>Interesting that people keep mentioning Marx when answering my mails and
>general hostility towards the canon. This is ironic when we consdier the
>debt F owes to his work and other Western Marxists (Althusser etc).
But F's analysis of power completely blows Marx out of the water. They
all view power as centered in the hands of the state and the bourgeosie.
F does not work from a Marxist core.
>interesting is the use of violent sexualised language in response to
>queries. For example, the reference to Marx screwing sheep and Asher Haig
>talking about fist fucking.
GIVE ME A FUCKIN BREAK! The comments weren't meant as serious
arguments! Don't take this stoic moral high ground. I was trying to
get us back on topic hence my sarcastic phrase, "tremenous argument."
>To stay on subject and keep with the theme, I wonder how much Foucault's
>well documented sexual experimentation (bondage, sado-masochism, sauna sex
>etc) fed into his general world view. Especially when we consider his views
>of the body as loci of resistance and power (bio-power). Any thoughts?
At last, back where we are supposed to be. I don't really know about
this one but I had a question to add. A debate team indicted F by
saying he was a pedaphile. I think they were just misinterpreting F's
study of pediatry in Greek and Roman culture, but I was wondering if it
was true. Its a stupid argument but I am curious about it.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com