance [...] patience, knowing how to listen [...] pretending to be listening, even if you don't want to listen anymore. And love, as she said [...]”. Turner, visibly in the objective perspective of the compensatory power that conquers submission by offering a positive reward and, trying to provide something of value to Sam to make him so submit, continuing, stated: “I admit it is hard to know what to say to Lucy, half the time [...] what does she need to raise her daughter”? Protesting, Rita said: “it’s not a question. It's an attack!”. Turner said: “the question is, if you love your daughter as much as she says she does, and I know she does, don't you think she deserves more? In your heart of hearts, do you not question this?”. Shaken, but without changing his belief about the love for his daughter, in the subjectivity of the conditioned power manipulated by Turner, Sam replied: “[...] I want to stop now! I don't want to go on with this."

In this categorization, power was exercised, in Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, emphasizing control and arbitrariness throughout this functioning network. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, highlighting the aphorism (5), Galbraith (1986, p.69), “an organization that has access to property and personality in the form of leadership acquires power from that association. Moreover, if it has free access to the whole range of condign, compensatory and conditioned powers, it will greatly increase its strength”. Coldness, insensitivity and lack of empathy were observed in the middle of such an established network.

In accordance to mechanisms and sources of power and aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, pp. 6-7): Personality (leadership), “[...] primarily associated with conditioned power – the ability to persuade or generate beliefs”. Property (wealth), whose “main association is with countervailing power”. Organization, “the most important source of power in modern societies, primarily linked to conditioned power [...]” and [...] there are numerous combinations between sources of power and related instruments”, in Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, at 26:35’, Nail called Faruk by name, he asked for respect, reinforcing being a captain. With the aphorism (4) Foucault (1987, p.174), “[...] the establishments of disciplines multiply, their mechanisms have a certain tendency to deinstitutionalize themselves, to leave the closed fortresses where they functioned and to circulate in a “free” state [ ...]”. Lócus 1, 1:04:10' Askorozlu, after continuous observations of Memo's natural behaviors, asked: “who among us is a father as good as he is and has so much conscientious of fatherhood”? At 1:05:50’, Nail received the order to execute Memo, 1:28:22’ discovered the hiding place of the witness reported by Ova, and that he was a deserting soldier. He told the captain: “we have to find the deserter and listen to him”.

At 1:38:01’ mine was in Nail's room. They prepared gallows in the courtyard. Nail said: “They are in a hurry. They want to finish before the elections. Objections, petitions... nobody cares. They will execute Memo”. Upon learning that the defector was dead at 1:44:09’, Hafiz exclaimed: “he is obsessed with Memo”. Askorozlu exploded: “Can’t we do anything?”. Yusuf, at 1:57:45’ said goodbye to his companions, as he had decided to be hanged instead of Memo. To operationalize this decision, it had the support of Askorozlu, as a messenger of the decision, two agents, Nail and Faruk. In the sequence of three scenes of Locus 2, there are dialogues between Sam and Lucy: at 14:10’ – “Dad, did God want you to be like this or was it an accident? [...] You're different [...]. You're not like the other parents [...]” – “Sorry [...]”. – “Do not apologize. I’m lucky. No other parent comes to the park”. At 27:05’, “[...] read the word [...] I can do this because I'm your father!” – “I'm stupid”. – “You are not [...] because you can read that word”. – “I don’t want to read if you can’t”. – “[...] Hearing you read makes me happy”. At 44:28’ – “never give up your dreams, Lucy". – “I don’t want any other father than you”. At Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, with aphorism (2), Galbraith (1986, pp. 6-7): Personality (leadership), “[...] primarily associated with conditioned power – the ability to persuade or generate beliefs”. Property (wealth), whose “main association is with countervailing power”. Organization, “the most important source of power in modern societies, primarily linked to conditioned power [...]” and [...] there are numerous combinations between sources of power and related instruments”, at 1:04:10', Turner asked Dr. Back: “where did you live while studying?” – “I lived with my mother’s parents”. – “[...] Can you say that the grandparents had normal intelligence?” – “Yes”. – “Then we can say that they were really responsible for you? [...]” – “Your Honor, record that my mother raised me”.

In this categorization, mechanisms and sources of power were shown in Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ in an expanded way, underlining the deinstitutionalization of these mechanisms and revealing other sources. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, standing out, personal power manifested itself, both through Sam and Lucy, despite the impersonal and arbitrary power prevailing.

In consonance the costs of exercising power and, in aphorism (1), Foucault (2006, p.217), “power, in fact, is not exercised without costing something”, the question posed here is: at whom does it cost? In two scenes from Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell N º.7’, the answer was answered: at 27:49’ Nail said to Memo: “if you make a wrong move, I’ll kill you myself”. Then he asked the guards for secrecy, trying to preserve Memo's life in prison; Memo was woken up and beaten at 34:09’ by his cellmates, as someone had revealed the secret to Askorozlu. At Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, 1:47:35’ Rita stated: “Sam, there’s an option we've never talked about. I know what happened the last time you testified”. – “It wasn’t very pleasant [...]”. – “There is the possibility of obtaining several visits that it would almost be equivalent to sharing custody” [...]”. In aphorism (4), Foucault (2006, p.14),“it is not a question of freeing the truth from any system of power – which would be chimerical insofar as truth itself is power – but of detaching the power of truth from the forms of hegemony (social, economic, cultural) within which it functions [...]”. In Locus1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, at 48:10’: “the court made the decision. According to testimonies and evidence gathered, it is decided that the defendant, Mehemet Koyuncu, found guilty of the 1st-degree murder of Seda Altinkaya, will be sentenced to death, following paragraphs 3 and 4 of article 450 of the Turkish penal code.” In aphorism (5), Foucault (1987, p. 153), “the art of punishing, in the regime of disciplinary power, aims neither at expiation, nor even exactly at repression [...] the perpetual penalty that crosses all points and it controls every instant of disciplinary institutions [...] disciplinary devices produced a “norm penalty” [...]”. At 1:18:10’ Nail discovers the inmates’ plan for Ova to visit her father, before the execution. When assigning the punishment, 1:23:41’, Askorozlu asked him: “can't you see? You asked where she is and he showed you [...]”. Nail said, “I have a report from the board saying this man is sane!” Askorozlu snapped, “a martial law commander put you here! Of course it says that [...]. We believe Memo is innocent”. Nail countered: “the dead girl is the commander’s daughter. He was found next to her, covered in blood [...]”. Askorozlu said: “the girl mentioned a witness. Talk to her. Finding such a witness will save Memo [...] Nail, you are a good man. What do you have to lose? What if she is telling the truth”? At 1:25:51’, Nail said: “Ova, I’ll take you home [...] tell me about the witness on the way”.

In aphorism (7), Rogers (1989, p.195), “the politics of power and control can be devastating [...]”. In Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, at 1:41:39’ three guards brought the deserting soldier to meet Aydin, who ordered: “take off the handcuffs [...] You can go [...]”. He asked him: “Did you witness the incident? [...] What you know can save the madman [...]”. The deserter began to narrate: “The children were playing in the lake, sir. The shepherd appeared. Everyone left except the girl. She kept playing with him [...]”. Aydin stubbed out his cigarette, walked back, drew his gun and shot the defector in the head. When the guards appeared, he told them: “He tried to run away”. Clearly, he preferred to execute him rather than admit Memo's innocence.

With the aphorism (6), Galbraith (1986, p. 88), “the dialectic of power is not free from complications and the same goes for the process by which it is regulated and controlled”. At 1:03:09’, Locus2 ‘I am Sam’, under the thesis that it is possible for fathers/mothers with intellectual/cognitive disabilities to exercise fatherhood/motherhood, Rita asked: “Dr. Blake, what kept you 12 years in medical school”? – “My mother's faith in me [...] – Do you know what her IQ was?” – “Below level. Around 70. – “So your mother, who had a 9-year-old mentality, predicted you would be a great doctor”. – “Yea. [..] she taught things that teachers cannot. Patience and compassion”. Rita interrogated Annie at 1:13:28’, – “During the time she lived with them, did she question Sam’s status as a father”? – “Never. Lucy is strong. She empathizes with all kinds of people. They think she’s smart despite him, but it’s because of him”. – “Do you mean to say that you don't care about Lucy's future?” – “I do not care! Taking Lucy away from her father will create a void inside her. I fear she will spend the rest of her life trying to fill that void”.

In this categorization, Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, the costs of exercising power were channeled directly to Memo and indirectly to the deserter, arbitrarily submitted to Aydin's devastating power/control. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, there is evidence of the impact of the longevity of the costs of this exercise, for Sam and Lucy, by the institutions.

Proportional to the disciplinary elements of the exercise of power, with the aphorism, (3) Srour (2005, pp.167-168), “[...] command is the operational face of power, it is a power attributed by its holders to agents who will apply imperative decisions [...]”. Locus1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’ is: 35:49’ Aydin ordered Faruk to be silent, in an attempt to enforce his orders regarding Memo's arrest, questioning him and later stating: “would I send him there if I wanted to kill him that way? I will execute him to make him an example. Everyone will read in the newspaper what happened to the man who did this to my daughter [...]”; 38:06’ Faruk said to the detainees: “he is a lieutenant colonel and, for you, he is God”. In aphorism (7), Foucault (1987, p.177), “the “discipline” cannot be identified with an institution or with a type of apparatus, as it is a type of power, a modality for exercising it, which includes a whole set of instruments, procedural techniques, levels of application, targets [...]”. Memo, noticing the gallows in the courtyard, at 1:47:09’ said: “you shouldn’t separate children [...] I don’t want to become an angel [...]. Who will take care of Ova”? Surprising the director and teacher, he said: “I’m going to be executed”. Memo said goodbye to his companions at 1:50:23’, while the director and two agents were waiting for him. Mine and Ova were on the balcony at 1:53:48’. Faruk, Nail and a soldier arrived. Nail handed something to Ova emotionally, telling her, “the man who sent this... your father sent you too”. Nail gathered the agents together at 2:02:32’ to announce that Yusuf Ağa “fled during last night's chaos. Start a search, immediately [...]”. On the boat, at 2:05:01’, with Faruk and Memo, Nail asked Ova: – “Where did you come from?” – “From Turkey”. “Because?” – “To escape police violence”. “Who is he?” – “Daddy”. “He looks funny, what's wrong?” – “The soldiers did it”. – “Good girl”! In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, with the aphorism (1), Foucault (2006, p.107), “discipline is the set of techniques by which power systems will target and result in individuals and their singularities”, at 1:40:35’ Rita recalled: “[...] it was one of the judge's conditions, to earn more money, to obtain privacy and comfort for Lucy [...]. Sam, you can have Lucy back. The court is in favor of it, but you have to fight for it” – “I tried so hard”. In the aphorism (4) about the power of regulation, Foucault (1987, p.154), “compels homogeneity [...] it is understood that the power of the norm works easily within a system of formal equality, because within a homogeneity that is the rule, it introduces, as a useful imperative and result of a measure, the whole gradation of individual differences”. Authoritatively Turner imposed this power on Sam.

In this categorization, in Locus 1 ‘Miracle in Cell Nº.7’, disciplinary elements of power were exposed not only by Aydin's authoritarianism but also by the rise of the sense of justice, it can be said that Srour's assertion (2005, p.169) was tested. In Locus 2 ‘I am Sam’, the exploration of the premise of dictionaries stands out, that ‘having power is not the same as having authority. That authority showed itself in self-discipline, every time Lucy ran away to be with Sam, immediately taking her back to the prospective adoptive parents.

Remembering Pagès, et. al. (2006, p. 208), “power can only be understood in a pluridimensional approach that articulates the psychological, the political, the economic and the ideological”. It is considered that in both locus films the alienation of this approach indicated a tonic in the exercise of represented power. Therefore, it becomes relevant to underline what had been defended by Rogers (1989, pp. 194-195), “there are two opposite ways of using power [...] by self-discipline taking the place of external discipline – personal power [...] by the exercise of arbitrary impersonal power, which does not try to investigate, discover the facts [...]”. Empirically, personal power was highlighted here and undoubtedly resides in the core of every human being, therefore, liable to be scrutinized and, desirably researched, as studies about impersonal and arbitrary power continue to advance.

5 FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

Emphasizing, this study aimed to investigate the constituent parts of the exercise of power, entering its mechanisms and sources, in both loc, pointing out at its core power itself, authority and authoritarianism.

In all constituent parts of the exercise of power, the preponderance of impersonal and arbitrary power was observed. From another point of view, the protagonists of both loci obtained accurate results of justice, only through the intervention of the personal power of those who could freely exercise it, since, due to the interference of impersonal and arbitrary power, both received unfair, unreasonable, arbitrary decisions. contestable, vitiated and even illegitimate.

The following contributions stand out, amid limitations and new possibilities: (1) for the academy, the possibility of revitalizing the teaching-learning process and research in the field of Administration, as well as the importance of resuming the theoretical study about the pluridimensional approach to power and personal power, based on the legacies left by Foucault and Rogers. (2) For organizations, the possibility of generating visibility about the importance of recognizing this phenomenon in their daily lives. (3) For society, researchers at different levels, to be able to create investigative possibilities about power, through observational studies in film analysis, which may benefit public and private institutions in dealing with this object. It reveals, therefore, agenda space for future research.

REFERENCES

Abbagnano, N. (2003). Dicionário de filosofia. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

Aoki, V. C. G. & Santos, S. S. S. (2020). Film analysis in management: a journey through the metaphors of the concept of leadership. Revista de Gestão, 27(2), 119-134. Recuperado em 27.05.2022 de http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/REGE-08-2018-0086.

Araújo, G. M. S. & Aiello, A. L. R. (2012). Rede social de apoio de mães com deficiência intelectual. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 26(4), 752-761. Disponível em www.scielo.br/prc Acesso em 06.06.2022.

Banks, M. (2009). Dados visuais para pesquisa qualitativa. Porto Alegre: Artmed.

Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (2011). Pesquisa qualitativa com texto, imagem e som: um manual prático. Petrópolis, RJ: Vozes.

Bertero, C. O. (1989). Cultura organizacional e instrumentalização do poder. In Fleury, M. T. L. & Fisher, R. M. (Coords.). Cultura e poder nas organizações, (29-44). São Paulo: Atlas.

Boava, D. L. T., & Macedo, F. M. F. (2011). Contribuições da fenomenologia para os estudos organizacionais. Rio de Janeiro: Cadernos EBAPE.BR, (9) especial, artigo 2, 478-487.

Boeira, S. L., & Vieira, P. F. (2006). Estudos organizacionais: dilemas paradigmáticos e abertura interdisciplinar. In Godoi, C. K., Bandeira-De-Melo, R. & Silva, A. B. (Orgs.). Pesquisa qualitativa em estudos organizacionais - paradigmas, estratégias e métodos, (17-47). São Paulo: Saraiva.

Çağatay, C. & Turan, S. (Produtores) & Öztekin, M. A. (Diretor). (2019). Koğuştaki Mucize (Milagre na Cela 7). Turquia: Tele Cine Play.

Carvalho, C. A. & Vieira, M. M. F. (2007). O poder nas organizações. (Coleção Debates em Administração). São Paulo: Thomson Learning.

Champoux, J. E. (1999). Film as a teaching resource. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8(2), 206-217.

Chizzotti, A. (2008). Pesquisa qualitativa em ciências humanas e sociais. Petrópolis: Vozes.

Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2016). Métodos de pesquisa em Administração. Porto Alegre: Bookman.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. California. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Davel, E., Vergara, S. C. & Ghadiri, D. P. (2007). Concluindo – a arte no ensino de Administração e administração com arte. In Davel, E., Vergara, S. C. & Ghadiri, D. P. (Orgs.). Administração com arte: experiências vividas de ensino-aprendizagem, (pp.287-290). São Paulo: Atlas.

Denzin, N. K. (2004). Reading film: using films and videos as empirical social science material. In: Flick, U., von Kardorff, E. & Steinke, I. A companion to qualitative research, (pp.237-242). California: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2006). O planejamento da pesquisa qualitativa: teorias e abordagens. Porto Alegre: Artmed.

Flick, U., von Kardoff, E., & Steinke, I. (2004). What is qualitative research? An introduction to the field. In: Flick, U., von Kardoff, E., & Steinke, I. A companion to qualitative research, (pp.3-11). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Foucault, M. A. (1981). As palavras e as coisas: uma arqueologia das ciências humanas. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

Foucault, M. A. (1987). Vigiar e punir: história da violência na prisão. Petrópolis: Vozes.

Foucault, M. A. (2006). Microfísica do poder. Rio de Janeiro: Edições Graal.

Galbraith, J. K. (1986). Anatomia do poder. São Paulo: Pioneira.

Gil, A. C. (2009). Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa social. São Paulo: Atlas.

Godoi, C. K., & Balsini, C. P. V. (2006). A pesquisa qualitativa nos estudos organizacionais brasileiros. In Godoi, C. K., Bandeira-De-Melo, R. & Silva, A. B. (Orgs.). Pesquisa qualitativa em estudos organizacionais - paradigmas, estratégias e métodos, (pp.89-107). São Paulo: Saraiva.

Huczynski, A. & Buchanan, D. (2004). Theory from fiction: a narrative process perspective on the pedagogical use of feature film. Journal of Management Education, 28(6), 707-726.

Leite, N. R. P., Leite F. P. (2012). Protocolo de observações para o processo de coleta e análise de dados oriundos de filmes comerciais, sob a égide dos estudos observacionais no processo de ensino-aprendizagem e pesquisa em Administração. Produção Técnica/Processos ou Técnicas.

Leite, N. R. P., Leite F. P., Nishimura, A. T., Silva, M. A. B. & Santos, E. G. (2021). Análise fílmica em pesquisas em Administração: sabendo o porquê e como utilizá-la. Revista Gestão & Regionalidade - G&R, 37(112), 337-350. ISSN 2176-5308.

Leite, N. R. P. & Leite F. P. (2007). Um estudo observacional do filme ‘Denise está Chamando’ à luz da Teoria de Ação de Chris Argyris e Donald Schön. Revista de Gestão - REGE USP, (Edição Especial), 77-91.

Loizos, P. (2011). Vídeo, filme e fotografias como documentos de pesquisa. In Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. Pesquisa Qualitativa com texto, imagem e som: um manual prático, (pp.137-155). Rio de Janeiro: Vozes.

Matos, F. R. N., Lima, A. C., & Giesbrecht, C. M. (2011). Estudo observacional das relações de poder no filme ‘O Óleo de Lorenzo’. Cadernos EBAPE.BR, 9(2), artigo 11, 438-449.

Moreira, D. A. (2004). Pesquisa em Administração: origens, usos e variantes do método fenomenológico. Revista de Administração e Inovação - RAI, 1(1), 5-19.

Motta, F. C. P. (1986). Organização e poder: empresa, estado e escola. São Paulo: Atlas.

Napolitano, M. (2013). Como usar o cinema na sala de aula. São Paulo: Contexto.

Nelson, J., Herskovitz, M. & Zwick, E. (Produtores) & Nelson, J. (Diretora). (2001). I Am Sam (Uma Lição de Amor). Estados Unidos: New Line Cinema.

Pagès, M., Bonetti, M., Gaulejac, V. & Descendre, D. (2006). O poder das organizações. São Paulo: Atlas.

Rogers, C. R. (1989). Sobre o poder pessoal. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.

Severino, A. J. (2016). Metodologia do trabalho científico. São Paulo: Cortez.

Silva, A. B. (2010). A fenomenologia como método de pesquisa em estudos organizacionais. In Godoi, C. K., Bandeira-de-Melo, R., & Silva, A. B. (Orgs.). Pesquisa qualitativa em estudos organizacionais - paradigmas, estratégias e métodos, (pp.267-297). São Paulo: Saraiva.

Srour, R. H. (2005). Poder, cultura e ética nas organizações: o desafio das formas de gestão. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.

Souza, M. C. & Gomes, C. (2015). Neurociência e o déficit intelectual: aportes para a ação pedagógica. Revista da Psicopedagogia, 32(97), 104-114. Recuperado em 27.05.2022 de http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0103-84862015000100011.

Triviños, A. N. S. (2013). Introdução à pesquisa em Ciências Sociais. São Paulo: Atlas.

Vergara, S. C. (2010). Projetos e relatórios de pesquisa em Administração. São Paulo: Atlas.

Yin, R. (2010). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. São Paulo: Bookman.