Foucault News

News and resources on French thinker Michel Foucault (1926-1984)

Brookfield, K.
Studentified areas as contested heterotopias: Findings from Southampton
(2019) Area, 51 (2), pp. 350-359.

DOI: 10.1111/area.12458

Abstract
The ongoing “massification” of higher education in the UK has generated increased demand for student housing. Some of this demand is being met by new, purpose-built student accommodation, but much is being met through an intensification of student properties in established “student areas,” and the expansion of student housing into neighbourhoods previously unaffected by high levels of student in-migration in a process termed “studentification.” Previous research indicates that the arrival of multiple student households in established residential areas creates conflict and adversely affects the non-student population. Wishing to understand better these effects, this paper draws on focus group discussions completed with 11 diverse residents’ groups based across Southampton, an English university city, which explored attitudes towards, and experiences of, studentification. Seeking a more robust theorisation of the sociospatial impacts of, and responses to, this process, the findings are considered in relation to Foucault’s concept of “heterotopia.” Reflecting previous findings, the residents’ groups emerged as firm critics of studentification. Considered against Foucault’s concept, it appeared that the “heterotopian” qualities of studentified areas formed the points of most concern. Implications for the future of studentified areas, and for the concept of heterotopia, are explored.

Author Keywords
heterotopia; higher education; neighbourhood change; resident activism; studentification; students

Progressive Geographies

EF 26.jpg

Since the last update, and a short holiday in Wales, I’ve been systematically going through each of the previously drafted chapters, and doing a bit of reorganization. I’ve also worked through all the issues of Le Magazine Littéraire which have theme sections on Foucault, many of which are revealing sources of information. More substantially, I’ve worked through the notes I took at IMEC in February, especially from the Fonds Althusser. These are helpful for looking at Foucault’s student years at the ENS, as well as the early reception of Folie et déraison.

I’ve also been consulting Daniel Defert’s revised ‘Chronologie’ in the Pléiade Oeuvres. This is somewhat abbreviated from the version in Dits et écrits, but what I hadn’t realized until recently is that some things are updated or amended. In particular, one key date is now a whole year later. I’d realized that this date…

View original post 713 more words

Herausgeber: Gerhards, Helene, Braun, Kathrin (Hrsg.), Biopolitiken – Regierungen des Lebens heute, Springer, 2019

Includes 2 chapters in English

​Das Buch versammelt konstruktivistische Perspektiven auf das Konzept „Biopolitik“. Dadurch werden die Analysepotentiale für aktuelle Phänomene, die den Zusammenhang zwischen dem Leben und dem Lebendigen und der Regierbarmachung betreffen, ausgelotet. Im Fokus stehen die Strategien und die Objekte der Regierungs- und Regulierungsbemühungen: In welcher Weise werden gesellschaftliche Probleme konstruiert und bestimmten „Zielscheiben“ zugeschrieben? Welche Subjektivierungsformen lassen sich im Rahmen biopolitischer Zugriffe ausmachen? Inwiefern spielen spezifische sozialtheoretische Überlegungen und Konzeptionen von Zeit für biopolitische Strategien und Konflikte eine Rolle? An welchen Gegenständen sind die fortdauernden Konflikte, die sich im Spannungsfeld zwischen Medizin, Ethik und Politik ergeben, zu explizieren?

Call for chapters:
Autoethnography and self-study as education research methods: Continuing debates and contemporary applications

Edited by
Deborah L. Mulligan, Emilio A. Anteliz and Patrick Alan Danaher

FOCUS AND RATIONALE
There is recurring and increasing scholarly interest in the ethical and methodological possibilities of autoethnography and self-study as research methods in education (understood broadly and inclusively as encompassing learning and/or teaching in diverse forms and ranging from formal and structured on the one hand to informal and incidental on the other hand). Against the backdrop of that scholarly interest, this proposed edited research book is centred on continuing debates and contemporary applications related to autoethnography and self-study. These continuing debates include the perceived legitimacy and rigour of focusing on the researcher as self, the relationship between that focus and wider conceptualisations of the self and possible opportunities for engaging productively with multiple manifestations of the other and of otherness. These contemporary applications encompass innovative strategies for building on the undoubted affordances of autoethnography and self-study while also addressing their perceived limitations, traversing different disciplines and paradigms, and mobilising inter- and trans-disciplinary and -paradigmatic approaches.

ORGANISING QUESTIONS

Across the range of issues traversed in the book, it is planned that the following organising questions will be addressed:
1. What are the genealogical origins and the defining characteristics of autoethnography and self-study?
2. What are the strengths and limitations of autoethnography and self-study as education research methods?
3. What are innovative and novel strategies for maximising the strengths and minimising the limitations of autoethnography and self-study?
4. How do debates about and applications of autoethnography and self-study generate new insights into the character and significance of education research methods?
5. How do autoethnography and self-study resonate with broader advances in theorising and understanding contemporary life and society?
6. How can autoethnography and self-study contribute to reconceptualising and reimagining the work and identities of current and future researchers?

CALL FOR CHAPTER ABSTRACTS
Abstracts of no more than 250 words are cordially invited as potential chapters for this proposed edited research book. The editors seek submissions that represent a diversity of geographical location, disciplinary focus, and theoretical and methodological approaches, united by a shared focus on the affordances, limitations and possibilities of autoethnography and self-study as productive and potentially transformative education research methods. Please email your abstract and a bionote of no more than 125 words for each chapter author to Deborah.Mulligan@usq.edu.au, emilio.anteliz@gmail.com or Patrick.Danaher@usq.edu.au

Feel free to contact by email with the book editors with any questions regarding the formation of your abstract.

Abstract deadline: 31 October 2019

EDITOR BIONOTES

Deborah L. Mulligan has spoken at a number of academic symposiums in South East Queensland and has presented in state-wide webinars. Her primary research interest resides in the field of gerontology. Her PhD investigated the role of contributive needs when addressing older men and suicide ideation. Deborah has a strong interest in community capacity building as a means of transforming the lives of older adults and combating the negative stereotypes surrounding this demographic. She is also interested in the long-term effects of research on the participants and the ethical implications of investigating marginalised groups. Email: deborah.mulligan@usq.edu.au

Emilio A. Anteliz is a hydrometeorological engineer who for many years coordinated the provision of learning extension programs, projects and courses by the Faculty of Engineering at the Central University of Venezuela in Caracas, Venezuela to professional engineers and related fields. His research interests include environmental movements, engineering education, informal and lifelong learning, and professional ethics. Email: emilio.anteliz@gmail.com

Patrick Alan Danaher is Professor of Educational Research in the School of Education at the Toowoomba campus of the University of Southern Queensland, Australia. He is also currently an Adjunct Professor in the School of Education and the Arts at Central Queensland University, Australia; and Docent in Social Justice and Education at the University of Helsinki, Finland. His research interests include the education of occupationally mobile communities; education research ethics, methods, politics and theories; and academics’, educators’ and researchers’ work and identities. Email: patrick.danaher@usq.edu.au
https://staffprofile.usq.edu.au/profile/patrick-danaher

Daniel Verginelli Galantin, A dimensão literária da genealogia em Foucault, Kriterion. Revista de Filosofia, v. 60, n. 143 (2019)

Open Access PDF

Resumo

Neste artigo propomos estabelecer uma comparação entre escritos de Foucault sobre a literatura, notadamente seu livro “Raymond Roussel”, e textos que se consagraram pela fortuna crítica enquanto fundadores da genealogia, especificamente “Nietzsche, a genealogia e a história”. Organizamos essa comparação em torno da repetição do uso de duas figuras: i) a proliferação de máscaras enquanto processo de desidentificação e ii) uma experiência da finitude com viés não fundacional. Sustentamos que a recorrência da multiplicação das máscaras para apagar o rosto, assim como a íntima relação entre linguagem e morte, a qual se desdobra, no artigo sobre Nietzsche, nos termos do sacrifício genealógico do sujeito de conhecimento, é sinal de que Foucault estaria se apropriando de certos elementos do pensamento literário que lhe interessavam na década de 1960. Contudo, essa segunda apropriação ocorre mediante algumas mudanças, notadamente com sua mudança de solo, de uma reflexão voltada para o ser da linguagem na modernidade, para uma genealogia histórica. Finalmente, esboçamos uma terceira e última apropriação do pensamento literário por meio de seus escritos derradeiros. Trata-se de uma atitude-limite que passa por uma ontologia crítica e histórica de nós mesmos.

Sarmiento, E., Landström, C., Whatmore, S.
Biopolitics, discipline, and hydro-citizenship: Drought management and water governance in England
(2019) Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 44 (2), pp. 361-375.

DOI: 10.1111/tran.12288

Abstract
In this paper we argue that English drought management rests on two imaginaries of hydrocitizenship: an economic/instrumental imaginary that frames people primarily as “customers,” and an imaginary that focuses more on the affectively charged, personal engagements between individuals and “hydrosocial” spaces. These imaginaries, we contend, roughly correspond with the two modalities of a form of governance referred to by Michel Foucault as biopower: biopolitics and discipline. Drawing on fieldwork conducted as part of a large interdisciplinary research project on drought in the UK, we sketch the contours of English drought management, exploring in particular the “macro-scale” elements of drought management (the biopolitical modality), premised on computer simulation modelling, and the elements of drought management that focus on the level of individual people (the disciplinary modality), premised in part on the work of local environmental organisations. The difference between the two notions of hydrocitizenship informing these two modalities of management, we conclude, produces tensions that potentially undermine water governance as it is currently organised in the UK. Ultimately, our goal in the paper is not solely to expose or critique existing governance efforts or the power relations therein, but rather to examine the interplay of governmentalities that constitute drought management in order to illuminate and expand the potential for “being governed differently.”. The information, practices and views in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG). © 2019 Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers).

Author Keywords
biopolitics; drought management; England; environmental governance; ethnography; Foucault

Index Keywords
citizenship, drought, ethnography, governance approach, organizational framework, water management; England, United Kingdom

CALL FOR PAPERS
Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts

Issue 21 Political Matters: Spatial Thinking on the Alternative

Theme Editors: Farzaneh Haghighi (University of Auckland) & Nikolina Bobic (University of Plymouth)

Deadline for paper submission:  9th December 2019 – 5:00pm (NZST)

https://interstices.ac.nz/index.php/Interstices/announcement

POLITICAL MATTERS: SPATIAL THINKING OF THE ALTERNATIVE

At a time when the Western political climate is synonymous with Brexit, Donald Trump and Boris Johnston, the Christchurch terrorist attack, Australia’s Manus Island detention centres, the US-Mexico border and the global refugee crisis, the urgency of addressing the relationship between politics and space is more pressing than ever. To answer the question of what it means for space to be political beyond it merely being an expression of hegemonic orders, we follow Hannah Arendt’s celebration of political action, and her stance that political questions are far too serious to be left to politicians (1970). We draw upon Chantal Mouffe’s concept of agonism and the impossibility of a final reconciliation in thinking the political (2013). We acknowledge Paul Virilio’s thinking on negative horizon whereby perception is not just dependent upon the framing and mastering of the rhetoric of media and memory, but rather this mastery is also framed and dependent upon seeing abysses (1989, 2005, 2009). Finally, we emphasise Michel Foucault’s reconceptualisation of power as being productive rather than oppressive (1980). To make sense of, and come to grips with, this contemporary landscape requires a detailed reflection and analysis at different levels – individual, social, cultural, environmental, technological, medical, economic or legal.

Comprehending the complex forms of surveillance and governance in the age of contemporaneity requires one to problematise the limits of spatial politics in the society of control (1995). Indeed, it may require a different placing and questioning of ideas, events and spaces than the norm. Questioning and disrupting the limits of the norm may enable frictions and generate new knowledge. This issue of Interstices seeks papers that address the complexity at the nexus of architecture, urbanism, sociology, human geography and political philosophy, and focuses on the following themes:

  • Power, Memory and Identity
  • The Spectacle and the Screen
  • Housing, Urban Commons and the Social
  • Events, Flows and Public Space
  • Territories, Walls and Peripheries

Discussion on the convolutedness of control societies are also oriented towards formulating the hopeful, active and productive role space may have in the formation of social movements and in transforming everyday life – in other words, where we become active participants in the cities we live in, rather than passive designers or consumers serving the interest of market economies. It is where liberating spaces for thinking differently can thrive. Likewise, it is where access to, and dwelling in, space is enabled. It is where we can engage with questions of conflict, security and territorial stability, however, not at the expense of dehumanising the Other. Moreover, the implication of these explorations for architectural pedagogy remains a fruitful opportunity for political agency and we encourage submissions on this topic as well.

The thematic call on Political Matters: Spatial Thinking on the Alternative for Issue 21 of Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts seeks ambitious, innovative and rigorous scholarship of 5,000-word papers. Interstices is New Zealand’s only peer-reviewed journal in its field. Since 2008, the journal publication has attracted papers from highly regarded international and national scholars. The proposed schedule is outlined below:

14th August 2019: Call for 5,000-word papers issued
9th December 2019: Deadline for 5,000-word paper submissions
July 2020: Estimated journal publication

For journal submission guidelines see: https://interstices.ac.nz/index.php/Interstices/Style_Guide

For all Interstices matters see: https://interstices.ac.nz/index.php/Interstices

For updates see: https://interstices.ac.nz/index.php/Interstices/announcement/view/2

References:

Arendt, Hannah. Men in Dark Times. London: Cape, 1970.

Deleuze, Gilles. “Postscript on Control Societies.” In Negotiations, 177 – 181. Translated by Martin Joughin. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.

Foucault, Michel. “Truth and Power.” In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writing, 1972 – 1977, edited by Colin Gordon, 109-33. New York: Vintage Books, 1980. Originally published in 1977 entitled Vèritè et pouvoir.

Mouffe, Chantal. Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso, 2013.

Virilio, Paul. Negative Horizon: An Essay on Dromoscopy. Translated by Michael Degener. London: Continuum, 2005; War and Cinema: The Logistics of Perception. Translated by Patrick Camiller; London: Verso, 1989; The Aesthetics of Disappearance. Translated by Philip Beitchman. New York: Semiotext(e), 2009.

Bay, U., Haynes, A., Western, D., Thinking what we do: reflexively testing post-structural theoretical concepts with social work practitioners and fieldwork educators
(2019) Social Work Education, 38 (7), pp. 941-953.

DOI: 10.1080/02615479.2019.1586868

Abstract
Neoliberalism is a contemporary political rationality in Australian public policy that frames how problems are understood and addressed. Neoliberalism also encourages certain kinds of subjectivities, ways of being and behaving in the world. Foucault’s theorizing about political rationalities was presented to and discussed with 19 Australian social work practitioners (also fieldwork educators) in two half-day professional development workshops. This small research study indicated that exploring social work practice using political rationalities led to participants asking broader questions post workshop, including ‘Why am I thinking about it that way? Why do we see things in a certain way?’ Instead of focusing mainly on their own individual behavior or attitudes and assumptions as indicated in the pre-workshop survey, their questions became ‘What are we doing in the first place?’’ and ‘Could I think about it in a different way?’ The pre and post surveys and the one-hour focus group interview transcripts were used to analyze the shifts in thinking by workshop participants. This study indicated that post-structural theorizing may add some new and worthwhile concepts to the process of critical reflection, especially on the psychosocial effects of neoliberalism. The implications for teaching critical reflection in social work fieldwork education are outlined. © 2019, © 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Author Keywords
conceptual issues; continuing professional development; post- modern/post-structural theories; Reflection; theory

Special Issue on Everyday Politics of Public Space, Space and Culture, Volume 22 Issue 3, August 2019

Articles

Preface: The Everyday Politics of Public Space
Mattias De Backer, Claske Dijkema, and Kathrin Hörschelmann

Abstract
While in the past two decades a rich literature has emerged about the politics of public space, many of these theoretical works and empirical studies consider public space interactions and behaviors against the backdrop of deliberative or representative politics. In this special issue, to which this article is the preface, we offer some reflections on how the everyday and the micro-level can be sites of political expression, leading inevitably to a critical discussion of the central assumptions regarding private/public space and its generational, gendered, classed, and “culturalized” construction. This analysis takes place with three theoretical axes in the background: Katz’s minor theory, anarchist theory on prefigurative politics, and Foucault, de Certeau, and Lefebvre’s work on power, knowledge, and place. © The Author(s) 2019.

“If You Can’t Hear Me, I Will Show You”: Insurgent Claims to Public Space
in a Marginalized Social Housing Neighborhood in France
Claske Dijkema

Negotiating Spaces and the Public–Private Boundary: Language Policies Versus
Language Use Practices in Odessa
Abel Polese, Rustamjon Urinboyev, Tanel Kerikmae, and Sarah Murru

Dutch-Moroccan Girls Navigating Public Space: Wandering as an Everyday
Spatial Practice
Patricia Wijntuin and Martijn Koster

A Prefigurative Politics of Play in Public Places: Children Claim Their Democratic
Right to the City Through Play
Penelope Carroll, Octavia Calder-Dawe, Karen Witten, and Lanuola Asiasiga

Regimes of Visibility: Hanging Out in Brussels’ Public Spaces
Mattias De Backer

Enquiry from one of the readers of Foucault News. Does anybody know what the two large paintings right at the beginning of this interview are?

15-minute footage is of an interview that was conducted by the Dutch philosopher Fons Elders in preparation for the debate between Noam Chomsky and Michel Foucault, which was broadcasted on Dutch television on Sunday, Nov. 28, 1971