Re: What is Power?

This is interesting and helpful except for one thing - I don't get how there 
can be intentions without subjects.  What are "imbedded" intentions?  To 
whom or what are they attributed?  Perhaps my confusion is stemming from 
a cultural obsession with a cohesive, bound self, whereas to Foucault, the 
self isn't a heuristic concept in this case, and intentions are as diffuse 
and elusive as power...?

-Karen Kolodenko
kkolode@xxxxxxxxx


 On Tue, 1 Aug 1995 CCOLWELL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Re: Power as intentional and non-subjective, see History of Sexuality, I 
> pp 92-6
> 	Power is intentional to the extent that there are intentions imbedded
> in power relations, e.g.,heterosexual or patriarchal intentions imbedded 
> in most if not all institutions in this country. It is non-subjective tot
> the extent that there is no subject to which origin or responsibility
> can be assigned for these intentions. The effects of our 'actions' 
> (conceived as broadly as possible) not only escape or intentions but 
> generate effects of power to which we can ascribe, or simply perceive,
> intentions. Indeed, if F coherently argues that subjects are the effects
> of power/knowledge relations then power relations must be non-subjective.
> 


     ------------------