CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Warwick Research Archives Portal Repository University of Warwick institutional repository: http://go.warwick.ac.uk/wrap A Thesis Submitted for the Degree of PhD at the University of Warwick http://go.warwick.ac.uk/wrap/1965 This thesis is made available online and is protected by original copyright. Please scroll down to view the document itself. Please refer to the repository record for this item for information to help you to cite it. Our policy information is available from the repository home page. Michel Foucault and Judith Butler: Troubling Butler’s Appropriation of Foucault’s Work by Kathleen Ennis A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Philosophy University of Warwick, Department of Philosophy July 2008 Contents Acknowledgements iv Declaration v Abstract vi Note on the Translation of Key Terms in Foucault‘s Work vii Introduction 1 Interpreting Butler‘s Work 7 Power-Knowledge, Discourse and Norms 10 Interpreting Foucault‘s Work 15 1 Butler: Power and Genealogy 23 Foucault, Hegel and Nietzsche 25 Foucault and Psychoanalysis 34 Genealogy and the Naturalization of Sex 41 Subjugated Knowledges, Genealogy and Discourse 50 2 Butler: Performativity and Psychoanalysis 63 From Inscription to Performativity 66 Power, Interpellation, Resistance and Hate Speech 77 A Psychoanalytic Critique of Foucault 86 Repression, Subject and Psyche 98 3 Discursive Practice and Archaeological Method: The Archaeology of Knowledge 112 Savoir, Connaissance and the Discursive Practice 114 The System of Formation 120 Butler and Foucault on Discourse 132 Archaeology and History 142 4 Knowledge, Power and Genealogy: Lectures 1970-1974 158 Truth and Power 162 Power-Knowledge 172 Archaeology and Genealogy 184 5 Power-Knowledge and Technology: Discipline and Punish 195 Three Practices of Punishment 197 Power and the Prisoner 203 ii Discipline as a Technology of Power 210 Power-Knowledge and the Disciplinary Dispositif 221 Discipline and Normalization 229 6 Processes of Subjection: Discipline and Punish 242 Subjection and Individualization 243 Norms and Normalization 254 Strategy and Resistance 263 The Modern Soul 270 7 The Apparatus of Sexuality: Abnormal and The History of Sexuality Volume 1 286 The Genealogy of Sexuality 289 The Medicalization of Child Masturbation 297 The Dispositif of Sexuality 302 Bio-politics and Discipline 313 The Genealogy of Psychoanalysis 323 8 Power, Discourse, Sexuality, and the Self: The History of Sexuality Volume 1 and Herculine Barbin 333 Repression and Psychoanalysis 334 Discourse, Strategy and Tactics 343 Truth and Sex: the Case of Herculine Barbin 358 Truth, Sex, and the Subject 373 Conclusion 384 Bibliography 392 iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Christine Battersby for the support she has given me with this thesis. Her generosity in giving her own time to see this project through to the end is very much appreciated. iv Declaration This thesis is my own work. This thesis has not been submitted for a degree at another university, v Abstract One of the main influences on Judith Butler‘s thinking has been the work of Michel Foucault. Although this relationship is often commented on, it is rarely discussed in any detail. My thesis makes a contribution in this area. It presents an analysis of Foucault‘s work with the aim of countering Butler‘s representation of his thinking. In the first part of the thesis, I show how Butler initially interprets Foucault‘s project through Nietzschean genealogy, psychoanalysis and Derridean discourse, and how she later develops this interpretation in line with the progress of her own project. In the main part of the thesis, I present an analysis of Foucault‘s thinking in the period from The Archaeology of Knowledge (1969) to The History of Sexuality volume 1 (1976). This analysis focuses on the aspect of his work which has most influenced Butler‘s thinking: namely the notion of a relationship between knowledge, discourse and power. The other issues in his work which Butler addresses— genealogy, the subject, the body, abnormality, and sexuality—are discussed within this framework. I show how, in the early 1970s, Foucault develops the notion of power-knowledge, and sets out a relationship between power- knowledge and discourse which is overlooked by Butler. I argue that Butler interprets Foucaultian power through the notions of repression and social norms, and ignores the concepts of technology and strategy which form a key part of Foucault‘s thinking. I show how, from The Archaeology of Knowledge on, Foucault develops a socio-historical ontology and a genealogy of the subject, both of which are at variance with Butler‘s interpretation of his thinking. vi Note on the Translation of Key Terms in Foucault’s Work The term dispositif has been translated into English in different ways. In Psychiatric Power (2003), Graham Burchell uses the term ―apparatus‖; Alan Sheridan, in his translation of Discipline and Punish (1975) employs the term ―mechanism‖; and Robert Hurley in The History of Sexuality Volume 1 (1976) uses the term ―deployment‖. Each of these translations conveys an aspect of the meaning of ―dispositif‖ and also the way in which the term is employed in slightly different senses in each of these different works. Rather than employing one of these three translations, I have, in the main, retained the word ―dispositif‖. Occasionally, I have used ―apparatus‖ in its place: Foucault sometimes uses the terms appareil (apparatus) and dispositif synonymously. Graham Burchell gives a useful account of both the problems involved in translating this term and the meanings which Foucault attaches to it (2003: xxiii-xxiv). The term énoncé which occurs in The Archaeology of Knowledge (1969) is translated by A. M. Sheridan Smith as ―statement‖. This is confusing as other philosophers, for example, J. L. Austin (1962), use this term as synonymous with the proposition. Foucault makes it clear that the énoncé is not a proposition and that he is employing the term in a broader way. I have, in my text, retained the French word. vii The term savoir is generally translated into English as ―knowledge‖. One of the problems with this is that, in French, there two equivalent words: savoir and connaissance. In Foucault‘s work, connaissance is generally used to refer to disciplines of knowledge, particularly the human sciences. The term savoir is employed in a specialist sense which Foucault defines within the context of his own work. The meaning of savoir also undergoes a change between The Archaeology of Knowledge and Discipline and Punish. In order to avoid confusion, I have often retained the original French term. viii Introduction 1 This thesis is structured as an argument with Judith Butler‘s interpretation and criticism of Michel Foucault‘s thought. From her first work, Subjects of Desire (1987), Butler has consistently engaged with key concepts in Foucault‘s thinking; she has also developed major elements in her own theoretical framework as a response to what she perceives to be inadequacies in his position. Butler‘s work is all relatively recent, but her output has been substantial and is still on-going. While she defines herself as a philosopher, her influence is now evident across a range of academic disciplines.1 In contrast to Butler, Foucault has been influential and widely commented on for over forty years. The recent, and on-going, publication of his courses at the Collège de France means that there are now opportunities for presenting new readings of his work. The combination of all these factors makes a study of Butler‘s interpretation of Foucault‘s thinking a good project for a thesis. The task of critical appraisal of Butler‘s thought is, not surprisingly, still at an early stage. At present, discussions of her work are mainly restricted to articles, and to sections in books which are not specifically devoted to her work. However, three full-length studies of Butler‘s work have recently appeared (Salih, 2002; Kirby, 2006; Lloyd, 2007). Foucault‘s influence on Butler‘s thinking is widely recognised and, in these works, this is commented on. In addition, Allen (1999) contains chapters on both Butler and Foucault, and a small number of articles have appeared that explicitly position Butler‘s thinking in relation to Foucault‘s (Burkitt, 1998; Schrift, 1995; Mills, 2003; 2 Dudrick, 2005). To my knowledge, my thesis is the first detailed study of Butler‘s reading of Foucault‘s work. It is my view that Butler‘s engagement with Foucault‘s work has resulted in a productive and valuable adaptation of his thinking. However, I also believe that she distorts important aspects of this thinking and that, given the attention that her work is now, rightly, enjoying, her reading will become influential. My aim here is, therefore, to present a critique of her view of his work and also to evaluate the criticisms that she makes of aspects of his thinking. In my thesis, I formulate my argument with Butler‘s interpretation and criticisms of Foucaultian thought mainly through a presentation of my own reading of his work. Reading Foucault‘s work in relation to Butler‘s has led me to focus on the relation between knowledge, discourse and power; this is the area in which Foucault‘s influence on Butler is most evident. Other themes which feature in Butler‘s use and critique of Foucault‘s thought are also discussed: genealogy, the subject, sexuality, the body, the abnormal, and psychoanalysis. The interpretation of Foucault‘s work which I present emerges out of my engagement with Butler‘s thinking. This interpretation highlights certain key concepts in Foucault‘s work that I consider to be misinterpreted or overlooked by Butler: his distinctive conceptualization of the relation between knowledge and discourse; his notion of a practice; and related to this, of technology; his 3 conceptualization of power as discipline and bio-politics; his view of discourse and power as tactical and strategic; his presentation of genealogy as a historical method as well as a political perspective; his distinction between processes of objectification and subjectification of human beings.