Finally, Foucault discovered lines of subjectification. This new
dimension has already given rise to misunderstandings, the reasons for
which are hard to see in precise terms. More than anything else, the
discovery of this new dimension arose out of a crisis in Foucault's
thought, as if it had become necessary for him to redraw the map of social
apparatuses [*dispositifs*], to find for them a new orientation in order
to stop them from becoming locked into unbreakable lines of force which
would impose definitive contours. Leibniz gave exemplary expression to
this state of crisis which sets thoughts on the move again when one thinks
a resolution has been found: we thought we were in port, but we were cast
back out into the open sea. Foucault, for his part, was concerned that the
social apparatuses [*dispositifs*] which he was analysing should not be
circumscribed by an enveloping line, unless other vectors could be seen as
passing above it and below it. Maybe he is using the term 'breaking the
line' in the sense of 'bypassing it'. This bypassing of the line of forces
is what happens when it turns on itself, meanders, grows more obscure and
goes underground -- or rather when the force, instead of entering into a
linear relationship with another force, turns back on itself, meanders,
grows obscure and goes underground -- or rather when the force instead of
entering into a linear relationship with another force, turns on itself,
works on itself or affects itself. This dimension of the Self is by no
means pre-existing determination which one finds ready-made. Here again, a
line of subjectification is a process, a production of subjectivity in a
social apparatus [*dispositif*]: it has to be made, inasmuch as the
apparatus allows it to come into being or makes it possible. It is a line
of escape. It escapes preceding lines and escapes *from* itself. The Self
is neither knowledge nor power. It is a process of individuation which
bears on groups and on people, and is subtracted from the power relations
which are established as constituting forms of knowledge [*savoir*]: a
sort of surplus-value. It is not certain that all social apparatuses
[dispositifs] comprise these.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>><
< John S. Ransom 717-2 <
< Political Science 4 <
^ Dickinson College 5 ^
^ Carlisle, PA 17013 - ^
> ransom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 1 <
< Denny 107 7 >
< 1 >
> 6 ^
><^<>^^<>^<>^<>^^>><<>^<^^<`
dimension has already given rise to misunderstandings, the reasons for
which are hard to see in precise terms. More than anything else, the
discovery of this new dimension arose out of a crisis in Foucault's
thought, as if it had become necessary for him to redraw the map of social
apparatuses [*dispositifs*], to find for them a new orientation in order
to stop them from becoming locked into unbreakable lines of force which
would impose definitive contours. Leibniz gave exemplary expression to
this state of crisis which sets thoughts on the move again when one thinks
a resolution has been found: we thought we were in port, but we were cast
back out into the open sea. Foucault, for his part, was concerned that the
social apparatuses [*dispositifs*] which he was analysing should not be
circumscribed by an enveloping line, unless other vectors could be seen as
passing above it and below it. Maybe he is using the term 'breaking the
line' in the sense of 'bypassing it'. This bypassing of the line of forces
is what happens when it turns on itself, meanders, grows more obscure and
goes underground -- or rather when the force, instead of entering into a
linear relationship with another force, turns back on itself, meanders,
grows obscure and goes underground -- or rather when the force instead of
entering into a linear relationship with another force, turns on itself,
works on itself or affects itself. This dimension of the Self is by no
means pre-existing determination which one finds ready-made. Here again, a
line of subjectification is a process, a production of subjectivity in a
social apparatus [*dispositif*]: it has to be made, inasmuch as the
apparatus allows it to come into being or makes it possible. It is a line
of escape. It escapes preceding lines and escapes *from* itself. The Self
is neither knowledge nor power. It is a process of individuation which
bears on groups and on people, and is subtracted from the power relations
which are established as constituting forms of knowledge [*savoir*]: a
sort of surplus-value. It is not certain that all social apparatuses
[dispositifs] comprise these.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>><
< John S. Ransom 717-2 <
< Political Science 4 <
^ Dickinson College 5 ^
^ Carlisle, PA 17013 - ^
> ransom@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 1 <
< Denny 107 7 >
< 1 >
> 6 ^
><^<>^^<>^<>^<>^^>><<>^<^^<`