Re: Foucault, Marx, and History

All interesting and fascinating questions Yoshie,
I was thinking of the following quotation when I read your post. I
think that Foucault is being modest here; I always felt that he jumped a
million miles above and beyond Marx, though deeply indebted to him of

" .. I quote Marx without saying so, without
quotation marks, and because people are
incapable of recognizing Marx's texts, I am
thought to be someone who doesn't quote Marx.
When a physicist writes a work of physics, does
he feel it necessary to quote Newton and Einstein?
He uses them but he doesn't need the quotation
marks, the footnote and the eulogistic comment
to prove how completely faithful he is being to
his master's thought. And because other
physicists know what Einstein did, what he
discovered and proved, they can recognise him
in what the physicist writes. It is impossible
at the present time to write history without
using a whole range of concepts directly or
indirectly linked to Marx's thought and
situating oneself within a horizon of thought
which has been defined and described by Marx.
One might even wonder what difference there
could ultimately be between being a historian
and being a Marxist."

Michel Foucault, _Power/Knowledge_, pp. 52-3

sorry, have to run,

Ian Robert Douglas,
Visiting Lecturer & Fulbright Fellow,
Thomas J. Watson Jr. Institute of International Studies,
Brown University, Box 1831,
130 Hope Street,
Providence, RI 02912

tel: 401 863-2420 (direct line)
fax: 401 863-1270

"Great is Justice;
Justice is not settled by legislation and laws
it is in the soul .. " - Walt Whitman

Partial thread listing: