credit where credit's due - i got the insight from Stuart Elden's "mapping
the present:" 106, and Beatrice Hanssen's "critique of violence": 153, the
latter of whom references Gayatri Spivak's "Outside the Teaching Machine:"
as for power being an actuality: you can take this in (at least) two ways
- either it is an actuality in terms of being a substance and thus a
property, or it is an actuality in terms of being a potentiality. i think
foucault means the later. thus to think of power as capacity is not to
think of it as an innate capability, or an essentail attribute, but
precisely the capacity "to be able to" (power - pouvoir as a verb, as a
doing) through the capacity to "know'how" (knowledge - savoir).
i think Nietzsche's observation that 'there is no "being" behind doing,
acting, becoming; "the doer" is merely a fiction imposed on the doing -
the doing itself is everything' ("On The Genealogy of Morals" 1996: First
Essay, 13), is a very good way to think about power/pouvoir as a verb.
regards - k.
On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:37:47 +1000, Lionel Boxer <lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Can we be certain that Foucault did not mean anything beyond something
> actual? I think the idea that it has something to do with "capacity"
> adds an interesting dimension. Where does Foucault make that statement
> in a clear way?
> Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA - 0411267256 - lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Charity day at Dame Elisabeth's - see http://intergon.net
> Victorian Scottish Regiment
> NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT (none may attack me with impunity)
> Melbourne Volunteer Rifle Regiment 150th Anniversary --
>> From: "Mark Kelly" <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Pouvoir
>> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:30:40 +1000
>> we've got to be careful with this - it was a line I chased for a while.
>> 'pouvoir' as a verb means 'to be able to'; as a noun, it means 'power'.
>> The reason we have to be so careful is that in 'The Subject and Power'
>> Foucault is very specific that by power he does not mean capacity or
>> potential but something actual. 'Power' in English also has the
>> connotation of a capacity to do something, but not in Foucault's usage.
>> >From: francois gagnon <francois.gagnon.1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >Subject: Re: micro-translations
>> >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:46:47 -0400
>> >Yes it can.
>> >Kevin Turner a écrit:
>> >>while we're on the subject of translation...
>> >>can someone confirm that the term foucault uses for power,
>> >>"pouvoir," can also mean "be able (to)",
>> "can," "be possible," or
>> >>"capacity," etc.
>> >>cheers - k
>> >>On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:52:00 +0200, xavier delcourt
>> >><delcourt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>équilibre européen: "european balance" would be
>> totally acceptable
>> >>>from my point of view
>> >François Gagnon
>> >Département de Communication
>> >Université de Montréal
> Protect yourself from junk e-mail:
Deptment of Sociology