Ferda Keskin wrote:
>
> >
> > It seems that in some respects Foucault's work is the
> >historico-philosophical application of ideas and interests that
> >occurred within the framework of Foucault's life alone. Foucault was
> >writing an applied version of himself.
> >
> > Nicholas
> >
>
> This is probably the most dangerous interpretation of Foucault's work.
> Such interpretations lead to such disasters as James Miller's "The
> Passion of Michel Foucault" and to excuses to dismiss the
> ethical/political substance and implications of his work (just
> another version of "the argumentum ad hominem": the guy was fucked
> up, so was the work!) What if we knew nothing about Foucault's
> private life? Would we have less to say about his work than we do
> about Blanchot's?
What you say about the ad hominem approach may be true for some
commentaries on Foucault, but I was simply trying to point out (as he
himself stated in interviews) that his writings are a sort of fiction
and that those fictions were, for Foucault, useful in his political
life. What's the danger in that?
Nicholas
>
> >
> > It seems that in some respects Foucault's work is the
> >historico-philosophical application of ideas and interests that
> >occurred within the framework of Foucault's life alone. Foucault was
> >writing an applied version of himself.
> >
> > Nicholas
> >
>
> This is probably the most dangerous interpretation of Foucault's work.
> Such interpretations lead to such disasters as James Miller's "The
> Passion of Michel Foucault" and to excuses to dismiss the
> ethical/political substance and implications of his work (just
> another version of "the argumentum ad hominem": the guy was fucked
> up, so was the work!) What if we knew nothing about Foucault's
> private life? Would we have less to say about his work than we do
> about Blanchot's?
What you say about the ad hominem approach may be true for some
commentaries on Foucault, but I was simply trying to point out (as he
himself stated in interviews) that his writings are a sort of fiction
and that those fictions were, for Foucault, useful in his political
life. What's the danger in that?
Nicholas