Sorry Jivko - I don't follow the logic of your last mail.
I am also puzzled as to why you are trying to discern my reasons for
not writing much about the notion of enonce!
I think AK is central to understanding almost all of Foucault. There
are long contextual readings of Histoire de la folie, Birth of the
Clinic, Discipline and Punish, etc. In discussing the theory I look at
AK and Les mots et les choses (The Order of Things) in depth. The stuff
on enonce is in there - it's not much, but i do cover it. There are
lots of discussions of lectures and shorter pieces. It's reasonably
comprehensive. Really, the only major work of Foucault's i don't
discuss at length is The History of Sexuality - which is what I am
working on now.
Stuart
--
I am also puzzled as to why you are trying to discern my reasons for
not writing much about the notion of enonce!
I think AK is central to understanding almost all of Foucault. There
are long contextual readings of Histoire de la folie, Birth of the
Clinic, Discipline and Punish, etc. In discussing the theory I look at
AK and Les mots et les choses (The Order of Things) in depth. The stuff
on enonce is in there - it's not much, but i do cover it. There are
lots of discussions of lectures and shorter pieces. It's reasonably
comprehensive. Really, the only major work of Foucault's i don't
discuss at length is The History of Sexuality - which is what I am
working on now.
Stuart
--