Howdy Gökhan,
I certainly agree with what you have written. The way these panics manifest
themselves in the media with various stakeholders affirming the discursively
constructed subject position of the deviant is crucial.
Your mention of biopower is interesting, because, ultimately in this section
of my thesis, it is what I am actually interested in. The ways populations
are enabled to be highly mobile masses are often mystified as stemming from
some notion of liberal freedom. Road safety and the system of automobility
is a classic example by which life itself becomes the subject of governance.
Much can be said about this.
Yeah, but back to work!
Ciao,
Glen.
-----Original Message-----
From: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gökhan Birdal
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 10:20 AM
To: Mailing-list
Subject: RE: [Foucault-L] governmentality and 'law and order'
Hi,
I am new at list, not studying cultural studies, however, I would have some
improvised thoughts to offer related with the issue. when we talk about
moral panic theory, it is essential to recall two things; media structures,
which are distributing the truth discourses of power and "deviance
amplification spiral" which could be the elementary component of any moral
panic phenomena. for the latter, I would say, deviances are no longer the
things that should be discovered, analyzed and confined for the population's
sake today; but they became the things that could be produced in the
discursive practices by the aid of media structures, tested by scientific
authorities, based on not negative, but positive, productive definition of
power. What happens is a great subjectivation process... So any "deviancy"
like "hoons" is no more posing real moral threat to the population as it is
captured in certain conditions and just works for shaping the norms by
differentiating from the original meaning of "cult". This difference marks
the governmental rationality of neo-liberalism and its ultimate end called
"control society". A link with biopower is also crucial here.
well, just a sudden chain of thoughts,
Gökhan
-----Original Message-----
From: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Glen Fuller
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 2:26 AM
To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Foucault-L] governmentality and 'law and order'
hi list,
I am researching modified-car culture and I have come to a particular
junction in my thinking. I was hoping the list might be able to help me
by pointing me in the direction of any research on similar situations
or whatever.
a
My specific problem is that I have been dealing with what in Australia
we call 'hoons' (in the UK and NZ they are called 'boy racers' in the
US it is sometimes the more traditional 'hot rodder'). Basically
the 'hoon' is an iconic cultural figure: a loud and aggressive young
man, driving a loud and aggressive car in a loud and aggressive way
(often playing loud and aggressive music on a booming car stereo;).
Anyway, the problem is that I can see there is a shift across three
phases in the power relations from the 'normative' governance of the
system of automobility (ala Jeremy Packer's essay on road safety)
through general anxieties about the 'at risk' group labelled 'young
drivers' to the moral panics that have recently emerged in Australia
around this figure of the hoon.
What I am interested in finding out is if anyone on the list had come
across any work that attempts to reconcile a Foucaultian
governmentality methodology with traditional moral panic theory. My
problem is in the way power relations operate differently in the two
situations. I have been thinking Agamben's work on the state of
exception may be a useful way to think about how moral panics are the
expression of a kind of localised state of exception within the
institutionalised cultural formations of a given society. By 'localised
state of exception' I mean organised around a particular social problem
and discursively constructed around a necessarily problematic figure,
such as the hoon. This would be thinking about folk devils as some way
equivalent to Agamben's conception of homo sacer, and, well, generally
offering a specific (but I think productive) misreading of Agamben.
These things can be worked around. However it becomes very problematic
when Agamben and Foucault's respective approaches are thought alongside
the neo-Gramscian approaches of the British cultural studies tradition,
specifically the work of Hall and others on the 'Exceptional State' and
the 'Law and Order Society'.
Hmmm, I may just leave it as an unresolved, but productive tension in
my thesis. But if someone has come across some work or has some
thoughts on how to think through this tension I would love to discuss
it with them.
ciao,
glen.
--
PhD Candidate
Centre for Cultural Research
University of Western Sydney
Read my rants: http://glenfuller.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
I certainly agree with what you have written. The way these panics manifest
themselves in the media with various stakeholders affirming the discursively
constructed subject position of the deviant is crucial.
Your mention of biopower is interesting, because, ultimately in this section
of my thesis, it is what I am actually interested in. The ways populations
are enabled to be highly mobile masses are often mystified as stemming from
some notion of liberal freedom. Road safety and the system of automobility
is a classic example by which life itself becomes the subject of governance.
Much can be said about this.
Yeah, but back to work!
Ciao,
Glen.
-----Original Message-----
From: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gökhan Birdal
Sent: Wednesday, 18 May 2005 10:20 AM
To: Mailing-list
Subject: RE: [Foucault-L] governmentality and 'law and order'
Hi,
I am new at list, not studying cultural studies, however, I would have some
improvised thoughts to offer related with the issue. when we talk about
moral panic theory, it is essential to recall two things; media structures,
which are distributing the truth discourses of power and "deviance
amplification spiral" which could be the elementary component of any moral
panic phenomena. for the latter, I would say, deviances are no longer the
things that should be discovered, analyzed and confined for the population's
sake today; but they became the things that could be produced in the
discursive practices by the aid of media structures, tested by scientific
authorities, based on not negative, but positive, productive definition of
power. What happens is a great subjectivation process... So any "deviancy"
like "hoons" is no more posing real moral threat to the population as it is
captured in certain conditions and just works for shaping the norms by
differentiating from the original meaning of "cult". This difference marks
the governmental rationality of neo-liberalism and its ultimate end called
"control society". A link with biopower is also crucial here.
well, just a sudden chain of thoughts,
Gökhan
-----Original Message-----
From: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Glen Fuller
Sent: Monday, May 16, 2005 2:26 AM
To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Foucault-L] governmentality and 'law and order'
hi list,
I am researching modified-car culture and I have come to a particular
junction in my thinking. I was hoping the list might be able to help me
by pointing me in the direction of any research on similar situations
or whatever.
a
My specific problem is that I have been dealing with what in Australia
we call 'hoons' (in the UK and NZ they are called 'boy racers' in the
US it is sometimes the more traditional 'hot rodder'). Basically
the 'hoon' is an iconic cultural figure: a loud and aggressive young
man, driving a loud and aggressive car in a loud and aggressive way
(often playing loud and aggressive music on a booming car stereo;).
Anyway, the problem is that I can see there is a shift across three
phases in the power relations from the 'normative' governance of the
system of automobility (ala Jeremy Packer's essay on road safety)
through general anxieties about the 'at risk' group labelled 'young
drivers' to the moral panics that have recently emerged in Australia
around this figure of the hoon.
What I am interested in finding out is if anyone on the list had come
across any work that attempts to reconcile a Foucaultian
governmentality methodology with traditional moral panic theory. My
problem is in the way power relations operate differently in the two
situations. I have been thinking Agamben's work on the state of
exception may be a useful way to think about how moral panics are the
expression of a kind of localised state of exception within the
institutionalised cultural formations of a given society. By 'localised
state of exception' I mean organised around a particular social problem
and discursively constructed around a necessarily problematic figure,
such as the hoon. This would be thinking about folk devils as some way
equivalent to Agamben's conception of homo sacer, and, well, generally
offering a specific (but I think productive) misreading of Agamben.
These things can be worked around. However it becomes very problematic
when Agamben and Foucault's respective approaches are thought alongside
the neo-Gramscian approaches of the British cultural studies tradition,
specifically the work of Hall and others on the 'Exceptional State' and
the 'Law and Order Society'.
Hmmm, I may just leave it as an unresolved, but productive tension in
my thesis. But if someone has come across some work or has some
thoughts on how to think through this tension I would love to discuss
it with them.
ciao,
glen.
--
PhD Candidate
Centre for Cultural Research
University of Western Sydney
Read my rants: http://glenfuller.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list