Dear Stuart,
You were looking for a reference for Butler's The Psychic Life of Power,
and here it is:
Butler, Judith (1997) The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Char
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Stuart Elden wrote:
> Hi Nathan
>
> There are probably a number of places. But the best I know is a quote from
> an interview i don't think is in English, and isn't in Dits et ecrits. It's
> quoted by David Macey, The Lives of Michel Foucault, p. 365 ('Le gai savoir
> II', Mec Magazine 6/7, Jul-Aug 1988, p.32).
>
> I am advancing this term [pleasure] because it seems to me that it escapes
> the medical and naturalistic connotations inherent in the notion of desire.
> That notion has been used as a tool... a callibration in terms of normality:
> 'Tell me what your desire is and I will tell you who you are, whether you
> are normal or not, and then i can qualify or disqualify your desire...' The
> term 'pleasure' on the other hand is virgin territory, almost devoid of
> meaning. There is no pathology of pleasure, no 'abnormal' pleasure. It is an
> event 'outside the subject' or on the edge of the subject, within something
> that is neither body nor soul, which is neither inside nor outside, in short
> a notion which is neither ascribed nor ascribable.
>
> I like this, but Freud refers to the Lustobjeckt of homosexuality - the
> object that gives pleasure, so I'm not sure if Foucault is entirely correct
> here.
>
> BTW, it is usually plaisirs, pleasures... so the book The Use of Pleasure is
> probably wrong.
>
> Two related issues: someone mentioned a Judith Butler piece called 'The
> Psychic Life of Power' - can you provide a reference please?
>
> And Macey also quotes Foucault saying 'pleasure has no passport, no
> identity' (p. 364). He suggests it's in the piece that was the introduction
> to the Herculine Barbin book, but only in the French version. I can't find
> it in either. Any ideas?
>
> Thanks
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Nathan
> Widder
> Sent: 10 February 2000 22:17
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: (no subject)
>
>
> I was wondering if anyone out there could recall a place -- or, rather,
> places, I'm sure there are many -- where Foucault makes the point in
> about a sentence or two that we moderns have linked together desire and
> truth and forgotten completely about pleasure? The passage I'm vaguely
> recollecting was a rather casual statement, so I think it's from an
> interview, but I can't seem to find it anywhere.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Nathan
> n.e.widder@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>
You were looking for a reference for Butler's The Psychic Life of Power,
and here it is:
Butler, Judith (1997) The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection.
Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Char
On Thu, 10 Feb 2000, Stuart Elden wrote:
> Hi Nathan
>
> There are probably a number of places. But the best I know is a quote from
> an interview i don't think is in English, and isn't in Dits et ecrits. It's
> quoted by David Macey, The Lives of Michel Foucault, p. 365 ('Le gai savoir
> II', Mec Magazine 6/7, Jul-Aug 1988, p.32).
>
> I am advancing this term [pleasure] because it seems to me that it escapes
> the medical and naturalistic connotations inherent in the notion of desire.
> That notion has been used as a tool... a callibration in terms of normality:
> 'Tell me what your desire is and I will tell you who you are, whether you
> are normal or not, and then i can qualify or disqualify your desire...' The
> term 'pleasure' on the other hand is virgin territory, almost devoid of
> meaning. There is no pathology of pleasure, no 'abnormal' pleasure. It is an
> event 'outside the subject' or on the edge of the subject, within something
> that is neither body nor soul, which is neither inside nor outside, in short
> a notion which is neither ascribed nor ascribable.
>
> I like this, but Freud refers to the Lustobjeckt of homosexuality - the
> object that gives pleasure, so I'm not sure if Foucault is entirely correct
> here.
>
> BTW, it is usually plaisirs, pleasures... so the book The Use of Pleasure is
> probably wrong.
>
> Two related issues: someone mentioned a Judith Butler piece called 'The
> Psychic Life of Power' - can you provide a reference please?
>
> And Macey also quotes Foucault saying 'pleasure has no passport, no
> identity' (p. 364). He suggests it's in the piece that was the introduction
> to the Herculine Barbin book, but only in the French version. I can't find
> it in either. Any ideas?
>
> Thanks
>
> Stuart
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Nathan
> Widder
> Sent: 10 February 2000 22:17
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: (no subject)
>
>
> I was wondering if anyone out there could recall a place -- or, rather,
> places, I'm sure there are many -- where Foucault makes the point in
> about a sentence or two that we moderns have linked together desire and
> truth and forgotten completely about pleasure? The passage I'm vaguely
> recollecting was a rather casual statement, so I think it's from an
> interview, but I can't seem to find it anywhere.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Nathan
> n.e.widder@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>
>