Post-structuralism and Discourse Analysisfoucault


Michel Foucault 1926-1984

"We must conceive of power without the king".

We do not recognize the will to truth as desire or power; this is a function of our discourse itself. Only one truth appears before us, and we are unaware of the prodigious machinery of the will to truth, with its vocation of exclusion.

-Foucault


Biography:
- born in 1926, Poiters, France
-trained as philosopher, taught in Paris
-activist, protested about prisoner's rights
-opposed military dictatorship in Brazil, Tunisia
-supported solidarity movement in Poland
-died in 1984, complications of AIDS

Roots:
-Nietzsche's belief that history is arbitrary
-existentialist belief in "authentic" life, through possibility of creativity
-critical theorist's belief that society is socially constructed to maintain social order/status quo

Primary thesis:  in every society the production of discourse is at once controlled, selected, organized and redistributed according to a certain number of procedures, whose role is "to avert its powers and its dangers, to cope with chance events, to evade its ponderous, awesome materiality."

discourse: ways of constituting knowledge, together with the social practices, forms of subjectivity and power relations which inhere in such knowledges and relations between them. Discourses are more than ways of thinking and producing meaning. They constitute the 'nature' of the body, unconscious and conscious mind and emotional life of the subjects they seek to govern.

1 argues against idea of Enlightenments that each person is autonomous, and acts freely through use of reason.
2  reason is not universal or outside of society, according to Foucault
3 instead all of society/reality is mediated by its description in language
   a. different societies describe reality differently through different grammatical rules/syntax of morality
   b. evidence of  social construction is clear by contrasts between different societies
 
4.. each person is  constituted as a subject within different institutional discourses that determine rules of appropriate behavior
   a. "epistemes" are structures of knowledge that determine our experience of world.
        1. control individuals by use of "codes of meaning"
        2. our concepts define our experience & how we describe them & make meaning of them

   b. prison is dominant metaphor for how society controls citizens
      1. ancient societies- deviant, criminal has body punished, publicly to control population (external control)
      2. modern societies- deviant/criminal has mind punishment, privately, internalized controls

5.  power and control over each subject is exercised by discursive rules 
     a. principle of exclusion is used to discipline 
        1. normal vs deviant  sstep
        2. "normalizing discourses" teach ppl not to deviate w/o punishment  anti-smoking
    b. exercised through power to speak, rituals
        1. who is allowed to have authority to decide true/false
        2. who is considered to be 'irrational'
   
   c. belief by subjects that they are under constant surveillance of  authority figures
        1. Hume's "panoptican"
        2. ppl self-discipline themselves as if police were not there- police no longer necessary
     
c. modern societies controlled through technology
      1. ancient societies- faith/ideology/power of police (Stalin)
      2. modern, divided self can't fight effectively- efforts are scattered
      3. every person is a self-contradiction (nexxus of different discourses)

6.  Power is synonymous with knowledge
    a. internalized by subjects, self-discipline
    b. science, mental institutions, financial institutions, churches, bureaucracies, prisons, beauty, sports, hospitals, schools, etc.- all construct subjects differently
        1. mutually contradictory ways, often
        2. offers possibility of resistance, play off contradictions

7. analyze the history/archeology/geneology of discourses
    a. rules change through different eras
    b. proves that it is arbitrary/socially constructed
    c. presented as being universal/never-changing
   d. past interpretation is always written from present perspective bi
        1. works to reinforce social order/stop rebellion
        2. an analysis of history is a way to open it up to question hs
          a. show it is "man-made"
          b. potentially open to reinvention
          c. always written to advantage one group over another (unmask it)

- my aim is most decidedly not to use the categories of cultural totalities (whether world-views, ideal types, the particular spirit of an age) in order to impose on history, despite itself, the forms of structural analysis. The series described, the limits fixed, the comparisons and correlations made are based not on the old philosophies of history, but are intended to question teleologies and totalisations;

- in so far as my aim is to define a method of historical analysis freed from the anthropological theme, it is clear that the theory that I am about to outline has a dual relation with the previous studies. It is an attempt to formulate, in general terms (and not without a great deal of rectification and elaboration), the tools that these studies have used or forged for themselves in the course of their work. But, on the other hand, it uses the results already obtained to define a method of analysis purged of all anthropologism. The ground on which it rests is the one that it has itself discovered. The studies of madness and the beginnings of psychology, of illness and the beginnings of a clinical medicine, of the sciences of life, language, and economics were attempts that were carried out, to some extent, in the dark: but they gradually became clear, not only because little by little their method became more precise, but also because they discovered - in this debate on humanism and anthropology - the point of its historical possibility.


8. not possible to have monolithic, all-encompassing struggle like Marxists- (grand narratives)
   a. no over-arching or totalizing conflict (class)
   b. multiples discourses operating simultaneously
      1. sexual orientation, gender, race, age, class, health, disability status, health, body  image, etc.
      2. any 'grand narrative' solution is just another discourse, equally imprisoning
          a.. ex. Russia- Soviet Union
          b. Iran (1979) Shah, Khomeini
     

9. possibility of ethical life found in situating yourself against the discursive field/rules
  a. transgressions are a risk, resistance
  b. authenticity is found at boundaries- "where life is lived dangerously"
     1. possibility of creativity
     2. exposes construction of rules as artificial, not natural
     3. create potentially a "new space", broadening of meaning of 'normal'   au
c. look to "difference" as a way of contesting these power relationships
     1. ruptures & discontinuities reveal socially constructed nature of natural
     2. opens up the ability to question settled meanings

10. reverse discourse- reinvent the meaning
   a. queer nation, Code pink, NWA
  b. humor, irony in the face of solemn truth

11. cultural becomes political, in terms of situating yourself against power of status quo
    a. those 'different' from 'normal' will be attacked to keep power relations as they are
    b. marginalized ppl have tremendous transformative power   milk
psa