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

[Prem Chandavarkar]

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/>