Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> At 12:05 AM -0500 3/15/97, brehkopf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >Anyway, I think this all merits some discussion. Perhaps I am the only
> >gay man who read Miller's bio of Foucault who (1) thinks Foucault is
> >amazing, and (2) is not offended -- but rather is impressed -- by
> >Miller's bio.
> >
> >Here's my question: for all the comments about that bio characterizing
> >it as homophobic, I've yet to hear a convincing reason for its actually
> >*being* homophobic. Could someone who has read it and who thinks it's
> >homophobic please tell me why they think this?
>
> This characterization of Miller as homophobic also mystifies me. I just
> don't see it. It seems to me that Miller admires Foucault a great deal, and
> I think he does a fine job of mixing biography and thought. He pushes on
> some things - Foucault's fascination with sadomasochism, torture, and death
> - that some may see as irrelevant personal detail, but seem quite relevant
> to the substance of Foucault. Just what's trashy and homophobic about it?
>
> Doug
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> At 12:05 AM -0500 3/15/97, brehkopf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >Anyway, I think this all merits some discussion. Perhaps I am the only
> >gay man who read Miller's bio of Foucault who (1) thinks Foucault is
> >amazing, and (2) is not offended -- but rather is impressed -- by
> >Miller's bio.
> >
> >Here's my question: for all the comments about that bio characterizing
> >it as homophobic, I've yet to hear a convincing reason for its actually
> >*being* homophobic. Could someone who has read it and who thinks it's
> >homophobic please tell me why they think this?
>
> This characterization of Miller as homophobic also mystifies me. I just
> don't see it. It seems to me that Miller admires Foucault a great deal, and
> I think he does a fine job of mixing biography and thought. He pushes on
> some things - Foucault's fascination with sadomasochism, torture, and death
> - that some may see as irrelevant personal detail, but seem quite relevant
> to the substance of Foucault. Just what's trashy and homophobic about it?
>
> Doug
I agree. I never understood this criticism of Miller.
Andrew Herman
>
> At 12:05 AM -0500 3/15/97, brehkopf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >Anyway, I think this all merits some discussion. Perhaps I am the only
> >gay man who read Miller's bio of Foucault who (1) thinks Foucault is
> >amazing, and (2) is not offended -- but rather is impressed -- by
> >Miller's bio.
> >
> >Here's my question: for all the comments about that bio characterizing
> >it as homophobic, I've yet to hear a convincing reason for its actually
> >*being* homophobic. Could someone who has read it and who thinks it's
> >homophobic please tell me why they think this?
>
> This characterization of Miller as homophobic also mystifies me. I just
> don't see it. It seems to me that Miller admires Foucault a great deal, and
> I think he does a fine job of mixing biography and thought. He pushes on
> some things - Foucault's fascination with sadomasochism, torture, and death
> - that some may see as irrelevant personal detail, but seem quite relevant
> to the substance of Foucault. Just what's trashy and homophobic about it?
>
> Doug
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> At 12:05 AM -0500 3/15/97, brehkopf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >Anyway, I think this all merits some discussion. Perhaps I am the only
> >gay man who read Miller's bio of Foucault who (1) thinks Foucault is
> >amazing, and (2) is not offended -- but rather is impressed -- by
> >Miller's bio.
> >
> >Here's my question: for all the comments about that bio characterizing
> >it as homophobic, I've yet to hear a convincing reason for its actually
> >*being* homophobic. Could someone who has read it and who thinks it's
> >homophobic please tell me why they think this?
>
> This characterization of Miller as homophobic also mystifies me. I just
> don't see it. It seems to me that Miller admires Foucault a great deal, and
> I think he does a fine job of mixing biography and thought. He pushes on
> some things - Foucault's fascination with sadomasochism, torture, and death
> - that some may see as irrelevant personal detail, but seem quite relevant
> to the substance of Foucault. Just what's trashy and homophobic about it?
>
> Doug
I agree. I never understood this criticism of Miller.
Andrew Herman