Foucault’s later work broke from his own earlier discourse-determinism

Evidence

Said’s pairing of those books of Foucault is curious for its lack of interest in how much the latter book contradicts the procedures and formulations of the former. If The Archaeology of Knowledge proclaims the entrapment of all human volition in structures of discourse, Discipline and Punish inaugurates for Foucault, even in its stunning opening section, a kind of history-writing which negotiates the relation between the discursive and the non-discursive. — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory, 697

Categorization

• QUESTION: A fruitful question: how much did Said’s Orientalism rest on an already-superseded Foucauldian model?
• XREF: connects to: Foucault’s late turn back to Nietzsche still fails to ground resistance. — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 45; Foucault’s own work shifted from linguistic to power-focused truth games — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 335; Foucault’s later turn to the subject still lacked a strong theory of agency — Alex Callinicos, Against Postmodernism: A Marxist…, 362 (+3 more)

Related

• Said borrowed only Foucault’s schematic features, losing his subversive critique (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault’s ‘discourse’ cannot span pre-modern centuries and capitalist eras alike (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault’s own work shifted from linguistic to power-focused truth games (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault’s concept of discourse cannot legitimately span ancient and modern history (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault examined discursivity’s ontological status but not its historical dynamics (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault held that all knowledge is a product of discourse bound up with power. (similarity 0.85)
• Discourse analysis reveals how European culture managed and produced the Orient (similarity 0.85)
• Foucault overlooked premodern European structures that caused the founders of discursivity (similarity 0.84)
• Said’s era-spanning generalizations misuse Foucault’s historically bounded concept of discourse (similarity 0.83)
• Foucault-derived critique risks undermining the possibility of cross-cultural understanding entirely (similarity 0.83)
• Said’s Orientalism deploys incompatible Foucauldian and humanist origin-stories simultaneously. (similarity 0.83)
• Said held contradictory claims about authorial agency to evade Foucault’s theory (similarity 0.82)
• Said’s critique of Orientalism relies on the same modernist assumptions that produced it (similarity 0.82)
• Said’s Foucauldian ‘will to power’ discourse operates without imperialist agency or design. (similarity 0.81)
• Said’s critique of Orientalism never explained how discourse connects to colonial power (similarity 0.81)