Re: Reading Against Yourself (Was: Re: Lynne Cheney's views on Foucault)

In a message dated 09/24/2000 4:02:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ahaig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

<<
What is it that makes Foucault's studies "honest and exhaustive"? I think
that Foucault would likely be the first to admit (demand?) that we engage
not merely in a "progressive" critique of the status quo, but instead in a
"sustained critique of our historical era." It seems that this would mean
much more than merely applying Foucault -- perhaps even reading Foucault
against himself (yourself/ourselves?)?
>>

well, I can see the idiocy to which this argument is heading. it isn't as if
these folks have a record. if you want to know why I think that Foucault is
*honest and exhaustive* all you have to do is read him, and compare the
extent of his research and the breadth of his argument to that of Ms Cheney.
any *sustained critique* of our historical era would put Ms Cheney in exactly
the light that I have focused on her. it's not me who's being postmodern
here, but you. I suppose we could have a balanced intellectual discussion
vis a vis the likes of Ms Cheney, but we'd have to ignore the bloody reality
that accompanies this crowd.

jb...

Partial thread listing: