What is enlightenment?

Kant’s enlightenment project is for all mankind?  Question authority is a motto.  But all humanity will think for itself?  Good education Q: To what extent should we question authority?  Reason should reinforce private roles.  Reason more for input on public issuesOkay in private question via public.  Kant gives limits to what we may know and expect.  When done, humanity will be an adult.

MF sees this as a lie and the birth of modernity.  MF notes its break with time and tradition  It “hero-izes” the present. But what costume?  Togas?  Not satisfied to watch, harvest, modernity is an active heroic stance.  He is a collector and passion is deranged.  You transform beauty by knowing what it is and taking it beyond itself.  Reality too  Know it transform it. The mode inside oneself is aestheticism. The discipline to know  TTo be modern is not to acept oneself in flux, but to take a positive grasp of reality.

FM response: 1st, negatively.  You are either of the enlighten ment or not human.  This is not humanism(which values humans above religion or science).  Enlightenment is rather a permanent creation of the self: in ways hostile to humanisms acceptance of man qua man. 2) positively: kant set limits to knowledge. The thing in itself is appearance. Outside v. inside.  [what was kants thought about descartes cogito?]  sealed in circumstance we cannot seek a transcendental. Our thoughts happen in a historical situation.[are we always then on the wrong side of the neuroscietific subject, object duality?Wrong side, cause its outside of ourselves and sees ourselves as an impossible object.  Somethi g one puts through adventure and watches the reactions of :  Again: Davinci v. Michaelangelo.  Suicide kills two.  You and the watcher.  Which do you want to stop?  Or is it the chasm?]  Nazism as a hope to nail down reality to a specific locale. A single enlightened point.  As nietzsche does a geneology of morals, MF does a geneology of consciousness.  We have the growth of capability, but not autonomy.  He also studies the world views that constitute the limits of our freedom.

This search has three axis: THe axis of knowledge(our relation s of control over things)  The axis of power (relations of actions upon others): The axis of ethics (relation with oneself).  How do we work as subject?  All of these entail how our relations to things ourselves and others have been problematized. He is trying to finish Kants work of objectifying knowledge.  He doesn’t know if it will work.


From truth/ power

Q: What is the relation of science to political and economic structure?  What are the structures in which psychiatry exists?  The politics of a scientific paradigm is in its grammar (its boundaries) that is why Kuhn’s paradigm shift happens.  There is the question of how the grammar of the structure overshadows particular events.  He doesn’t seek to evacuate the event into structure. He just points to it being multi leveled.  Not passive, like grammar, but war between structures is history.  These are relations of power, not meaning.  Ask who the discourse serves. He studies, not the content, but the style of the ower attacks (marginalized).  His contexts that create the idea as sealed.  There is no universal view outside of them.  He tries to het in it, without analyzing it from a supra place.  a problem with the term “ideology” is that it is always used in contradistinction to a “truth” a neutral space.  Repression is also said to undergird society.  Civ and Madness assumed a bubbling madness that must be packaged. But repression is an inadequate term, its negative.  The form allows positive expression of sex  and such too.  During 17th and 18th century apparatus of power mushroomed.  The state beauracracies.  He contrasts this state with feudalism.  The army police beauracrates.  The soverign imposed hiss will and pormised order and peace via negative action.  But the state is only superstructural to deeper constructs. Networks that invest the body, sexuality, family , kinship , knowledge technology, with a positive limit.  Revolution needn’t be based then, on the duality of revolution (govt. v. people) and instead, can be personal relationship struggles for forms.  His ideas are cleareer when applied to Islam. He would love a homosexual army.  Population statistics are used to eye the microbes.  The intellectual used to be the conscious conscience of the people and solitary.  Marxism helped him join people.  New the text has been depersonalized and so universals no longer apply.  The intellectual switches from voltaire like universals law jurist style, to atomistic scientist types. Then comes relativity and thousands working alone.  They write, not of big systems, but of life and death of individuals.:  “great writers.” with psychiatry the specific takes on a universal significance.  THe intellectual is enmeshed in an institution .  His freedom and place of action isn’t outsid eof it, but in it.  The intellectual doesn’t find truths to be discovered, but roles by which true and false are made and the power behind them.  Truth cannot be power free!


Nietzsche, geneology and history.

Geneology is tedious work.  It happens on many scraps of paper.  Not a nitary smooth progress.  Especially as words change meaning and resonance. Plato did not become muhammed.  It seeks , assumes, to uncover something that was already there. 

Liberty, as an ideal was invented.  The origin of religions is piecemeal and muddled and zaranthustra is followed and harrassed by a monkey (darwin’s)  Not of solid origin, truth is a trick.  This is seen in the occultation of origins by priests and philosophers.   Geneology seeks accidental development, not origin:  descent.  The fighting of competing moral purifications shows that they don’t occupy a common space.  The combatants come from shaky places and therefore codify their positions in ritual and tradition. Rules can be bent to any purpose.  The successes of history belong to those who seize the rules and then bend them to their own ends.  History doesn’t lead to now  It is a series of successive events.  There is no constant, of sentiment.    Even the body is pliable by food rythms of work and rest.  To be honest we must undermine recognition in history.  History is liberating as it finds discontinuities.  Knowledge is not made for understanding, it is made for cutting. Bring the past close to announce its difference. Don’t glorify its distance  and fetishize its sameness to us.  As medicine exames the close to exclaim its difference.  History and the historians have beginnings that are impure and confused.  They claim impariality and deny their tast: mistake!  He studies the mundane and reduces it to its LCD.  Written by plebians for plebians and carries the demagogue refrain:  Noone is better than you and anyone that says they are is evil. No past is greater than your present.  The demagogery is  hiden under objectivity and universals.  He cloaks his individual will and highlights eternal will.   They pass themselves off as aesthetic eunics.  [haircuts as political ]  This aestheticism is tied to the objective scientist view. He sees and anti - Platonic sense of history: no essence.  He finally says we need models of greatness, but they obscure the real intensities and actualities of life.  Wear a stronger mask!  Not the homeland of metaphysicians, but destruction the historian seeks.  History is based on a will to knowledge: to do and destroy others that claim happiness in ignorance.  All knowledge rests on injustice and a malicious intinct (not the happiness of man).  Knowledge must go forward and fears no sacrifice.  To perish pursuing knowledge might be part of the basis of being.  No sacrifice is too great for knowledge.


What is an author?


We now study authors, not heros.   In philosophy its odd to credit one person with an idea.  Its modern to do so.  Does the work give immortality to the author?  Does it express or obscure its rigins?  The author is the assumed, unexpressed element behind the words.  Criticism evaluates the work, not the autor.  What is “the work” ?  Doesn’t it include all the author said and wrote?  Is the work a unitary whole?  If the author is dead the work is alone.  Is it the combination of letters or the meaning they conceal?  Arenn’t there multiple meanings? (vague and repressed).  The author’s name sits between description and designation.  One name ties several works together.  It marks off parameters then. It also gives status.  Letters and brochures don’t have “authors”.  TV shows have writers.  Authors come into being when folks were punished for their works.  It was seen as an act: sacred or profane, good or evil.  WIth publishing property ownership of publishing rights reified the author.  Legend stories , bible, have no author  They have embellishments and age for authority.  Science publications had different “authorsip” the work is only an emenation of the “author” Old texts may not be puthentic.  What is the names purpose then?  The work is there and then we invent an author.  We do this today to expalin the contradictions in ideas.  But pronouns and narratives will refer to “the author” .  In novels the narrator is a fiction  Non-fiction too.  He differentiates and calls it transdiscursive when an author creates a tradition or discipline as well as text.  Everyone who interprets Freuds ideas, rewrites him.  And authors are the authors of those who oppose the tradition.  Subsequent work is referred back to the author (ot in science where it goes back to phyusical evidence as reference). He notes the preceding to , perhaps, found a discourse.  AND to note that modes of discourse are modified by each culture in terms of curculation, valorization, attrribution and appropiation.  This sheds light on the status of works in a culture.  This frees the work from the author.  “authors” make limits on the poles of discourse.  They are pillars to knock down. They are thepoles in the holes.  It’s unrealistic to think this can make us all authors. Questions will change. Not was in the soul of that author, but what are the modes of this discourse?  Who can use this?  Who is the audience? What difference does it make who the author is that lies behind all?


            From madness and civilization

the great confinement

The 17th century created huge houses of confinement for the poor unemployed, imprisioned and insane.  The bigtgest was the Hospital General of 1656.  It was not a medicatl establishment.  Established by the king, it was outside of judicial and police control.  It was an offshoot of monarchical - bourgeoius organization.  In 1676 they were put in each city and run by the best families.  The counter reformation had created a time of simultaneous competition and cooperation between the church and state.  This was preceded by a law which arrested beggars and made them clean sewers chaing together.  A law of 1607  ordered beggars publicly whipped, branded , shorn and exiled. 
Archers were put around the city to keep them out.  Many uprisings happened, unions were banned and conedemned by the church.  The hospital general was a new tactic. The beggar got food, but lost freedom.  Initially married folks weren’t let in.  THey were vagabond and not socialized and crude.  England couldn’t ship em to neighbor countries so sent them to canada and Australia.  Confinements swelled during economic downturns. Soon made to work the confined became a source of cheap labor  This spread with industrialization.  They were given 1/4th the value of their work.  But free labor protested and it was stopped.  But busy work was given to cure the disease of idleness and the new sin and haunted place in the moral universe.  It was excommmunication.  The unemployed were, at some oint, no longer confined.  But the insane stayed on.  Madness had been associated wtih transcendance and religion  Now with idlers.  Idleness was explicityly seen to be due to a transgression of bourgeouis values , therefore, forced labor camps were necessary:  to enforce good values. 

Work = redemption = morality not= to sickness, not = to madnessl.  The civil law of the nation will no longer tolerate disorder of hearts.  The walls of confinement enclose the negative of the moral city.  Laws of the state and laws of the heart finally became identical: A synthesis of the garded of god and cities of men.

The birth of the Asylum

We have a myth of the humanitarian gesture of the state towards the creation of asylums and Pinel making them human places. The contemporary descriptions say the people were enemies of reason, vulgar and uunfit to accept the gift of religion.  It was done fortwo reasons:  first trhe sight of ivil hurt sensitive souls.  But the main reason is that religion had become, not only the rule of conduct, but nature (so that anything that went against it was unnatural).The effort was to impose reason and religion on the insane.In fear, the insane dialogue with religion and reason.Madness could never cause fear if it was controlled with fear.The madman is guilty of disturbing society and should feel guilty.  He is responsible for his own confinement.  The asylum substituted for the free terror of madness, the stifling anguish of responsibility. Fear raged in the conscience.    The asylum didn’t punish the madmans guilt, but it organized it for him. He was to see himself as an object and control himself.


Pinel didn’t segregate by religion.  But there was worry that the nature of Catholicism could lead people to insanity.  Death and hallucinations and saints and hell.Many folk suffered from religious madness.  In the year X, fifty percent.  Year after year of the war on religion in greater society it went doewn.  Therefore the asylum was freed from religion and from its iconographic connections.   This was a radical change by pinel from the earlier pro religion asylums (championed by Tuke).  He used a religion cleansed of icons and recieved people for cure on priests requests.  This was like a medical confessional.

            Finally the religious references were gone. Just pure morality and ethical uniformity.  The asylum reduces differences, represses vice and eliminates irregularities.  It denounces everything that opposes the essential virtues of society: celibacy (marriage helps keep women from madness), laziness.

            The ayslum is a reminder to those who are near moral degredation. Pinel achieved his aims by :

1) silence.   He released a man who thought he was jesus from the chains in the dongeon. He then let him walk about, but told others not to talk to him.  He felt humiliated and alone.  He then came back to the fold.The man had been recieving sarcasms that he had seen as the proof of his martyrdom.   This was a religious feeling for him.  They restored him.  The dungeon and chains he was in was left for a much looser/tighter straight jacket. MF points out the liberty was lonely.  From spectacle to silence and indifference.  Outside he could derive no exaltation, since he was not even humiliated.  The liberty sent him from delerium to a monologue that exhausted itself in the silence of others. (good passage pf 151).The absense of language about madness cut it off.   Noone to confess to.  Freud starts the talk with madness again, but it is always guilty about itself henceforth.  Dirty little secret.


2) recognition by mirror. Madness isolated is stared at and stares at itlef with no connection to the sane world.  We use reason as a mirror for them to look at their insane behavior.   Tell the man he is not Louis the king.  Show others who believe they are too.  Note he cant leave.   Previously  craziness was to deny god.  Now people believed they were god.  Madness changes shape with time   Themes go and come and represent reflections of the major culture.


3) Perpetual judgementThe asylum is an invisible tribunal in permanent session. The madman must understand that he belongs to a world of judgement. [we hope Pinel ended the age of miracles.  But virgins keep busting out].   Pinel turned medicine into justice. Torture of inmates to reasoning with them with torture added to speed their recognition of guilt.There were dungeons only , now, for those who were diswobedient be religioius fanaticism, resistance to working or theft. 


4) the medical personage.The phsyician becomes in charge of entry to the asylum.  The scientist of objective knowledge takes over.  [how much of my insanity is judged by  social stantdards?  Isn’t it normal to be objessional.  Not normal, okay.  What if there is no society?].  Pinel acknowledged that medicine of his time couldn’t do any good.  but the doctors authority helped staff and patient alike.  He was the top of reason personified.There was a spoiled and haughty girl to whom they gave the shower punishment.  She admited her guilt.  The doctor was her father and judge. [It would be good to do a similar treatment of educational institutions and to bolster the claim for reason in the face of insanity.  But the post-school seems to have had enough analysis].  Madness is a hard area for science to observe.    This is the point in which psychiatry became independent.  It used to be a part of medicine as a disease of the head. Now it took on a moral element and independence as a field (it absorbed morals and religion and judical and medical functions).    The mystical accoult of secret understanding of insanity gave him his power to heal hysterics and others.  Mesmer was a shaman.  Freud too.thaumaturge means to deal in miracles and wonders.   The symptoms of madness become a sign of the unbridgeable.   Freud smashed this. He came in and stared down madness. Hedemystified all the asylum structures.  He abolished silence and observation; got rid of the judgmenet.    Freud moves the madperson from object to subject.  [antiphrasis means a figure of speech by which words are used in a sense opposite to their proper meaning.]  Even with freud though, we turn the straight jacket off in order to study and control madness.  Here madness becomes only madness.   And we are safe to go outside the walls of the asylum.


            disciplines and sciences of the individual

The body of the condemned (from discipline and punish)

This book is a correlary, that explained the emergence of the basis of scienc3e for explaining the modern soul  Th justice system isn’t to lower crime and negative only.  It has a positive effect: it nakes us useful.  And others have looked at its evolution with econimic forms.  And its rising simultaneous with science isn’t a coincidence.  MF wants to examine its affect on our relation to the body. The body is involved in power relations that train it.  torture it, force it to carry out tasks, perform ceremonies and emit signs:  the political technology of the body he calls it.  The outcome s solid but the tools of this technology are multiple.  This is an active changing battle for control.  This is always applied . It doesn’t have to do with realist abstraction. Forget that power makes you mad and that renunciation of power is the route to knowledge.  Power produces knowledge!!!  The is no knowledge without power or vis versa.  Take doctorse who whorde what is property.  Who is “interested””disinterested”  Govt. by which words and decrees creates what and excludes what from debate.  Look at the words that kept the king bestowed with power.  Words/symbols of coronation.  On the opposite end.  What are the words associated with the condemned man on what word authorites.  Symbol of letter grades.  What if I gave you a “G” inthis class?    The condemned man, on which a soul to be looked out for, trapped ina body.  “Recent prison revolts were against educationalists, psychologists psychiatrists, walls and time.


Docile bodies

Soldiers of the 17th century wore identifyable signs.  Marching an nd posture and shields part of a rhetoric of honor.  La Mettries the man machine (pg 180) has descartes in the preface.  (**wings on looks a medical mechanics the other social mechanics.  Both are centered on the word”docility”.  Itjoins the analyzable body to the manipulable body.  Frederick II was obsessed with autamaton and regimens.  New control (all societies are controlled) was scientific and not based on slavery and caprice, but disciplines.  A body is useful to the extent that it is coerced.  It dissassociates body power andaptitutde.  Thus disciplined, docile bodies.  Increase of force on the body economically and decreates politically.  Discipline went from schools to “hospitals to military”  Degrees and attention to the import of little things. Historically, for christian aesthetice, no immenisty is greater than a small detail.  This transfers to the detail of regulation and the bussiness of inspection.  Napoleon was a great fan of regulations.  POlitics is a continuation of war by power strategies but politics is an application of the military regimentation of the ilitary.  The classical age saw the birth of the great political and military strategy by which nations confronted eachothers economic and demographic forces.  We often attribute utopias to dreamers .  More it comes from mechanized military strategists who dream of docile regimented armies.


The means of correct training

Architecture of military ranks, kings castles, judges benches.  All show power.  Low cubicle walls allow for observation .  In schools orphanages and military those who don’t do tasks are punished.  In school it creates object of behavior to conform to and text to learn.  It brings into binary opposition the permitted and the forbidden.  Power of the norm appears through the discipline.  Exames impose opwer realtions and knowledge relations. The exm transfered power from what was shown to what was known.  The exams turn knowledge in objects the  grad ceremony finishes this.  The angle aof the legs of troops being revieed.  Exams situate students in networks of writing.It engages them in a whole mass of documents and fix them.  Registration and documentation rise with exams in hospitals and military.  Disease made it necessary to check habits population habitats were objectified.  As this new science tries to get to individuals, they are cases classified and compared on the way to being made nomal again.  from childhood folks are tested and placed in included and excluded.



This discipline happens in families with the states watchful eye.  This discipline is an antinomadic technique.  This technique lead heavily into taxes.  Taylorizing the techniques later on were foreshadowed by getting the most of all.  The accumulation of men and the accumulation of capital are inseparable.  The micro management of equal process and rights  creates more regulation . Training for jobs.  These are the underside of law!


Complete and austere institutions.

Through prisons we all have control.  Once prisons took over for other punishments they seemed so obvious as to be second nature.  It is the deprivation of liberty .  We prize that sooooo much.  Sentences in time are quantifiable.  Observation and knowledge of the deeper mind of the prisoner were tools of control.  They replace punishment.  Documentation of observations by a moral overlord creates good behavior all the time.  There is a real effort to know the biography of the criminal before the crime. What were the social, family, psych causes .  So psychiatry and judiciary cross eachother for control.  This redeemable sort is called delinquent.  This treatable type is created by the penitentiary system.  The prison is the model for all disciplines.  The most austere.


Illegalities and delinquencies

Protests of the ineffectuality of prisons is nearly immediate.  Detention causes recidivism.  The prison is to teach justice, but feels injust.  This fosters the feeling that the system is unjust and the delinquent is innocent.  The prison does succeed in that it turns the delinquent into a pathological subject.  This is why we don’t dispense with it.    Mettray opens in 1840.  It is the ultimate penetentiary.  It  does vocational , educational, discipline, moral observational controls.  It is the same year as the official birth of social psychology.  it is the 1st institution totally dedicated to control .  Total control, body and soul.  On each cell it said, “GOD SEES YOU”.


Space, knowledge and power

At the end of the 18th century the architecture begins to reflect on its political tature.  What a city/society should be.This came with the supra state that thought of its state as one big city.  Being in the city wasn’t a privelege, it wall all (psychologically).  The capitol is the main square.  Towns and beighborhoods.  Napoleon creates “policing” the state.  This is separate from police.  There is also the creation of a new reality called society: a complex and independent reality that  has its own laws and mechanisms of reaction.  This goes beyond police.  Urban space has its own dangers: epidemic and uprisings.


The french thought the railroad would create communication and lessen war.  The germans saw it as a ar tool  As space got bigger (19th) architecture gives way to infrastructure as the issue of space.  He doesn’t hate the present or wish to go to a mythical past.  Some radicals of post modernism do . He is worried about irrationality.  But he does want to ask what is the reason we use?  What are its limits and dangers?  To what use/abuse?  Don’t say reason is the enemy or without total reason well descend into total irrationality.  His studies of prisons help us critique today. But they don’t presentan ideal past to return to.  Modernist architects wanted to escape any reference to the past.  Not possible. Sex and baths were a social pleasure for Greek and Romans.  Religious architecture is interesting: monestaries, cells, common areas.  High ceilings, confessional boxes.  Allo cation of space and walls is a political function of architecture.  Human relations force architecture too.  Chimineys inside, dividing kibbutzes.  Techne is a practical rationality guided by a a conscious goal.  He focuses on this.  Not whether something is an exact science or not.


Right of death and power over life


Soveriegns have traditionally had power over life and death (as a roman father had over his children and slaves).  Later kings just had the right in self/state defense.  He could go to war and put people in jeapoardy of death. It was conditional.


[I think he’s going to show how the power of life changed from not killing to positively fosteringFrom stopping treason to stopping lots based on protecting “rights”. Exactly!!] 

He uses the words “administer, optimize and multiply life”.  Precise controls and comprehensive regulation waged on behalf of everyone with entire populations mobilized.  Massacres are a vital part of this. [perhaps wars aren’t useful when none of your population dies.  Should the population have the right to speak out on the vurtue of the war during the war?]  He is very concerned with the need to kill being part of life in the nuclear age.  The amount of ritual around the death penalty has lessened.  You used to pass from one soveriegn to another. Now...?  It would celebrate the power of the soveriegn.  Now power is over life so death becomes a limit to the power of the soveriegn.  Suicide was a crime as it took the kings power.  The control over life took two shades.    One was the positive discipline where bodies were bent into the economic machine.  The later, focused on biological processes and propogation: births mortality, health , life expectancy.  He calls the two poles anatomical and biological power.  Migrations, education, sanitation all became government concerns.    The cdeployment of sexuality was key too.  We often note celibacy in the early power of America.  And the biological had impinged on the political before.  plagues and death forces the church and state joining.  WIth the end of man’s plagues life relaxed and politics could face it. Life left the environment and the struggle for life and death and went into historiocity.  The opwer to punish with death faded.  Law became normative.  The golden age of the past as a goal was replaced by life of the demand, the realization of potential , a right to plentitude  “rights” to heal, happiness and property. [is life better when tinged with morbidity in the past?]    All this is the background to studying sex.  Sex is the intersection of the anatomical and biological aspects of contro.  Sex with macro and micro managed chased down in dreams seen as the core of individuality.  Sexual morality became the inddex of social morality.  Morality and procreation (biological and anatomical).  When life was precarious the blood of ones people was important.  A society of blood (spilling of it in war and kinship).  We on the other hand are a society of sex.  Clearly nothing was more in the side of the law, death, transgression the symbolic and soveriegn than blood; just as sexuality was on the side of the norm, knowledge, life, meaning, the disciplines and regulations.  Race got rid of the aristocratic peculiarites of blood.  Blood and sex andrace are central to hitler and freud.


The politics of Health in the 18th Century

Not the fact that , but the extent that health became a policy issue was an 18th century change.  This isn’t just top-down. chanrity organizations and curches get conc3erned with health and free medicine.  Help to the poor originates in disease concern.  The idea of the pauper gives was to the good poor v. the bad poor. Analysis of idleness replaces the christian sacrilization of “the poor”This makes poverty very useful.


It justifies society.  And it is tied to the anatomy control  Ther e is also a move to raise the health of the whole.  Deep in the middle ages soveriegns controolled war and peace (internal via pax justica).  The late middle ages saw enrichment as a goal.  The 18th saw the emerence of health and longevity as goals.  Economics, order (prisons and health 9hygeine sewage disease) are the policing powers.  Health blends with utility and two great characteristics of policing emerge.


1) The priviledge of the child and the medicalization of the family.

            Birth survival and survival to adulthood.  Filial relations aren’t just kinship.  But many reciprocal roles with th e survival of the child at center emerge.  Lineage is less important than making a functioning adult.  A clean home , proper nourishment , medication became home stuff.  Medical books are aimed at the poor.


2)  The privilege of hygiene and the function of medicine as an instance of social control.

            Longevity requires medical interventions and controls.  Zoning and sewage , cemetaries and density in the urban landscape.  The city is medicalizable object.  Poor houses and prisons were sanitized.  Doctors became more administrative and do more statistics. Food regulations kick in.  Doctors became huge authorities.  Hospitals are seats of death.  The rest of society is made hygenic.  “pooulation” as an idea is simultaneous with the concept of public health.  Our clinics and home care are encouraged.  Homes become extensions of the hospital / government.


We other victiorians

At the beginning of the 17th century, sex was spoken of publicly. Then it moved into the home bedroom and our subconscious.  Sex became a tool for reporoduction  Sterile behavior outside the bedroom and sanitary language .  Children had no sex.  There was repression except in the brothels and mental hospitals.  Have we been liberated since?  Maybe by Freud.  Sex control rises with capitalism , because it feeds the work ethic and doesn’t distract from it.  Thus we have a tidy conventional history of sex.  Why is this the favorite?  Might it benefit the teller?  If its still repressed the teller of this tale is a transgressor against power.  Often its combined with a prophecy of great tomorrow.   The dreams of revolutionary utopians has, in the west, been transmitted into sex!  How?  Our society has been castigating itself for hypocricy for more than a century now  We speak loudly on our silence about sex!  We went from sex being a sin to saying we’ve sinned against sex?  He doesn’t just want to deny this thesis, but to ask why, generally, is sex discussed so much?  WHo seaks of it and from what position?  Not that sex wasn’t repressed but why is this the discourse about sex?

The repressive hypothesis (from history of sex vol. II)


1. The incitement to discourse.  In the previous 3 centuries there has been an exploration of discourse aroung sex.  Discretion in confession was advised after the council of trent.  But there was an increase in this, now clearly expressed, topic, due to the routinization of self scrutiny and increase of attention to penance of the counter - reformation.  How did the body stain the soul?  THe sins of fleshThis is the first formalizing of this discussion that is so peculiar to the west. We transform sex into a discourse.  It goes into literature. SADE writes folly and evoketively of this.  In an anonymous  “a secret life” described sex and said it had no shame.  But he is just like the church in the compulsion to tell of ones sex.  An increase in valor surrounding it. Philosophers and doctors spoke of it and included the need to discuss it for full disclosure and rigorousness.  Account and controlan innovation of import of the 18th was “population”.  not “subjects” or a “people”, but a “population” as wealth, manpower and labor capacity.  Sex was at the heart of population: birth rate marriage, legitimacy, precocious sex. It became a part of racism.  People didn’t talk less of sex, but differently.  There is change in vocab and who can say what to whom always.

Architecture of schools was built around the subject of youth sexuality. And young boys sex came to be seen as a problem.  This created a lieterature of guidance and plans.  We medicalized it , criminalized it, literaturized it, wrote more on it than any society previous. And still we’re convinced we hadn’t spoken enough on it:  The big change went from our discourses being singular (confessional) to multiple type.


the perverse implantation


The quality, not just quantity, of sex talk must be spoken of.  Much of it, till the 18th regarded married relations. The rest laid undiscussed.  Note the vagueneess of “sodomy and sodomites”.  In and out of marriage things against nature, were prohibited.  In the 19th private marriagebecomes more secret, less of a topic.  But the sex of perverts become a topic.  A  subrace is born.  Was their appearance a sign of laxness or repression?  The punishments went down and became medical. Child masterbation became a futile battle.   Homosexuality became an identity.  It had become the root of all his actions.  Not a type of sex, but a sensibility of femininity  The term homosexual was coined in 1870.  Homosexual was now a species.  The medicalization of this was bizarre.  It rewired ideas of normality and pathology  The sickness was embedded in the body.  The symptoms had to be looked for. The extended domains of control.  But also affected a sensualization of power and a gain of pleasure.  pleasure and power (as well as the intended diminishing) came with the medical exams, psych investigations, pedagogical reports and family controls...society has made perversion exciting.  When it was finally affordable, parents and children, boys and girls, servants and masters rooms were separated.  Locks  show a netweork of pleasure’s and powers.  Perversions were taken out of peoples bodies and spoken.  Pleasure and power don’t subvert eachother, they reinforce eachother.


Preface to the history of sexuality pt II pg 332