File spoon-archives/foucault.archive/foucault_1996/96-07-25.211, message 25


Date: Mon, 08 Jul 96 10:54:11 EST
From: "Joe Cronin" <croninj-AT-thomasmore.edu>
Subject: Re[6]: what is bio-power?


          To Michael Donnelly:

          I agree, we have been talking past each other, but I'm not
          quite satisfied with yoyur response.  In your article "On
          Foucault's Use of the Notion of 'Biopower'" (cited from
          Michel Foucault: Philosopher), you make a distinction
          between the genealogical level of analysis, and what you
          call an 'epochal' analysis:
          To put the distinction in other terms: certaqin formulations
          in Foucault's texts refer to PARTICULAR (my emphasis)
          targets of biopower in delimited time periods; these can be
          called 'genealogical'.  Other formulations summarise long
          periods and refer to effects of biopower on 'society' -
          to orderly, enduring, 'programmed' consequences which follow
          from the application, according to strategic calculations,
          of biopower; these can be called 'epochal'.

          What is unwarranted, according to the article, is a kind of
          inference from the 'genalogical' (defined as a kind of
          particularity, I still hold), and the 'epochal' - an example
          of which is the 'carceral society' in D&P.  Follwing form
          this unwarranted inference, is an 'elision' of the two
          descriptions - one genealogical, and one epochal.  The
          virtue of genealogy, you argue, is its particularism: "as a
          result the accounts are burdened with historical detail and
          necessarily localised in character."  The unwarranted
          aspect, ("the contrast,") is his general desiptions: "the
          disciplinary techniques whose historical constitution he has
          tried to document are formalised into a general 'diagram'
          ('panopticism'), emptied of specific contents or contexts."
           You then claim that "What is striking here is the
          suspension of those patient and nominalist procedures..."

          According to your account, there are two histories Foucault
          is writing, mixing them together at certain points: the
          first is "particular" "Localised" and "nominalist," the
          se4cond is "general" "programmtic," and "formalised."
          Here is where the problems begin.  First of all, where does
          Foucault ever give a "grey, meticulous, patiently
          documentary" account?  As early as Madness and Civ., he
          chose "pivotal" figures such as Tuke and Pinel, Freud,
          Bentham, etc. - all of whom exerted a "general" influence.
          In Discipline and Punish, the description of Damiens is
          quoted out of a few manuals, as are the timetables from the
          1830's.  Foucault cites these texts to demonstrate a
          "general" shift in peneal technolgoeies, procedures, etc.

          You seem to suggest that one should dispense with this
          general level of analysis, which you call 'epochal'.  First
          of all, I don't see Foucault's generalties as being
          constituted along periodal lines, as you suggest in your
          article when you say that "The weakness of the 'epochal'
          approach is that it lapses into a crude
          periodisation...flattening our historical developments in
          the mean time."  I suggest that Foucault's treatment of
          "generalities," and his inclusion of generalities in his
          "grey meticulous" accounts is not periodical, but
          archeological.  The "carcel society" stenms from certain
          rationalities.  The first step of genealogy, as I have been
          suggesting, is archeological, as he claims in "Two
          Lectures": "What I mean is this: In a society such as ours,
          but basically in any society, there are manifold relations
          of power whcih permeate, characterize, and constitute the
          social body, and these relations of power cannot themselves
          be established, consolidated nor implemented without the
          production, accumulation, circulation, and fucntioning of a
          discourse."(P/K, 93)
          Why does Foucault refer to a "carceral society"?  Because
          that's what he finds in nineteenth century
          disciplinary-architectural manuals which make an
          invariable reference to Bentham.  What can be said is that
          a discourse on penal technologies has been produced,
          distributed, and accumulated at a general level.
          This is consistent with a Marxian analysis.  One respects
          what one finds at teh local, empirical level - but there are
          general phenomenon - otherwise capital could not be
          distributed and appropriated on a general level.  In other
          words, not all empirical accounts have to remain at the
          local and particualr level; there are general phenomenon,
          and Focualt is trying to grap these phenomenon in their
          'specificity,' just as Marx attempted to grasp the concept
          of labour ion its material, historical specificity without
          resorted to idealist "mystifications."  The local level of
          analysis is necessary for criticval purposes as well as
          methodological ones - but that does not mean that the
          phenomena under investigation have no generality.  I will
          close with a quote from REMARKS ON MARX (152):
          "Localizing problems in indispensable for theoretical and
          political reasons.  But that doesn't mean that they are not,
          however, general problems.  After all, what is more general
          in a society than the way in which it defines its realtion
          ot madness? Or the way in which society is recognized as
          "rationality" personified?...It is quite true that I
          localize problems, but I believe that this permits me to
          make others emerge from them that are very general..."(RM,
          152).




   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005