>Hi! I'd like to reply to a message from Phil Sawyer sent on the 13th
>of December and also a more recent one which I have mistakenly
>deleted so (sorry) I can't quote from it. Phil explained that he
>was trying to use Foucault's analysis of power to enlighten his
>understanding of the community participation in urban regeneration
>partnerships. What strikes me about this message is that it is very
>unusual for the list because he is USING Foucault to understand
>empirical work. This contrasts with most of the messages I have
>read in which people are, understandably, struggling with
>interpretation (some of it goes way over my head!). Perhaps they are
>struggling with interpretation in order to use Foucault in another
>area, but this is not the feeling I get.
>All this leaves me thinking : where is everybody else who is using
>Foucault? What parts of his work are they using? What fields are
>they applying it to? It seems ironic that Phil and I
>are from similar departments and based in the same city (we have
>never met) but that we appear to be the only people around talking
>about using Foucault. There must be a few others out
>there....mustn't there?
>
>All the best, Liz
>
>
Dear Liz,
That's a very good point. I am one of the administrators of the Centre
Michel Foucault in Paris, and I must confess that I am sometime quite fed
up with all these interpretations around Foucault's work. What we are
trying to do in the Centre MF is precisely to use Foucault, and not to
comment upon his work.
Personnally, my field is historical geography : I have used Foucault when
trying to explain the 1994 genocide in Rwanda (in an article called
"Genealogie du genocide rwandais", published in Les Temps Modernes,
mai-juin 1995, and in a small book to be published next february), for
instance, and I use it in a huge book I am writing about catholic missions
in Rwanda.
Using Foucault "as a toolbox", as he has put it, seems to me the most
interesting way of dealing with his work. Fortunately, Phil, you and I are
not the only ones using Foucault in order to understand empirical work. If
you read French, you will be able to find very soon some new texts dealing
with this matter : the Centre Michel Foucault and the Centre Georges
Pompidou publish next month a book called "Aux risques de Foucault", with
texts written by Arlette Farge, Arnold Davidson, Jana Sawicki, Michelle
Perrot, Jacques Revel, Jacques Le Goff, Hartwig Zander, Giovanna Procacci,
Roger Chartier, etc. This book will show you several ways of using
Foucault. If you are interested, let me know about it, and I will give you
more informations (as I am not sure that advertising for a book is allowed
on this forum).
Sincerely and foucauldianely yours,
Dominique Franche (Mr)
dfranche@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dominique Franche, 3 rue de Valenciennes, 75010 Paris, France; tel.: 0146077058
La vie est un desert dont la femme est un chameau
>of December and also a more recent one which I have mistakenly
>deleted so (sorry) I can't quote from it. Phil explained that he
>was trying to use Foucault's analysis of power to enlighten his
>understanding of the community participation in urban regeneration
>partnerships. What strikes me about this message is that it is very
>unusual for the list because he is USING Foucault to understand
>empirical work. This contrasts with most of the messages I have
>read in which people are, understandably, struggling with
>interpretation (some of it goes way over my head!). Perhaps they are
>struggling with interpretation in order to use Foucault in another
>area, but this is not the feeling I get.
>All this leaves me thinking : where is everybody else who is using
>Foucault? What parts of his work are they using? What fields are
>they applying it to? It seems ironic that Phil and I
>are from similar departments and based in the same city (we have
>never met) but that we appear to be the only people around talking
>about using Foucault. There must be a few others out
>there....mustn't there?
>
>All the best, Liz
>
>
Dear Liz,
That's a very good point. I am one of the administrators of the Centre
Michel Foucault in Paris, and I must confess that I am sometime quite fed
up with all these interpretations around Foucault's work. What we are
trying to do in the Centre MF is precisely to use Foucault, and not to
comment upon his work.
Personnally, my field is historical geography : I have used Foucault when
trying to explain the 1994 genocide in Rwanda (in an article called
"Genealogie du genocide rwandais", published in Les Temps Modernes,
mai-juin 1995, and in a small book to be published next february), for
instance, and I use it in a huge book I am writing about catholic missions
in Rwanda.
Using Foucault "as a toolbox", as he has put it, seems to me the most
interesting way of dealing with his work. Fortunately, Phil, you and I are
not the only ones using Foucault in order to understand empirical work. If
you read French, you will be able to find very soon some new texts dealing
with this matter : the Centre Michel Foucault and the Centre Georges
Pompidou publish next month a book called "Aux risques de Foucault", with
texts written by Arlette Farge, Arnold Davidson, Jana Sawicki, Michelle
Perrot, Jacques Revel, Jacques Le Goff, Hartwig Zander, Giovanna Procacci,
Roger Chartier, etc. This book will show you several ways of using
Foucault. If you are interested, let me know about it, and I will give you
more informations (as I am not sure that advertising for a book is allowed
on this forum).
Sincerely and foucauldianely yours,
Dominique Franche (Mr)
dfranche@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dominique Franche, 3 rue de Valenciennes, 75010 Paris, France; tel.: 0146077058
La vie est un desert dont la femme est un chameau