On Sun, May 12, 1996 12:07:51 AM, WDRUMMON@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>We communicated a long time ago regarding your project. I read your
>latest post on Canguilhem. From my vantage point, I just do not see
>how you can not be interested in his earlier works, given your breaks,
>discontinuities, etc. The Journal of the Human Sciences translated a
>piece which was taken out of the original French translation of the
>Archaelogy of Knowledge. [above I should say given your interest
>in breaks, discontinuities, etc.]. Bill
Bill: I forget exactly what we were talking about, but as for my interests
in early Foucault (with the exception of madness and civ.), the focus there
on the discursive to the exclusion of the spacial and temporal is less
appealing to me. not to say that it is in itself lacking in this respect,
just that it's probably more useful for discourse analysis than the kind of
spacial historical ethnography I am interested in. I am also at the
moment interested in a "political history of the body", in both a
discilinary and an ethical sense: a project to which "discourse on
language" would, I thihk, have little to offer.
but then, on the other hand, somebody named steve caton has recently
suggested to me that this periodization of Foucault's work (archealogy,
disciplinary, ethical) is false and ignores the fact that each model
implies the development of the other...... panoptic power is discursive as
well as spacial and disciplinary.... so I argue against my position
already.
"The Journal of the Human Sciences translated a
>piece which was taken out of the original French translation of the
>Archaelogy of Knowledge." what is this piece about?
maybe I'll kick this over to the main list.
sb
>We communicated a long time ago regarding your project. I read your
>latest post on Canguilhem. From my vantage point, I just do not see
>how you can not be interested in his earlier works, given your breaks,
>discontinuities, etc. The Journal of the Human Sciences translated a
>piece which was taken out of the original French translation of the
>Archaelogy of Knowledge. [above I should say given your interest
>in breaks, discontinuities, etc.]. Bill
Bill: I forget exactly what we were talking about, but as for my interests
in early Foucault (with the exception of madness and civ.), the focus there
on the discursive to the exclusion of the spacial and temporal is less
appealing to me. not to say that it is in itself lacking in this respect,
just that it's probably more useful for discourse analysis than the kind of
spacial historical ethnography I am interested in. I am also at the
moment interested in a "political history of the body", in both a
discilinary and an ethical sense: a project to which "discourse on
language" would, I thihk, have little to offer.
but then, on the other hand, somebody named steve caton has recently
suggested to me that this periodization of Foucault's work (archealogy,
disciplinary, ethical) is false and ignores the fact that each model
implies the development of the other...... panoptic power is discursive as
well as spacial and disciplinary.... so I argue against my position
already.
"The Journal of the Human Sciences translated a
>piece which was taken out of the original French translation of the
>Archaelogy of Knowledge." what is this piece about?
maybe I'll kick this over to the main list.
sb