hello Johnathan,
May I suggest "History of sexuality, Vol 1".
The reasons I suggest this is because its style is quite precise... by
that I mean it sort of presents a summary (for want of a better word)
of Foucault's thinking. The first chapter (from memory, I don't have
it with me) "The repressive hypothesis" is one of the best refusals
of negation I have read. Also chapter 3 (I think?) has a precise
outline of his method in analyzing power. Read it slowly and
thoughtfully, relating it to your experiences of living, if need be.
It is only a small book.
Other then this suggestion, anything by F that works for you will do.
Don't worry if you don't understand something the first reading. F is
such a wonderful writer that I read him for the joy of it, rather
then taking a proper scholarly approach which demands you fully
understand every word and be able to argue the logic or place it
historically in a cannon of "great" philosophical works. I feel F is
better approached by reading for the fun of reading. There is much
pleasure to be had from him.
Power/knowledge, I found made more sense after reading History...vol
1, but that is only my experience. Different readers may have
different stories to tell. Archeology of Knowledge I found useful for
F notions of the episteme. I guess, what I am saying is I read F not
to comprehend his entire thought but to understand various parts
of his thinking that connect to my own projects. F allows you to
invent new ways of thinking and writing.
That's my approach, anyhow. Hope it helps.
enjoy,
Chris Jones.
ps Have you read Nietzsche, that also helps with F. I read N after F,
not first, though. So maybe F helped with N?
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000, you wrote:
> hello,
>
> i'm sorry to burst into your listserve uninvited, but i was hoping to find
> some help. when i stumbled across it some time ago i was impressed with
> everyone's knowledge of foucault and kept it as a bookmark for future
> reference. basically, i've read very little of foucault's writing, although
> i've read some secondary stuff as well as others' which has benifited from
> foucault. i'd like to break into reading foucault himself, but i'm not sure
> what i should begin with. i considered madness, but decided against it
> because it was early (i thought his writing might be more clear in later
> works). so i considered discipline, but was uncertain about that because it
> was so much later and might take for granted the reader's knowledge of his
> work. i began archaeology because i understood it to be the closest thing to
> an explanation of a methodology, but some portions were fairly difficult and
> i've heard that sheridan smith's english translation is pretty shady.
> finally, i considered rabinow's foucault reader, but while those who are
> familiar with foucault say that it is simple and good for a mere
> introduction, those who are not familiar with him already say that it is
> difficult.
>
> i was hoping someone could point me in the right direction.
>
> while i've read only portions of foucault's actual writing, i am somewhat
> familiar with the major themes of postmodernity. my background is
> philosophy, but i've also read on such foucault-influinced subjects as the
> New Historicism of literary theory. basically, i believe i have enough
> foundation to get into foucault, i'm just wondering where i should start.
>
> i'd appreciate any advice/response at all.
> thanks!
>
> jonathan f. keesecker
>
>
> ps. what about power/knowledge? i've read portions and it seemed not too
> unclear, but i've heard it can be difficult.
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com