Date: Fri, 4 Aug 1995 09:29:30 +1000 From: S.Wilcox-AT-mailbox.uq.oz.au (Shane Wilcox) Subject: Re: Foucault on power John Ransom-- I suspect I wasn't too clear in the phrasing of my comment/question. I was agreeing with the principle that there is no capital-P Power as such, but wondering whether the assertion that power (note the lowercase) is nevertheless "always the same thing" in Foucault or anywhere else doesn't call upon the possibility of an essential power transferable between singular relationships. I don't think power exists--it has no Being of its own, but at best is the negative horizon from which beings proceed towards subjectivity and which necessitates that beings-becoming-subjects are always-already in relation from the moment of their coming into the world. This is possibly Foucault's unspoken metaphysics, but it's probably worth pointing out that it's transcendent rather than being transcendental (to employ Deleuze's distinction)--a phenomenology of power rather than an ontology (to the extent that the two are separable). I'm going to have to sign off--the vice-chancellor's getting a new toilet block here, and the jackhammers are right outside my window. I hope this excuses the brevity and abstractness of my comments. Again, I look forward to your response. Shane _______________________ Shane Wilcox Department of English University of Queensland Brisbane Q 4072 Australia ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005