Walt,
I like it.
But let me be stuffy and bourgeois, and say that we ought to be a little
teeny-tiny bit careful about approaching a stage at which we reduce
philosophical work to biography.
If biography is important, maybe we should also be looking for what the
guy read. We could all use a little some of it. All of us.
Matt
>From owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Wed Dec 16 10:52:42 1998
>Received: from [128.143.2.9] by hotmail.com (1.0) with SMTP id
MHotMail3091287095274109350653247321568558175572611; Wed Dec 16 10:52:42
1998
>Received: from lists.village.virginia.edu by mail.virginia.edu id
aa26156;
> 16 Dec 98 12:59 EST
>Received: (from domo@localhost) by lists.village.virginia.edu
(8.8.5/8.6.6) id LAA62828 for foucault-outgoing; Wed, 16 Dec 1998
11:42:17 -0500
>X-Authentication-Warning: lists.village.virginia.edu: domo set sender
to owner-foucault@localhost using -f
>Received: from mailhost2.attcanada.net (mailhost2.attcanada.net
[206.191.82.43]) by lists.village.virginia.edu (8.8.5/8.6.6) with ESMTP
id LAA48232 for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 16 Dec 1998
11:42:11 -0500
>Received: from waltstein ([142.194.122.67]) by mailhost2.attcanada.net
> (InterMail v03.02.07 118 124) with SMTP
> id <19981216153922.EPNX8233@waltstein>
> for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:39:22 +0000
>X-Sender: stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
>Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:41:45 -0600
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From: Walt Stein <stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Foucault and AIDS
>In-Reply-To: <004401be28de$490b9860$695708c3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Message-Id: <19981216153922.EPNX8233@waltstein>
>Sender: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>The issue of the relation of Foucault's flesh (I prefer to avoid the
term
>"sexuality" precisely because of the insights Foucault has given me in
that
>regard) to his work has always interested me, because I suspect (on no
>empirical basis whatsoever) that there is yet another way to view the
>matter. I would like to try this out on the group. I believe that
>Foucault's fleshly appetite is very important to the work he produced,
but
>for a much more commonplace reason than those adduced by Miller or
rejected
>by Miller's critics.
>
>Foucault grew to adulthood as a "pervert" and died as an "orientation";
his
>appetites were transgressive in his youth, "normal" in his later years.
>During his most productive years, discursive formations that dealt with
>"homosexuality" underwent massive fracture. To what extent might the
>personal experience of watching himself redefined and recategorized
>throughout his working lifetime have contributed to the insights that
>brought us the work on madness, prisons, and medicine....never mind the
>obvious question of the history of sexuality or the more speculative
>archeological and genealogical writing? I've read Macey, Eribon and
>Miller, but do not recall this particular "spin" displayed with any
>importance in any of the books. Is the point so obvious as to be
beneath
>mention...or what? Curious to know what others might think.
>
>At 09:16 AM 12/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>Well, being picky, you cannot 'die of aids'. At most, you can die from
>>opportunistic infections as a result of AIDS. But I guess that's
beside the
>>point. More to the point is the suggestion that his lifestyle
contributed to
>>his death. Well, it might have done, but it doesn't really matter if
he
>>slept with 100 men or 1 man, or 1 woman. You only need to be infected
with
>>HIV from one person. This attitude of the Oxford Dictionary falls into
that
>>old trap of suggesting gay men in the 80s were swimming around in a
trough
>>of their own sordid desires, and that they got their just desserts.
HIV
>>awareness and education has tried (at least relatively successfully)
to
>>dispel this prejudice/myth and put things on a more balanced level.
>>
>>James Miller, The Passion of Michel Foucault, tries to draw parallels
>>between the life and the work of Foucault, suggesting all sorts of
things
>>about F's sex life. Apart from mistakes, much of this is quite
dubious. More
>>plausible, and certainly more philosophically sound, is David Macey,
The
>>Lives of Michel Foucault or Didier Eribon, Michel Foucault (which
doesn't
>>really talk about sex at all, as I recall). A response by a gay writer
is
>>David Halperin, Saint Foucault.
>>
>>I guess the inevitable question is, does it matter? Foucault's work on
>>sexuality is obviously informed by his personal life, but his
reputation as
>>a thinker was there before this work began to be published. To be
honest,
>>whatever its merits, to me it is his least satisfactory work.
>>
>>By the way, what is meant by the subject/abject distinction? Who is
this
>>taken from? Sounds a bit of a poor joke, and a poor criticism of
Foucault.
>>
>>Best wishes
>>
>>Stuart
>>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>"Clinton's crimes are incestuous: He makes the whole world his family
and
>then seduces and pollutes it, person by person"--Paglia
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
I like it.
But let me be stuffy and bourgeois, and say that we ought to be a little
teeny-tiny bit careful about approaching a stage at which we reduce
philosophical work to biography.
If biography is important, maybe we should also be looking for what the
guy read. We could all use a little some of it. All of us.
Matt
>From owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Wed Dec 16 10:52:42 1998
>Received: from [128.143.2.9] by hotmail.com (1.0) with SMTP id
MHotMail3091287095274109350653247321568558175572611; Wed Dec 16 10:52:42
1998
>Received: from lists.village.virginia.edu by mail.virginia.edu id
aa26156;
> 16 Dec 98 12:59 EST
>Received: (from domo@localhost) by lists.village.virginia.edu
(8.8.5/8.6.6) id LAA62828 for foucault-outgoing; Wed, 16 Dec 1998
11:42:17 -0500
>X-Authentication-Warning: lists.village.virginia.edu: domo set sender
to owner-foucault@localhost using -f
>Received: from mailhost2.attcanada.net (mailhost2.attcanada.net
[206.191.82.43]) by lists.village.virginia.edu (8.8.5/8.6.6) with ESMTP
id LAA48232 for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 16 Dec 1998
11:42:11 -0500
>Received: from waltstein ([142.194.122.67]) by mailhost2.attcanada.net
> (InterMail v03.02.07 118 124) with SMTP
> id <19981216153922.EPNX8233@waltstein>
> for <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> Wed, 16 Dec 1998 15:39:22 +0000
>X-Sender: stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
>Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:41:45 -0600
>To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From: Walt Stein <stein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: Foucault and AIDS
>In-Reply-To: <004401be28de$490b9860$695708c3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Message-Id: <19981216153922.EPNX8233@waltstein>
>Sender: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Precedence: bulk
>Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>The issue of the relation of Foucault's flesh (I prefer to avoid the
term
>"sexuality" precisely because of the insights Foucault has given me in
that
>regard) to his work has always interested me, because I suspect (on no
>empirical basis whatsoever) that there is yet another way to view the
>matter. I would like to try this out on the group. I believe that
>Foucault's fleshly appetite is very important to the work he produced,
but
>for a much more commonplace reason than those adduced by Miller or
rejected
>by Miller's critics.
>
>Foucault grew to adulthood as a "pervert" and died as an "orientation";
his
>appetites were transgressive in his youth, "normal" in his later years.
>During his most productive years, discursive formations that dealt with
>"homosexuality" underwent massive fracture. To what extent might the
>personal experience of watching himself redefined and recategorized
>throughout his working lifetime have contributed to the insights that
>brought us the work on madness, prisons, and medicine....never mind the
>obvious question of the history of sexuality or the more speculative
>archeological and genealogical writing? I've read Macey, Eribon and
>Miller, but do not recall this particular "spin" displayed with any
>importance in any of the books. Is the point so obvious as to be
beneath
>mention...or what? Curious to know what others might think.
>
>At 09:16 AM 12/16/98 +0000, you wrote:
>>Well, being picky, you cannot 'die of aids'. At most, you can die from
>>opportunistic infections as a result of AIDS. But I guess that's
beside the
>>point. More to the point is the suggestion that his lifestyle
contributed to
>>his death. Well, it might have done, but it doesn't really matter if
he
>>slept with 100 men or 1 man, or 1 woman. You only need to be infected
with
>>HIV from one person. This attitude of the Oxford Dictionary falls into
that
>>old trap of suggesting gay men in the 80s were swimming around in a
trough
>>of their own sordid desires, and that they got their just desserts.
HIV
>>awareness and education has tried (at least relatively successfully)
to
>>dispel this prejudice/myth and put things on a more balanced level.
>>
>>James Miller, The Passion of Michel Foucault, tries to draw parallels
>>between the life and the work of Foucault, suggesting all sorts of
things
>>about F's sex life. Apart from mistakes, much of this is quite
dubious. More
>>plausible, and certainly more philosophically sound, is David Macey,
The
>>Lives of Michel Foucault or Didier Eribon, Michel Foucault (which
doesn't
>>really talk about sex at all, as I recall). A response by a gay writer
is
>>David Halperin, Saint Foucault.
>>
>>I guess the inevitable question is, does it matter? Foucault's work on
>>sexuality is obviously informed by his personal life, but his
reputation as
>>a thinker was there before this work began to be published. To be
honest,
>>whatever its merits, to me it is his least satisfactory work.
>>
>>By the way, what is meant by the subject/abject distinction? Who is
this
>>taken from? Sounds a bit of a poor joke, and a poor criticism of
Foucault.
>>
>>Best wishes
>>
>>Stuart
>>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>"Clinton's crimes are incestuous: He makes the whole world his family
and
>then seduces and pollutes it, person by person"--Paglia
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com