Dan Smith writes:
>To put it another way, *maybe* Deleuze's book on Foucault isn't Deleuze
>finally getting Foucault "right" (ie, getting away from a reductive reading
>of Foucault)
>but rather Deleuze enveloping and deploying yet another thinker within
>his own "image of thought." Any comments you have would be appreciated.
I agree with you, but I don't see this for cause of alarm. There is no
purely neutral objective reading of Foucault which dispenses with the
reader's politico-historical position. It would be a mistake to wish Deleuze
could give an innocent reading of Foucault without his own "image of
thought". Deleuze can't step outside of his position into some ahistorical
vantage point and describe Foucault for us perfectly and completely - no one
can do that. Hence the reason for the multiple readings and appropriations
that Foucault's texts take after their dissemnination (see Death of the
Author).
-JMG
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
http://www.hotmail.com
