Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Interviews’ Category

Hamdi Nabli : “Le discours radical offre une binarisation du monde, il faut un discours alternatif”, Bondy Blog en partenariat avec Liberation, mardi 27 janvier 2015

Par Mathieu Blard

Influencé par les théories de Foucault et Baudrillard, Hamdi Nabli, politologue, livre son regard sur la radicalisation, le traitement médiatique et ses conséquences. Rencontre.

Vendredi 23 janvier, 10h Collège des Bernardins, dans le Ve arrondissement parisien, rendez vous avec Hamdi Nabli, politologue, auteur de La fraternité aryenne, l’esprit du terrorisme au cœur de l’Amérique blanche, et co-auteur de L’inégalité politique en démocratie.

Est-il possible de dégager les causes de radicalisation ?

Hamdi Nabli : Les causes sont plus ou moins connues. Les policiers et les criminologues en ont conscience, ce sont les inégalités économiques et sociales. C’est aussi la prison au cœur de la société française, autour de laquelle il y a une vraie hypocrisie. Il est dit que c’est un problème, alors que c’est un système fonctionnel. Comme le souligne Michel Foucault dans Surveiller et punir, on utilise la prison pour créer cette figure du délinquant qu’on va pouvoir ensuite attaquer dès qu’il va se passer quelque chose. La prison est l’institution phare de la société occidentale moderne. C’est elle qui fonde une société qui exclut, régie par le principe selon lequel celui qui enfreint la loi doit être hors la société. Ce n’est pas un problème de cas sociaux, c’est un problème de civilisation. L’exclusion est un problème central qui se voit aussi au niveau des territoires. Il existe une forme de ségrégation au cœur même de l’inclusion sociale.

suite

Read Full Post »

Diálogo sem Fronteira – Michel Foucault e a Revolução Iraniana (2015)
Broadcast on the TV Channel of the State University of Campinas.

Read Full Post »

Booked #3: What Exactly is Neoliberalism?
Timothy Shenk ▪ Dissent, April 2, 2015

Booked is a monthly series of Q&As with authors by Dissent contributing editor Timothy Shenk. For this interview, he spoke with Wendy Brown about her new book Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution (Zone Books, 2015).

Climate change, a crippled welfare state, the 2008 financial crisis, skyrocketing income inequality, political disappointments reaching back decades, terrible superhero movies grossing billions of dollars, and Tinder—these are just a few of the sins attributed to neoliberalism. But what exactly is neoliberalism? An economic doctrine? The revenge of capitalism’s ruling class? Or something even more insidious?

Wendy Brown takes up these questions, and more, in her latest work, Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. A searching inquiry, the book is part historical study, part philosophical treatise, and part engaged polemic. Scholarship on neoliberalism is booming, but Undoing the Demos highlights a subject too often neglected: the political consequences of viewing the world as an enormous marketplace. Her conclusions are grim, but that makes grappling with them all the more urgent.

—Timothy Shenk

read more

Read Full Post »

Miro Brada, Discontinuity, the new Artform

This film was presented during an exhibition in Holland Park, UK between 18.Oct-3.Nov 2013:
http://mirobrada.blogspot.co.uk/2013/…

It is partially based on the philosophy of Michel Foucault…

The interview I was doing with Miroslav Marcelli (a student of Foucault) about Foucault philosophy is here:
http://mirobrada.blogspot.co.uk/2013/…

You can also find this interview with visual material at philpapers

Excerpt from the interview (Discontinuity and exclusion):

MB Did Foucault’s criticism of universal concepts deny differences (in charm, intellect, morality)?

MM Foucault does not deny differences, only questions conditions of their possibility. The differences transfer in our responses to judgements whose basis is however neither natural nor stable. It emerged in certain historical moment whose circumstances reveal interest to exclude those who differ.

MB Fools?

MM There were times when the higher truth notifying the future was revealed through a mouth of a fool. How happened, that since Enlightenment a fool had been classified as a folly and got into enclosed institution? This question lead to the Foucault’s first great book: History of Madness (1961). He will ask such questions during whole of his life. Why is an idea once a deep knowledge, marked as a blunder?

MB Is historical, social, cultural, science evolution illusionary?

MM Foucault doubted the progress of Western society that should be guaranteed by acquired privileges as scientific advance, humanistic base of law, progressive education. He was not the first critique. Psychologist Jean Piaget noticed similarity between Foucault’s The words and the things (1966) and Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962).

MB What was Foucault’s contribution?

MM He particularized steps and processes of preconditions. Episteme, the principle of power structure, notifies in an indefinite form, and then transforms itself to theory. The norm to supervise and punish had only gradually resembled a prison or school. These motions don’t need to be overlapped by a story of unstoppable progress of modern society.

MB What’s a message of Foucault’s book This is not a pipe with a pipe’s image?

MM Foucault thought that Magritte’s painting of a pipe entitled This is not a pipe, deviated from imitation that long dominated western art. Plato called such images – without predetermined pattern, simulacra and condemned their creators as producers of delusions. Simulacra can explain many phenomena of our contemporary visual culture.

MB According to Foucault, the power defines the “author” and its role, while the invention is secondary, irrelevant or an obstacle (e.g. Galileo). How was Foucault as an “author” defined?

MM Foucault challenged the idea of „author”, as a source of hidden abilities and inspirations. Likewise Russian formalists or art historian Wölfflin thought that creator’s great secret was an illusion. So Foucault’s position belongs here too.

MB What was Foucault’s contribution?

MM He was dismantling this illusion being a challenge for a thorough historical analysis of assumptions. The author should be decomposed and reconstructed according to different social orders, by relevant archived texts. As we see the result of study in archives, we can see Foucault closer.

MB He – himself authority – viewed the authority a power tool. Isn’t it a paradox?

MM Foucault taught us that history of thought of 19 century can be written without emphasis on the most recognized philosophers: Hegel, Marx. He didn’t claim that power only represses us, and so we must release ourselves. He rejected the concept of punitive power, and understood its function to repress as well as create us. He just refused its innocent appearance. Power affects relation of teacher-student, which does not imply to remove the teacher. Understanding history of such relations transfers their character.

Read Full Post »

Peut-on critiquer Foucault ? Entretien avec Daniel Zamora, Par Ballast – 3 décembre 2014

See earlier post on Critiquer Foucault

See also a translation of this interview into English by Seth Ackerman on the Jacobin magazine site. (With thanks to Leonardo Goi for this link)

Le titre est provocateur, soit. Mais à voir sa canonisation et son omniprésence dans le monde universitaire ainsi que dans bien des cercles de la gauche radicale, la question est en droit de gratter. D’autant que nous aimons, à Ballast,  faire la part belle aux débats, aux échanges de vues — discordantes et contradictoires, de préférence — et aux démêlées qui agitent le vaste champ socialiste. Un essai collectif, titré Critiquer Foucault, vient de paraître aux éditions Aden. « Loin de mener une lutte intellectuelle résolue contre la doxa du libre marché, Michel Foucault semble, sur bien des points, y adhérer », assure-t-il tout de go. Pour en discuter, nous avons rencontré l’instigateur dudit essai, le sociologue belge Daniel Zamora.

Link to interview on Ballast site

Read Full Post »

Foucault’s legacy: an interview with Frédéric Gros 14 July 2014, Verso Blog. Translation.

Frédéric Gros is the editor of Michel Foucault’s lectures at the Collège de France and the author of Michel Foucault (1996) and Foucault et la folie (1997). Having taught in prison for many years, he devoted a book to the philosophical fundaments of the right to punish (Et ce sera justice, 2001), as well as other texts such as States of Violence: An essay on the end of war (2010) and Le Principe sécurité (2012). Nicolas Truong from Le Monde recently interviewed Gros about the legacy of Michel Foucault.
read more

Read the original French interview here.

Read Full Post »

Originally posted on synthetic zero:

Paul Rabinow on Foucault & the Contemporary

rabinow

– the host is a bit lacking but Rabinow is probably the most important intellectual of our time…

Paul Rabinow is Professor of Anthropology at the University of California (Berkeley), Director of the Anthropology of the Contemporary Research Collaboratory (ARC), and former Director of Human Practices for the Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center (SynBERC). He is perhaps most famous for his widely influential commentary and expertise on the French philosopher Michel Foucault. He was a close interlocutor of Michel Foucault, and has edited and interpreted Foucault’s work as well as ramifying it in new directions.

Rabinow is known for his development of an “anthropology of reason”. If anthropology is understood as being composed of anthropos + logos, then anthropology can be taken up as a practice of studying how the mutually productive relations of knowledge, thought, and care are given form within…

View original 110 more words

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 6,842 other followers

%d bloggers like this: