[Reader-list] Foucault as a genealogist : Response to Prem

sadan at sarai.net sadan at sarai.net
Sat Jan 5 11:24:35 IST 2008 

Dear Arnab and Prem,
Let me spell out my concern about archives(concern about archives is
different then making an arguement to have archives). I am not advocating
for archives. You may find this statement quite provocative, specially
coming from a person who respect archives and have spent considerable time
engaged with activities that are considered archival work in one or other
way.
Both Arnab and Prem's questions are related to the need of having archives
and compulsion to have archives (in context of certain practices). Arnab, I
do recognice that you can use these as departure points for a very creative
and fruitful discussion on geneology, memory and history. And, I look
forward to it. And, we can also get a fresh insight on what is archives.
For me this question is a matter of secondary importance. I want to draw
distinction (not by seperating but by treating the two differently) between
the idea of archives as recognised in the discipline of history and
practices associated with this idea outside the discipline of history. By
confining my objective to this philosophically mundane aspect, I wish to
achive a tension not between what is disciplinary and non-disciplinary
practices but between the usages associated with the idea of an archives.
This tension can be reduced by attacking the very basis of the binary, by
making the binary appear ridicule in itself. The difficult part is how to
sustain and why to sustain this tension. How to blow the idea from within?
Within--what? within its own difinitional, practiced criterions. But, for
what purpose? To achieve a new set of understanding or to complicate the
issue further...?
In a way I am not interested in what Foucault has said at a particular
point of time. This is not because he himself used to laugh at his earlier
positions( power/knowledge). For him the question was different, for
Derrida and Agamben the question is different. Please correct me if I am
wrong but, my reading is that both Foucault and Derrida are not interested
in whether archives is needed or not. for both of them archives is given,
apriori, a trace. However, for both of them this apriori is devoid of life,
any character. Something that Agamben attacks very sweetly.
My sense is that you too are not interested in the relevance of archives.
However, you are not clear at this point on why do you wish to think about
archives? May be later on we shall get an opportunity to understand the
core of your question in better manner.
Right now, I am in the midddle of something completely different hence my
apology, if I will not be able to attend your postings in near future. I
however, promise to respond as soon as possible. Also look forward to hear
on Nietzche and on memory and geneology.
wishes,
sadan.
   
      


On 6:47 pm 01/04/08 ARNAB CHATTERJEE <apnawritings at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
>   Dear Prem,
>               I think the questions are already
> separate and needs to be rephrased if you want it the
> way you've put it.
>      1. The question is not whether WE need archives
> or not( there are many things which exist even if we
> don't need them); lets talk in terms of practices and
> ask, infact that is what I've asked, what sort of
> practices need archives?What sort of practices don't
> need them? Does philosophical history ( I have in mind
> the Hegelian or the Kantian kind) need the archival
> backing? Does Nietzschean or Foucauldean genealogy
> need it? With all its distrust of origins, what is the
> status of the use of sources in Foucault? ( Mahmood
> for instance asked, will the Foucauldian enterprise
> remain intact if his source materialiastic resources
> are removed? I think yes but many will say no, lets
> discuss it . What is the difference between origins
> and sources? --and join in other questions I've
> already asked and has been asked by many of us and
> others.
> 2. Secondly, in response to the phrasing of your
> second question, let me tell you and all, the answer
> we would like to know is   not whether archives are
> neutral or not ( You know and have told the answer),
> but whether the question of neutrality can itself be
> based on the archives. Your other questions stand
> automatically modified in regard to the revision of
> your two questions I've made. It'll be great if you
> attempt to answer them for us.
>
> Thanking you
> with  apologies for making frequent postings ( even
> though I'm not a hindu right)but immediate responses I
> guess will put the debate in perspective and maintain
> it.)
> Arnab
>
> --- Prem Chandavarkar <prem.cnt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >  Are we not confusing two questions here which need
> >  to be kept separate:
> >  1. Do we need archives?
> >  2. Are archives neutral?
> >  The answer to each question could be different. We
> >  would probably say yes to
> >  the first and no to the second.  In which case we
> >  confront the need for a
> >  critical and discerning alertness when we consider
> >  archives.  Which raises
> >  some other questions such as:
> >  1. What are the ethical dimensions and compulsions
> >  of this alertness?
> >  2. How does it shape the discipline of history?
> >  3. How does it determine what we consider an
> >  archive?
> >  4. How does it determine where we search for
> >  archives?
> >
> >  Regards,
> >  Prem
> >
> >
> >  On 04/01/2008, ARNAB CHATTERJEE
> >  <apnawritings at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> > >
> > >  Dear Sadan,
> > >             Thank you! Your prompt response
> >  actually
> > >  begins the discussion where I gues others will
> >  soon
> > >  join in and we shall all learn and unlearn  from
> >  each
> > >  other in a very very creative way.
> > >  You do recognise Foucault and I think let us limit
> > >  ourselves to a few texts in the beginning. I shall
> > >  keep aside Derrida and Agamben on archives, since
> >  none
> > >  of them claimed to have been practising genealogy
> >  like
> > >  Foucault. And my hunch was simply this : to
> >  involve
> > >  many who have been doing things on archives etc
> >  and
> > >  make such an involved statement as you've done. It
> >  is
> > >  not a comment on yr text in the Censor book. But
> >  your
> > >  one might be engaged later while we discuss memory
> >  vis
> > >  a vis Foucault and Nietzsche. I'm perturbed by one
> > >  question here and let me state that for all :
> > >  genealogy has a problem with origins ( singular or
> > >  not) and therefore distrusts history but still
> > >  Foucault calls for heavy documentation using
> >  volatile
> > >  sources : What is the difference between sources
> >  and
> > >  origins?
> > >     And Sadan, neither I'm making a case for the
> >  non
> > >  existence of archives. I'm far from making any
> >  such
> > >  logistical suggestions, I'm troubled by the
> >  compulsion
> > >  with which the question of the archive is driven
> >  at
> > >  some who have been trying to practise something
> > >  else.This question remains to be settled, yes I am
> > >  sincere here and I can quote you major incidents
> >  here
> > >  and abroad. Let us try to find a way out.
> > >  So, its purely an academic question for me and I
> >  think
> > >  all of us.
> > >     More soon
> > >  love
> > >  arnab
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  --- "sadan at sarai.net" <sadan at sarai.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >  Dear Arnab,
> > > >  thanks for suggestion to reread Foucault on
> > > >  archives. Agamben may be
> > > >  another person to consider in this excercise.
> >  Tow
> > > >  quick respond, we also
> > > >  need to read Foucault's geneology, Nietzsche...
> >  as a
> > > >  point in between his
> > > >  earlier 'Archeology' and his lecutures... and
> >  then
> > > >  his power/knowledge.
> > > >  The point i was trying to raise in my article
> >  though
> > > >  is not whether we need
> > > >  archives or not but how archives can be
> >  profitably
> > > >  seen from vantage points
> > > >  of different sets of people.
> > > >  thanks.
> > > >  sadan.
> > > >
> > > >  On 4:53 pm 01/03/08 ARNAB CHATTERJEE
> > > >  <apnawritings at yahoo.co.in> wrote:
> > > > >  Dear friends,
> > > > >         Now atlast I'm geared up to rise and
> >  make
> > > > >  reviews of sentences we talked and questions
> >  we
> > > > >  answered or left them out at  our last meeting
> >  in
> > > > >  Delhi.
> > > > >  First my conversation with mahmood farooqui
> >  and
> > > >  this
> > > > >  is simultaneously for Sadan Jha and Ritwik
> > > > >  Bhattacharya ( our own Kolkata archive
> >  theorist)
> > > >  as
> > > > >  well ( having read sadan's  stuff on archive
> >  in
> > > > >  CENSOR..book etc. and Ritwik's research on the
> > > >  archive
> > > > >  and our own debate ehether pornography could
> >  have
> > > >  an
> > > > >  archival living or not). Does philosophical
> > > >  history
> > > > >  need archival materials? Does genealogy need
> > > >  archives?
> > > > >  My answer is unequivocal "No". I'll go into
> >  the
> > > > >  speculated details in my next post-- a bit of
> > > >  detail,
> > > > >  that is. But I'll first submit to mahmood
> >  farooqui
> > > >  and
> > > > >  my friends to reread Foucault's 'Nietzsche,
> > > >  genealogy
> > > > >  and History' because there is stuff for both
> >  sides
> > > >  and
> > > > >  I think Foucault simply puts his own oeuvre
> >  down
> > > >  by
> > > > >  claiming a case for vast source materials once
> >  and
> > > > >  then declaiming by saying archival materials
> >  have
> > > > >  their origin in a sort of non archival trace.
> >  I'll
> > > > >  argue, we could start by asking again ,
> >  whether
> > > >  the
> > > > >  necessity of archives arises from within the
> > > >  archives.
> > > > >  If not, what are the consequences?
> > > > >  And another hint,Foucault is helped by
> >  Nietzsche
> > > >  here,
> > > > >  but consider Nietzsche's career as a
> >  genealogist(
> > > >  e.g
> > > > >  of values): how much of  a source materialist
> >  he
> > > >  was,
> > > > >  how deep referential?
> > > > >
> > > > >      Lets get onto the game, the outwork once
> >  more.
> > > > >  Un happy new year to all
> > > > >  arnab
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >        DELETE button is history. Unlimited mail
> > > >  storage is just a
> > > > >  click away. Go to
> > > >
> >  https://edit.india.yahoo.com/config/eval_register
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >       DELETE button is history. Unlimited mail
> >  storage is just a click
> > >  away. Go to
> >  https://edit.india.yahoo.com/config/eval_register
> > >
> > >  _________________________________________
> > >  reader-list: an open discussion list on media and
> >  the city.
> > >  Critiques & Collaborations
> > >  To subscribe: send an email to
> >  reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> > >  subscribe in the subject header.
> > >  To unsubscribe:
> >  https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> > >  List archive:
> >  <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
> >
>
>
>
>
>       Bring your gang together - do your thing. Go to
> http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header. To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.ne
> t/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>

More information about the reader-list mailing list