Comments on: Reading Foucault in Karachi

By: sattar rind

sattar rind — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 21:26:48 +0000

i like Foucault and read his all books. ok rather almost all. but i not sensed anything what Ms Zakaria has written. yes. its an other thing that i am old enough to remember all his view. therefore i am sorry. besides Foucault never completyed his any work all the work he left in uncompleted thus they are great even.

By: Naeem

Naeem — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:57:17 +0000

And exactly what do you mean with “non persons” and “non witnessses”? Self therapy or not ,his writings were not a reflection of his biases towards his desires!

By: Harbans Mukhia

Harbans Mukhia — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 05:15:07 +0000

Well written piece, Ms Zakaria, except that “medieval” was not as lawless as you assume or as Karachi is today, nor was Foucault as anti-modernity !!!

By: Azad

Azad — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 04:53:38 +0000

The discussion is about Foucault’s philosophy and his contributions to knowldege. Why are you talking about his personal life?

By: DharmendraGoel

DharmendraGoel — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 10:17:37 +0000

RafiaZakaria iswell travelledandwellversed modern lady from Pakistan with all its very obvious contradictions. she holds great instincts and passion for a modern scientific attitude againast ante diluvian stuck- up prejudices of the Taliban and their spiritual mentors the Medieval Mullas and ulemas,.
She would love to raise the ladies o f Karachi jump over the tedious process of slowly resiling away from medieval mentality by sheerly giving up shararas and Salvars by ultra-short flimsy skirts , perhaps.
Whether medieval Khandani debaucheries of old feudal Seraglios could be improved for woman’s liberation by Cabaret-Hall sleazy dancing one must ask Ms Rafia of Karachi. D. Goel

By: Blood-Ink-Diary

Blood-Ink-Diary — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:16:45 +0000

ZZX-1, this is your rebuttal? *yawns* !
Well, seems like you really knew him!
“He was not objective but in self-therapy through his writing”, ever wonder that one can be quite objective in “self-therapy”, but, maybe, you have a different take on self therapy – ofcos, no pun intended!
Good day to you !

By: Blood-Ink-Diary

Blood-Ink-Diary — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:03:25 +0000

Btw, my second reply is to: ZZX-1 (about Foucault’s personality). cheers.

By: ZZX-1

ZZX-1 — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 09:02:38 +0000

You digress. Nothing was said about him not being a saint or being a criminal or less than human. All that was said was that his live style affected his thought process and vise versa…influenced what he wrote—he was not objective but in self therapy through his writing. Homosexuality was his infusion. No pun intended.

Amid the chaos his move to Iran was not without purpose: Shall we say in search of drugs and the other bit of ‘excitement’ experimenting with non-persons and non-witnesses.

By: samiranboruah

samiranboruah — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 06:44:58 +0000

It would be a mockery if one tries to reduce the philosophical contribution of Foucault, particularly his works on the concept of power and knowledge, just in few newspaper reporting on Iran and try to comment on the present situation in Pakistan by deriving farfetched parallel. Besides, it is irrational to compare Pakistan with Iran. Before the revolution, Iran was run by a puppet government of USA with all its modern cultural paraphernalia supported by the mainstream western media including New York Times, BBC etc. In that historical moment it was strategically important to demolish those modern cultural paraphernalia to dislodge that puppet regime, the regime that tried to legitimize the western hegemonic control of Iran in the disguise of modernization and cultural emancipation. After independence Pakistan need not had to worry for such western hegemony. On the contrary, from the very beginning Pakistan played the role of an accomplice to the western powers, facilitating them to extend their hegemonic control. So there is a basic difference. Since revolution Iran is fighting continuously against the western hegemony, but since independence Pakistan is consciously and consistently accommodating the western hegemony. Regarding post modernity it is rather the western powers who are displaying it in their fleeing contradictory and inconsistent behavior and attitude towards the third world countries, particularly in the Middle-East. Pakistan is rather the object of Post modernity, not the subject. Of course, Pakistan’s present plight is of its own making. The day it had chosen to be the pawn of the western powers to defeat the progressive Marxist experiment in the neighboring Afghanistan its road to progressive future has been sealed. At that particular historical moment it was practically impossible to defeat the reasoning of the Marxist philosophy (which promised the emancipation of the poor and destitute) with any other logic and human rationale. So the religious dogma, which did not need scientific reason or logic to justify, became necessary. Only it had the power with the capacity to defeat reason. How these religious dogmas were created? Of course, by controlling knowledge in the religious schools of Pakistan. The rest is history. So reading Foucault in Karachi, or for that matter, in any part of Pakistan need not poses any difficult question provided the question is focused on the basic issues like control of power and knowledge in Pakistan.

By: Blood-Ink-Diary

Blood-Ink-Diary — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 06:16:31 +0000

No one disputes that Foucault was a human, nor, did he claim to be a saint, thus, if he suffered “suicidal tendencies, loneliness”, what is such a crime? Let’s not fool ourselves to negate from the fact that most of us at some point in time have suffered a day or two in loneliness – we are flesh and blood – human, not mechanical creatures, no?
Perhaps, the documentation of his personality, tendencies, etcetra woule require another article, I do not think Ms. Zakaria intended this piece to be about his overall personality, hence, let’s try to understand the offerings in this piece.
Cheers.