Foucault

Rating:
Summary: A fabulous hommage, I am floored.
Review: Being a Foucault fanatic who had never read Deleuze, I bought this merely because I wanted to read more about my favorite author and also because I knew how influential and important Deleuze was, not only for Foucault himself but in the field of continental philosophy in the last century.

The further I read, the more fascinating I found Deleuze's analysis of Foucault's works and methods. Although he places his focus on mainly "The Archaeology of Knowledge" and "Discipline and Punish", he makes constant references to Foucault's other important works.

What stands out as completely unique is the utterly and unsurpassably rigorous way in which Deleuze reads Foucault. Deleuze's prose is decidedly difficult, but if you're a Foucault reader who has had some contact with postmodern theories in the past then you'll at least grasp the meaning of his words.

What's more, Deleuze breaks down Foucault's epistemological and methodological theorizing to their barest, making this an extremely important learning experience for those who wish to understand Foucault in-depth.

This book is essential, but I also recommend you read it once you've become fairly familiar with Foucault... and as I said, I had never read Deleuze but that didn't stop me from finding this book to be absolute food for thought. Granted, it needs to be read MANY times to fully appreciate its potential and maybe integrate Deleuze's reflections into any kind of practical research... because I also found it to be enlightening in that respect.

Had Foucault lived to read this book, I'm sure he would have been humbled to tears.

Magnificent.

Rating:
Summary: A pointless book-the blind by the blind
Review: First off, I must state that I do typically enjoy philosophy. However, this book made me question myself.

I have read a fair amount of Foucault, and consider myself to have a strong grasp of his ideas. I stubbornly kept on through the dense and boring texts, until I finally understood it. I had heard some people talking about Deleuze with awe in their voices, as if he was some kind of god, so I figured he was an intersting/important philosopher. I picked up this book, and boy was I disappointed.

First of all, Deleuze seems incapable of writing a coherent sentence. The grammar and spelling in this text were atrocious. This may be a function of the translation, but somehow I doubt it. Secondly, Deleuze never really SAYS anything. It is all masturbatory talk. Now that I consider it, so is Foucault. So perhaps my title should instead be "the masturbatory by the masturbatory".

And as for the comments below me, by Nathan, you are far too kind to the book. "[I]t is nonetheless brilliant and intellectually rigorous". Excuse me? This was perhaps the least interesting or stimulating book I have read in the last 5 years! And for you to say that this book is a philosophical masterpiece is simply ridiculous. Philosophical Grammer is a philosophical masterpiece. Being and Time is a philosophical masterpiece. Beyond Good and Evil is a philosophical masterpiece. This is not. In conclusion, this is most certainly NOT a treat.

DON'T BUY THIS BOOK!

Rating:
Summary: Good Book
Review: I am not sure where some of this hostility comes from but in my opinion this was a very interesting work regarding one of the pioneers of poststructuralist philosophy. The knowledge of Deleuze is in my opinion unparalleled. This is a very good book and as Nathan said above you do need to be well read in both philosophers. This would be especially helpful just to understand the writing style of deleuze. He is quite difficult. Regardless, I found this to be a great introductory text to one of the greatest philosophers of the modern era.

Rating:
Summary: NOT an introduction
Review: Well, on the one hand, this is a great book. Deleuze is a master at the art of reducing philosophers to what he sees as being their essential parts, and then showing us new and fascinating ways of interpreting these parts and putting them to use. In FOUCAULT is a rich assortment of new perspectives on concepts first introduced to us by Michel Foucault, and intriguing new readings of his original work. A knowledgeable scholar of Foucault's writings will find FOUCAULT a delightful treasure trove of intellectual jewels.

But this book is really, really hard. It's not a matter of having trouble reading it - you'll either get it or you won't. This is NOT a good introduction to Foucault. It should be read only after one has acquired a deep knowledge of Foucault's work, and a knowledge of Deleuze is helpful as well. Without this background knowledge, this book will not only be incomprehensible, but also entirely uninteresting.

Depending on your background, you'll love this book or think it was a waste of money.

Rating:
Summary: An introduction? Perhaps. The essentials? Without a doubt.
Review: While it is true that this is not an introduction to the thought of Foucault -- Deleuze instead called his book a 'portrait' -- on the other hand it is such a masterful grasp of Foucault's philosophy, written in chapters that move progressively from one essential stage of Foucault's thought to another until the bigger picture emerges, that one cannot but wonder whether one has really read Foucault until one encounter's Deleuze's portrait of him. So in that sense, if one means that an introductory book should truly explain the material, then this is without doubt an introduction to the thought of Foucault, and one not likely to be surpassed. This is a short book, around 130 pages. Given the Parisian milieu in which Foucault worked, and for a time was very good friends with Deleuze (Deleuze refers in this book to manuscripts that Foucault never published), this book offers us a highly developed look from the left bank onto the problems that Foucault found himself working through, and it articulates them chapter by chapter: each chapter is devoted to one philosophical problem, and then moves to the next level and onto a different problem in the following chapter, thereby allowing Deleuze to unfold the problems (there are three, under the rubric of Topology) and explicate their relation to Foucault's thought as a whole. It is in this sense that Deleuze's book is a philosophical portrait: he has captured the essentials of the philosophical thought that underlies Foucault's work. The style of the book is predicated on repetition, or seriality, which may madden some; but so long as one understands the book as a progression or unfolding the reader should be able to adjust his or her reading habits accordingly. A word of caution is however necessary: this translation is a very sloppy job, and the buyer should be aware of that. I have not taken off any stars for Sean Hand's failure here, as I am assuming that the reader only has access to the book in its English version. But it is not going too far to note in a review that this is the worst translation into English of any of Deleuze's books (which normally receive meticulous care), which is all the more unfortunate, because it is so very insightful.