Interpretation And Criticism Of Michel Foucault 1926–1984

Interpretation Criticism Psychologymichel Foucault1926 1984biog

Interpretation & Criticism & Psychology Michel Foucault 1926 – 1984 Biographical Sketch • Had a privileged youth • Hated what his parents represented • He started self-harming and thought constantly of suicide. • In university, he decorated his room with images of torture. • At 22, he tried to commit suicide. • Kept his sexuality away from society. Foucault, Big Ideas Foucault is best known for his analysis of the relations among knowledge, power, and discourse – the ways in which the language we use to describe social phenomena (madness, sexuality, punishment, art). These things play a pervasive political role and are effectively instruments of domination. There is no politically neutral form of expression or understanding. How does power function in society? Do you think that art can be used as a form of expressing / using power? Philosophical Inspiration On the uses and Abuses of History for Life: Academics had poisoned our sense of how history should be read and taught. Nietzsche: NO! There is no point in learning about the past for its own sake. We should dig out ideas from that past that can help us lead a better life in our own times. How does power work? We live in a society where there are power structures. In the past, there were also societies with power structures. In your view, how has the use of power changed ? Madness and Civilization Foucault as a “Philosophical Historian†We treat people with mental illness in a more humane way than past? Foucault argues that conditions for the “mad†renaissance were far better. Medicine has not become better with time. Discipline and Punish, 1975 State punishment: the prison and punishing systems are so much more humane when people used to be hung in public squares. Foucault: No. Problem: Power now looks kind, but is not. In the past: It wasn’t kind and therefore could encourage rebellion. Modern Punishment: barbaric and primitive. The Order of Things “An Archaeology of the Human Sciences†The human disciplines are not academic disciplines; they are rather an interdisciplinary space for the reflection of the “man†who is the subject of more mainstream scientific knowledge. Interested in how discourse changes throughout history. The Order of Things Foucault offers an analysis of what knowledge meant— and how this meaning changed—in Western thought from the Renaissance to the present. He focuses on thenotion of representation. What structure (formal reality) to ideas in, say, a map, represent? Representation Classical Representation: We know in virtue of having ideas that represent what we know. We have direct, introspective access to the abstract structures of our ideas. So how do we know that an idea is a representation of an object? Foucault Representation is only possible via human beings. Without human beings as the subjects of our art, we will be less able to connect the ideas from the past to the present. Not all art should depict human beings and their social lives’, but some of the best art does because it is so distinctively human. Psychology and Art Sigmund Freud 1856 – 1939 What does it mean to “day dreamâ€? How is imagination connected to art? Imaginative Writers If we could only find some activity in ourselves, or in people like ourselves, which is similar to writing imaginative works. If we could do so, then we’d have some hope of obtaining some insight into the creative powers of imaginative writers. Artists always try to lessen distance between themselves and ordinary human beings; they assure us that every one is a poet (artist) at heart. The Child and Play We ought to look towards the child as the first true source of imaginative activity. The child’s best loved and most absorbing activity is play. Every child at play behaves like an imaginative writer?: They create a world of their own, or rearranges things of their world in a way that pleases them. The opposite of play = reality? The Writer and the Child Like the child, the writer creates a world of fantasy that they take very seriously: They invest it with a great deal of affect, while separating it from reality. Unreality: Many things which, in real life, produce no pleasure can actually produce pleasure in a play. You might enjoy or find it pleasurable to witness a character feel pain. Reality vs. Play After a child grows up and stopped playing, after decades trying to grasp the realities of life, they may reach a state of mind where the contrast between reality and play is blurred. The adult throws off the seriousness (a heavy burden in life) and obtains the great pleasure of humor. As people grow, they cease to play. But, it is so difficult for people to give up something pleasurable that they once knew. Creating “Phantasy†When we give something up, all we really do is adopt a substitute. When someone ceases to play, they begin to create phantasy. The adult “builds castles in the air†and essentially day- dreams. The importance of recognizing that human beings do this as long as they live is underappreciated. Is everyone an artist? What is it that differentiates an ordinary person from a brilliant artist? Adult vs. Child Child: does not conceal (hide) their play from others Adult: ashamed of day dreams and conceals them from others. Day Dreaming Is something the adult cherishes as their most intimate possessions and would rather confess their misdeeds than tell his day dreams. Fundamental Flaw: The adult thinks that they are the only people who make up phantasies, without having any idea that everyone else probably does, too. Day dreaming is a continuation of play, but the motives which underlie these two activities are different. The play of children is determined by their wishes—or really one wish to be grown up or be “grown-upâ€. The child is consistently pretending to be grown up. For the adult, they know they are not expected to play any longer or to day dream, but to be concerned with the real world. The adult is ashamed of their phantasies as being childish. Imaginative Writer and The Day Dreamer Distinction: There are artists who take over material that already exists, and those who create their material spontaneously. One thing they share: They all have a hero who is the center of interest, for whom the author tries to win sympathy for by any means. The hero is always saved some way or somehow. The hero is always saved someway or somehow. Freud: Day Dreams manifest in the artist’s creations. Day Dreams and The Artist Experience creates a strong impression on the artist, maybe stirs up a memory of an earlier experience (probably from childhood) and this enables day dreaming. Day Dreamer: Hides his day dreams from us, but even if he disclosed them it would give us no pleasure. Artist: A person of refined talent presents their creations (from day dreams) and we experience great pleasure from it. Carl Jung Freud and Psychoanalysis Psychoanalysis: Method of treating mental disorders which emphasizes unconscious mental processes. The aim of psychoanalytic therapy is to make the unconscious conscious. 1. Extraverted (outward-looking) and Introverted (in-ward looking) 2. Collective Unconscious What does it mean to explain or interpret a work of art? On Psychology We can expect that psychological research to: Explain the formation of a work of art: We must deal with a product of complicated psychic activities – but a product that is intentional and consciously shaped. Reveal the factors that make a person artistically creative. We must deal with the psychic apparatus itself. The Work of Art Explain the formation of a work of art: We must deal with a product of complicated psychic activities – but a product that is intentional and consciously shaped. Psychological Works Literary products (or others) of highly dubious merit are often the greatest interest to a psychologist. “Psychological Novelâ€: Not very rewarding. Such a novel explains itself and its own psychological interpretation. The psychologist can only expand or criticize. The most fruitful novels are those which the author has not already given a psychological interpretation. Room for analysis and interpretation. Do we need to supply extra meaning? In truly great works, there is nothing a psychologist can add that the poet (artist) has not already said in their own words. The second part, however, calls for interpretation. The creative an imaginative capacities of the artist are not self-explanatory. Artistic Creation Psychological: Deals with materials drawn from the realm of human consciousness. Lessons of life, emotional shocks, experience of passion, crises of human destiny – all things that make up the conscious life of humans and their feelings of life. This material is psychically assimilated, raised from the artist’s experience, and given an expression to which the observer can receive clarity of human insight. Artistic Creation Psychological: The artist’s creation(s) is an interpretation and illumination of the contents of consciousness of the inescapable experiences of human life.

Paper For Above instruction

The intersection of interpretation, criticism, and psychology offers a profound insight into how artworks and human experiences intersect with the underlying structures of power, discourse, and subconscious processes. Michel Foucault's analysis of power and knowledge reveals that societal norms and institutions are not neutral but are imbued with power relations that shape human behavior and perceptions. His historical analyses demonstrate that what appears humane or progressive on the surface often conceals underlying mechanisms of control, such as modern penal systems which, despite appearing more humane, are still acts of power maintaining societal order (Foucault, 1977). Similarly, Foucault's exploration of discourse illustrates that language and knowledge are not merely descriptive but are active tools of domination, shaping societal realities (Foucault, 1972). This understanding is crucial in critique and interpretation, especially concerning art and psychological representations.

Art serves as a potent medium for both expressing and contesting power. Throughout history, art has wielded symbolic and direct power—serving as propaganda, resistance, or a form of social commentary. Michel Foucault's ideas suggest that art is not a neutral reflection but a site where power relations are enacted and challenged. For instance, revolutionary artworks challenge existing power structures by reconfiguring discourse and inciting social change (Hassan, 1982). From this perspective, art can be both an instrument of power and a form of resistance, embodying the complex dialectic of societal transformation.

The philosophical perspective on the use and abuse of history by Friedrich Nietzsche emphasizes that history should be mined for ideas that serve life, rather than learned for its own sake. Nietzsche’s critique from the late 19th century underscores that understanding historical context is essential for personal and societal growth. This idea parallels Foucault's archaeology of knowledge, which investigates how historical discourses shape the understanding of human sciences (Foucault, 1966). The shift from viewing history as a repository of facts to a dynamic network of discursive formations highlights the change in how power is exercised through knowledge and the importance of interpretation for critical engagement with the past.

Foucault’s critique of the treatment of madness and the evolution of punishment reflects how societal perceptions and practices concerning mental health and discipline are intertwined with power structures. Contrary to the assumption of medical progress, Foucault argues that contemporary mental health practices and penal systems disguise mechanisms of social control, often more insidious than older, more overtly barbaric methods (Foucault, 1961). The transition from brutal public executions to prisons demonstrates a reconfiguration of how state power manifests—an attempt to conceal the exercise of power behind the façade of civility and care.

The analysis of representation in the Order of Things reveals how forms of representation underpin knowledge and how they change over time. Classical representation relies on the idea that our ideas directly mirror reality, but Foucault shifts this view, emphasizing that representation is mediated through human cognition and social discourse, always embedded in historical context (Foucault, 1966). This conceptual shift has profound implications for interpreting works of art and understanding their psychological and social meanings.

In psychological discourse, Freud’s theories on the unconscious, daydreams, and imagination provide insight into the creative process and human nature. Freud viewed daydreaming as an extension of childhood play, a space where the imagination freely constructs worlds and scenarios that reflect unconscious desires (Freud, 1908). Artists and writers, like Freud himself, often channel these inner fantasies into creative works that serve as expressions of deeper psychic currents, which can be examined through psychoanalysis (Jung, 1964). The distinction between adult and child play highlights how socialization suppresses natural imaginative urges but does not eradicate them entirely.

Jung’s archetypes and collective unconscious further extend Freud’s ideas, suggesting that creative expressions tap into universal psychic structures accumulated through history. Artistic creation, from a psychological perspective, is an interpretive process that involves conscious effort as well as unconscious inspiration, revealing the depth of human consciousness (Jung, 1959). Critical analysis of art, therefore, requires understanding both the conscious choices and unconscious influences that shape artistic products.

The psychological study of art posits that many highly regarded works embody complex psychic activities, often originating from emotional shocks, life crises, and passion. Artistic creation is thus an act of psychic interpretation—manifesting internal experiences outwardly—enabling viewers to grasp universal aspects of human existence (Langer, 1953). Artists encode their conscious and unconscious insights into their works, which serve as windows into human consciousness. Interpreting such works involves uncovering the psychic states and societal discourses that influence them, aligning with Foucault’s notion that knowledge and power are inextricably linked within social and artistic domains (Foucault, 1972).

References

• Foucault, M. (1966). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. Vintage.
• Foucault, M. (1972). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books.
• Foucault, M. (1977). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings. Pantheon Books.
• Hassan, I. (1982). The Postmodern Turn: Critical Essays. University of Massachusetts Press.
• Freud, S. (1908). The Interpretation of Dreams. Basic Books.
• Jung, C. G. (1959). The Archetypes and The Collective Unconscious. Princeton University Press.
• Jung, C. G. (1964). Memories, Dreams, Reflections. Vintage Books.
• Langer, S. K. (1953). Feeling and Form: A Theory of Art. Charles Scribner's Sons.
• Hassan, I. (1982). The Postmodern Turn: Critical Essays. University of Massachusetts Press.
• Additional sources as needed to support specifics in the analysis.