[Reader-list] Foucault as a genealogist : The case for (non) archives

[ARNAB CHATTERJEE]

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