I hope that this may be somewhat helpful:
"Pouvoir is of course, 'power.' But there is also a sense of 'can-do'-ness
in 'pouvoir,' if only because, in its various conjugations, it is the
commonest way of saying 'can' in the French language. If power/knowledge is
seen as the only translation of 'pouvoir/savoir,' it monumentalizes Foucault
unnecessarily. The French language possesses quite a number of these
doublets....The trick is to get some of the homely verbiness of savoir in
savoir-faire, savoir-vivre into pouvoir; if you do, you might come up with
something like this: if the lines of making sense of something are laid down
in a certain way, then you are able to do only those things with that
something which are possible within and by the arrangement of those lines.
Pouvoir-savoir -- being able to do something -- only as you are able to make
sense of it....Power as productive rather than merely repressive resolves
itself in a certain way if you don't forget the ordinary sense of
pouvoir/savoir. Repression is then seen as a species of production. There is
no need to valorize repression as negative and production as positive." (p
151)
&
"Foucault's final focusing on the relationship of the self to the experience
of the flesh is a practical ontology. Transformed into a reflex, such a
practical ontology comes to contaminate the ontic, but, kept as a code, it
straddles the ontico-ontological difference in a way that full-dress moral
philosophies will, indeed can, never do: 'the care of the flesh is ethically
prior [ethiquement premier] in the measure that the relationship to the self
is ontologically prior.' This is pouvoir-savoir at ground level, 'the
working of thought upon itself...as critical activity,' not at degree zero."
(p 157)
both are from "More on Power/Knowledge" by Gayatri Spivak, the page numbers
are from _The Spivak Reader_.
Please excuse the lengthy quotes.
RF
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bryan C
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 5:50 PM
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Power and the Subject
I don't understand, you said that people's agency is formed by
norms. How can one will to reshape norms without a free will?
The fact that I can reject the norm speaks of my free will, a
will that exists before the norms are imposed on me and is
capable of liberating itself from them.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
"Pouvoir is of course, 'power.' But there is also a sense of 'can-do'-ness
in 'pouvoir,' if only because, in its various conjugations, it is the
commonest way of saying 'can' in the French language. If power/knowledge is
seen as the only translation of 'pouvoir/savoir,' it monumentalizes Foucault
unnecessarily. The French language possesses quite a number of these
doublets....The trick is to get some of the homely verbiness of savoir in
savoir-faire, savoir-vivre into pouvoir; if you do, you might come up with
something like this: if the lines of making sense of something are laid down
in a certain way, then you are able to do only those things with that
something which are possible within and by the arrangement of those lines.
Pouvoir-savoir -- being able to do something -- only as you are able to make
sense of it....Power as productive rather than merely repressive resolves
itself in a certain way if you don't forget the ordinary sense of
pouvoir/savoir. Repression is then seen as a species of production. There is
no need to valorize repression as negative and production as positive." (p
151)
&
"Foucault's final focusing on the relationship of the self to the experience
of the flesh is a practical ontology. Transformed into a reflex, such a
practical ontology comes to contaminate the ontic, but, kept as a code, it
straddles the ontico-ontological difference in a way that full-dress moral
philosophies will, indeed can, never do: 'the care of the flesh is ethically
prior [ethiquement premier] in the measure that the relationship to the self
is ontologically prior.' This is pouvoir-savoir at ground level, 'the
working of thought upon itself...as critical activity,' not at degree zero."
(p 157)
both are from "More on Power/Knowledge" by Gayatri Spivak, the page numbers
are from _The Spivak Reader_.
Please excuse the lengthy quotes.
RF
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Bryan C
Sent: Sunday, January 28, 2001 5:50 PM
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Power and the Subject
I don't understand, you said that people's agency is formed by
norms. How can one will to reshape norms without a free will?
The fact that I can reject the norm speaks of my free will, a
will that exists before the norms are imposed on me and is
capable of liberating itself from them.
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com