With regards to Ali's first question, I think Veyne's statement could refer more to what Foucault may have hoped to accomplish with his writing. Especially in books like Madness and Civilization, and Discipline and Punish, it is clear how Foucault is making a "diagnosis of present possibilities" and "draw[ing] up a strategic map". While these texts remain largely analyses of the historical circumstances leading to the modern psychiatric institution or prison, Foucault often commented on the nature of those institutions at the time that he was writing in interviews and lectures. However, he always insisted that he didn't understand why people called him an anti-psychiatrist, since all he did was write the history of psychiatry. It is true that Madness and Civilization barely utters a word about modern psychiatry; nevertheless, most readers sense (rightly, I think) an underlying hostility in Foucault's work. I think that this may be the "secret" to which Veyne refers. Especially since Foucault indicates the impossibility of being an 'objective' observer, his assertion that he has said nothing to impugn psychiatry should probably be taken with a grain of salt. I recall, though I don't have my copy of Power/Knowledge on me, that Foucault once said in an interview that the job of the intellectual was to provide tools to be used in local struggles. By drawing up a 'map' of the power relations surrounding, for example, the prison he hoped to assist those struggling against it. Naturally, his rendering of the topography of power would always be 'biased' and suggest some sites for struggle over others, hence the 'secret hope of influencing the choice of combats'.
As for what choices might be involved here, I think Veyne refers to Foucault's analysis of what it means to have a 'power relation'. Again, I don't have my copy of Power on me, but I know that somewhere in there he explains that a power relation, no more how infused with domination, by definition allows the subordinated several options for resistance (even when the only alternative is death). Any number of strategic options are open to prisoners (not that they are the only ones involved in the anti-prison struggle, but I think they have a privileged place in Foucault's thoughts on the matter). To name a few, there is the violence of rioting, the possibility of making their complaints heard in the media (which entails a new set of choices about which complaints to make and where), refusing to participate in the many 'rehabilitation' programs made available, and even suicide. In his writing, and certainly in his own involvement with the GIP, Foucault implicitly or explicitly encouraged some of these options over others.
Sorry, but I too have little to say about the 'question of hygiene'. Perhaps more context for the quote would help, I myself have never read Veyne.
>
>I understand Foucaultian power and strategy to refer to the shaping of
>the possibilities, options, openings and closures in the our spaces of
>action. Who and/or what does the shaping is never entirely clear in
>Foucault's writings and probably cannot be fully traced since every
>social relationship will contain an element of power and contribute to
>the shaping of our spaces of possible action (whether in deed or in
>word). In that sense I guess there is something 'secret' about it. I
>would not call this perspective 'dangerous', rather it keeps us alert,
>reminds us never to take anything for granted, never to believe we know
>the answer and understand it all. It urges us to keep asking, and that,
>in my view, is not 'dangerous' except perhaps for those who benefit from
>the way things are at the moment.
>
>I have nothing to offer on the "reasons of hygiene". I look forward to
>hearing what others may have to offer.
>
>Best regards, Jesper.
>
>Ali Rizvi wrote:
>>
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I am wrestling with two short quotes from Veyne in order to understand
>> what it exactly means to say that Foucault was a strategic thinker [not
>> every body would agree]. I am posting the two quotes below [wtih brief
>> connecting comments] to see what others have to say about the ideas
>> expressed therein. [Paul Veyne, was Foucaults colleague and very close
>> friend and one of his most perceptive commentators].
>>
>> Paul Veyne describes the aim of the Foucauldian type of philosophy as to
>> make a diagnosis of present possibilities and to draw up a strategic
>> map-with the secret hope of influencing the choice of combats (Veyne 1997
>> p. 230). What are these combats,
>> and which kinds of choices are involved? and why the hope is secret?? Some
>> would say that, this strategic philosophy with the secret hope of
>> influencing choice of combats is overtly dangerous philosophy because it is
>> secretive, and subtle, because it takes long detours which makes it hard to
>> easily grasp the direction towards which it is heading.
>>
>> Again concerning Foucault's method Veyne writes that Foucault preferred to
>> preach by example, to exemplify his method in history books rather than
>> setting it out. This was done for strategic reasons (to avoid words which
>> might shock, since the thing is not shocking, because people are already
>> living out the death of truth without knowing it); but it was done also for
>> reasons of hygiene: he preferred not to subject the idea of finitude to too
>> much scrutiny, for it is made rather to live out (Veyne 1992 p. 342). what
>> is the meaning of the pharse "for reasons of hygiene" in this context?
>>
>> I have used these fragments in different contexts before but would like to
>> delve more deep. I would like to know what others think on the issue in
>> gneneral, or any particualr issue involved in it or related to it.
>>
>> Betst regards
>> ali
>>
>> References:
>>
>> Paul Veyne (1992) Foucault and going beyond (or the fulfilment of)
>> nihilism in Armstrong ed. (1992).Michel Foucault Philosopher trans. Timothy
>> J. Armstrong (Hemel Hempstead, Harvester Wheatsheaf).
>>
>> Paul Veyne (1997) The Final Foucault and his Ethics in Davidson ed.
>> (1997).Foucault and his interlocutors (London, Chicago University Press).
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
__________________________________________________________________
Pre-order the NEW Netscape 7.0 browser. Reserve your FREE CD and pay only $2.99 shipping and handling. http://cd.netscape.com/promo_one/
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
As for what choices might be involved here, I think Veyne refers to Foucault's analysis of what it means to have a 'power relation'. Again, I don't have my copy of Power on me, but I know that somewhere in there he explains that a power relation, no more how infused with domination, by definition allows the subordinated several options for resistance (even when the only alternative is death). Any number of strategic options are open to prisoners (not that they are the only ones involved in the anti-prison struggle, but I think they have a privileged place in Foucault's thoughts on the matter). To name a few, there is the violence of rioting, the possibility of making their complaints heard in the media (which entails a new set of choices about which complaints to make and where), refusing to participate in the many 'rehabilitation' programs made available, and even suicide. In his writing, and certainly in his own involvement with the GIP, Foucault implicitly or explicitly encouraged some of these options over others.
Sorry, but I too have little to say about the 'question of hygiene'. Perhaps more context for the quote would help, I myself have never read Veyne.
>
>I understand Foucaultian power and strategy to refer to the shaping of
>the possibilities, options, openings and closures in the our spaces of
>action. Who and/or what does the shaping is never entirely clear in
>Foucault's writings and probably cannot be fully traced since every
>social relationship will contain an element of power and contribute to
>the shaping of our spaces of possible action (whether in deed or in
>word). In that sense I guess there is something 'secret' about it. I
>would not call this perspective 'dangerous', rather it keeps us alert,
>reminds us never to take anything for granted, never to believe we know
>the answer and understand it all. It urges us to keep asking, and that,
>in my view, is not 'dangerous' except perhaps for those who benefit from
>the way things are at the moment.
>
>I have nothing to offer on the "reasons of hygiene". I look forward to
>hearing what others may have to offer.
>
>Best regards, Jesper.
>
>Ali Rizvi wrote:
>>
>> Hi list,
>>
>> I am wrestling with two short quotes from Veyne in order to understand
>> what it exactly means to say that Foucault was a strategic thinker [not
>> every body would agree]. I am posting the two quotes below [wtih brief
>> connecting comments] to see what others have to say about the ideas
>> expressed therein. [Paul Veyne, was Foucaults colleague and very close
>> friend and one of his most perceptive commentators].
>>
>> Paul Veyne describes the aim of the Foucauldian type of philosophy as to
>> make a diagnosis of present possibilities and to draw up a strategic
>> map-with the secret hope of influencing the choice of combats (Veyne 1997
>> p. 230). What are these combats,
>> and which kinds of choices are involved? and why the hope is secret?? Some
>> would say that, this strategic philosophy with the secret hope of
>> influencing choice of combats is overtly dangerous philosophy because it is
>> secretive, and subtle, because it takes long detours which makes it hard to
>> easily grasp the direction towards which it is heading.
>>
>> Again concerning Foucault's method Veyne writes that Foucault preferred to
>> preach by example, to exemplify his method in history books rather than
>> setting it out. This was done for strategic reasons (to avoid words which
>> might shock, since the thing is not shocking, because people are already
>> living out the death of truth without knowing it); but it was done also for
>> reasons of hygiene: he preferred not to subject the idea of finitude to too
>> much scrutiny, for it is made rather to live out (Veyne 1992 p. 342). what
>> is the meaning of the pharse "for reasons of hygiene" in this context?
>>
>> I have used these fragments in different contexts before but would like to
>> delve more deep. I would like to know what others think on the issue in
>> gneneral, or any particualr issue involved in it or related to it.
>>
>> Betst regards
>> ali
>>
>> References:
>>
>> Paul Veyne (1992) Foucault and going beyond (or the fulfilment of)
>> nihilism in Armstrong ed. (1992).Michel Foucault Philosopher trans. Timothy
>> J. Armstrong (Hemel Hempstead, Harvester Wheatsheaf).
>>
>> Paul Veyne (1997) The Final Foucault and his Ethics in Davidson ed.
>> (1997).Foucault and his interlocutors (London, Chicago University Press).
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
__________________________________________________________________
Pre-order the NEW Netscape 7.0 browser. Reserve your FREE CD and pay only $2.99 shipping and handling. http://cd.netscape.com/promo_one/
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/