the questions raised about the relationship between Foucault the 'person'
and Foucault the 'theorist' are very hard to answer by the token of the
man's own comments on the subject. On one hand, he insists there is only
an "tenuous analytical link" between a theorists life and the work. On the
other hand there is both his idea of a specific, engaged intellectual as
well as the notion of the "experience book"-- that his texts were the
production of particular experiences he had rather than philisophical
pondering. This makes sense, of course. He wrote Madness and Civilization
after turning from an early interest in psychology and actually
_experiencing_ asylums and hospitals. Discipline and PUnish is connected
to his work with the GIP. History of Sexuality probably had to do with his
own struggles with his own sexuality. The Dider Eribon biography (very
good) *suggests* that _Birth of the Clinic_ might have arisen because
Foucault's father was a doctor, and there was a life-long tension between
the two....but whatever... The point is that while this link is only
"tenuous", its certainly there. And foucault's own thoughts on that
connection change throughout his intellectual life.
On a side note. One of my favorite interviews is "critical history,
intellectual history" AKA "structuralism and poststructuralism"...this
interview makes me wonder why the word "poststructuralism" is still a
free-floating signifer in the academic community despite foucault's
proclamation that he doesn't know what concerns such
"Poststructuralists"... its all quite amusing..
loren
utexas
At 10:19 PM 1/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
>> > The transendental principle is a priori.
>> Does anyone on this list actually read Foucault?
>
>Um...I'm talking about Kant just then, dear. Want to elaborate?
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
and Foucault the 'theorist' are very hard to answer by the token of the
man's own comments on the subject. On one hand, he insists there is only
an "tenuous analytical link" between a theorists life and the work. On the
other hand there is both his idea of a specific, engaged intellectual as
well as the notion of the "experience book"-- that his texts were the
production of particular experiences he had rather than philisophical
pondering. This makes sense, of course. He wrote Madness and Civilization
after turning from an early interest in psychology and actually
_experiencing_ asylums and hospitals. Discipline and PUnish is connected
to his work with the GIP. History of Sexuality probably had to do with his
own struggles with his own sexuality. The Dider Eribon biography (very
good) *suggests* that _Birth of the Clinic_ might have arisen because
Foucault's father was a doctor, and there was a life-long tension between
the two....but whatever... The point is that while this link is only
"tenuous", its certainly there. And foucault's own thoughts on that
connection change throughout his intellectual life.
On a side note. One of my favorite interviews is "critical history,
intellectual history" AKA "structuralism and poststructuralism"...this
interview makes me wonder why the word "poststructuralism" is still a
free-floating signifer in the academic community despite foucault's
proclamation that he doesn't know what concerns such
"Poststructuralists"... its all quite amusing..
loren
utexas
At 10:19 PM 1/31/01 -0700, you wrote:
>> > The transendental principle is a priori.
>> Does anyone on this list actually read Foucault?
>
>Um...I'm talking about Kant just then, dear. Want to elaborate?
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com