What do you think?
Rate this book
The Final Foucault
The Final Foucault is devoted to his last published (and some as yet unpublished) work and includes a translation of one of his last interviews, a comprehensive bibliography of his publications, and a biographical chronology. Michel Foucault left a rich legacy of ideas and approaches, many of which still await exposition and analysis. The Final Foucault is devoted to his last published (and some as yet unpublished) work and includes a translation of one of his last interviews, a comprehensive bibliography of his publications, and a biographical chronology. Foucault was still working on his history of sexuality when he died in 1984, but his main concern remained, as throughout his career, a deeper understanding of the nature of truth. His final set of lectures at the College de France, described here by Thomas Flynn, focused on the concept of truth-telling as a moral virtue in the ancient world. In the other essays, Karlis Racevskis examines the questions of identity at the core of Foucault's work; Garth Gillan takes up the problems inherent in any attempt to characterize Foucault's philosophy; James Bernauer explores the ethical basis of Foucault's work and offers a context for understanding his late interest in the Christian experience; and Diane Rubenstein offers a Lacanian interpretation of the last work. The Final Foucault is based on a special issue of the Journal Philosophy and Social Criticism, edited by David Rasmussen and published at Boston College.
178 pages, Paperback
First published March 18, 1988
3 people are currently reading
39 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 17, 2024
ONE OF FOUCAULT’S LAST INTERVIEWS, AND SEVERAL ESSAYS ON HIS WORK
Michel Foucault (1926-1984) was a French philosopher, historian of ideas, and social theorist and activist; openly gay, he died of AIDS---the first “public figure” in France to die of the virus.
In the 1984 interview which opens the book, Foucault says, “My problem has always been… the problem of the relationship between subject and truth. How does the subject enter into a certain game of truth? My first problem was, how is it, for example, that beginning at a certain point in time, madness was considered a problem and the result of a certain number of processes---an illness dependent upon a certain medicine? How has the mad subject been placed in this game of truth defined by knowledge or medical model? And it is in doing this analysis that I noticed that, contrary to what had been somewhat the custom at that time… it was not in talking simply about ideology that we could really explain that phenomenon. In fact, there were practices… which sent me back to the problem of institutions of power, much more than to the problem of ideology.” (Pg. 10)
Later in this interview, he said, “Power is not an evil. Power is strategic games. We know very well indeed that power is not an evil. Take, for example, sexual relationship or love relationships. To exercise power over another, in a sort of open strategic game, where things could be reversed, that is not evil. That is part of love, passion, of sexual pleasure.” (Pg. 18)
Karlis Racevskis asks, “is Foucault the theoretician of the subject or of power? Foucault himself has at times felt obliged to clarify his stance, although the positions he has taken on this question have varied. The whole question is probably moot because, to put it simply, Foucault HAS to be concerned with both power and the subject since the theoretical importance of any one of the two elements is directly related to the existence of the other.” (Pg. 23)
Garth Gillian asks, “Is this shift toward philosophy in ‘The Use of Pleasure’ an abandonment of the theory of discursive practices and a taking shelter from the exposure to the infinity of language? Why philosophy? And why phrase the question in an existentialist manner, i.e., precipitated by a life crisis? Foucault implicitly answers those questions in ‘The Use of Pleasure’ and [‘The Care of the Self’]. The angle of approach of those two later volumes may not be congruent with the first volume of ‘The History of Sexuality,’ but both sets of questions focus upon the same object.” (Pg. 37)
James Bernauer explains of the ‘History of Sexuality’ series, “The titles of the projected volumes in the series on sexuality indicated the direction he intended to pursue in exploring the constitution of modern ‘sexuality.’ The planned second volume, ‘Flesh and Body,’ would have sketched the difference between a premodern approach to sexual experience, as a realm of necessary religious and moral asceticism, developed in relation to a juridical code, and the modern fabrication of sexuality as a domain of knowledge-power centered on the body. The succeeding volumes would take up each of the major nineteenth century sexual unities that were the principal vehicles for knowledge-power relations to operate.
Volume 3, ‘The Children’s Crusade,’ would treat how children were sexualized and how their sexual behavior became a major concern for education. Volume 4, ‘Woman, Mother and Hysteric’ would study the sexualization of the woman’s body, the concepts of pathology which arose in relation to that sexualization, and the insertion of that body into a perspective which invested it with significance for social policy. Volume 5... would study the isolation of sex as an instinct, the definition of its normal and abnormal functioning, and the corrective technology envisioned to deal with the latter. Volume 6, ‘Population and Races,’ would examine how the sexual domain became an object for ever increasing state intervention, as well as the emergence of eugenics and theories of race in the contemporary configuration of knowledge.” (Pg. 49)
Bernauer also suggests, “Although it was only in his last writings that Foucault dealt explicitly with ethics, the ethical interest as decisive for his thought… While Foucault’s study of sexuality, and of Christianity in particular, opened up the domain of ethics for explicit consideration, there were two events in the political realm which motivated a concentration with ethics, events which were more significant for him than the election of a French Socialist government in 1981. The first was the Iranian Revolution of 1978-1979… This specific discrimination of the ethical was promoted by the emergence of the Solidarity movement in Poland, where Foucault had lived in 1958 and whose fortunes he followed closely in the years after.” (Pg. 64-65)
This book will interest those seriously studying Foucault---although there are certainly more extensive collections of interviews and comments one should read first.
Michel Foucault (1926-1984) was a French philosopher, historian of ideas, and social theorist and activist; openly gay, he died of AIDS---the first “public figure” in France to die of the virus.
In the 1984 interview which opens the book, Foucault says, “My problem has always been… the problem of the relationship between subject and truth. How does the subject enter into a certain game of truth? My first problem was, how is it, for example, that beginning at a certain point in time, madness was considered a problem and the result of a certain number of processes---an illness dependent upon a certain medicine? How has the mad subject been placed in this game of truth defined by knowledge or medical model? And it is in doing this analysis that I noticed that, contrary to what had been somewhat the custom at that time… it was not in talking simply about ideology that we could really explain that phenomenon. In fact, there were practices… which sent me back to the problem of institutions of power, much more than to the problem of ideology.” (Pg. 10)
Later in this interview, he said, “Power is not an evil. Power is strategic games. We know very well indeed that power is not an evil. Take, for example, sexual relationship or love relationships. To exercise power over another, in a sort of open strategic game, where things could be reversed, that is not evil. That is part of love, passion, of sexual pleasure.” (Pg. 18)
Karlis Racevskis asks, “is Foucault the theoretician of the subject or of power? Foucault himself has at times felt obliged to clarify his stance, although the positions he has taken on this question have varied. The whole question is probably moot because, to put it simply, Foucault HAS to be concerned with both power and the subject since the theoretical importance of any one of the two elements is directly related to the existence of the other.” (Pg. 23)
Garth Gillian asks, “Is this shift toward philosophy in ‘The Use of Pleasure’ an abandonment of the theory of discursive practices and a taking shelter from the exposure to the infinity of language? Why philosophy? And why phrase the question in an existentialist manner, i.e., precipitated by a life crisis? Foucault implicitly answers those questions in ‘The Use of Pleasure’ and [‘The Care of the Self’]. The angle of approach of those two later volumes may not be congruent with the first volume of ‘The History of Sexuality,’ but both sets of questions focus upon the same object.” (Pg. 37)
James Bernauer explains of the ‘History of Sexuality’ series, “The titles of the projected volumes in the series on sexuality indicated the direction he intended to pursue in exploring the constitution of modern ‘sexuality.’ The planned second volume, ‘Flesh and Body,’ would have sketched the difference between a premodern approach to sexual experience, as a realm of necessary religious and moral asceticism, developed in relation to a juridical code, and the modern fabrication of sexuality as a domain of knowledge-power centered on the body. The succeeding volumes would take up each of the major nineteenth century sexual unities that were the principal vehicles for knowledge-power relations to operate.
Volume 3, ‘The Children’s Crusade,’ would treat how children were sexualized and how their sexual behavior became a major concern for education. Volume 4, ‘Woman, Mother and Hysteric’ would study the sexualization of the woman’s body, the concepts of pathology which arose in relation to that sexualization, and the insertion of that body into a perspective which invested it with significance for social policy. Volume 5... would study the isolation of sex as an instinct, the definition of its normal and abnormal functioning, and the corrective technology envisioned to deal with the latter. Volume 6, ‘Population and Races,’ would examine how the sexual domain became an object for ever increasing state intervention, as well as the emergence of eugenics and theories of race in the contemporary configuration of knowledge.” (Pg. 49)
Bernauer also suggests, “Although it was only in his last writings that Foucault dealt explicitly with ethics, the ethical interest as decisive for his thought… While Foucault’s study of sexuality, and of Christianity in particular, opened up the domain of ethics for explicit consideration, there were two events in the political realm which motivated a concentration with ethics, events which were more significant for him than the election of a French Socialist government in 1981. The first was the Iranian Revolution of 1978-1979… This specific discrimination of the ethical was promoted by the emergence of the Solidarity movement in Poland, where Foucault had lived in 1958 and whose fortunes he followed closely in the years after.” (Pg. 64-65)
This book will interest those seriously studying Foucault---although there are certainly more extensive collections of interviews and comments one should read first.
Displaying 1 of 1 review