Sunday, July 7, 2013

Bederman and Foucault

I really enjoyed how Bederman laid out her methodological approach in the beginning of the book (p. 24) and gave you a check list of Foucault that she says that she was going to follow. I am struggling, however, to relate the work in the rest of the book to the Foucauldian theory as presented up-front. Can anyone help me out?
Posted by at

2 comments:

  1. UnknownJuly 7, 2013 at 3:55 PM

    Richard,

    I was also impressed by Bederman's explanation of Foucault and how she planned on employing his methodology. One of the main takeaways I got from her explanation of Foucault, is that his definition of discourse allows historians to study "intellectual ideas and material process." (24) Throughout the book, Bederman looks at more than just the language of influential actors, but at the actions taken my other members of society (race riots, the Rough Riders, etc). By studying both language and actions, a Foucauldian methodology allows Bederman to truly demonstrate the agency of actors and their ability to reshape discourse as they desired. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousJuly 8, 2013 at 4:16 PM

    Richard and Mark: very well stated. I also understood Bederman's reference to Foucault and his methodology to set out her methodology, which as she states and as Mark above references, included both 'ideas and material practices'.... or, the intellectual ideas and theories propagated through books, tracts, lectures, fictional stories, etc. and the actual historical happenings (practices) by historical actors. This allowed her to not be constrained by any distinctions between the two modes of articulating the discourse of civilization...this is how I took it.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)