Michael Bartos wrote:
> There may be some
> connections between Foucault's gayness and his writings, and these
> connections are the stuff of which biography is made. But it would be
> a mistake, I think, to try to understand, for example, The History of
> Sexuality, vol. 1, in tems of its gay author.
I am curious how extreme a statement you're trying to make. It seems
to me that a "natural" interpretation of writing always involves, and
interacts with, some kind of author-construction. Any "extraneous"
information one has about the author feeds into this process, albeit
in very subtle ways. Are you saying that Foucault's gayness in particular
should be excluded from this feedback loop; or that it shouldn't be assigned
a disproportionate weight; or that interpretation should be attempted in
a way which does not involve any author-construction? (These are obviously
not the only choices.)
- malgosia
------------------
> There may be some
> connections between Foucault's gayness and his writings, and these
> connections are the stuff of which biography is made. But it would be
> a mistake, I think, to try to understand, for example, The History of
> Sexuality, vol. 1, in tems of its gay author.
I am curious how extreme a statement you're trying to make. It seems
to me that a "natural" interpretation of writing always involves, and
interacts with, some kind of author-construction. Any "extraneous"
information one has about the author feeds into this process, albeit
in very subtle ways. Are you saying that Foucault's gayness in particular
should be excluded from this feedback loop; or that it shouldn't be assigned
a disproportionate weight; or that interpretation should be attempted in
a way which does not involve any author-construction? (These are obviously
not the only choices.)
- malgosia
------------------