If you are going down the autonomist movement influenced by Foucault, don't forget Franco 'Bifo' Berardi whose pottering around the UK at the moment promoting his new book 'The Soul at Work'
And in that vein (I don't know if it's been translated into English) there's Conversacioneos en el Impasse [trans. Conversations in the Impasse] (Tinta Limón, 2009). From the Latin American/ Post Autonomist Foucaultian influenced crossover train to subjectivisation-ville
Alastair Kemp
--- On Sat, 13/3/10, Umut Kocagöz <ukocagoz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Umut Kocagöz <ukocagoz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault, intelligibility, social movements
To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, 13 March, 2010, 10:56
hi.
Maybe you can look for Negri's works. I don't know any exact place, but in their Empire(with Hardt) there is a part called 'Biopolitical production'. I guess that Negri does not position himself as Gramscian or neo-gramscian; he is more likely to be Foucaultian or Deleuzean. Or you can check the Italian Autonomist movement (especially 1968-1977) and their debates. Radical Thought in Italy can be an essential source for this movement. (Hardt, Virno, Lazzarato, Negri etc...)
> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:06:18 -0800
> From: montgomerynick@xxxxxxxxx
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Foucault-L] Foucault, intelligibility, social movements
>
> hi all,
>
> i'm looking for places where foucault (and foucault scholarship) takes
> on the question of 'social movements' and/or 'collective action' (or
> 'politics' more generally), especially with respect to the question of
> intelligibility. in other words: i'm trying to figure out how social
> movements become intelligible, and ideally find some nuanced thinkers
> on this question.
>
> so far, laclau and mouffe and the theory of 'hegemony' is as far as
> i've gone, but laclau positions himself as a gramscian, not a
> foucauldian. on this note, does anyone know of specific debates
> between foucauldians and gramscians on these questions?
>
> any guidance on these questions would be much appreciated.
>
> cheers,
> nick
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list
And in that vein (I don't know if it's been translated into English) there's Conversacioneos en el Impasse [trans. Conversations in the Impasse] (Tinta Limón, 2009). From the Latin American/ Post Autonomist Foucaultian influenced crossover train to subjectivisation-ville
Alastair Kemp
--- On Sat, 13/3/10, Umut Kocagöz <ukocagoz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Umut Kocagöz <ukocagoz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] Foucault, intelligibility, social movements
To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Saturday, 13 March, 2010, 10:56
hi.
Maybe you can look for Negri's works. I don't know any exact place, but in their Empire(with Hardt) there is a part called 'Biopolitical production'. I guess that Negri does not position himself as Gramscian or neo-gramscian; he is more likely to be Foucaultian or Deleuzean. Or you can check the Italian Autonomist movement (especially 1968-1977) and their debates. Radical Thought in Italy can be an essential source for this movement. (Hardt, Virno, Lazzarato, Negri etc...)
> Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:06:18 -0800
> From: montgomerynick@xxxxxxxxx
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [Foucault-L] Foucault, intelligibility, social movements
>
> hi all,
>
> i'm looking for places where foucault (and foucault scholarship) takes
> on the question of 'social movements' and/or 'collective action' (or
> 'politics' more generally), especially with respect to the question of
> intelligibility. in other words: i'm trying to figure out how social
> movements become intelligible, and ideally find some nuanced thinkers
> on this question.
>
> so far, laclau and mouffe and the theory of 'hegemony' is as far as
> i've gone, but laclau positions himself as a gramscian, not a
> foucauldian. on this note, does anyone know of specific debates
> between foucauldians and gramscians on these questions?
>
> any guidance on these questions would be much appreciated.
>
> cheers,
> nick
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/210850552/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Foucault-L mailing list