Re: Re[10]: useful and docile bodies

At 10:15 AM 4/17/96 -0500, you wrote:

> Comments? --I'd especially be interested in soemone's
> comments on teh D&P, H&S disparity/connection.

> Joe
>
Joe, I have to run to class so only a quick comment: I myself have been
most motivated by those two texts in my analysis of cultural communities
among maya indians in mexico (yucatan), and would agree that they are
distinct, although my use of them has been via making them complementary--
or better, supplementary perhaps in a derridean sense. that is my
appropriation of those two texts (my making do with F. in decerteauian
terms) has "required" my making them less distinct; hiding what you are
identifying here as a disjunction of sorts. my half baked idea of the
moment is that His.Sex takes up where the "discourse on Language" left off:
(and thus is much closer to order of things than our foucaultian
historiorgarphy allows a la the organicist historizing of dreyfuss & rabinow
as you noted). so, his.Sex is a study of discursive formations and
discourses in relation to broad arrangements of power; it is a treatise in
the political philosophy whereas disc./punish is clearly a very rooted
(despite the dispersion of the object) analysis of material arrangements --
how discourses (such as benthams) became material and materialized in
bodies, spaces, temporalities, etc. So, yes, i agree we should rewrite the
history of foucault into the proliferation of "foucaults" of the
author-texts called fpouicatl.

gotta go...

:)

quetzil.



Partial thread listing: