Hi Steven,
I'm new to the foucault list and still a bit tentative about posting to the
list. Nonetheless, the question of the totalizing voice is one which is of
some concern to my research at present.
I am looking at "The Subject and Power"
with a view to a critique based on some of the
'decentered' notions presented by Haraway in
particular, but also by such as Liz Grosz and D&G. I will
also be looking at decentered power structures as
opposed to the centre/periphery with which F operated.
I feel, as does Nancy Frazer in "Unruly Practices", that there is a
priveleged subtext operating which is manipulated by F as a legitimizing
discourse; that he uses a position of erudition and complexity to produce
himself as a 'new totality of historical insight'.
You can understand my reluctance to post an opinion such as this to the group
- my research is in its infancy and I am as yet working with tentative senses
of how this critique might be approached.
Your comments?
regards
Tom
I'm new to the foucault list and still a bit tentative about posting to the
list. Nonetheless, the question of the totalizing voice is one which is of
some concern to my research at present.
I am looking at "The Subject and Power"
with a view to a critique based on some of the
'decentered' notions presented by Haraway in
particular, but also by such as Liz Grosz and D&G. I will
also be looking at decentered power structures as
opposed to the centre/periphery with which F operated.
I feel, as does Nancy Frazer in "Unruly Practices", that there is a
priveleged subtext operating which is manipulated by F as a legitimizing
discourse; that he uses a position of erudition and complexity to produce
himself as a 'new totality of historical insight'.
You can understand my reluctance to post an opinion such as this to the group
- my research is in its infancy and I am as yet working with tentative senses
of how this critique might be approached.
Your comments?
regards
Tom