Date: Wed, 12 Apr 1995 20:28:57 -0700 (MST)
From: Kathleen G Williamson <kgw-AT-gas.uug.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Foucault and Normativity


I'm very interested in the intellectual meta-language employed here.  I'm 
not sure what exactly your are saying.  As with much hyper-theoretical 
writing, here is so much abstraction that the reader (like the viewer in 
art) is left to do a lot of interacting and interpretation (open spaces?) 
with the object or text.  I wonder if it would be tooo much of a 
challenge to ask you to discuss these various concepts here in grounded 
terms, concrete examples in the living color world of practices? As the 
lawyer sez in Gump, "tell it to me like I'm a six year old."  I know its 
possible, there are a lot of children who know what "hegemony" is, long 
before they ever hear or read the word.   Kathleen Williamson  
kgw-AT-gas.uug.arizona.edu

On Wed, 12 Apr 1995 AH7301R-AT-acad.drake.edu wrote:

> Kristin wrote:
> "I think that Gabriel Ash has hit upon a very interesting idea in her
> statements about political action and pragmatism.  She talks about
> Foucault's attempt to de-center and how this is different from
> pragmatism, which takes its impetus/strength from being at the center of
> a discourse, or being that around which a discourse functions.
> Does this mean that de-centered political actions are necessarily
> marginal, in the Foucauldian-Derridean sense of the term?  Is this why
> revolution (in the grand sense) is impossible?  Is this also Lyotard's
> idea of "glissement" and Joanna Crosby's idea of "opening up spaces" in
> which to operate"
> 
> I was wondering Kristen (or anybody else) if there are some readings you
> would reccommend that deal with this difference between Foucault and
> pragmatism.
> 
> 
> Andrew Herman
> 

     ------------------