"it was sabotaged by academics peut etre..."I agree with this. Maybe today there is several species of "academical modisms" related to "dernier foucault", or something like it.
But this "modism" do not notice the complexity of foucauldian thinking, and the several levels of his "critics on modernity".
This is an interessant subject to ask about, for exemple, the atuality of Secondary Thesis, it´s relationships avec Histoire de la Folie, Les Mots et les Choses, and with "derniere Foucault". Between this texts there is a lot of questions.
As Lebrun stated once, maybe we do not notice that Les Mots et les Choses was not a simple book for mere social theory and secondary literature, but "a book made for combat"
;)
--- Em qua, 1/10/08, Arianna <ari@xxxxxxxx> escreveu:
De: Arianna <ari@xxxxxxxx>
Assunto: Re: [Foucault-L] The Order of Things - relevance for today
Para: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Data: Quarta-feira, 1 de Outubro de 2008, 17:08
it was sabotaged by academics peut etre...
Edward Comstock wrote:
> I agree with this (and I'd love to know more about how you think
Rabinow
> misinterprets Foucault on the "death of Man"). I really
don't understand
> how OT has fallen out of favor--if indeed this is what has happened--and
> it makes me suspect that people simply find it too difficult to read?
> Although I do understand that Foucault, and others, moved on from the
> project of describing discourse because this poses obvious restrictions on
> "the project," I still think the archaeology has obvious
ramifications to
> those who work within the scholarly discourses. And while it's
probably
> true that OT reflects insights that are not uniquely "Foucault,"
> especially perhaps Canguilhem, I also can't imagine understanding what
the
> rest of his works are doing without it.
>
> In any event, I read Foucault on the death of Man as presaging many of
> those events and techniques that we now label "post-modern" in
culture and
> politics, and as a kind of inevitability rather than a completed process.
> _____________________
> Ed Comstock
> College Writing Program
> Department of Literature
> American University
> ------------------------------------
> The easy possibility of letter writing must--seen theoretically--have
> brought into the world a terrible dislocation of souls. It is, in fact, an
> intercourse with ghosts, and not only with the ghost of the recipient, but
> also with one's own ghost... How on earth did anybody get the idea
that
> people can communicate with each other by letter!--Franz Kafka
>
>
>
> "Vemuri, Chathan V" <chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 10/01/2008 04:29 AM
> Please respond to
> Mailing-list <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> "foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> [Foucault-L] The Order of Things - relevance for today
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> Some people are of the opinion that The Order of Things is an outdated
> work with a misleading premise of the death of man via language that they
> discard in favor of his other writings on prisons and sexuality, etc. I
> think The Order of Things still has much relevance for modern
> understanding of the social sciences and that the ending is far too
> misunderstood, especially by Ian Hacking (who pushes a Kantian
> interpretation of Foucault). To me, it seems his proclamation of the
> "death of Man" is not so much a proclamation that man has
already died but
> a future warning or hypothesis that our current notion of Man as a
> Cartesian subject which originated in the 17th century or so is a recent
> invention that will have its end eventually like all other meta concepts.
> Yet many view this as Foucault already proclaiming that man has already
> disappeared via the configuration of language, and that this prediction is
> miscast (notably Foucault interpreters such as Rabinow and even Hacking)
> t!
> hus the reason why I think this book has been downplayed in favor of
> Discipline and Punish, History of Sexuality and other works (though those
> are my favorites). I was wondering what you guys thought about the
> relevance of The Order of Things and your interpretation of his prediction
> at the end. I feel the work is very much essential to understanding the
> general logic behind Foucault's work, as well as The Archaeology of
> Knowledge, thus why I recommended it to someone who was beginning to read
> Foucault for the first time.
>
> I would love to hear from you guys as soon as possible.
>
> Chathan Vemuri
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
Novos endereços, o Yahoo! que você conhece. Crie um email novo com a sua cara @ymail.com ou @rocketmail.com.
http://br.new.mail.yahoo.com/addresses
But this "modism" do not notice the complexity of foucauldian thinking, and the several levels of his "critics on modernity".
This is an interessant subject to ask about, for exemple, the atuality of Secondary Thesis, it´s relationships avec Histoire de la Folie, Les Mots et les Choses, and with "derniere Foucault". Between this texts there is a lot of questions.
As Lebrun stated once, maybe we do not notice that Les Mots et les Choses was not a simple book for mere social theory and secondary literature, but "a book made for combat"
;)
--- Em qua, 1/10/08, Arianna <ari@xxxxxxxx> escreveu:
De: Arianna <ari@xxxxxxxx>
Assunto: Re: [Foucault-L] The Order of Things - relevance for today
Para: "Mailing-list" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Data: Quarta-feira, 1 de Outubro de 2008, 17:08
it was sabotaged by academics peut etre...
Edward Comstock wrote:
> I agree with this (and I'd love to know more about how you think
Rabinow
> misinterprets Foucault on the "death of Man"). I really
don't understand
> how OT has fallen out of favor--if indeed this is what has happened--and
> it makes me suspect that people simply find it too difficult to read?
> Although I do understand that Foucault, and others, moved on from the
> project of describing discourse because this poses obvious restrictions on
> "the project," I still think the archaeology has obvious
ramifications to
> those who work within the scholarly discourses. And while it's
probably
> true that OT reflects insights that are not uniquely "Foucault,"
> especially perhaps Canguilhem, I also can't imagine understanding what
the
> rest of his works are doing without it.
>
> In any event, I read Foucault on the death of Man as presaging many of
> those events and techniques that we now label "post-modern" in
culture and
> politics, and as a kind of inevitability rather than a completed process.
> _____________________
> Ed Comstock
> College Writing Program
> Department of Literature
> American University
> ------------------------------------
> The easy possibility of letter writing must--seen theoretically--have
> brought into the world a terrible dislocation of souls. It is, in fact, an
> intercourse with ghosts, and not only with the ghost of the recipient, but
> also with one's own ghost... How on earth did anybody get the idea
that
> people can communicate with each other by letter!--Franz Kafka
>
>
>
> "Vemuri, Chathan V" <chathan-vemuri@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent by: foucault-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 10/01/2008 04:29 AM
> Please respond to
> Mailing-list <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> To
> "foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> cc
>
> Subject
> [Foucault-L] The Order of Things - relevance for today
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey guys,
>
> Some people are of the opinion that The Order of Things is an outdated
> work with a misleading premise of the death of man via language that they
> discard in favor of his other writings on prisons and sexuality, etc. I
> think The Order of Things still has much relevance for modern
> understanding of the social sciences and that the ending is far too
> misunderstood, especially by Ian Hacking (who pushes a Kantian
> interpretation of Foucault). To me, it seems his proclamation of the
> "death of Man" is not so much a proclamation that man has
already died but
> a future warning or hypothesis that our current notion of Man as a
> Cartesian subject which originated in the 17th century or so is a recent
> invention that will have its end eventually like all other meta concepts.
> Yet many view this as Foucault already proclaiming that man has already
> disappeared via the configuration of language, and that this prediction is
> miscast (notably Foucault interpreters such as Rabinow and even Hacking)
> t!
> hus the reason why I think this book has been downplayed in favor of
> Discipline and Punish, History of Sexuality and other works (though those
> are my favorites). I was wondering what you guys thought about the
> relevance of The Order of Things and your interpretation of his prediction
> at the end. I feel the work is very much essential to understanding the
> general logic behind Foucault's work, as well as The Archaeology of
> Knowledge, thus why I recommended it to someone who was beginning to read
> Foucault for the first time.
>
> I would love to hear from you guys as soon as possible.
>
> Chathan Vemuri
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
Novos endereços, o Yahoo! que você conhece. Crie um email novo com a sua cara @ymail.com ou @rocketmail.com.
http://br.new.mail.yahoo.com/addresses