BIOGRAPHY
Michel Foucault resisted giving biographical details, claiming he
"wrote to be invisible." Ironically, however, his life has been more
visible than his writings for most people--several sensational biographies
compete for attention (see the suggested readings).
Paul Michel Foucault was born in Poitiers, France, in 1926, the second
child of Paul Foucault and Anne Malapert Foucault. Both parents were the
children of doctors. Foucault's father was a successful surgeon and professor
of anatomy at the local medical school. Foucault apparently came to hate his
surgeon father, even dropping his father's Christian name, Paul, from his own
name. As Foucault later related, the formative experiences of his childhood
were not associated with family, but with the Second World War:
I think
that boys and girls of [my] generation had their childhood formed by [the
events of the Second World War]. The menace of war was our background, our
framework of existence.... Much more than the activities of family life, it was
these events concerning the world which are the substance of our memory....
Maybe that is the reason why I am fascinated by history and the relationship
between personal experience and those events of which we are a part.
Despite the war around him, Foucault finished grade school successfully
and, on a second try, gained admission to the prestigious École Normale
Supérieure in Paris. Foucault's years studying philosophy there were not happy.
He had trouble relating to his classmates, attempted suicide on several
occasions, and seemed on the verge of madness. The doctor at the École said
"these troubles resulted from an extreme difficulty in experiencing and
accepting his homosexuality."* Although Foucault's École years were
personally difficult, they were academically successful. He received, in turn,
the licence de philosophie (1948), the licence de psychologie
(1949), and the agrégation de philosophie (1952).
After graduation Foucault taught briefly at the University of Lille
before becoming director of studies at the Maison Française in Uppsala, Sweden.
Here he wrote his doctoral dissertation--later published in an abridged edition
as Madness and Civilization (1961). Following brief teaching stints in
Warsaw, Poland, and Hamburg, Germany, Foucault returned to France to chair the
philosophy department at the University of Clermont-Ferrand. After The
Order of Things (1966) made him famous, Foucault followed Daniel Defert,
his lover, to Tunisia, until an offer to head the philosophy department at a
new university in Vincennes drew him back to France in 1968. There he wrote The
Archeology of Knowledge (1969). Two years later, he was elected Professor
of the History of Systems of Thought at the Collège de France. From this
position, Foucault made periodic visits to America, Canada, Japan, and Brazil,
becoming an international celebrity. In 1976, Foucault completed three volumes
of his History of Sexuality. Before he could complete the fourth
volume, he died in 1984 of AIDS.
Throughout his life, Foucault was attracted to activities that pushed
the envelope of cultural acceptability, oscillating often between radical
positions. In the early 1950s, for example, he was a member of the French
Communist Party, but he later took a strong anti-communist position. For a time
in the early 1970s, he sided with the "Maoist" ultra-left. His next
political passion was the Iranian Revolution. His consistent physical passion
seems to have been the drug-and-gay bathhouse scene in San Francisco.
BASIC
THOUGHT
"Cultural defiance" describes Foucault's philosophy as well as
his life. For most of his professional life, his thought was not only
antimetaphysical, but also anti-Enlightenment and antihumanist. Perhaps the
best way to discuss the history of his thought is by way of his own view of
history.
Foucault held that history, rather than being linear, is marked by
"ruptures." These ruptures create discontinuous epochs, which, like
layers in an archeological dig, are not causally connected. The archaeology of
Foucault's own thought can be divided into three layers, roughly correlating
with the three decades of his work. The last layer is quite discontinuous from
the first two, but all three reject evolutionary modes of thought.
The word "archaeology" was Foucault's key figure of speech in
the 1960s. The Birth of the Clinic (1963), for example, is subtitled
"An Archaeology of Medical Perception," and The Order of Things
(1966) is subtitled "An Archaeology of the Human Sciences." Both
books attack modern philosophy, which created "man" as both the
subject and object of knowledge, and built thought (separate from empirical
reality) on either a priori categories (Immanuel Kant)
or essentialized consciousness (Husserl). Foucault, however, proclaims the
"death of Man" merely molded by the "episteme," (structure
of thought) that constitutes an era's "discursive practices."
Foucault sees the Enlightenment episteme as turning the history of
science into a teleology, in which progress is achieved only through rational
exploration. But "rationality" itself is an artificial construct that
situates discoveries of science in structures of belief rather than in
individuals. In fact, contrary to Enlightenment ideals, there is no such thing
as "disinterested truth," for knowledge is always created by power.
Many people misinterpret Foucault's use of "power" as
comparable to Marxian "ideology." But Foucault came to regard Marxism
as naive in its assumption of progress, and in its belief that there is an
essential nature in humans, who need to be liberated from restrictive economic
systems. For Foucault, power is located neither in human subjects nor in social
institutions but is diffused throughout society. Indeterminate in character,
with no origin, power is nevertheless generative of human thought and behavior.
Foucault thus undermines human agency, ending his last work of the 1960s, The
Archaeology of Knowledge (1969), with a philosophic extension of Nietzsche:
"You may have killed God beneath the weight of all that you have said; but
don't imagine that, with all that you are saying, you will make a man that will
live longer than he."
Nietzsche's
word "genealogy" became Foucault's key term in the 1970s. Foucault
moved his analysis from operations of power on the mind to those that colonize
the body. In so doing, he altered his focus from the changing constitution of
knowledge to that of social practices and institutional systems. Human identity,
or "subjectivity," is thus defined as "subjection" to
structures and practices that normalize behavior. His most famous work from
this decade, Discipline and Punish (1975), traces the genealogy of
behavior toward criminals. He concludes that the humanist institutions of the
nineteenth century, which sought to reform, were more despotic than earlier
systems that tortured. Torture focused only on the body, whereas reform put the
soul under the domination of cultural norms.
The first two phases of Foucault's work discussed "technologies of
domination" over mind and body; his last phase explored "technologies
of the self." He acknowledged, in contrast to his earlier work, the
possibility of human agency--not through the discovery of self (which implies
an essence independent of discourse) but through the reinvention of self. He
advocates "micropolitics," in which small groups of people contest
the discursive practices that dominate society. In contrast to the totalized
vision of a Marxist revolution, then, Foucault encourages the proliferation of
multiple voices, especially those previously silenced by the hegemonic system.
Although Foucault's work has its discontinuous epochs, there is still a
genealogical relationship among his constructs. Throughout his career, he
explored the discourses that define sickness versus health, deviancy versus
normality, error versus truth. Foucault takes the side of those whose discourse
has been shunned as unacceptable. As an advocate of pluralism, he discusses, in
pluralistic ways, the modes of power that constitute society.
Yet throughout his writings, Foucault is aware of the irony of his own
power as a speaker of "truth." In "What Is an Author?,"
Foucault tackles the issue of authorial authority. The word "author"
usually refers to the individual who guarantees the unity and intention of a
written work--a meaning-giver who is transcendent to the text. But, Foucault
explains, "criticism and philosophy took note of the disappearance--or
death--of the author some time ago." Instead, Foucault examines the
"author-function," exploring its characteristics, to find how it is
used.
According to Foucault, as long as we are concerned with the author or
the author-function, we will not be focusing on the text itself. For example,
does the little biography of Foucault given here help you to read the selection
from Foucault that follows? Or does it cause you to focus on the author and not
on the text itself? Instead of asking "What part of his deepest self did
Foucault express in this discourse?," Foucault would have us look at the
text itself and ask such questions as, "What are the modes of existence of
this discourse? Where has it been used, how can it circulate, and who can
appropriate it for himself?" But more fundamentally, Foucault would have
us question the author-function itself and ask, "What difference does it
make who is speaking?"
ENDNOTES:
1. Michel Foucault, Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interviews and
Other Writings, 1977-1984 (New York: Routledge, 1988), p. 7.
2. Didier Eribon, Michel Foucault (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press, 1991), p. 26.
By Forrest Baird
©2000 by Prentice Hall from Philosophic Classics, Volume V