“Two versions of the shift from centralized, authoritarian control of prisons, by staff and prisoners, to a more diffuse pattern of interaction, can be discerned. First, Stastny and Tyrnauer's case study of Walla Walla describes the replacement of the extreme rigidity of the former authoritarian pattern of staff-inmate relations by a pluralism of staff and prisoner groupings, many of the latter autonomous, such as ethnic clubs, status clubs, community and self-help groups, religious or semi-religious organizations and special interest clubs, reflecting a more open and interactive prison environment (Stastny and Tyrnauer, 1982, p. 157). They argue that Korn and McCorkle were mistaken to imply that handing over power to prisoners would simply generate 'patterns of internal group coercion more punitive, more rigid, and incomparably more discriminatory' (Korn and McCorkle, 1959, p. 525). On the contrary, they adopt Irwin's opinion that the view of prisons as run by corrupt oligarchies of staff and prisoners is unrealistic. Most prisoners 'bring their "pre-prison orientations" with them and are resistant to prisonization' (Stastny and Tyrnauer, 1982, p. 157).” - Robert Adams, Prison Riots in Britain and the United States. Second Edition. Consultant Editor: Jo Campling. London: MacMillan, 1994. p. 90.
