Re: [Foucault-L] Poulantzas on Foucault: Was, Re: Revoltes Logiques

regarding Foucault and Poulantzas: you might want to check out some of Bob
Jessop's stuff @
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/sociology/research/resalph.htm#jessop

- k


> -----Original Message-----
> From: stuartelden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:52:48 +0100
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Poulantzas on Foucault: Was, Re: Revoltes
> Logiques
>
> Thanks for this David. There is also some quite interesting discussion of
> Foucault from a Marxist perspective in some of Henri Lefebvre's work,
> much
> of it rather crudely dismissive, but there is some more useful and
> sympathetically critical material in De l'Etat. De l'Etat was a work that
> Poulantzas noted positively in State, Power, Socialism as closer than
> most
> to his position.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of David McInerney
> Sent: 23 July 2005 10:45
> To: Mailing-list
> Subject: [Foucault-L] Poulantzas on Foucault: Was, Re: Revoltes Logiques
>
>
> On Poulantzas and Foucault, it is worth trying to find the following by
> Poulantzas, where he discusses Foucault in a manner even more
> sympathetic than in SPS.
>
> 'Is there a Crisis in Marxism?', trans. Sarah Kafatou, _Journal of the
> Hellenic Diaspora_, Vol. VI, No. 3, Fall 1979, p. 7-16.
>
> There is also a statement by the editors on Poulantzas's suicide and
> his contribution to Marxism on pp. 5-6.
>
> The passage on Foucault (and Annales) is as follows:
>
> 'Marxism obviously cannot borrow isolated concepts from other
> disciplines and use them in its own problematic without first seeing
> to what degree the philosophy underlying those concepts is compatible
> with its own. A Marxism which did so would be reduced to eclecticism
> and pseudo-intellectual babbling; the borrowed concepts would not only
> not enrich it, but they would operate within it as linguistic barriers
> or even disorienting forces.
>
> Often, however, there is a possibility of harmonizing other theoretical
> approaches with Marxism, that is to say, with the fundamental
> conceptual system of historical materialism. This possibility can
> takes many forms. The most important are the following:
>
> 1) Some scholars have an approach which explicitly agrees with Marxism
> on basic issues. A case in point is Annales, the well-known French
> school of historiography. In such a case some concepts and conclusions
> can certainly be incorporated into the conceptual apparatus of
> historical materialism.
>
> 2) Some scholars work without a clear theoretical framework whereas
> their procedures and results can only be understood with the aid of an
> implicit logic compatible with Marxism.
>
> 3) Some scholars profess to be anti-Marxist, but are really opposed
> only to a caricature of Marxism such as Stalinist economism, whereas
> their operative intellectual philosophy is perfectly compatible with an
> authentic Marxist approach.
>
> 4) Some scholars have an anti-Marxist problematic which is extrinsic to
> their work. Their work is actually grounded on theoretical
> pre-suppositions which are concealed in their overt argument and
> coincide with Marxism on fundamental points.
>
> The last two of these categories, as I argued in my last book (_State,
> Power, Socialism_), apply to the work of Michel Foucault. Indeed, some
> of Foucault's analyses enrich Marxism greatly, even though in his
> latest book (_The History of Sexuality_) he expounds an explicitly
> anti-Marxist problematic, but one directed against a caricature of
> Marxism. In any event, Foucault's anti-Marxism is by and large not
> related organically to his intellectual conclusions, but gives the
> impression of something tacked on.
>
> Within the limits of these categories, then, Marxism can be enriched
> with elements of theories concerning its own object. In that sense,
> our recognition of the omissions, disjunctions, and contradictions in
> Marxism and of the crisis of Marxism is indeed hopeful and can be
> creative.' (Poulantzas, _loc. cit._, pp. 14-15)
>
> Some points might be made about this passage. The main one is that
> Poulantzas and Althusser seem to have diverged after 1967 with respect
> to their conceptions of 'philosophy', with Poulantzas seemingly evoking
> something like Gramsci's characterisation of Marxism as the 'philosophy
> of praxis' here in a way that Althusser never did after 1967. But I
> don't think this would change the main points with respect to
> Althusser's relation to Foucault, where there were many points of
> convergence, especially after 1970 (as Montag argues in his essay in
> _Yale French Studies_ Vol. 88, 1995).
>
> This passage from Poulantzas possibly represents one of the most
> positive assessments of Foucault within the Marxist left, and was
> certainly unprecedented in 1979. I hope that the passage is of some use
> to those working on theses trying to use Foucault in non-anti-Marxist
> ways.
>
>
> On 23/07/2005, at 6:02 PM, Richard Bailey wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Poulantzas in State, Power, Socialism cites an interview with Foucault
> > in Revoltes Logiques, No.4 Winter 1977. I am assuming that is a French
> > Language journal. Does anyone know whether this interview has been
> > published in English anywhere?
> >
> > This is a passage from the interview:
> >
> > "Something in the body of society - in classes, groups and even
> > individuals - which somehow escapes the relations of power... which is
> > their limit, their reverse side, and their consequence... It is that
> > which responds to every advance of power with a movement designed to
> > break free from it."
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Richard
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list

Replies
Re: [Foucault-L] Poulantzas on Foucault: Was, Re: Revoltes Logiques, Stuart Elden
Partial thread listing: