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

ARNAB CHATTERJEE apnawritings at yahoo.co.in
Fri Jan 4 18:47:11 IST 2008 

  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

More information about the reader-list mailing list