Well, lets see ...who didnt read the book:-)))
In a place, which a cannot point right now, he sais
that this book is not theory, i.e. it does not have
deductive form, and in that moment the book is not
grown enough to become theory. So, a friend of mine
told me :"wait,this is archeaology, its not theory-
because the archeologist have his hands dirty, and the
theorist dont"
But there is a certain theory in that book:exactly,
the theory of l'enonces, and another part, which is
not exactly theory.
Derrida is here, as i mentioned - and is all the time
logo(locu)centrism springing from everyone in the
conference.
So thats why i think that the west is logocentric, and
the rest of the world is not so logocentric. For
example we , Bulgarians, we are more musical.
regards!
Jivko
--- Stuart Elden <stuart.elden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I guess i'd say that it's not that we 'should
> search' but we could,
> potentially.
>
> As for the worry, that seems interesting. I'd say it
> is way of
> investigating, rather than an all-encompassing
> explanation. It yields
> localised results rather than grand theory. But it
> would, i guess depend on
> what you, and Foucault, mean by theory.
>
> I don't have a problem with theory! Perhaps you
> could say more
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Jivko
> Georgiev
> Sent: 14 November 2001 17:43
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: L'enonce /German influenced French
> guys..
>
>
> Thank You for this answer!
> And it scares me a little. Because if we should
> search
> in every, or almost every, practice for the
> discursive
> practice that enables it, it will not work( but here
> im starting to see the theory of the
> performatives).He
> claims that archeaology is not theory, but if you
> assert, that the practices are born of the
> discursive
> practices,of all that realy large discursive field,
> than you make theory out of the archeaology. Or
> maybe
> I am wrong, if i do, sorry.
> Jaques Derrida will be here, in Sofia. In friday.
> For three days conference.
> Should i convey your good wishes to him:-))))
>
> jivko
>
> --- Stuart Elden <stuart.elden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 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
> >
> > --
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com
In a place, which a cannot point right now, he sais
that this book is not theory, i.e. it does not have
deductive form, and in that moment the book is not
grown enough to become theory. So, a friend of mine
told me :"wait,this is archeaology, its not theory-
because the archeologist have his hands dirty, and the
theorist dont"
But there is a certain theory in that book:exactly,
the theory of l'enonces, and another part, which is
not exactly theory.
Derrida is here, as i mentioned - and is all the time
logo(locu)centrism springing from everyone in the
conference.
So thats why i think that the west is logocentric, and
the rest of the world is not so logocentric. For
example we , Bulgarians, we are more musical.
regards!
Jivko
--- Stuart Elden <stuart.elden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I guess i'd say that it's not that we 'should
> search' but we could,
> potentially.
>
> As for the worry, that seems interesting. I'd say it
> is way of
> investigating, rather than an all-encompassing
> explanation. It yields
> localised results rather than grand theory. But it
> would, i guess depend on
> what you, and Foucault, mean by theory.
>
> I don't have a problem with theory! Perhaps you
> could say more
>
> Stuart
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Jivko
> Georgiev
> Sent: 14 November 2001 17:43
> To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: L'enonce /German influenced French
> guys..
>
>
> Thank You for this answer!
> And it scares me a little. Because if we should
> search
> in every, or almost every, practice for the
> discursive
> practice that enables it, it will not work( but here
> im starting to see the theory of the
> performatives).He
> claims that archeaology is not theory, but if you
> assert, that the practices are born of the
> discursive
> practices,of all that realy large discursive field,
> than you make theory out of the archeaology. Or
> maybe
> I am wrong, if i do, sorry.
> Jaques Derrida will be here, in Sofia. In friday.
> For three days conference.
> Should i convey your good wishes to him:-))))
>
> jivko
>
> --- Stuart Elden <stuart.elden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 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
> >
> > --
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Find the one for you at Yahoo! Personals
http://personals.yahoo.com