Re: illegality and intolerability

Hello Eric-

Depending on your interest, there is an ostensible geneaology set off by
Foucault and Deleuze in their discussion, "Intellectuals and Power" in
_Language, counter-memory, practice: selected essays and interviews_.
Translated from the French by Donald F. Bouchard and Sherry Simon.
>From (against) this, Spivak launches her seminal, "Can the Subaltern
Speak?" which leads to the School of Subaltern Studies (Gupta, Spivak).

Others in this Vein, James C. Scott (_Weapons of the Weak_); Basch et al.
_Nations Unbound_.

Categorically, this should take you through the subaltern school into
discussions of hegemony, conscent, etc. Or, at least that is where it
would take me.

Best of luck,
R

________________
Robert F. Carley
Graduate Student
Department of English
University of Pittsburgh
carley+@xxxxxxxx

On Thu, 16 Jul 1998 embuck1@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I guess I did not say enough about these two concepts to draw any response.
> Foucault is often accused of critiquing power and institutions, but of never
> providing a constructive alternative. In Discipline and Punish, Foucault
> very briefly discusses illegality, almost in a tone of advocating deliberate
> illegality to overcome the application of disciplinary correction. I say
> "almost" because I am not yet sure he did advocate such an approach. In an
> interview in Power/Knowledge, he mentions the Gulag question in terms of
> intolerability. Is this an inchoate tool for resistance? This is the sort
> of thing I am trying to work out. Has anyone seen any work on these areas?
> Can you point me to other mentions of them in Foucault?
>
> Thanks
>
> Eric
>


Partial thread listing: