[.] If one takes the question of power or political power and replaces it with
the more general question of governmentality -governmentality intended as a
strategic field of power relations, in the broader, not simply political, sense
of the term-, if one takes governmentality as the strategic field of power
relations, in so far as they are mobile, transformable and reversible, I think
that the reflection on this notion of governmentality must go through, both
theoretically and practically, the element of a subject that would be defined by
the relation of the self to the self. In so far as the theory of political power
as institution normally refers to a juridical conception of the subject of
rights, it seems to me that the analysis of governmentality -i.e. the analysis of
power as an ensemble of reversible relations-must refer to an ethics of the
subject defined by the relation of itself to itself. I simply want to say that in
the kind of analysis that I have tried to propose for some time, you see that:
relations of power-governmentality; government of oneself and others and relation
of oneself to oneself, all these constitute a chain, a web. It is there, around
these notions, that one must be able to, I think, articulate the question of
politics and the question of ethics.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Turner" <k.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: government
> hi colin,
>
> the probelm i see with my thesis is that, due to the fact that i come from
> a 1970s comprehensive education at a school which never really pushed
> second languages, i can read neither french nor german. and whilst i don't
> subscribe to the opinion that one has to read foucault in the original
> french, i certainly think it has its advantages (as stuart elden's book on
> spatial history attest to). and so the materials i am drawing upon to
> write the stuff on governmentality, and note the linkages between this as
> the military model, are the same materials that dean, rose, etal have been
> drawing upon. hence my original question as to how this secondary
> literature relates to the 1978-9 courses.
>
> it will certainly be a very interesting time when these two lecture
> courses are finally released in english translation (any idea when this
> might be).
>
> regards - kevin.
>
> --
> Kevin Turner
> Dept. of Sociology
> Cartmel College
> Lancaster University
> Lancaster
> LA1 4YL
>
> (01524) 594508
>
the more general question of governmentality -governmentality intended as a
strategic field of power relations, in the broader, not simply political, sense
of the term-, if one takes governmentality as the strategic field of power
relations, in so far as they are mobile, transformable and reversible, I think
that the reflection on this notion of governmentality must go through, both
theoretically and practically, the element of a subject that would be defined by
the relation of the self to the self. In so far as the theory of political power
as institution normally refers to a juridical conception of the subject of
rights, it seems to me that the analysis of governmentality -i.e. the analysis of
power as an ensemble of reversible relations-must refer to an ethics of the
subject defined by the relation of itself to itself. I simply want to say that in
the kind of analysis that I have tried to propose for some time, you see that:
relations of power-governmentality; government of oneself and others and relation
of oneself to oneself, all these constitute a chain, a web. It is there, around
these notions, that one must be able to, I think, articulate the question of
politics and the question of ethics.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Turner" <k.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: government
> hi colin,
>
> the probelm i see with my thesis is that, due to the fact that i come from
> a 1970s comprehensive education at a school which never really pushed
> second languages, i can read neither french nor german. and whilst i don't
> subscribe to the opinion that one has to read foucault in the original
> french, i certainly think it has its advantages (as stuart elden's book on
> spatial history attest to). and so the materials i am drawing upon to
> write the stuff on governmentality, and note the linkages between this as
> the military model, are the same materials that dean, rose, etal have been
> drawing upon. hence my original question as to how this secondary
> literature relates to the 1978-9 courses.
>
> it will certainly be a very interesting time when these two lecture
> courses are finally released in english translation (any idea when this
> might be).
>
> regards - kevin.
>
> --
> Kevin Turner
> Dept. of Sociology
> Cartmel College
> Lancaster University
> Lancaster
> LA1 4YL
>
> (01524) 594508
>