Madame O'Farell,
It is indeed pretty funny! But is there any indication as to what are the key
reasons why he wants to leave power-knowledge aside? Getting away from
ideology, for example, was an effort to get rid of the quasi-implied false
consciousness in any usage of it - amongst other things.
I'm asking because when I look at the concepts that have been associated by
Foucault and/or others to the governmentality frame of reference I don't see so
much discontinuity as the following of a particular line of inquiry:
problematisation, truth, genealogy, liberal rule, un-governable populations,
etc.- these were all notions that he had used before - or that he could well
have used, ie. they fit in well with his previous concerns. In other words, it
does'nt seem to me that this 'new' conceptual apparatus is so much a
fundamental distanciation from previous work as an extension in (a) specific
direction(s).
Thanks,
Francois
PS I hope I'm not boring list members with my insistance on this!
Selon Clare O'Farrell <panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> A few days ago Colin Gordon was referring to some comments by
> Foucault about his use of power-knowledge and governmentality.
>
> I have located the passages in question. It is in his lecture of 9
> January 198o. This lecture has not been published as yet. I found it
> in the Foucault archives in Paris. It's actually a rather amusing
> passage in places. He says:
>
> 'This notion of the government of men by truth ... Elaborating this
> notion means displacing things a little in relation to the now
> overused and worn out theme of power-knowledge. For the history of
> thought, I had an analysis which was more or less organized, or which
> revolved around, the notion of dominant ideology. In general, if you
> like, there are two successive displacements: then, from the notion
> of dominant ideology to that of power-knowledge and now, a second
> displacement from the notion of knowledge-power to the notion of
> government by the truth... Discarding the notion of knowledge-power
> the same way as I discarded the notion of dominant ideology. Well,
> when I say that, I am perfectly devastated (detruite) because it is
> obvious that you don't discard something you thought yourself in the
> same way as you discard what others have thought. As a consequence I
> will certainly be more indulgent with the notion of knowledge-power
> than with that of dominant ideology, but it is up to you to criticize
> me for that.'
> --
> Clare
> ************************************************
> Clare O'Farrell
> email: panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.foucault.qut.edu.au
> ************************************************
>
François Gagnon
Étudiant au Doctorat
Département de Communication
Université de Montréal
(514)343-6111 poste 1464
It is indeed pretty funny! But is there any indication as to what are the key
reasons why he wants to leave power-knowledge aside? Getting away from
ideology, for example, was an effort to get rid of the quasi-implied false
consciousness in any usage of it - amongst other things.
I'm asking because when I look at the concepts that have been associated by
Foucault and/or others to the governmentality frame of reference I don't see so
much discontinuity as the following of a particular line of inquiry:
problematisation, truth, genealogy, liberal rule, un-governable populations,
etc.- these were all notions that he had used before - or that he could well
have used, ie. they fit in well with his previous concerns. In other words, it
does'nt seem to me that this 'new' conceptual apparatus is so much a
fundamental distanciation from previous work as an extension in (a) specific
direction(s).
Thanks,
Francois
PS I hope I'm not boring list members with my insistance on this!
Selon Clare O'Farrell <panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> A few days ago Colin Gordon was referring to some comments by
> Foucault about his use of power-knowledge and governmentality.
>
> I have located the passages in question. It is in his lecture of 9
> January 198o. This lecture has not been published as yet. I found it
> in the Foucault archives in Paris. It's actually a rather amusing
> passage in places. He says:
>
> 'This notion of the government of men by truth ... Elaborating this
> notion means displacing things a little in relation to the now
> overused and worn out theme of power-knowledge. For the history of
> thought, I had an analysis which was more or less organized, or which
> revolved around, the notion of dominant ideology. In general, if you
> like, there are two successive displacements: then, from the notion
> of dominant ideology to that of power-knowledge and now, a second
> displacement from the notion of knowledge-power to the notion of
> government by the truth... Discarding the notion of knowledge-power
> the same way as I discarded the notion of dominant ideology. Well,
> when I say that, I am perfectly devastated (detruite) because it is
> obvious that you don't discard something you thought yourself in the
> same way as you discard what others have thought. As a consequence I
> will certainly be more indulgent with the notion of knowledge-power
> than with that of dominant ideology, but it is up to you to criticize
> me for that.'
> --
> Clare
> ************************************************
> Clare O'Farrell
> email: panoptique@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.foucault.qut.edu.au
> ************************************************
>
François Gagnon
Étudiant au Doctorat
Département de Communication
Université de Montréal
(514)343-6111 poste 1464