hi ricky,
the way i read this is that F is characterising the time-table as a collective and obligatory rhythm imposed from the outside
whereas discipline introduced a programme - an anatamo-chronological schema - that assures the elaboration of the act itself, not by some external timetable, but by the internalisation of punctal gestures (it controls from the interior the unfolding and the phases of the act itself).
and thus what defines the ordinance of 1766 is not a timetable but a programme.
F notes earlier in the text that discipline alters the mothods of temporal regulation from which they derive (i.e. the time-table and religious orders: 150).
regards,
k
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rickydcrano@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 17:59:31 -0400
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] tr. question re: D&P
>
> hi Kevin,
>
> I think you're incorrect in changing "rather" to "more than" -- Foucault
> is
> drawing on Leroi-Gourhan's notion of program here (see e.g. Stiegler's
> extensive reading of L-G in Technics and Time 1) -- The ordinance indeed
> defines (not is defined by) the "collective and obligatory rhythm" that
> constitutes its program-ness. Foucault's point seems to me to be that the
> ordinance produces or subjugates subjects at a deeper, ontogenetic level
> than thinking of it as a mere time-table would allow. Or, in Deleuzian
> terms, we could say Foucault is interested as much in the real virtual
> and
> incorporeal effects of the ordinance as in the corporeal actualizations
> that
> it conditions.
>
> good luck,
> R
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> i'm having problems with a passage from D&P which doesn't make sense.
>>
>> the passage is on page 151-2, and reads as follows:
>>
>> What the ordinance of 1766 defines is not a time-table – the general
>> framework for an activity; it is rather a collective and obligatory
>> rhythm,
>> imposed from the outside; it is a “programme;” it assures the
>> elaboration of
>> the act itself; it controls its development and its stages from the
>> inside
>> (DP: 151-2).
>>
>> the original French reads:
>>
>> Ce que définit l'ordonnance de 1766, ce n'est pas un emploi du temps —
>> cadre général pour une activité; c'est plus qu'un rythme collectif et
>> obligatoire, imposé de l'extérieur; c'est un «programme»; il assure
>> l'élaboration de l'acte lui-même; il contrôle de l'intérieur son
>> déroulement
>> et ses phases (SP : 153).
>>
>> would this be a better translation?
>>
>> What defines the ordinance of 1766, is not a timetable – the general
>> framework for an activity; it is more than a collective and obligatory
>> rhythm, imposed from outside; it is a “programme;” it assures the
>> elaboration of the act itself; it controls from the interior its
>> unfolding
>> and its phases.
>>
>> regards,
>> kevin.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
>> Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social
>> networks.
>> TRY IM TOOLPACK at http://www.imtoolpack.com/default.aspx?rc=if2 for
>> FREE
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
____________________________________________________________
Publish your photos in seconds for FREE
TRY IM TOOLPACK at http://www.imtoolpack.com/default.aspx?rc=if4
the way i read this is that F is characterising the time-table as a collective and obligatory rhythm imposed from the outside
whereas discipline introduced a programme - an anatamo-chronological schema - that assures the elaboration of the act itself, not by some external timetable, but by the internalisation of punctal gestures (it controls from the interior the unfolding and the phases of the act itself).
and thus what defines the ordinance of 1766 is not a timetable but a programme.
F notes earlier in the text that discipline alters the mothods of temporal regulation from which they derive (i.e. the time-table and religious orders: 150).
regards,
k
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rickydcrano@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 17:59:31 -0400
> To: foucault-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Foucault-L] tr. question re: D&P
>
> hi Kevin,
>
> I think you're incorrect in changing "rather" to "more than" -- Foucault
> is
> drawing on Leroi-Gourhan's notion of program here (see e.g. Stiegler's
> extensive reading of L-G in Technics and Time 1) -- The ordinance indeed
> defines (not is defined by) the "collective and obligatory rhythm" that
> constitutes its program-ness. Foucault's point seems to me to be that the
> ordinance produces or subjugates subjects at a deeper, ontogenetic level
> than thinking of it as a mere time-table would allow. Or, in Deleuzian
> terms, we could say Foucault is interested as much in the real virtual
> and
> incorporeal effects of the ordinance as in the corporeal actualizations
> that
> it conditions.
>
> good luck,
> R
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Kevin Turner <kevin.turner@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> i'm having problems with a passage from D&P which doesn't make sense.
>>
>> the passage is on page 151-2, and reads as follows:
>>
>> What the ordinance of 1766 defines is not a time-table – the general
>> framework for an activity; it is rather a collective and obligatory
>> rhythm,
>> imposed from the outside; it is a “programme;” it assures the
>> elaboration of
>> the act itself; it controls its development and its stages from the
>> inside
>> (DP: 151-2).
>>
>> the original French reads:
>>
>> Ce que définit l'ordonnance de 1766, ce n'est pas un emploi du temps —
>> cadre général pour une activité; c'est plus qu'un rythme collectif et
>> obligatoire, imposé de l'extérieur; c'est un «programme»; il assure
>> l'élaboration de l'acte lui-même; il contrôle de l'intérieur son
>> déroulement
>> et ses phases (SP : 153).
>>
>> would this be a better translation?
>>
>> What defines the ordinance of 1766, is not a timetable – the general
>> framework for an activity; it is more than a collective and obligatory
>> rhythm, imposed from outside; it is a “programme;” it assures the
>> elaboration of the act itself; it controls from the interior its
>> unfolding
>> and its phases.
>>
>> regards,
>> kevin.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> Send any screenshot to your friends in seconds...
>> Works in all emails, instant messengers, blogs, forums and social
>> networks.
>> TRY IM TOOLPACK at http://www.imtoolpack.com/default.aspx?rc=if2 for
>> FREE
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Foucault-L mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Foucault-L mailing list
____________________________________________________________
Publish your photos in seconds for FREE
TRY IM TOOLPACK at http://www.imtoolpack.com/default.aspx?rc=if4