--=====================_56331880==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I am surprised that this discussion, valuable as it is, tends to conflates
two issues: textuality, on the one hand, and traditional concerns with
"explanation" on the other.
Of course, Foucault's homosexuality, or ethnicity, or height, or taste in
food in no way corrupt, enhance, or affect, his texts. As he has pointed
out, texts like his were normally anonymous during the middle ages, in much
the same way that "scientific" texts are essentially anonymous
today. Texts named Foucault clearly stand on their own and must be treated
independently of authorship.
It would seem to me, however, that people interested in Foucault, perhaps
the foremost analyst of transgression and its sources, limits, etc. would
be very curious to attempt to explore the origins of these transgressive
texts. How, in short, did it come about that Foucault prepared texts with
these subjects, perspectives, and interests? Why Foucault, that is, and
not someone else?
Would it be stretching plausibility to suggest that a man who found himself
converted from a "pervert" to an "orientation" within the very discourse of
psychology in which he began his studies might have found interest (not to
mention a certain Nietzschean amusement) in that turn of events? If so,
Foucault's homosexualty may certainly help to explain the being of his
texts, while in no way affecting their independence of him.
Yours,
Walt
--=====================_56331880==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<font size=3>I am surprised that this discussion, valuable as it is,
tends to conflates two issues: textuality, on the one hand, and
traditional concerns with "explanation" on the other.<br>
<br>
Of course, Foucault's homosexuality, or ethnicity, or height, or taste in
food in no way corrupt, enhance, or affect, his texts. As he has
pointed out, texts like his were normally anonymous during the middle
ages, in much the same way that "scientific" texts are
essentially anonymous today. Texts named Foucault clearly stand on
their own and must be treated independently of authorship.<br>
<br>
It would seem to me, however, that people interested in Foucault, perhaps
the foremost analyst of transgression and its sources, limits, etc. would
be very curious to attempt to explore the origins of these transgressive
texts. How, in short, did it come about that Foucault prepared texts with
these subjects, perspectives, and interests? Why Foucault, that is,
and not someone else?<br>
<br>
Would it be stretching plausibility to suggest that a man who found
himself converted from a "pervert" to an
"orientation" within the very discourse of psychology in which
he began his studies might have found interest (not to mention a certain
Nietzschean amusement) in that turn of events? If so,
Foucault's homosexualty may certainly help to explain the being of his
texts, while in no way affecting their independence of him.<br>
<br>
Yours,<br>
Walt</font></html>
--=====================_56331880==_.ALT--
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I am surprised that this discussion, valuable as it is, tends to conflates
two issues: textuality, on the one hand, and traditional concerns with
"explanation" on the other.
Of course, Foucault's homosexuality, or ethnicity, or height, or taste in
food in no way corrupt, enhance, or affect, his texts. As he has pointed
out, texts like his were normally anonymous during the middle ages, in much
the same way that "scientific" texts are essentially anonymous
today. Texts named Foucault clearly stand on their own and must be treated
independently of authorship.
It would seem to me, however, that people interested in Foucault, perhaps
the foremost analyst of transgression and its sources, limits, etc. would
be very curious to attempt to explore the origins of these transgressive
texts. How, in short, did it come about that Foucault prepared texts with
these subjects, perspectives, and interests? Why Foucault, that is, and
not someone else?
Would it be stretching plausibility to suggest that a man who found himself
converted from a "pervert" to an "orientation" within the very discourse of
psychology in which he began his studies might have found interest (not to
mention a certain Nietzschean amusement) in that turn of events? If so,
Foucault's homosexualty may certainly help to explain the being of his
texts, while in no way affecting their independence of him.
Yours,
Walt
--=====================_56331880==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
<html>
<font size=3>I am surprised that this discussion, valuable as it is,
tends to conflates two issues: textuality, on the one hand, and
traditional concerns with "explanation" on the other.<br>
<br>
Of course, Foucault's homosexuality, or ethnicity, or height, or taste in
food in no way corrupt, enhance, or affect, his texts. As he has
pointed out, texts like his were normally anonymous during the middle
ages, in much the same way that "scientific" texts are
essentially anonymous today. Texts named Foucault clearly stand on
their own and must be treated independently of authorship.<br>
<br>
It would seem to me, however, that people interested in Foucault, perhaps
the foremost analyst of transgression and its sources, limits, etc. would
be very curious to attempt to explore the origins of these transgressive
texts. How, in short, did it come about that Foucault prepared texts with
these subjects, perspectives, and interests? Why Foucault, that is,
and not someone else?<br>
<br>
Would it be stretching plausibility to suggest that a man who found
himself converted from a "pervert" to an
"orientation" within the very discourse of psychology in which
he began his studies might have found interest (not to mention a certain
Nietzschean amusement) in that turn of events? If so,
Foucault's homosexualty may certainly help to explain the being of his
texts, while in no way affecting their independence of him.<br>
<br>
Yours,<br>
Walt</font></html>
--=====================_56331880==_.ALT--