What does it mean to have a chain of oneself to oneself, and itself to
itself, how does this constitute the basis for an ethics?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arianna" <ari@xxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: government
> [.] 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
> >
>
itself, how does this constitute the basis for an ethics?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Arianna" <ari@xxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 10:25 PM
Subject: Re: government
> [.] 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
> >
>