>From: Jill Molan <Jill.Molan@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:14:59 +1000
>I'm still quite confused about what Lionel meant by 'drug gaze' - 'the
>gaze of the underground drug traficing profession' (as per Lionel's
>original post) - and it's been challenged a couple of times without
>clarification - can you elaborate on what you mean by it Lionel? How
>does this use of the term 'gaze' correspond with Foucault's use of it?
My impression of what Foucault's gaze means is that it represents the
capability of some sort of human group (profession or some other collection
of people) to influence power over the wider community. Where Foucault
identified medical gaze and then judicial gaze, I have noticed that
feminists have extended that idea to male gaze. Chris Weedon (1987, p. 23)
is a Feminist who suggests that paternalistic society has supressed feminine
aspects of humanity through something that could be described as a
Foucauldian gaze. While I acknowledge that the Feminist movement has
largely drawn of Foucualt with at best a veneer of academic integrity, the
concept does provide a seed for more serious academic exploration. In my
thesis I suggest that management excudes some sort of Foucauldian gaze that
is responsible for the complacency that impedes some organisations
appropriately dealing with sustainability. I have developed this idea with
some analogies drawn from electromagnetic theory to show that cultures
produce residue that leaders need to deal with before they can change
directions.
Relating more specifically to my drug gaze postings:
My impression is that the drug enthusiast community (in an earlier posting I
flipantly referred to this as 'the drug traficing profession') does indeed
excude some sort of "cheech and chong" enthusiastic and captivating ritual
that draws people into participating in a
look-at-me-I-can-do-it-too-fun-club where they consume, deal and create
drugs. There is some sort of aura about that sucks people in. I have felt
it when I lived in a northern Melbourne suburb 15 years ago, and I felt it
when I lived in the mountains outside Melbourne 14 years ago, and I felt it
when I lived in inner-suburban Melbourne 13 years ago, and I have seen it in
corporate Melbourne. I saw it on a less-all-encompassing scale in
Toronto-the-good where I grew up.
About five years ago there were major stories in Melbourne newspapers about
executives who were involved in drug consumption in a rather serious way.
These poeple had families, big houses and children enrolled in expensive
schools. They had been found out to have stuffed up businesses. One CEO
drove a potentially highly successful business into the ground and then
somehow staggered off a cliff while he was walking his daughter along the
top of the cliff (I happened to attend the funeral through some a series of
interconnected friendships). His friends said he lost his balance and the
investment community said he jumped. I met the fellow once and cannot
really make a judgement. My impression was that he was a lovely person who
had been led astray down several gutters of resistance quite unecessarily -
a tragedy that he amounted to such a useless sum at the end of his life.
Something leads people to explore gutters of stupid behaviour (drugs,
gambling, etc). I suggest that what does this can be explained in terms of
a Foucauldian gaze. I do not think most of the people who do drugs really
need to or benefit from it in any way apart from satisfying the drug gaze
that is everywhere about them.
I am not afraid of drugs or other pursuits that people engage in that are
different to what I prefer to involve myself in. I have lived amongst
people sucking on bongs and sticking needles in their arms; others I am
close to are enthusiastic and committed gamblers who drain their disposable
income in the most foolish of ways. My neighbours are quite open about
sucking on joints or dubbies, sucking on each other's dicks, and fucking one
another up the ass; I always have a sincere and friendly chat with them when
we meet and we sometimes drink wine and eat together. I have my own
blemished past and I am far from being a prude or wowser, but I do have a
personal bias as you might have noticed.
Lionel Boxer - 0411267256 - lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx
Attend MAAOE 03 --- Melbourne --- 20-22 Oct 03
http://www.intergon.net/maaoe
----------------------------------------------
In 1976 Michale Foucualt said: ... terrorism ... has a totally opposite
effect which is to make the bourgeois class even more closely attached to
its ideology ... (original in French) 'Le Savoir Comme Crime'
----------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=174&referral=Hotmail_taglines_plain&URL=http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp
>Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 15:14:59 +1000
>I'm still quite confused about what Lionel meant by 'drug gaze' - 'the
>gaze of the underground drug traficing profession' (as per Lionel's
>original post) - and it's been challenged a couple of times without
>clarification - can you elaborate on what you mean by it Lionel? How
>does this use of the term 'gaze' correspond with Foucault's use of it?
My impression of what Foucault's gaze means is that it represents the
capability of some sort of human group (profession or some other collection
of people) to influence power over the wider community. Where Foucault
identified medical gaze and then judicial gaze, I have noticed that
feminists have extended that idea to male gaze. Chris Weedon (1987, p. 23)
is a Feminist who suggests that paternalistic society has supressed feminine
aspects of humanity through something that could be described as a
Foucauldian gaze. While I acknowledge that the Feminist movement has
largely drawn of Foucualt with at best a veneer of academic integrity, the
concept does provide a seed for more serious academic exploration. In my
thesis I suggest that management excudes some sort of Foucauldian gaze that
is responsible for the complacency that impedes some organisations
appropriately dealing with sustainability. I have developed this idea with
some analogies drawn from electromagnetic theory to show that cultures
produce residue that leaders need to deal with before they can change
directions.
Relating more specifically to my drug gaze postings:
My impression is that the drug enthusiast community (in an earlier posting I
flipantly referred to this as 'the drug traficing profession') does indeed
excude some sort of "cheech and chong" enthusiastic and captivating ritual
that draws people into participating in a
look-at-me-I-can-do-it-too-fun-club where they consume, deal and create
drugs. There is some sort of aura about that sucks people in. I have felt
it when I lived in a northern Melbourne suburb 15 years ago, and I felt it
when I lived in the mountains outside Melbourne 14 years ago, and I felt it
when I lived in inner-suburban Melbourne 13 years ago, and I have seen it in
corporate Melbourne. I saw it on a less-all-encompassing scale in
Toronto-the-good where I grew up.
About five years ago there were major stories in Melbourne newspapers about
executives who were involved in drug consumption in a rather serious way.
These poeple had families, big houses and children enrolled in expensive
schools. They had been found out to have stuffed up businesses. One CEO
drove a potentially highly successful business into the ground and then
somehow staggered off a cliff while he was walking his daughter along the
top of the cliff (I happened to attend the funeral through some a series of
interconnected friendships). His friends said he lost his balance and the
investment community said he jumped. I met the fellow once and cannot
really make a judgement. My impression was that he was a lovely person who
had been led astray down several gutters of resistance quite unecessarily -
a tragedy that he amounted to such a useless sum at the end of his life.
Something leads people to explore gutters of stupid behaviour (drugs,
gambling, etc). I suggest that what does this can be explained in terms of
a Foucauldian gaze. I do not think most of the people who do drugs really
need to or benefit from it in any way apart from satisfying the drug gaze
that is everywhere about them.
I am not afraid of drugs or other pursuits that people engage in that are
different to what I prefer to involve myself in. I have lived amongst
people sucking on bongs and sticking needles in their arms; others I am
close to are enthusiastic and committed gamblers who drain their disposable
income in the most foolish of ways. My neighbours are quite open about
sucking on joints or dubbies, sucking on each other's dicks, and fucking one
another up the ass; I always have a sincere and friendly chat with them when
we meet and we sometimes drink wine and eat together. I have my own
blemished past and I am far from being a prude or wowser, but I do have a
personal bias as you might have noticed.
Lionel Boxer - 0411267256 - lboxer@xxxxxxxxxxx
Attend MAAOE 03 --- Melbourne --- 20-22 Oct 03
http://www.intergon.net/maaoe
----------------------------------------------
In 1976 Michale Foucualt said: ... terrorism ... has a totally opposite
effect which is to make the bourgeois class even more closely attached to
its ideology ... (original in French) 'Le Savoir Comme Crime'
----------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=174&referral=Hotmail_taglines_plain&URL=http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp