Litigating the Carceral Soundscape

Sound has always been a material issue in prisons, whether it be connection with sonic surveillance, the “silent cell,” or insistence of sound (excessive noise, counter-carceral music making). This article asks: How and when does carceral soundscape become litigable issue? Our opens discussion challenges involved attempting to study ambiance penitentiary through medium written documents proposes methodology “sensing between lines” by way solution. It goes on analyze “moral architecture” at foundation modern prison an effort excavate dimensions incarceration context system that was designed silence its core. Solitude were presumed have “emancipatory effect” prisoner attuning subject “the inner voice conscience” forced withdrawal from distractions senses. The next part considers ways that, despite attempts manage sound, resisted these forms control. presents solitary confinement as crucial site explore which enforced silence, organizing principle, undergone several contortions gave rise alternative rationales such “structured intervention,” yet persisted. then explores how this enduring figured contemporary case law, alongside other acoustic violence, excessive noise resistance conditions inmates (e.g., rapping beat rap). While some cases describe experience one unbearable others without respite. research highlights remained important discipline contestation reverberates being appreciated adequately courts. concludes observations about probing role logic can complement litigation efforts question logics.