I can only offer one piece of advise with regard to Foucault. I'm a grad
student who is doing his dis on Foucault and has come up against an
impenetrable wall. Most scholars feel that "true" scholarly research entails
looking at the author's work(s) and explicating the texts. With Foucault,
there is much in the way of interviews and personal opinions. Don't ignore
Foucault's interviews as they can sometimes offer a clearer meaning than his
texts. To those scholars who dismiss this method as irrelevant or
"uncolloquial" I have to disagree. when there is an ambiguity or a
contradiction, why wouldn't one look to the author. To hold one to one's
written word when a meaning is unclear is inauthentic and irresponsible. Polit
ics, Philosophy, Culture is an excellent piece of work and one I highly
recommend to all who have an interest in Foucault.
student who is doing his dis on Foucault and has come up against an
impenetrable wall. Most scholars feel that "true" scholarly research entails
looking at the author's work(s) and explicating the texts. With Foucault,
there is much in the way of interviews and personal opinions. Don't ignore
Foucault's interviews as they can sometimes offer a clearer meaning than his
texts. To those scholars who dismiss this method as irrelevant or
"uncolloquial" I have to disagree. when there is an ambiguity or a
contradiction, why wouldn't one look to the author. To hold one to one's
written word when a meaning is unclear is inauthentic and irresponsible. Polit
ics, Philosophy, Culture is an excellent piece of work and one I highly
recommend to all who have an interest in Foucault.