Kelly,
Olivia Custer in an article on Kant and Foucault quotes from Subject and
Power p. 221 and then writes a footnote saying that I have amended
translation "because it leaves out the last part of the sentence". I gather
from this that the original must be in French. However I do not have Dits et
ecrits in front of me to say anything definetely. [See Olivia Custer,
Exercising Freedom: Kant and Foucault' in Philosophy Today, vol. 42, p. 139
and note 13]
The rest of the issue you raise about the analyticality of this piece seems
to me a bit dubious. Foucault had the ability to change his style according
to audiance and this much can be conceded. References to Habermas signals
the fact that recent polemics (especially in American context) were in his
mind. But to derive from this that Foucualt introduces the element of
analyticity in this piece which is lacking in his previous writings needs
more evidence.
Regards
ali
----Original Message Follows----
From: Mark Kelly <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: obscure Foucault questions
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:22:26 +1000
hi
in contrast to the recent entertaining traffic I've been humourlessly
complaining about, I need help with some really spoddy questions arising
from my recent close reading of 'The Subject and Power', the stuff by
Foucault which first appeared as the original appendix to Breyfus and
Rabinow's book 'Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics'.
Part of this was originally written in English and part in French - does
anyone have any idea if the version in Dits et ecrits went back to the
original French version or if it is retranslated from the English?
Does anyone know anything more about when and where this stuff was written
and why it was written in different languages?
Lastly, a lot of this piece has strong resonances with the analytical
philosophy of action, in ways indeed in which it bears almost no realtion to
Foucault's other stuff. I wonder if he might not have come into contact with
that stuff in America, but can't think how I'd even begin finding that out -
there's nothing on that score in the biographies.
not holding my breath,
Mark
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection
http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband
Olivia Custer in an article on Kant and Foucault quotes from Subject and
Power p. 221 and then writes a footnote saying that I have amended
translation "because it leaves out the last part of the sentence". I gather
from this that the original must be in French. However I do not have Dits et
ecrits in front of me to say anything definetely. [See Olivia Custer,
Exercising Freedom: Kant and Foucault' in Philosophy Today, vol. 42, p. 139
and note 13]
The rest of the issue you raise about the analyticality of this piece seems
to me a bit dubious. Foucault had the ability to change his style according
to audiance and this much can be conceded. References to Habermas signals
the fact that recent polemics (especially in American context) were in his
mind. But to derive from this that Foucualt introduces the element of
analyticity in this piece which is lacking in his previous writings needs
more evidence.
Regards
ali
----Original Message Follows----
From: Mark Kelly <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: obscure Foucault questions
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:22:26 +1000
hi
in contrast to the recent entertaining traffic I've been humourlessly
complaining about, I need help with some really spoddy questions arising
from my recent close reading of 'The Subject and Power', the stuff by
Foucault which first appeared as the original appendix to Breyfus and
Rabinow's book 'Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics'.
Part of this was originally written in English and part in French - does
anyone have any idea if the version in Dits et ecrits went back to the
original French version or if it is retranslated from the English?
Does anyone know anything more about when and where this stuff was written
and why it was written in different languages?
Lastly, a lot of this piece has strong resonances with the analytical
philosophy of action, in ways indeed in which it bears almost no realtion to
Foucault's other stuff. I wonder if he might not have come into contact with
that stuff in America, but can't think how I'd even begin finding that out -
there's nothing on that score in the biographies.
not holding my breath,
Mark
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of 56k? Get a FREE BT Broadband connection
http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband