yeah -- but i don't think there's a contradiction between exploring a foucauldian analysis and this other approach. as to the latter, the one you outline, i found what you wrote vague. maybe i need more coffee? could you provide more details. i've seen Life is A House a few times -- it's a favorite of my partner's. but i'm not clear on how the main character represents a "strong, integrated ego." he seems to have lead a rather fucked up life, harboring a sense of loss associated with his own drunkard, abusive father, that had repercussions for the way he treated his family and himself -- prior to his illness. The film plays into a fave theme: the special individual who bucks the system -- pissing in the ocean off a cliff, building without correct permits, encouraging a dog to piss on a YUP neighbor's newspaper, keeping a house a shack irritating the neighbors in swank neighborhood. he only really bucks the system at work when he gets canned IIRC. (memory's vague on the sequence.)
so this special individual does all the right things, in the face of death!, makes everyone fall in love with him after years of abusing them. he has treated both his ex-wife and the ex-gf neighbor, as well as his kid, kind of crappy. and does so because of his own shattered relationship with his father -- who managed to kill himself, his wife, another couple in a car accident while driving under the influence. the survivor's are kline's character and a little girl who has been disabled by the accident, and now lives in a trailer. (Of course, she couldn't possibly have a sense of community and family where she lives and must be transported to some house on a cliff overlooking the bay in Ranchos Palo Verdos, CA. (Hmm. I thought it was SF...)
the house, of course, is built as a way to reconcile relationships between dad and son -- and between kline's character and everyone else. and eventually, the whole community pitches in to help, so inspired are they by his heroic individualism! house is built, kline dies, little disabled girl inherits the house. because, what she needs is to live in a house overlooking bay, transported away from the community she once had and transplanted into a community that, until the house building episode, had been a typical middle class community of people who make a beeline for the door when they get out of their car after work but who, when walking the dog, peer into your yard and your home to make judgements about your life and mutter to themselves about what a jerk you are. smile pleasantly when they see you, but call the cops or lawyers on you the minute they feel they have an excuse. no doubt the money and material things will help a great deal, but the film seems to suggest it will account for everything the young woman will need. all you need to be happy is a rilly rilly nice house -- not a meaningful way to contribute to society, not a network of friends, neighbors, family. you need a big see-through house! (i'm being sarcastic. obviously the other message is that you need more than that, but so little attention is paid to this, the movie seems unintentionally demeaning to the disabled. mind is kind of an unfair criticism of a sappy movie.)
i'm also wondering if you've ever read Larry Hirschhorn's _The Workplace Within_ and, if so, your thoughts? If not, I'd be interested in your take if you have time to read it.
shag
http://cleandraws.com Wear Clean Draws ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)