On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Dennis Perrin wrote:
> You certainly see this on the "Manufacturing Consent" DVD Special
> Features section. Foucault prattles on on on on while Chomsky strains to
> make sense of what he's saying. I've known more than a few lefties who
> find value in Foucault's work, and like Chomsky I don't understand it.
> Are there any Foucault fanciers here who might give it a go?
>
> DP
I've admitted on the list already I think Foucault is worth reading. Yes, he has that strange French intellectual affected writing style. However, there is a there there (cf. later Baudrillard). His work's all over the place; he dabbled in a number of disciplines (history, psychiatry, criminal justice, philosophy) and didn't really stick to one guiding idea. He kinda reminds me of John Nash in that he attacks problems in a novel way that "experts" would not think of. For instance, History of Sexuality, Vol. 1: his main thesis is that the Victorian era marked a proliferation of sexual types and awareness of sexual types--the notion that "Victorians were sexually repressed" is highly misleading.
I guess I understand Chomsky's point here: Foucault "babbling" about the emergence of modern sexuality is not going to bring about the political changes Chomsky envisions. However, there is more to social relations than the politics that Chomsky diligently elucidates. I think we need to understand the social production of sexuality as much as we need to understand the atrocities of the U.S. terror state. (There are opportunities for enlightenment and activism in each case!)
Miles