It seems to me that Foucault is very against identity politics; identity
is one way power exercises control over individuals by pre-defining what
they are and may become. to say that power is productive is merely to
say that all is power, power is everywhere in discourse and it is
through discourse that we form ourselves. Power being everywhere is a
way to dismiss the notion that language offers access to freedom or
truth, discourse a la Nietzsche is a form of power exercised on us and
the meanings we give to our lives. to accept an identity is to submit to
power, passive while it seems to me that Foucault is asking us to remain
active, to exercise power through discourse as well as realizing that we
can never totally escape it, and find the happy place of pure true
discourse. A pure true discourse that will enable us to define ourselves
free from 'power' (pre definitions). It seems to me that power is really
just a term for pre definitions, for the context we are thrown into and
can never transcend totally_we can only transgress the limits to our
meaning.
I don't think that Foucault ever gets rid of volition, agency?it is a
misreading of his work to see that we are determined, rather we are
caught in a dialectic or predefinitions (social meanings that we use to
make our selves) and the indeterminacy of the language that makes
us?even in Discipline and Punish it is possible for the 'subjects' to
transgress the meanings imposed on them?that is why the goal of the
reformers is not successful, language never inscribes one meaning into
us; and there is the subsequent need for the social body to act again on
the body (lock it up) and to give up on controlling the prisoners (for
the prison has its own rules) and it tries to act on the population in
general through the figure of the delinquent (but the delinquent has
several subversive meanings (hero for the underclass as an example).
Volition in Foucault comes from the inadequacy of the tools used to make
us?direct force on body or discourse.
is one way power exercises control over individuals by pre-defining what
they are and may become. to say that power is productive is merely to
say that all is power, power is everywhere in discourse and it is
through discourse that we form ourselves. Power being everywhere is a
way to dismiss the notion that language offers access to freedom or
truth, discourse a la Nietzsche is a form of power exercised on us and
the meanings we give to our lives. to accept an identity is to submit to
power, passive while it seems to me that Foucault is asking us to remain
active, to exercise power through discourse as well as realizing that we
can never totally escape it, and find the happy place of pure true
discourse. A pure true discourse that will enable us to define ourselves
free from 'power' (pre definitions). It seems to me that power is really
just a term for pre definitions, for the context we are thrown into and
can never transcend totally_we can only transgress the limits to our
meaning.
I don't think that Foucault ever gets rid of volition, agency?it is a
misreading of his work to see that we are determined, rather we are
caught in a dialectic or predefinitions (social meanings that we use to
make our selves) and the indeterminacy of the language that makes
us?even in Discipline and Punish it is possible for the 'subjects' to
transgress the meanings imposed on them?that is why the goal of the
reformers is not successful, language never inscribes one meaning into
us; and there is the subsequent need for the social body to act again on
the body (lock it up) and to give up on controlling the prisoners (for
the prison has its own rules) and it tries to act on the population in
general through the figure of the delinquent (but the delinquent has
several subversive meanings (hero for the underclass as an example).
Volition in Foucault comes from the inadequacy of the tools used to make
us?direct force on body or discourse.