3 Answers

  1. In order to avoid a tedious and lengthy story about my involvement in the alleged “order”, I will only say that after one stormy saturnalia, I woke up with Michel's last name tattooed right under my nipple, which I was extremely pleased with as a way to show obvious distrust of the metanarrative.

  2. Somehow it so happened that in Russia, phucologists are often also translators of his works.

    Among the pioneers of Foucault in Russia – Avtonomova Natalia Sergeevna. In addition to the preface and translation (co-authored with Vizgin) of Words and Things in 1977, Voprosy Filosofii published articles on Foucault's Concept of Archaeological Knowledge (1972) and From the Archeology of Knowledge to the Genealogy of Power (1978). Later, only review works devoted to Foucault appear (“History as an archeology of knowledge in M. Foucault's concept “1984,” M. Foucault's Epistemology ” 1989 and an article about Foucault in the third volume of the collection Art of the 20th and 21st centuries).

    Co-author of the translation of” Words and Things ” Viktor Pavlovich Vizgin published several articles in the late 90's (“Michel Foucault-theorist of the civilization of knowledge” in 1995 and in 1998 another article ” Ontological prerequisites “of the genealogical” History of Michel Foucault “(and also all in “Questions of Philosophy”)), and never returned to Foucault in written works.

    Ilya Petrovich Ilyin is also among the first discoverers in 1993, his article “The History of Madness, Sexuality and Power (Michel Foucault's Post-Structuralism)” was published in the Russian literary magazine. But his much better-known book is “Poststructuralism, Deconstructivism, Postmodernism” from 1996, where a whole section is devoted to Foucault. Two years later, “Two Philosophers at the Crossroads of time” (at the crossroads of Deleuze and Foucault) is published with a good introductory article. Ilyin does not go further than the one dedicated to Foucault.

    From the works of the 90s, we can also mention “Sexuality and Power: The Anti-repressive Hypothesis of Michel Foucault” by Mikhail Kuzmich Ryklin, published in Logos in ' 94.

    In 2001, in addition to an excellent article by Zinaida Aleksandrovna Sokuler (M. Foucault's Concept of “Disciplinary power”), a collection of articles” Michel Foucault and Russia ” is published, where Russian interpretations of Foucault's work are described on more than three hundred pages and there are even attempts to analyze Russian reality in the Foucian spirit (sometimes more than strange, however). Here you can find just those who consider themselves “Fucodian”.

    Also (despite the recent accusations of plagiarism on Didier Eribon ) Alexander Vladimirovich Dyakov wrote the first monograph in Russian “Michel Foucault and his time” (2010). In any case, the monograph is very worthy. In 2008, Dyakov co-authored with Olga Alexandrovna Vlasova the article “Michel Foucault in the clinic space”.

    In 2015, Olga Vlasova herself wrote the coolest introductory article to the book “Michel Foucault. Early works” (which, however, I translated).

    Back in 2011, Russian futuologists with a bias towards literary studies wrote the collection “Michel Foucault and Literature” ( Pakhsaryan N. T., Amiryan T. N., Demin V. I.).

    Such cases.

  3. We are tired of getting the right answers. We are waiting for the right question to be posed – this philosophical wisdom was once presented to the world by Michel Foucault's fellow countryman, the famous French intellectual Jean-Luc Godard. The question posed by the author is a rare type of question in nature-a correct question. However, the right question does not require a correct answer. The correct question immanently contains all the wrong answers to it – and after all the wrong answers voiced, only one remains – the correct one. Which should no longer be voiced, because everyone knows exactly what is left after these incorrect answers. As a rule, correct answers are given to the wrong questions – their ultimate goal is not to answer the question correctly, but to correctly ask the wrong question. But the right question is not always absolute: sometimes this right question is more correct in a particular time and less correct in other epochs. The time to ask this particular correct question has not yet passed, but it should have been asked much earlier. In forms that are not quite correct (yes – the correct questions may be asked incorrectly) it was asked in 2001 in Russia. The Novoe Literaturnoe Obozrenie magazine sent out a questionnaire to humanitarians with the question “Is Foucault relevant for Russia?” and published the results of the survey in issue 49. The wrong (and, who knows, correct) answers to the correct question were given then. Correctly and incorrectly replying to them today is pointless. But if I did try to give the wrong answer to this correct question, I would ask this question incorrectly and briefly formulate it like this: “Who in Russia does not study Foucault seriously”? (Not)the correct answers to this correct, but now incorrectly formulated question are given in the same issue of UFOs.

Leave a Reply