On Mon, 20 Jul 1998, Daniel F. Vukovich wrote:
> attempt an answer to. But one of the things one learns from Derrida
> (amongst others, and I think not least Foucault) is the fallacy of thinking
> "the beyond" as such. Rhetorics of origins/progress/telos are not
> "productive lines of thought." Rather than figure out how Foucault trumps
> Marx (or vice versa), a better "game" would be to think about what
> Foucault, or Marx, or Fanon et. alia., can allow us to see, or not see. And
> in specific contexts, not simply in general (which is why I, for one, find
> the notion of "surplus power" in Jan Muhammed or Deleuze kind of klunky, or
My intent, if I did not make is clear, was not an attempt to get to the
beyond, as such, or to try to find any origins (where is the origin in the
beyond?) but to try to see how, in a Nitzschean sense, Foucault works
through Marx, but doesn't stop there.
Joanna