Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 09:00:49 -0400 From: francois gagnon <francois.gagnon.1-AT-UMontreal.CA> Subject: Re: Pouvoir You can find a similar interpretation (or discussion) in Deleuze's 'Foucault'. I don't know if it has been translated. Francois Kevin Turner a écrit: > credit where credit's due - i got the insight from Stuart Elden's > "mapping the present:" 106, and Beatrice Hanssen's "critique of > violence": 153, the latter of whom references Gayatri Spivak's > "Outside the Teaching Machine:" 25-52. > > as for power being an actuality: you can take this in (at least) two > ways - either it is an actuality in terms of being a substance and > thus a property, or it is an actuality in terms of being a > potentiality. i think foucault means the later. thus to think of > power as capacity is not to think of it as an innate capability, or > an essentail attribute, but precisely the capacity "to be able to" > (power - pouvoir as a verb, as a doing) through the capacity to > "know'how" (knowledge - savoir). > > i think Nietzsche's observation that 'there is no "being" behind > doing, acting, becoming; "the doer" is merely a fiction imposed on > the doing - the doing itself is everything' ("On The Genealogy of > Morals" 1996: First Essay, 13), is a very good way to think about > power/pouvoir as a verb. > > regards - k. > > On Sat, 09 Oct 2004 19:37:47 +1000, Lionel Boxer <lboxer-AT-hotmail.com> > wrote: > >> Can we be certain that Foucault did not mean anything beyond >> something actual? I think the idea that it has something to do with >> "capacity" adds an interesting dimension. Where does Foucault make >> that statement in a clear way? >> >> Lionel Boxer CD PhD MBA - 0411267256 - lboxer-AT-hotmail.com >> Charity day at Dame Elisabeth's - see http://intergon.net >> Victorian Scottish Regiment >> NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT (none may attack me with impunity) >> ---------------------------------------------- >> Melbourne Volunteer Rifle Regiment 150th Anniversary -- >> http://intergon.net/rifles >> ---------------------------------------------- >> >>> From: "Mark Kelly" <mgekelly-AT-hotmail.com> >>> Reply-To: foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU >>> To: foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU >>> Subject: Pouvoir >>> Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:30:40 +1000 >>> >>> we've got to be careful with this - it was a line I chased for a while. >>> 'pouvoir' as a verb means 'to be able to'; as a noun, it means >>> 'power'. The reason we have to be so careful is that in 'The >>> Subject and Power' Foucault is very specific that by power he does >>> not mean capacity or potential but something actual. 'Power' in >>> English also has the connotation of a capacity to do something, but >>> not in Foucault's usage. >>> Mark >>> >>> >From: francois gagnon <francois.gagnon.1-AT-UMontreal.CA> >>> >Reply-To: foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU >>> >To: foucault-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU >>> >Subject: Re: micro-translations >>> >Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:46:47 -0400 >>> > >>> >Yes it can. >>> >F. >>> > >>> >Kevin Turner a écrit: >>> > >>> >>while we're on the subject of translation... >>> >> >>> >>can someone confirm that the term foucault uses for power, >>> >>"pouvoir," can also mean "be able >>> (to)", "can," "be possible," or >>> >>"capacity," etc. >>> >> >>> >>cheers - k >>> >> >>> >>On Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:52:00 +0200, xavier delcourt >>> >><delcourt-AT-cuej.u-strasbg.fr> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>>équilibre européen: "european balance" would >>> be totally acceptable >>> >>>from my point of view >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> > >>> >-- >>> >François Gagnon >>> >Doctorant >>> >Département de Communication >>> >Université de Montréal >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> _________________________________________________________________ >> Protect yourself from junk e-mail: >> http://microsoft.ninemsn.com.au/protectfromspam.aspx >> > > > -- François Gagnon Doctorant Département de Communication Université de Montréal
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005