On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Matthew King wrote:
> I guess the interesting question is whether they remain enslavements only
> so long as they remain invisible, or whether invisible enslavements are
> present whenever and however one engages with a text (self-help or
> otherwise--
my (not so) short response to the first part of your question: no,
self-enslavement need not be invisible to be understood as enslavement.
but the discussion you refer to was directed at self-help literature
*specifically* (my apologies for not making that clear). The point i was
trying to make was that 'the triumph of the therapeutic' or popular
psychological 'self-help' as a cultural practice can be understood as
institutionalizing essentialist and universalist (amongst others) power
relations. By binding the individual to an almost exclusive focus on the
"private" or personal these power relations become 'invisible' and
non-negotiable. These power relations (in self-help texts) cultivate the
idea that one can escape from the constraints and regulations of certain
social relationships by producing and constituting the atomized
self-constituting psychological subject. So...the discursive production of
the 'self-helping subject' can be conceived as an effect of discourse (in
this case, pop psychology) naturalizing itself and thereby rendering the
effects of power - selves - as natural self-governing objects in a
(pre)discursive world.
and what's the difference between the "enslavement" of engaging
> with self-help texts and engaging with philosophy texts, anyway?),
i would guess that there exists both differences AND similarities between
these two types of texts (if you would permit me to categorize if only for
analytic reasons...). Historically, (ie the Ancient world) there may not
have been any distinct differences between these sorts of texts, but this
is another sort of question i dont feel qualified in answering. perhaps
someone else would like to jump in here...My tale on self-enslavement was
in particular relation to self-help literature "proper" - eg codependency,
the psycho-spiritual, and generic formula oriented books. Beyond that, I
appreciated your questions. Am also trying to "answer" the other, more
general questions you posited about skepticism, freedom, self-help,
irony, governance, choice - let me know if you figure it out...
Is it possible that I saw you give a talk at the Learneds last June?
best,
heidi
> I guess the interesting question is whether they remain enslavements only
> so long as they remain invisible, or whether invisible enslavements are
> present whenever and however one engages with a text (self-help or
> otherwise--
my (not so) short response to the first part of your question: no,
self-enslavement need not be invisible to be understood as enslavement.
but the discussion you refer to was directed at self-help literature
*specifically* (my apologies for not making that clear). The point i was
trying to make was that 'the triumph of the therapeutic' or popular
psychological 'self-help' as a cultural practice can be understood as
institutionalizing essentialist and universalist (amongst others) power
relations. By binding the individual to an almost exclusive focus on the
"private" or personal these power relations become 'invisible' and
non-negotiable. These power relations (in self-help texts) cultivate the
idea that one can escape from the constraints and regulations of certain
social relationships by producing and constituting the atomized
self-constituting psychological subject. So...the discursive production of
the 'self-helping subject' can be conceived as an effect of discourse (in
this case, pop psychology) naturalizing itself and thereby rendering the
effects of power - selves - as natural self-governing objects in a
(pre)discursive world.
and what's the difference between the "enslavement" of engaging
> with self-help texts and engaging with philosophy texts, anyway?),
i would guess that there exists both differences AND similarities between
these two types of texts (if you would permit me to categorize if only for
analytic reasons...). Historically, (ie the Ancient world) there may not
have been any distinct differences between these sorts of texts, but this
is another sort of question i dont feel qualified in answering. perhaps
someone else would like to jump in here...My tale on self-enslavement was
in particular relation to self-help literature "proper" - eg codependency,
the psycho-spiritual, and generic formula oriented books. Beyond that, I
appreciated your questions. Am also trying to "answer" the other, more
general questions you posited about skepticism, freedom, self-help,
irony, governance, choice - let me know if you figure it out...
Is it possible that I saw you give a talk at the Learneds last June?
best,
heidi