Foucault News

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

FOUCAULT 71
12 janvier – 6 février 2011
feuilleton théâtral en trois épisodes :

La Cartoucherie
Route du Champ de Manœuvre
75012 Paris

Théâtre de l’Aquarium
les mercredis à 20h30 : Foucault 71
les jeudis à 20h30 : La prison
les vendredis à 20h30 et les dimanches à 16h : Qui suis-je, maintenant ?
les samedis à 16h : intégrale

Foucault 71
La prison
Qui suis-je maintenant ? (création)
feuilleton théâtral en 3 épisodes à voir séparément ou dans la foulée

par le Collectif F71 :
direction artistique Sabrina Baldassarra, Stéphanie Farison, Emmanuelle Lafon, Sara Louis, Lucie Nicolas / direction de production Thérèse Coriou

Michel Foucault est décidément inoxydable, qui fouilla sa vie durant les relations complexes entre réel et discours, pouvoir et subjectivité. Pour habiter plus librement notre étrange pays, cinq jeunes femmes de théâtre se sont emparées de ses textes, manifestes et interviews, elles ont rencontré moult chercheurs, militants et prisonniers, elles se sont inventé en collectif leurs propres règles du jeu, pour concevoir ce « feuilleton théâtral » en trois épisodes, aussi impertinents qu’énergisants :

FOUCAULT 71
/ durée 1h35
spectacle qui a reçu le prix du jury du Festival « Impatience » 2009 de l’Odéon :

conception, mise en scène, scénographie et interprétation Sabrina Baldassarra, Stéphanie Farison, Emmanuelle Lafon, Sara Louis, Lucie Nicolas
lumières Frank Condat et Daniel Lévy

Où l’on verra Michel Foucault s’engager avec d’autres intellectuels, à travers trois « affaires » de l’année 1971, pour la cause des prisonniers, contre la désinformation policière et le racisme dans la Goutte d’or …

LA PRISON
durée 1h10
conception, mise en scène et interprétation Sabrina Baldassarra, Stéphanie Farison, Emmanuelle Lafon, Sara Louis, Lucie Nicolas
scénographie > Daniel Lévy et le collectif F71
lumières Frank Condat et Daniel Lévy

Où l’on verra Foucault analyser le fonctionnement de la prison pour mettre au grand jour les rapports de pouvoir à l’œuvre dans notre quotidien…

QUI SUIS-JE MAINTENANT ?
durée 1h30
création
mise en scène et interprétation Stéphanie Farison, Emmanuelle Lafon, Sara Louis, Lucie Nicolas
musique et interprétation Fred Costa
assistanat à la mise en scène Estefania Castro
scénographie Denis Gobin, Magali Murbach et le collectif F71
lumières Denis Gobin
costumes Magali Murbach

Où l’on verra (à partir de La vie des hommes infâmes) un Foucault amoureux de l’archive révéler la force des mots sur les vies.

coproduction : La Concordance des temps / Théâtre-Studio (Alfortville) / Arcadi (Action régionale pour la création artistique et la diffusion en Ile de France) / Le Studio-Théâtre (Vitry) / avec le soutien de l’Adami, la participation artistique et d’après une maquette issue du comité de lecture du Jeune Théâtre National, la collaboration du SPIP 94. Le Carré, Scène Nationale de Château Gontier, Collectif 12, Théâtre du Crochetan, avec l’aide à la production de la DRAC Ile de France, de la SPEDIDAM et le soutien du 104, coréalisation Théâtre de l’Aquarium.

Foucault Studies is pleased to announce the publication of issue 10. All articles are freely available as open access on the Foucault Studies website.

A Special Issue on Foucault and Agamben
Guest Edited by Jeffrey Bussolini

Including five original articles and an interpretive review essay of recent publications by Agamben bearing on the work of Foucault.

The issue also includes a report from the Foucault Archives at Berkeley, a review essay of the recent translation of Michel Foucault’s lectures at the Collège de France 1982-1983: The Government of Self and Others and seven new book reviews.

Foucault Studies is an electronic, open access, peer reviewed, international journal that provides a forum for scholarship engaging the intellectual legacy of Michel Foucault, interpreted in the broadest possible terms. We welcome submissions ranging from theoretical explications of Foucault’s work and texts to interdisciplinary engagements across various fields, to empirical studies of contemporary phenomena using Foucaultian approaches.

Please visit the website to sign up for E-alerts to receive news of CFP’s and new issues.

Number 10, November 2010:
Table of Contents:

Editorial
Sverre Raffnsøe, Alan Rosenberg, Alain Beaulieu, Sam Binkley, Jens Erik Kristensen, Sven Opitz, Chloë Taylor & Ditte Vilstrup Holm

______________________________________________________
Special Issue on Foucault and Agamben

Introduction to the Special Issue
Jeffrey Bussolini

The Allegory of the Cage: Foucault, Agamben, and the Enlightenment
Arne de Boever

Violence and the Biopolitics of Modernity
Johanna Oksala

Agamben’s Foucault: An overview
Anke Snoek

One Paradigm, Two Potentialities: Freedom, Sovereignty and Foucault in Agamben’s Reading of Aristotle’s ‘δύναμις’ (dynamis)
David Bleeden

What is a Dispositive?
Jeffrey Bussolini

Critical Encounter Between Giorgio Agamben and Michel Foucault: Review of Recent Works of Agamben
Jeffrey Bussolini

___________________________________________________
Toolbox

The Foucault Archives at Berkeley
Alain Beaulieu
_______________________________________________________
Review Essay

Michel Foucault, The Government of Self and Others: Lectures at the Collège de France 1982-1983, edited by Arnold I. Davidson. translated by Graham Burchell (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010)
Alan Milchman, Alan Rosenberg

____________________________________________________

Reviews

Raymond Aron. Michel Foucault. Dialogue. Analyse de Jean-François Bert (Paris: Nouvelles Éditions Lignes, 2007)
Sophie Bourgault

Paul Marcus, In Search of the Good Life: Emmanuel Levinas, Psychoanalysis and the Art of Living (London: Karmac Books Ltd., 2010)
George Kunz

Mitchell Dean, Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society, 2nd Edition (London: Sage, 2010)
Michael Lait

Alain Badiou, Theory of the Subject (New York: Continuum, 2009)
Tomas Marttila

Colin Koopman, Pragmatism as Transition: Historicity and Hope in James, Dewey, and Rorty (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009)
Corey McCall

David Couzens Hoy, The Time of Our Lives: A Critical History of Temporality (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2009)
Alexander Paulsson

Mari Ruti, A World of Fragile Things: Psychoanalysis and the Art of Living (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2009)
Marcus Schulzke

Ecole doctorale : 27/28/29 avril 2011. IMEC. Caen

L’Association pour le Centre Michel Foucault propose, pour la troisième année consécutive, avec l’aide de la Fondation de France une école doctorale visant à réunir les doctorants travaillant sur, avec et autour de la pensée de Michel Foucault.

L’objectif est, comme les années précédentes de mettre en relation, le plus agréablement possible et de manière assez informelle, les jeunes chercheurs afin de constituer un réseau de travail national et international.

Cette rencontre aura lieu les 27, le 28 et le 29 avril 2011 à l’IMEC, à l’abbaye d’Ardenne à Caen (avec une arrivée l’après-midi du premier jour et un départ le 29 en fin de journée).

Les frais de séjour sur place et les billets Paris-Caen-Paris seront offerts aux intervenants par l’Association pour le Centre Michel Foucault.

Pour que les échanges puissent être les plus féconds possibles – et compte tenu des capacités d’accueil de l’abbaye – nous limitons le nombre de participants, ce qui impliquera nécessairement un choix de notre part.

Les doctorants ayant participé les années passées aux journées pourront bien entendu décider d’y assister, mais la priorité sera donnée aux nouveaux intervenants et à ceux qui, les années précédentes n’avaient pu être choisis.

Les propositions d’intervention (une page maximum), portant soit sur une question particulière de votre travail de thèse, soit sur un problème méthodologique précis, devront nous être envoyées avant le 1er février 2011.
En fonction des demandes, nous établirons et diffuserons un programme courant février.

N’hésitez pas à nous contacter pour toute question.

Très cordialement,

Philippe Artières, Jean-François Bert, Luca Paltrinieri, Mathieu Potte-Bonneville, Judith Revel, Ferhat Taylan

Contact :
Luca Paltrinieri : l.paltrinieri@gmail.com

Frank Welz, ‘Lost in Agency? Kant, Foucault and the Task of Sociology’
Paper delivered at the Social Agency. Theoretical and Methodological Challenges of the 21st Century Humanist Sociology Conference, Wrocław, Poland, on 20-22 October 2010

Abstract
No sociology without agency: Without the discovery of social agency there would not be any sociology. (1) If anything laid the foundation for the birth of sociology, it has been, first, the breakthrough of the European industrial revolution that changed the prior perception of human history (the unintended consequences of social agency); secondly, the experience of the modern political revolution (the intended consequences of agency); and thirdly, the modern scientific revolution that made clear that our understanding of the world does not represent adequately the latter, but is being created by agents – by us.
(2) Re-emphasizing this starting point, my paper aims to discuss one of the perennial questions of sociology as an intellectual controversy on social agency between Immanuel Kant, on the one hand, and Michel Foucault. Kant provided modernity with its voice. He articulated that it is “us” who shape the phenomena: the free, reflective, self-determining subject. Men make history. Foucault, on the other hand, identified the limits of agency – circumstances that men did not select themselves. According to Foucault, there is no autonomous centre of agency. On the contrary, the human subject is regarded as a point of intersection between different forces.
(3) Finally, sociologizing the contrasting positions and reminding us of the task of sociology, I will discuss whether there can be a way out of the current aporetic dilemma between the sociological understanding of the triumph of the individual, under the current regime of post-fordist flexibilization of production and its promotion of “promotional” selves, and its opposite, the sociological deletion of the agent in recent post-structuralist and systems-theoretic approaches that eclipse the (formerly) basic axiom of sociology.

Paul Patton, ‘Activism, Philosophy and Actuality in Deleuze and Foucault’ Deleuze Studies, Dec 2010, Vol. 4, No. supplement : pp. 84-103
https://www.jstor.org/stable/45331436

Abstract
Deleuze and Foucault shared a period of political activism and both drew connections between their activism and their respective approaches to philosophy. However, despite their shared political commitments and praise of each other’s work, there remained important philosophical differences between them which became more and more apparent over time. This article identifies some of the political issues over which they disagreed and shows how they relate to some of their underlying philosophical differences. It focuses on their respective approaches to the state, to ‘actuality’ and to the analysis of the present.

These cards from the Unemployed Philosophers Guild have been around for a while – but a reminder just before Christmas might come in handy.

Michel Foucault Card

A Michel Foucault card for your own personal discourse! Each card comes with an envelope and a sticker sheet filled with quotes from Foucault plus traditional messages like “Happy Birthday.”

A workshop on Foucault and Habermas is being convened in the context of the MANCEPT Workshops in Political Theory, to be held between 31 August and 2 September 2011 at the University of Manchester.

Papers are invited on any aspect of the social and political thought of Foucault, Habermas, the Foucault/Habermas debate and the Habermas/Rawls debate.

Please submit an abstract to Dr. Evangelia Sembou, Convenor, Political Thought Specialist Group of the PSA
evangelia.sembou@hotmail.com by 15 January 2011.
Please also submit an abbreviated CV. Completed papers should be submitted by 29 July 2011.

Information about the conference can be found at
http://manceptworkshops.wordpress.com

Edited Essay Collection
2nd call for Abstracts – Final Deadline Jan. 15, 2011

Drawing from Foucault’s notion of the ‘political technology of the body’ and the ‘spectacle of the scaffold’, the collection looks to explore sovereign power and control over the body through a consideration of the cinema’s, arguable, co-option of the state’s political-military-corporate aims and goals.

Following a strong response to the initial call for abstracts, including those from significant academics, I am now specifically seeking abstracts/papers on:

i) The ‘punished’ politicised-body
ii) The body-politic (e.g. JFK assassination as media spectacle, re: Jameson/Baudrillard)
iii) Identity and (geographical) body-space
iv) Body ‘re-inscription’ (re: Grosz) as challenge to sovereign control and gender construction

Will consider any films related to the subject matter.

Mark de Valk
Southampton Solent University
UK
Email: mark.de.valk@solent.ac.uk

CFP: The Figure of the Author in the Short Story in English

Location: France
Call for Papers Deadline: 2010-12-15

The CRILA short story research group (JE2536) of the Université d’Angers, France, will be hosting an international conference in collaboration with Edge Hill University, U.K. on “The Figure of the Author in the Short Story in English,” 8-9 April 2011 at La Maison des Sciences Humaines, Université d’Angers, France.

Plenary speaker: Charles E. May, Professor Emeritus, California State University, Long Beach.

The specter of the author has haunted the scene of contemporary literary criticism since the advent of 20th century authorial displacements. William K. Wimsatt Jr. and Monroe C. Beardsley heralded the age of Anglo-American New Criticism with “The Intentional Fallacy” (1946) and the “The Affective Fallacy” (1949), insisting that the meaning of a literary text is to be found in the text’s status as an independent artifact and not in authorial intention. The author is later explicitly declared defunct in France with Roland Barthes’ infamous “The Death of the Author” (1967), voicing the concerns of post-structuralism where the author is écriture rather than a historical, psychological figure. This tendentious essay, along with Michel Foucault’s “Author function” in his 1969 essay “What is an Author?” helped foster an aura of suspicion and controversy around authorial identity, and the repercussions of authorial “death” or “disappearance” continue to ripple through literary criticism today. The author has “died” only to be replaced by a proliferation of conceptual guises: “implied author,” “text,” “structure,” “intentionality,” or even, perversely, “reader.” French scholar Antoine Compagnon even suggests in Le Demon de la Théorie (1998) that the author is like a demon who is virtually impossible to expel from literary criticism. In the meantime, the rise of Creative Writing as a distinctive form of critical discourse in the US, UK, Australia and elsewhere, seems to place the biographical author once more at centre stage.

Wherever we turn, we are confronted with the question of authorship, particularly if we juxtapose criticism with the public sphere, where the expression “death of the author” meets with bewilderment as readers rush to book signings and author events Many authors actively cultivate authorial personas through websites, blogs, facebook and twitter . This conference proposes to re-investigate the question of authorship through the lens of the short story, as the brevity of the genre and its emphasis on form seem to intensify an impression of authorial presence. As Charles May has observed, short stories are “more dependent on craftsmanship and exhibit more authorial control than novels” (May 1994, xxvi.). We propose to bring together literary authors and scholars to examine the issue of authorial manifestations in the short story. Some questions to consider might include, but are not limited to, the following:

How has critical method evolved since 20th century “attacks” on the figure of the author ?
How might we assess our current critical practices regarding the authorial figure?
What concepts, such as the “implied author,” have emerged in the wake of authorial “death,” and how might these concepts be re-evaluated today?
What role does authorship (individual, corporate, anonymous, erroneous) play in both the composition and reception of literary works?
How might we draw connections between the theorization and study of authorship and the critical study of specific fictional works? In what ways do short narratives amplify or attenuate perceptions of the authorial figure?
Has the gap between authors of fiction and the study of authorship been adequately addressed over the last 50 years? How do we perceive this gap in contemporary critical circles? How might we confront the perspectives of fiction writers and critics?
How do political contexts or concerns (race, class, gender….) affect perceptions of authorship? How does the authorial figure function in politically saturated fictional texts?
How do historical or cultural contexts affect concepts of authorship? In what ways have modern and contemporary writers recovered historical modes of authorship? (For example, contemporary appropriations of fairy tale or other forms of collective narrative (oral or written)).
How do contemporary practices and theories of intertextuality, parody, pastiche, affect our perception of authorship?
How do metafictional/metatextual modes allow us to contemplate the question of authorship? How do such modes affect perceptions of authorial presence or absence?

We also welcome presentations dealing with authorial issues arising from translation or cinematographic adaptation and studies of authorial performance or marketing techniques. Presentations from short story authors are particularly welcome.

A selection of articles will be published in two peer review journals: Short Story in Theory and Practice , published by Intellect Press, and The Journal of the Short Story in English, published by Université d’Angers

Paper proposals of approximately 300 words in English, followed by a short bio-bibliography, should be sent to the following conference organizers for 15 December 2010:
Michelle Ryan-Sautour (michelle.ryan-sautour@univ-angers.fr)
Ailsa Cox (Coxa@edgehill.ac.uk)

Michelle Ryan-Sautour
Universite d’Angers, France
UFR Lettres, Langues et Sciences Humaines
11 blvd Lavoisier
49045 Angers CEDEX
France

and

Ailsa Cox,
Reader in English and Writing,
Edge Hill University,
St Helens Rd,
Ormskirk
L39 4QP

Email: michelle.ryan-sautour@univ-angers.fr and coxa@edgehill.ac.uk

Pratiques savantes et savoirs mineurs

les mardi 30 novembre, 14 Décembre, 11 Janvier, 8 Février, 8 Mars, 12 Avril, 10 Mai à 17 heures, au 7, rue Huysmans, 75006 Paris. Code d’accès : A9657, sonnette : EHESS.

Les usages de Foucault (2) : « pratiques savantes et savoirs mineurs ».

Séminaire dirigé par B. Faure, L. Paltrinieri, F. Taylan avec le soutien du Centre Michel Foucault

Dans les sillages de Foucault, on peut repérer deux tentatives qui tendent à se disjoindre : la généalogie des pratiques savantes et l’exhumation des savoirs mineurs.

D’un côté il s’agit de repérer les formations discursives et les dispositifs institutionnels qui mettent en oeuvre une prétention à la scientificité ; et de mettre en évidence les multiples articulations de ces “pratiques savantes” avec les transformations des modes de gouvernement.

D’un autre côté, il s’agit de faire entendre “l’insurrection des savoirs assujettis”, de retrouver les élaborations théoriques, les savoirs faire pratiques et les capacités de jugement mis en œuvre par les classes subalternes.

Le séminaire de cette année pourrait se situer au croisement de ces deux perspectives, entre l’histoire des sciences et les subaltern studies. L’enjeu serait d’explorer la variété des rapports entre pratiques savantes et savoirs mineurs : les formes de dénégations, reprises, détournements mais aussi les répétitions, transgressions, hybridations qui replacent inlassablement au cœur des luttes politiques les questions du savoir et de la parole, de la capacité et de la connaissance.

Pour ce faire, le groupe se donnera pour objet les textes de philosophes et d’historiens plus ou moins “travaillés” par les analyses de Foucault et faisant porter leurs travaux sur les questions qui nous intéressent. Ce pourrait être par exemple A.Farge, J.C. Scott, I.Hacking ou L.Daston. Le séminaire se définit comme un groupe de travail collectif, dans lequel chacun pourra proposer des textes et des pistes de réflexion. La première séance devrait permettre d’affiner une ligne problématique et de répartir les différentes tâches, de recherche et organisationnelle, du séminaire.