In Quiet Rage: The Stanford Prison Study, one can view the distribution of power through the formation of an institution and its associated habits.  These aspects combine to illustrate the defining paradox of institutions: man can make a world and then experience that world as something he did not create.  The institution in this case is a mock prison constructed by Dr. Zimbardo in the basement of a Stanford University psychology building.
    Power, as defined in the American Heritage College Dictionary 3rd edition, is “a person, group, or nation having great influence or control over others.”  There are three types of power relationships: symmetrical; parallel; and complementary.  Symmetrical relationships are those in which both parties have equal power in all areas of interaction.  The prisoners in the Stanford study definitely did not have the same amount of power as the guards, so they did not have a symmetrical power relationship.  Neither did they have a parallel relationship, in which each party has power in a different area.  The guards obviously had power over their prisoners, as evidenced in their ability to put prisoners in the hole and remove their beds, among other things.  One calls this type of stilted power relationship complementary.
    The guards exerted their power in many ways.  The most obvious was their ability to take away the prisoners’ given names.  According to Julia Wood in Communication Theories in Action 2nd edition, the power to name “is equivalent to the power to construct reality” (Wood 277).  By the third day of the study, the prisoners did not refer to themselves by their given names.  They called each other by their numbers instead.  Indeed, when Dr. Zimbardo and the second rebellious prisoner discussed  the option of leaving the study, Dr. Zimbardo had to forcibly remind him of his name and identity.  This paper will examine more examples of this complementary power relationship during the analysis of the prison as an institution with habits.
    Berger and Luckman in “Society and Institutions as Human Products” propose that social order and stability are ongoing productions and that humans have a biologically rooted need for order.  Therefore, they insist, people come together to create institutions.  Institutions are “cultures that are produced and reproduced through communication activities among members” (Wood 234), and they naturally support a hierarchy.  In other words, an institution is a group of people that both create and are defined by their communication with other members of the group. There are four types of communication involved in institutional culture: vocabulary, stories, rites, and rituals.  The vocabulary of an institution reflects its members’ norms and ideologies.  In the case of the Stanford Prison study, the guards (who held the power) created the vocabulary.  One example is the use of numbers in place of names discussed earlier.  The prisoners also acknowledged the guards’ power by referring to them as “sir”.  They did rebel with this same type of communication, however.  By calling the cruelest guard “John Wayne,” they showed their disapproval of his harsh treatment, which reflects their experiences as prisoners.  The prisoners created their own vocabulary to reflect their role as inferior captives.  The guards' introduction of words that demonstrated their power reinforced this idea.  The vocabulary of the prison definitely reflected the experiences of its members!
    Stories, the second type of communication within institutions, create meaning.  There are three types of stories, and Quiet Rage contains examples of each.  Corporate stories reflect the institutions’ viewpoints and ideals.  The overlying corporate story in the Stanford Prison Study was the creation of the prison.  The prisoners brought Dr. Zimbardo’s story to life by believing they were in a real prison, that the police really arrested them, and that they needed to seek the help of legal council.  The families of the prisoners also accepted this story-- they ignored their sons’ descriptions of life in the prison and tried to work through the prison system to ensure better conditions.
    Personal stories reveal how a person sees himself.  The creation of personal stories helped the prisoners deal (or refuse to deal) with prison life.  The first prisoner to leave the study led himself to believe the prison was driving him crazy.  He acted on this fantasy, and after a day or so, proceeded to believe it.  His personal story enabled him to leave the study.  The prisoner brought in after the start of the study created a story of resistance.  He believed that by not eating his sausages, he would retain his identity.  Interestingly enough, while talking of this incident afterward, this prisoner insisted his identity at the time was his number!
    The last type of story is the collegial story.  This is a story whose purpose is to account for other members of an institution.  During the first revolt, the prisoners banded together through hearing that other prisoners barricaded their door and removed their caps.  This and similar stories of noncompliance enabled the prisoners to feel they were part of a coherent group.  Indeed, near the beginning of the study the good prisoners refused their preferential treatment to show their solidarity with their fellow prisoners.  This camaraderie eventually changed into a cohesive unit of submission, with the prisoners refusing to give up their blankets to get the new prisoner out of the hole.  Stories played an integral role in the creation of the prison as an institution.  The corporate story created the prison, the personal stories involved the prisoners more intimately, and the collegial stories encouraged the prisoners’ cohesion.
    The third type of communication in an institution involves rites.  These are dramatic one time events that  demonstrate an institution’s values.  The most obvious rite involved in the Stanford Prison Study was that of the initial admission process.  The guards stripped the prisoners naked, sprayed them off and then gave them humiliating gowns, caps and rubber shoes.  This event occurred only once, and it showed the incoming prisoner how the guards would treat him while in the prison.  This ritual’s purpose was to utterly humiliate and dehumanize the prisoners so as to create a feeling of powerlessness and helplessness.  By initiating the prisoners in this manner, the guards introduced the institution of the prison and the prisoners' role in it.
    Rituals, the fourth type of institutional communication, are repeated performances that express the power hierarchy through role definition.  A ritual is an expected event-- a given that is inconceivable to challenge.  The most obvious ritual in Quiet Rage was that of the count.  At any time of day or night the guards roused the prisoners and forced them out of their cells to be counted.  This ritual usually involved a number of physical exercises, such as push-ups and sit-ups, as well as occasional play acting (e.g., Frankenstien and his bride).  In these repeated interactions, the guards instructed the prisoners to perform humiliating acts and the prisoners learned to obey.  Only at first did the prisoners rebel.  After a day or so in the prison, they accepted this embarrassment as part of the routine of life in the study.  The guards perpetuated this ritual to make sure the prisoners knew their inferior role in the prison institution.  The use of vocabulary, stories, rites and rituals in the Stanford Prison Study created a real institution that had definite power hierarchies.
    Related to rituals is the formation of habits.  Habits are a direct consequence of being involved in an institution, and they help create it.  They are a type of ritual that produces order and cuts down the number of decisions one has to make by narrowing one’s range of choices.  The Stanford Prison Study revolved around creating and maintaining certain habits.  The guards took up the habit of punishing the prisoners without cause, and most of the prisoners acquired the habit of avoiding eye contact and generally acting submissive towards the guards.  After the establishment of these patterns, the guards no longer questioned the maltreatment of the prisoners and the prisoners accepted their abuse.  These habits eliminated all possibility of escaping from the roles assigned to those in the study, thereby reinforcing the prison institution.
    The habits involved in this study cover all areas previously discussed in this paper.  They show the complementary power relationship between the guards and prisoners and each type of communication within an institution (the only exception is the one-time rite).    These are all habits in that they narrow one’s options, create order and are repeated.  Berger and Luckman in “Society and Institutions as Human Products” argue “institutionalization occurs whenever there is a reciprocal typification of habitualized actions by types of actors” (420).  Dr. Zimbardo hired the guards and prisoners as “actors” to participate in a psychology study, but their habits helped to create a real institution.  Another interesting point shown in Berger and Luckman’s statement is that habits have a reciprocal influence.  That is, the guards’ power enforcing habits encouraged the prisoners’ submissive ones.  The prisoners’ abasement then aroused the guards to show more power, and the cycle continued.  Reciprocal habits therefore contribute to the overall power hierarchy within this institution.
    After watching Quiet Rage, one cannot help wondering how the subjects in the study knowingly created their prison, yet were unable to mentally escape from it.  This is a perfect example of the paradox discussed by Berger and Luckman.  They purport that “man is capable of producing a world he then experiences as something other than a human product” (422).  Dr. Zimbardo even acknowledged he had become so wrapped up in the study he did not realize he should, or could, stop it.  One might argue it did not occur to him that he could prematurely end the study (his creation)  until one of his graduate students mentioned it.  The fact that this paradox occurred during the Stanford Prison study proves that the prison became a real institution for those involved.  The subjects could have faked the types of institutional communication, power hierarchy and habits seen during the study.  However, it is impossible to act out the idea that institutions are products of human activity and the reality where that activity occurs.  The people involved in the study (except the graduate student) created the prison and then failed to recognize it was their creation.  This proves the prison was an institution.
    In Quiet Rage: The Stanford Prison Study, a complementary power relationship, institutional forms of communication and reciprocal habits created an institution.  The study adheres to the paradox of man creating a world that he then views as pre-existing him.  Therefore, the prison must have been a real institution.  Although this study is by today’s standards unethical and even cruel, it teaches much about the creation and maintenance of an institution.  This scholar is thankful that Dr. Zimbardo carried out this study, for it provides interesting insights to many different areas of study within and beyond communication.