And to join the discussion...
it interesting to note that Foucault himself came to see The Order of Things as a marginal book in his overall project.
In the Trombadori interview of EW3: 267, Foucault states that The order of Things was 'a very technical book that was addressed, above all, to the technicians of the history of the sciences.' He goes on to note how its 'a book that's not truly mine: it's a marginal book in terms of the sort of passion that runs through the others.'
This, of course, is not to say that Foucault disowned the book. I just wanted to point out that Foucault himself saw is a being marginal in relation to the other works.
My own opinion is that these other works lose a lot of their critical force if they are not referenced back in some way to the analysis done in OT.
Regards,
Kevin.
____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth
it interesting to note that Foucault himself came to see The Order of Things as a marginal book in his overall project.
In the Trombadori interview of EW3: 267, Foucault states that The order of Things was 'a very technical book that was addressed, above all, to the technicians of the history of the sciences.' He goes on to note how its 'a book that's not truly mine: it's a marginal book in terms of the sort of passion that runs through the others.'
This, of course, is not to say that Foucault disowned the book. I just wanted to point out that Foucault himself saw is a being marginal in relation to the other works.
My own opinion is that these other works lose a lot of their critical force if they are not referenced back in some way to the analysis done in OT.
Regards,
Kevin.
____________________________________________________________
FREE 3D EARTH SCREENSAVER - Watch the Earth right on your desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/earth