lindy_b's review
1.0
Sorry but Foucault was a hack-- an influential hack, to be sure, but a hack nonetheless.
liam_5murphy's review against another edition
2.0
A poetically written and questionably founded account of history and psychology with a controversial argument. This review is a little more structured around Foucault as a whole, but I believe this work aptly parallels his general philosophy. I apologize for my relatively normie take.
There have been monstrously inadequate forms of dealing with concepts such as madness as humanity has progressed. I can agree with that. Many “progressions”, interpretations of morality, notions of human nature, etc. have been utter failures. But that prescribes the notion of… ALL attempts of progress to be futile? What?!
Now, maybe I’m not that good of a reader, and there’s a possibility that Foucault’s book isn’t explicitly stating this. But 1. The book gets lost in assessing failed attempts and thus seems to offer no possible solutions, 2. The postmodernism/normative relativism movements were kinda fathered by Foucault (I can get behind the factual nature of descriptive moral relativism, but this is different), 3. The last line of the book aligns with this vein; “And nothing in itself, especially not what it can know of madness, assures the world that it is justified by such works of madness”, and 4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5wuB_p63YM&t=731s
Maybe I’m not isolating the book enough from the author, but in this case, I don’t think that matters too much; it seems to all fall in line. To give it some credit, it’s critiques of past attempts to “solve” the “issue” of madness are enlightening, interesting, and well-written. But, while skepticism is great, it doesn’t negate everything.
There have been monstrously inadequate forms of dealing with concepts such as madness as humanity has progressed. I can agree with that. Many “progressions”, interpretations of morality, notions of human nature, etc. have been utter failures. But that prescribes the notion of… ALL attempts of progress to be futile? What?!
Now, maybe I’m not that good of a reader, and there’s a possibility that Foucault’s book isn’t explicitly stating this. But 1. The book gets lost in assessing failed attempts and thus seems to offer no possible solutions, 2. The postmodernism/normative relativism movements were kinda fathered by Foucault (I can get behind the factual nature of descriptive moral relativism, but this is different), 3. The last line of the book aligns with this vein; “And nothing in itself, especially not what it can know of madness, assures the world that it is justified by such works of madness”, and 4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5wuB_p63YM&t=731s
Maybe I’m not isolating the book enough from the author, but in this case, I don’t think that matters too much; it seems to all fall in line. To give it some credit, it’s critiques of past attempts to “solve” the “issue” of madness are enlightening, interesting, and well-written. But, while skepticism is great, it doesn’t negate everything.
julialandi13's review
4.0
Very interesting! Foucault’s theories were very interesting and well put (and I felt like I mostly agreed with him) and I also learned a lot of history stuff about the development of asylums so that was also cool. Good read for anyone interested in post-modernism.
hberg95's review
4.0
May '22
I read this again very quickly because I'm taking a Summer class on Foucault. Like always, I was met with new insights and thoughts about the text, but I still struggle with those middle chapters and the writing style a bit.
The connection between madness, art, and dreams has me thinking about writing something on David Lynch as an artist of madness, pushing for the world as-is to justify itself as any more rational or true than Lynch's mad version of things.
I also enjoyed seeing how much M&C presages D&P in its discussion of perpetual observation, surveillance, and judgement, as well as its discussion of a kind of internalized subjugation of the soul which comes in to replace the physical chains of punishment.
-------------
I've read this a couple of times and I find it really aesthetically valuable. I always struggle with the writing style of early Foucault, but I love the way he talkes about Bosch, Sade, and Brughel especially.
Not my favorite Foucault, but still very commendable.
I read this again very quickly because I'm taking a Summer class on Foucault. Like always, I was met with new insights and thoughts about the text, but I still struggle with those middle chapters and the writing style a bit.
The connection between madness, art, and dreams has me thinking about writing something on David Lynch as an artist of madness, pushing for the world as-is to justify itself as any more rational or true than Lynch's mad version of things.
I also enjoyed seeing how much M&C presages D&P in its discussion of perpetual observation, surveillance, and judgement, as well as its discussion of a kind of internalized subjugation of the soul which comes in to replace the physical chains of punishment.
-------------
I've read this a couple of times and I find it really aesthetically valuable. I always struggle with the writing style of early Foucault, but I love the way he talkes about Bosch, Sade, and Brughel especially.
Not my favorite Foucault, but still very commendable.