-----Original Message-----
From: Clare O'Farrell <c_ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Bad Writing?
>Colin
>
>Many thanks for the reference, which I have left along with the text in
>English at the bottom of this post. Here is the sentence in French from
>p. 182 (1969, Paris: Gallimard)
>
>L'archeologie ne cherche pas a retrouver la transition continue et
>insensible qui relie, en pente douce, les discours a ce qui les precede,
>les entoure ou les suit. Elle ne guette pas le moment ou, a partir de ce
>qu'ils n'etaient pas encore, ils sont devenus ce qu'ils sont; ni non
>plus le moment ou denouant la solidite de leur figure ils vont perdre
>peu a peu leur identite.
>
>My translation:
>
>Archaeology does not try to rediscover the continuous and imperceptible
>transition which seamlessly links discourses to those that went before,
>surround or follow them. It does not wait for the moment when discourses
>became what they are, going from what they were not yet, neither for the
>moment when they little by little lose their identity as the solidity of
>their form dissolves.
He's making a point about the difference between his type of theory and
theories of progress in general and Hegel in particular, no?
-- John
>
>I'm not entirely sure whether this makes anything clearer, but I think
>it sounds a lot better (not that I'm biased)!!! It is however clearly a
>critique of methods in the history of ideas. Quibbles anyone???
>
>The quote comes from pg. 139 of 'Archaeology', Routlege edition,
>>Part IV, Chapter 1, 5th page.
>>
>> "Archaeology does not seek to rediscover the continuous,
>insensible
>> transition that relates discourses, on a gentle slope, to what
>precedes
>> them, surrounds them, or follows them. It does not await the
>>moment when, on the basis of what they were not yet, they
>became
>>what they are;
>> nor the moment when, the solidity of their figure crumbling
>away, they
>> will gradually lose their identity." (Foucault, 1972, p139)
>
>Clare
>
>Clare O'Farrell
>email:c_ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxxx
>web page: http://www.qut.edu.au/edu/cpol/foucault/
>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
From: Clare O'Farrell <c_ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, February 19, 1999 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: Bad Writing?
>Colin
>
>Many thanks for the reference, which I have left along with the text in
>English at the bottom of this post. Here is the sentence in French from
>p. 182 (1969, Paris: Gallimard)
>
>L'archeologie ne cherche pas a retrouver la transition continue et
>insensible qui relie, en pente douce, les discours a ce qui les precede,
>les entoure ou les suit. Elle ne guette pas le moment ou, a partir de ce
>qu'ils n'etaient pas encore, ils sont devenus ce qu'ils sont; ni non
>plus le moment ou denouant la solidite de leur figure ils vont perdre
>peu a peu leur identite.
>
>My translation:
>
>Archaeology does not try to rediscover the continuous and imperceptible
>transition which seamlessly links discourses to those that went before,
>surround or follow them. It does not wait for the moment when discourses
>became what they are, going from what they were not yet, neither for the
>moment when they little by little lose their identity as the solidity of
>their form dissolves.
He's making a point about the difference between his type of theory and
theories of progress in general and Hegel in particular, no?
-- John
>
>I'm not entirely sure whether this makes anything clearer, but I think
>it sounds a lot better (not that I'm biased)!!! It is however clearly a
>critique of methods in the history of ideas. Quibbles anyone???
>
>The quote comes from pg. 139 of 'Archaeology', Routlege edition,
>>Part IV, Chapter 1, 5th page.
>>
>> "Archaeology does not seek to rediscover the continuous,
>insensible
>> transition that relates discourses, on a gentle slope, to what
>precedes
>> them, surrounds them, or follows them. It does not await the
>>moment when, on the basis of what they were not yet, they
>became
>>what they are;
>> nor the moment when, the solidity of their figure crumbling
>away, they
>> will gradually lose their identity." (Foucault, 1972, p139)
>
>Clare
>
>Clare O'Farrell
>email:c_ofarrell@xxxxxxxxxxx
>web page: http://www.qut.edu.au/edu/cpol/foucault/
>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>