A brief correction:
Thus it seems to me that the issue at hand is not whether or not D.
ignores that F. said the power-resistance couplet is not one of resistance
[should read "one of opposition"],
but whether or not Deleuze's description of Foucauldian power as a molar
effect of desire and not as a primary constitutive force has anything to it?
Cheers,
Dan
Thus it seems to me that the issue at hand is not whether or not D.
ignores that F. said the power-resistance couplet is not one of resistance
[should read "one of opposition"],
but whether or not Deleuze's description of Foucauldian power as a molar
effect of desire and not as a primary constitutive force has anything to it?
Cheers,
Dan