From: atefeh oliai <atefeho@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 20:35:47 -0600
Preface on monday the 18 is good. I just think a chapter a week is to much
for my schedule now
At 02:14 AM 3/15/96, you wrote:
>Received: from jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU by wigate.nic.wisc.edu;
> Fri, 15 Mar 96 02:14 CDT
>Received: (from daemon@localhost) by jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
> (8.7.1/8.6.6) id BAA19026 for foucault-outgoing;
> Fri, 15 Mar 1996 01:24:52 -0500
>Received: from orion.sfsu.edu (dallums@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [184.108.40.206])
> by jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU (8.7.1/8.6.6)
> with ESMTP id BAA111181 for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Fri, 15 Mar 1996 01:24:47 -0500
>Received: (from dallums@localhost) by orion.sfsu.edu (8.7.1/8.7.1)
> id WAA27029; Thu, 14 Mar 1996 22:24:44 -0800 (PST)
>Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 22:24:41 -0800 (PST)
>From: DERRICK ALLUMS <dallums@xxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: foucault roundtable
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> I am rather excited about this roundtable. I think this is the
>only way books and ideas were meant to be experienced, in contact with
>other, even if the contact is virtual...
> On the planning of the thing, let me say first off that I agree
>with Christopher that we should err on the side of reading too slowly as
>opposed to going too quickly. Not only can the quality of the discussion
>suffer from superficiality but people can get overwhelmed. I, for one,
>work and quite a lot. So, I'll definitely have to make time for this; I
>don't want to make it a chore, however.
> That said, I think Gina's idea of Monday check-ins in great.
>That is, we can set Monday as the day by which the chapter in question
>should have been read. In other words, discussion of the chapter will
>begin on that day. Can we agree to discuss the work as though we were
>reading it for the first time? I mean, can we agree not to discuss
>chapters that remain to be read here?
> I also like Gina's idea for providing subject headings. Only I
>have one suggestion to make: could we simply use the title of the chapter
>instead of any number system? The titles of the English text follow
>those of the French very closely and so there should not be any language
>barriers there. So, we would simply write for the first reading:
>"preface" as the subject heading. Here are my suggestions for the rest
>chapter 1: "meninas"
>chapter 2: "prose"
>chapter 3: "representing" or "representer" (this is the French; very close)
>chapter 4: "speaking" or "parler" (not so close but very familiar word)
>chapter 5: "classifying" or "classer"
>chapter 6: "exchanging" or "echanger"
>chapter 7: "limits" or "limites"
>chapter 8: "language" (because identical to French) "language"
>chapter 9: "doubles" (again, identical to French)
>chapter 10: "human sciences" or "sciences humaines"
> I would very much like that we start with the prefaces. In the English
>edition there are two, only one in the French. But the French text of
>the English preface is text #72 of _dits et ecrits_. I send it in its
>entirety in another message.
> Also, I think we should cut up the longer chapters. There we
>could simply indicate the section numbers, which are the same in the
>French and English in the subject headings. ex:" classifying i-iv"
> Finally (and I realize this message is already too long) on the
>matter of language, I think we should try to use English where no undue
>burden is borne by so doing. If it is too hard for someone to express an
>idea in English then please do not hesitate to list it in French and I
>will try to translate it. Similarly, if someone does not understand an
>English message, then let me know and I will translate it. This is only
>on a case by case basis; I will not translate everything. I will assume
>that people are following unless notified to the contrary.
> So, unless people strongly disagree, we will start with a
>discussion of the prefaces on Monday, March 18 and we will list as
>subject heading "preface."
>Bursting with excitement,