[Foucault-L] governmentalities?

Hi
Instead of refutation a plea for clarification. Just what is 
'governmentality'? It seems, from my admittedly limited readings on 
the subject, to be a term now used by 'Foucauldian' scholars mainly 
to signify 'forms of political control/discourse'. This certainly 
seems to be the sense in which Steven is using it. But the quote of 
Foucault's that i just invoked (viz, that "contact between the 
technologies of domination of others and those of the self I call 
governmentality"), seems to lead us away from an analytical gaze 
focused purely on the 'political' level. Governmentality here is a 
neologism coined by Foucault in order to define that particular form 
of power manifested when technologies of the self and technologies of 
domination merge.
However we loose this concern with 'technologies of the self' when we 
use the term 'governmentalites, as Steven does in his original 
message, as a synonym for "domains/realms of government", or forms of 
official governmental "rationality". 'Governmentality' seems here to 
be just another way of saying "forms of political 
practice/discourse", in which case why the neologism at all?
Now Steven may well be aware of all this. He does mention that his 
historical inquiry revolves around the private writings of a 
"low(ish)-level administrator in colonial India, who was put in 
charge of urban improvement in the 1930s". But i suspect, [though i 
am just guessing] that his study is leaning towards the analysis and 
description of the tension between discrete, broad forms of political 
practice/discourse as concentrated and crystallized in the biography 
of an individual personality. This personality will be the parchment, 
so to speak, upon which we are invited to read of a mighty battle 
between gargantuan political and social forces, or better, the window 
through which the dust raised by their lusty struggles is perceived. 
But does Steven address (and he may well do) these private writings 
as mode of reflexively constructing, defining, and 'objectifying' the 
self, by a 'self', within certain social conditions at a certain 
point in time? [if any are interested in how such a history may 
indeed be written i would direct them to Joyce's "Democratic 
Subjects" 1994.] If he does, and if he also explicates on these 
writings as a 'technology of domination' imposed by external forces 
[that is, by the system of colonial administration, its exigencies 
and obligations, in which he was embedded- though this type of 
writing, i have just realised, is not exactly the same as that of the 
order of 'private writings'], then in my understanding of the term, 
he is engaged in a study of Foucauldian 'governmentality', if not, 
then he is engaging in a work of political history that draws on 
biographical historical sources [which is, of course, still an 
entirely valid research program which could be highly valuable].
I would have sent this message privately for, despite offering 
refutation, i do not wish to be thought here to be 'attacking' or 
'undermining' Steve's research project, but i have decided to post it 
because i'm genuinely interested in gaining a better understanding of 
how the list generally understands Foucauldian 'governmentality' so 
please start writing...
best regards
bradley nitins