Seemingly I missed that discussion - a more specific question - is it
dominant ideology he rejects as distinct from rejecting the concept of
ideology per se?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Kelly" <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: quote
>
>
> > Below is a quote of the month from Clare O'Farrell's site - anyone fancy
> > interpreting it? Why does he reject ideology but nevertheless punctuates
> his
> > discourse with the term ideological/ideology?
> >
> > Anthony
>
> What? Didn't we just discuss this quote for ages? The reasons why Foucault
> rejects ideology are oft-stated and not at all tenebrous: it implies, on
the
> one hand, the possibility scientific knowledge which is not ideological,
and
> on the other it implies a superstructural relation of ideology to what is
> really going on at the level of class, say.
> The real question is what Foucault is doing rejecting his own concept of
> power-knowledge in favour of governmentality. It seems to me that this
move
> is similar to his rejection of ideology in that his rejection of ideology
> involves taking certain cues from ideology critique, namely the way in
which
> it traces discourses to hidden origins which have to do with power, and
> improves upon it by understanding that we cannot simply reduce
> discourse/knowlege in this way. Similarly, governmentality is an
> acknowledgement that the reality is more complex than the concept of
> power-knowledge allows for.
>
> Mark
>
> Stuart - was very pleased and not at all annoyed by the wide dissemination
> of the Foucault Studies CFP. Thanks for the clarification regarding
> deadlines.
>
dominant ideology he rejects as distinct from rejecting the concept of
ideology per se?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Kelly" <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2004 2:45 AM
Subject: Re: quote
>
>
> > Below is a quote of the month from Clare O'Farrell's site - anyone fancy
> > interpreting it? Why does he reject ideology but nevertheless punctuates
> his
> > discourse with the term ideological/ideology?
> >
> > Anthony
>
> What? Didn't we just discuss this quote for ages? The reasons why Foucault
> rejects ideology are oft-stated and not at all tenebrous: it implies, on
the
> one hand, the possibility scientific knowledge which is not ideological,
and
> on the other it implies a superstructural relation of ideology to what is
> really going on at the level of class, say.
> The real question is what Foucault is doing rejecting his own concept of
> power-knowledge in favour of governmentality. It seems to me that this
move
> is similar to his rejection of ideology in that his rejection of ideology
> involves taking certain cues from ideology critique, namely the way in
which
> it traces discourses to hidden origins which have to do with power, and
> improves upon it by understanding that we cannot simply reduce
> discourse/knowlege in this way. Similarly, governmentality is an
> acknowledgement that the reality is more complex than the concept of
> power-knowledge allows for.
>
> Mark
>
> Stuart - was very pleased and not at all annoyed by the wide dissemination
> of the Foucault Studies CFP. Thanks for the clarification regarding
> deadlines.
>