PS:
For those interested in such minutiae, I should clarify that, in fact, not
all of the first sentence was written by Ewald - he only wrote the part up
to the word "Kant" (in the English). The second part of the sentence,
describing the work as a "critical history of thought" is by 'M.F.'
Timothy
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> Dear Timothy,
>
> It may indeed have been your article in Foucault Studies in which I read
> this. I have also read it on some on-line versions of this text, but like I
> said, I could find no note giving an explanation of where the claim came
> from.
>
> The passage you cite does indeed provide this explanation, and is, as you
> say, about as "authoritative" as one could wish for.
>
> The reason I asked the question is that it seems to me that the three texts
> I mentioned, when read in conjunction, provide a very useful intelligibility
> key for understand Foucault. By that I do not mean that they form a cypher
> with which to unlock the enigmatic secrets of his books. But I do think they
> do offer a very useful description - both in terms of a retrospective of his
> previous work and in terms of how his last work relates to this - of how to
> understand what it was he was doing..
>
> Many thanks for providing me with this info., and special thanks for doing
> the translation (however roughly translated).
>
> Kind Regards,
> Kevin.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: autrement@xxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:11:44 +0800
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maurice Florence
> >
> > Dear Kevin,
> >
> > I myself have actually made that claim somewhere in print! The
> > 'evidence',
> > such as it is, is in the note that appears in Dits et Ecrits before that
> > selection. But, unfortunately the 'Essential Foucault' translation only
> > gives us a greatly truncated version of that note.
> >
> > In French, in addition to the info given in the English version, we read
> > (roughly translated): ...At that time, Foucault had written a first
> > version
> > of volume II of HS which he knew would need re-working. A part of the
> > Introduction which he had written for this book was a retrospective
> > presentation of his work. This was the text he gave to Denis Huisman,
> > completed with a short presentation and a bibliography. It was decided to
> > sign it 'Maurice Florence', which gave the obvious abbreviation 'M.F.'...
> >
> > According to further notes (in the French and English editions) only the
> > first sentence of the published text was written by Francois Ewald - the
> > rest was by 'M.F.'
> >
> > Since these notes were compiled by Francois Ewald and Daniel Defert, I
> > take
> > them to be as authoritative as one could wish for.
> >
> > Best,
> > Timothy
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Kevin Turner
> > <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Foucault Listers,
> >>
> >> I have read that the self title essay by Foucault, published under the
> >> pseudonym of Maurice Florence (EW2: 459-463), was the first of three
> >> version
> >> of what finally became the 'Introduction' to Vol. 2 of the "History of
> >> Sexuality:" the second being 'The Preface to the History of Sexuality,
> >> Volume Two' (EW1: 199-205); and the third being Chapter 1,
> >> 'Modifications,'
> >> of the actual 'Introduction' itself (UP: 3-13).
> >>
> >> The problem is, whilst I have read this, I have not come upon any actual
> >> evidence to support this claim – i.e. those who mention it cite no
> >> references.
> >>
> >> My question, then, is, firstly, are these text three version of the same
> >> introduction; and, secondly, where might I find evidence to support this
> >> claim.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Kevin.
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> >> Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click.
> >> Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click.
> Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>
For those interested in such minutiae, I should clarify that, in fact, not
all of the first sentence was written by Ewald - he only wrote the part up
to the word "Kant" (in the English). The second part of the sentence,
describing the work as a "critical history of thought" is by 'M.F.'
Timothy
On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 1:12 AM, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> Dear Timothy,
>
> It may indeed have been your article in Foucault Studies in which I read
> this. I have also read it on some on-line versions of this text, but like I
> said, I could find no note giving an explanation of where the claim came
> from.
>
> The passage you cite does indeed provide this explanation, and is, as you
> say, about as "authoritative" as one could wish for.
>
> The reason I asked the question is that it seems to me that the three texts
> I mentioned, when read in conjunction, provide a very useful intelligibility
> key for understand Foucault. By that I do not mean that they form a cypher
> with which to unlock the enigmatic secrets of his books. But I do think they
> do offer a very useful description - both in terms of a retrospective of his
> previous work and in terms of how his last work relates to this - of how to
> understand what it was he was doing..
>
> Many thanks for providing me with this info., and special thanks for doing
> the translation (however roughly translated).
>
> Kind Regards,
> Kevin.
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: autrement@xxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:11:44 +0800
> > To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Maurice Florence
> >
> > Dear Kevin,
> >
> > I myself have actually made that claim somewhere in print! The
> > 'evidence',
> > such as it is, is in the note that appears in Dits et Ecrits before that
> > selection. But, unfortunately the 'Essential Foucault' translation only
> > gives us a greatly truncated version of that note.
> >
> > In French, in addition to the info given in the English version, we read
> > (roughly translated): ...At that time, Foucault had written a first
> > version
> > of volume II of HS which he knew would need re-working. A part of the
> > Introduction which he had written for this book was a retrospective
> > presentation of his work. This was the text he gave to Denis Huisman,
> > completed with a short presentation and a bibliography. It was decided to
> > sign it 'Maurice Florence', which gave the obvious abbreviation 'M.F.'...
> >
> > According to further notes (in the French and English editions) only the
> > first sentence of the published text was written by Francois Ewald - the
> > rest was by 'M.F.'
> >
> > Since these notes were compiled by Francois Ewald and Daniel Defert, I
> > take
> > them to be as authoritative as one could wish for.
> >
> > Best,
> > Timothy
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Kevin Turner
> > <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Foucault Listers,
> >>
> >> I have read that the self title essay by Foucault, published under the
> >> pseudonym of Maurice Florence (EW2: 459-463), was the first of three
> >> version
> >> of what finally became the 'Introduction' to Vol. 2 of the "History of
> >> Sexuality:" the second being 'The Preface to the History of Sexuality,
> >> Volume Two' (EW1: 199-205); and the third being Chapter 1,
> >> 'Modifications,'
> >> of the actual 'Introduction' itself (UP: 3-13).
> >>
> >> The problem is, whilst I have read this, I have not come upon any actual
> >> evidence to support this claim – i.e. those who mention it cite no
> >> references.
> >>
> >> My question, then, is, firstly, are these text three version of the same
> >> introduction; and, secondly, where might I find evidence to support this
> >> claim.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Kevin.
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> >> Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click.
> >> Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Foucault-L mailing list
> > _______________________________________________
> > Foucault-L mailing list
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
> Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click.
> Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
>