FOUCAULT.INFO

Archive of Foucault-L +11.000 messages


 

Foucault-L mail-list

Re: archaeology was Bad Writing?


List Information Page | search this list | RSS Feed    - switch to: Subject Directory | Date Directory | Author Directory -

 
<< Thread Prev < Date Prev ^ date index+… ^ thread index+… Date Next > Thread Next >>
message ## 05194…

 
+  From: Fmacke4sph@xxxxxxx
+  Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 00:08:38 EST
Clare O'Farrell writes

"I think Raymond Roussel would have to be Foucault's least read book
(with good reason I might add)!!"

It's interesting. We each have our personal favorites (and least favorites)
in everything. Death and the Labyrinth: The World of Raymond Roussel was
highly recommended to me by my dissertation director ten years when I was also
reading Archaeology. He had studied with Dreyfus at Berkeley (and some with
Foucault during his last visit to California). He remarked that I would find
Death and the Labyrinth helpful as an example of the sort of poststructuralist
semiology (for lack of a better term) that Foucault was proposing in
Archaeology. I liked it and, I believe, saw what was going on. Maybe it
helped that my director was walking me through both. Maybe I was influenced
tremendously by his opinion. (I will of course vehemently deny both
accusations to my biographer.)

Just curious, Clare (and others on the list): What is your feeling about the
Roussel book?

Sincerely,
Frank

Previous by Thread: Re: archaeology was Bad Writing?
Next by Thread: Re: archaeology was Bad Writing?
Partial thread listing: