I just realized that I inadvertantly mischaracterized John Ransom's
characterization of Foucault. I claimed that he used "What is
Enlightenment?" to defend the idea that Foucault advocates
transgression in 1963. On re-reading his remarks I realize that he
does not in fact do this. On the contrary, he only summarizes the
1963 text, says that it has implications broader than for Bataille's
work, and goes on to suggest that, decades later, Foucault says
various thing about transgression, but these do not (John says)
include any general advocacy of transgression.
I'm very sorry. I certainly wasn't being malicious or anything.
Steve D.
characterization of Foucault. I claimed that he used "What is
Enlightenment?" to defend the idea that Foucault advocates
transgression in 1963. On re-reading his remarks I realize that he
does not in fact do this. On the contrary, he only summarizes the
1963 text, says that it has implications broader than for Bataille's
work, and goes on to suggest that, decades later, Foucault says
various thing about transgression, but these do not (John says)
include any general advocacy of transgression.
I'm very sorry. I certainly wasn't being malicious or anything.
Steve D.