I don’t want to “improvise on the metaphor Deleuze used to describe the way he made use of fellow philosophers (though he usually made use of them in quite a gentle manner) to come across with his own ideas. I rather like to think of such theorists as Nietzsche, Foucault, or Greenblatt in a more detached manner as atomic particles that hardly ever meet, but sometimes do, and when they crash make something emerge that may be new and may be not. I’d like to take some of that enthusiastic energy Greenblatt felt when first he met Foucault and heard him lecture and let this paper run on it. I will follow that ‘thread’ of power that in a way puts Nietzsche, Foucault, and Greenblatt in touch in order to figure out whether there is anything new about new historicism’s concept of power as compared to that of Nietzsche and Foucault. In the following a brief outline will be given of how Nietzsche employs power to understand how the cosmos works. Then I shall describe Foucault’s understanding of how power relations condition society, government, discourse, and the way we look at things. Afterwards I shall discuss new historicism’s concept of power, focussing on the consequences this concept of power has for the understanding of the relation between society and works of art and for the interpretation of literary and historical texts. In the end there will be a short outlook on what could be an answer to the question of whether there is anything new about new historicism’s concept of power.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Foucault’s Concept of Power
1.1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
1.2. Powered by Nietzsche: Michel Foucault
2. New Historicism’s Concept of Power
Conclusion
Objectives and Key Themes
This paper examines the evolution and interconnection of the concept of power from Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche through Michel Foucault to the theoretical framework of New Historicism. The primary research goal is to determine whether New Historicism offers a truly novel conceptualization of power or if it functions as a synthesis of preceding philosophical and historical models.
- The shift from Nietzschean "will to power" to Foucaultian power relations.
- The analysis of power as a productive, circulating force within the social body.
- The intersection of power, discourse, and the interpretation of historical and literary texts.
- The mechanisms of hegemony, containment, and subversion in New Historicist theory.
- The self-reflexive position of the critic within networks of power and historical interpretation.
Excerpt from the Book
1.1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
Nietzsche was among the first to integrate “power” into the concept of a soulless, godless universe of pure physis. To Nietzsche the universe (Welt) is nothing but power (Kraft), or, described more accurately, it is: ”ein Ungeheuer von Kraft, ohne Anfang und Ende.” (Nietzsche 1964: 696). Staying true to his physical, materialist view of things, Nietzsche opposed the hypostization of “power” as well as a too static view of it by conceiving the interactions of powers to be the essential condition for the existence of what he calls: “meine dionysische Welt” (Nietzsche 1964: 697). The world is “power(s)” in motion.
This network of contending forces is what Nietzsche calls life. The will to power, i.e., the will to participate in the process of life, is the basic will, the fundamental drive all organisms, cellular micro-organisms as well as social macro-organisms, have in common. This vital will to power is also the necessary prerequisite for the existence of all kinds of change. The will to power has its object in obtaining as much life, i.e. power, as possible. The more life there is, the more pleasure can be enjoyed. The struggle for power is really a struggle for pleasure; it is hedonism.
Since every power, i.e., every living organism, tries to obtain maximum pleasure, there is a constant fight going on among them. Every single living being must decide constantly whether it is preferable to fight against or to contain or to withdraw from contending forces (cf. Nietzsche 1964:433, n°. 641). In this constant contest of powers transient dominant powers arise. These dominant forces manage to lead and direct the weaker ones. The rigidity of their dominance depends on their amount of power.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: The author outlines the scope of the paper, aiming to connect Nietzsche, Foucault, and New Historicism to assess the originality of the latter's understanding of power.
1. Foucault’s Concept of Power: This chapter details how Foucault moved away from hierarchical models of power to view it as a productive, circulating network that relies on resistance and defines discourse.
1.1. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche: An analysis of Nietzsche’s materialist view of the universe as a chaotic struggle of competing forces or "will to power," which serves as a foundational influence for Foucault.
1.2. Powered by Nietzsche: Michel Foucault: This section explores Foucault's pragmatism, his distinction between force and power, and his focus on governing techniques and the discursive construction of reality.
2. New Historicism’s Concept of Power: The chapter evaluates how New Historicists like Greenblatt and Montrose adapt Foucault’s theories to literary studies, specifically regarding the "social energy" of texts and the negotiation between dominance and subversion.
Conclusion: The author concludes that while New Historicism draws heavily on Foucault and Nietzsche, its unique value lies in its application of these power concepts to the interpretation of historical and literary artefacts and the critic's own role.
Keywords
New Historicism, Michel Foucault, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, Will to Power, Discourse, Hegemony, Subversion, Social Energy, Power Relations, Renaissance Literature, Literary Theory, Cultural Studies, Historicity of Texts.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this academic work?
The paper examines the conceptual development of "power" through three influential perspectives: Nietzsche’s philosophical foundations, Foucault’s analysis of power relations, and New Historicism’s application of these ideas to literary and cultural history.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
Key themes include the materiality of power, the circulation of discourse, the interaction between dominant and subversive forces, and the way literary criticism participates in social and political power structures.
What is the central research question?
The central question is whether the New Historicist concept of power introduces something genuinely new or whether it is essentially a recontextualization of Nietzschean and Foucaultian theories within a Renaissance literary framework.
Which scientific methodology does the author employ?
The study utilizes a comparative analysis of primary philosophical texts and secondary literary criticism, mapping theoretical continuities and ruptures in the definition of power across different intellectual periods.
What does the main body of the text address?
The main body breaks down the transition from Nietzsche’s "will to power" to Foucault’s network-based power model, followed by a detailed discussion on how New Historicism employs these models to analyze social institutions like the Elizabethan theatre.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
Central keywords include New Historicism, power relations, discourse, hegemony, subversion, social energy, and the historicity of texts.
How does the author characterize the role of the "anecdote" in New Historicist analysis?
The author argues that the anecdote is crucial because it possesses the highest potential to interrupt the continuous flow of traditional master narratives, thereby exposing cracks and "real" experiences that have been unassimilated by dominant powers.
How is the relationship between the state and subversion described?
The paper discusses the "containment hypothesis," where the dominant order (like the state) produces its own subversion to maintain its power; however, it notes the counter-argument that theatre and other forces can sometimes turn this containment into a subversive act against the state.
- Quote paper
- Karolin Dunschen (Author), 2005, Powered by Foucault: New Historicism's Concept of Power, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/40945
