Daniel
A quick response as I'm busy preparing for my viva. First, this piece
appeared in French as "Par-dela le bien et le mal", so the English title
perhaps gives the 'until now' undue emphasis. The speech of F you mention
reads:
"Ce qui me frappe dans votre raisonnement, c'est qu'il tient dans la forme
du jusqu'a present. Or cette entreprise revolutionnaire est precisement
dirigee non seulement contre le present, mais contre la loi du jusqu'a
present" (excuse the lack of accents). Dits et ecrits, Vol II, p236.
The English translation you cite reads:
What strikes me in your argument is that it takes the form
"until now." However, a revolutionary undertaking is directed
not only against the present but against the rule of "until
now" (p. 233).
This isn't terrible, but misses the link between 'present' and 'jusqu'a
present'. I think Foucault is saying that we undertake revolutionary action
not just against the current situation (the present) but against the
precedents that might appear to be parallels. The previous interlocutor
cites a number of examples of revolutionary action that failed to achieve
what was desired (i.e. they simply replaced, rather than surpassed, forms of
power existing beforehand). You can see the exact examples given if you look
back at the speech by 'Frederic'. F is suggesting future events need not
replicate the same patterns, that 'Frederic' is universalising what might be
contingent circumstances, etc. So, revolutionary action is directed against
the present, but also against precedent.
At least, that's my (quick) reading. Whether F is correct to suggest this is
another question: I happen to think there is something very important at
stake here. I hope this makes it clearer.
Best
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Smith <dls216@xxxxxxx>
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, April 19, 1999 16:36
Subject: Revolutionary Action:"Until Now"
>Greetings all:
>
>I've just finished reading the dialogue "Revolutionary
>Action: 'Until Now'," reprinted in _Language, Counter-Memory,
>Practice_ and am having trouble interpreting the last
>statement by Foucault. In response to an interlocutor's
>statments about "the fundamental contradiction of revolutionary
>action," Foucault replies:
>
>What strikes me in your argument is that it takes the form
>"until now." However, a revolutionary undertaking is directed
>not only against the present but against the rule of "until
>now" (p. 233).
>
>Would anyone mind unpacking that a bit for me? I must admit,
>somewhat sheepishly, that I find it a bit cryptic -
>especially in response to the passage that precedes it.
>Did something get lost in translation, or I am missing
>something?
>
>thanks,
>dan
>
>
>
A quick response as I'm busy preparing for my viva. First, this piece
appeared in French as "Par-dela le bien et le mal", so the English title
perhaps gives the 'until now' undue emphasis. The speech of F you mention
reads:
"Ce qui me frappe dans votre raisonnement, c'est qu'il tient dans la forme
du jusqu'a present. Or cette entreprise revolutionnaire est precisement
dirigee non seulement contre le present, mais contre la loi du jusqu'a
present" (excuse the lack of accents). Dits et ecrits, Vol II, p236.
The English translation you cite reads:
What strikes me in your argument is that it takes the form
"until now." However, a revolutionary undertaking is directed
not only against the present but against the rule of "until
now" (p. 233).
This isn't terrible, but misses the link between 'present' and 'jusqu'a
present'. I think Foucault is saying that we undertake revolutionary action
not just against the current situation (the present) but against the
precedents that might appear to be parallels. The previous interlocutor
cites a number of examples of revolutionary action that failed to achieve
what was desired (i.e. they simply replaced, rather than surpassed, forms of
power existing beforehand). You can see the exact examples given if you look
back at the speech by 'Frederic'. F is suggesting future events need not
replicate the same patterns, that 'Frederic' is universalising what might be
contingent circumstances, etc. So, revolutionary action is directed against
the present, but also against precedent.
At least, that's my (quick) reading. Whether F is correct to suggest this is
another question: I happen to think there is something very important at
stake here. I hope this makes it clearer.
Best
Stuart
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Smith <dls216@xxxxxxx>
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Monday, April 19, 1999 16:36
Subject: Revolutionary Action:"Until Now"
>Greetings all:
>
>I've just finished reading the dialogue "Revolutionary
>Action: 'Until Now'," reprinted in _Language, Counter-Memory,
>Practice_ and am having trouble interpreting the last
>statement by Foucault. In response to an interlocutor's
>statments about "the fundamental contradiction of revolutionary
>action," Foucault replies:
>
>What strikes me in your argument is that it takes the form
>"until now." However, a revolutionary undertaking is directed
>not only against the present but against the rule of "until
>now" (p. 233).
>
>Would anyone mind unpacking that a bit for me? I must admit,
>somewhat sheepishly, that I find it a bit cryptic -
>especially in response to the passage that precedes it.
>Did something get lost in translation, or I am missing
>something?
>
>thanks,
>dan
>
>
>