福柯的微理论和生存美学

Introduction介绍

 

在1960年代,有许多不同的学生运动在西方资本主义国家,68年5月发生在法国的是最重要的一个学生运动。在六七十年代,许多法国学者认为,68年5月事件标志代表工人阶级已经权威。与此同时,许多评论68年5月事件只专注于其政治方面。然而,compareto资产阶级革命,68年5月革命的特点,让人们知道,它应该是一个运动对文化批评一个多运动对政治叛乱。分析68年5月活动与福柯的微观权力理论和美学的存在,它可以发现,68年5月革命是一场革命充满后现代主义和革命显示实际的日常生活审美的意义在法国。In the 1960s, it had many different student movements in western capitalist countries and May 68 events in French is one of the most important student movements. In the sixties and seventies, many French scholars believed that May 68 events is a mark to represent the working class has gotten authority. At the same time, many comments about May 68 events only focused on its political aspects. However, compareto the bourgeois revolutions, the characteristics of May 68 revolutionlet people know that it should be a movementabout cultural criticism more than a movement about political rebellion. To analyze May 68 events with Foucault's theories of micro power and aesthetics of existence, it can be found that May 68 revolution is a revolution full of postmodernism and it is a revolution to show the actual meaning of aesthetic of everyday life in French.

 

Foucault’s theories of micro power and May 68 events 微功率和68月事件的福柯的理论

 

After World War II, capitalism and the economy development were advancing rapidly. Before May 68 events, the development of national economy and the condition of employment in French were going well. Beside, French were also playing an important and strong role on the international stage at the same time.  However, a feeling of emptiness and anxieties came with the consumer society and oppressed the new generation who was born after the war in French. Therefore, they need to express and vent their disagreement as well as perplexities to their life through some actions. In that time,the traditional educated systems in French were criticized for sticking to old ways and this is another reason that stimulated university students to rebel for their life. In the past of French, the concept of social class was emphasized under the traditional social culture and thinking. That made a great distance between teachers and students so they cannot have an equal communication and relationship. Before May 68 events, the university students not merely faced the oppressive feeling from consumer society, but they also have to deal with the new challenges which came with the social and economy establishment. Unfortunately the requirements of the university students cannot be satisfied because of the old traditions and social customs. For example, the subjects in the universities were too stale and cannot provide chances to students to develop their own skills. Under the oppression and confusion of future life, the university students feel disappointed and painful to their life. To Foucault (1997), every violent and physical punishments or the punishment about mental tortures all can be said is a juridical discursive mode of power. He mentions that power has no visibility but it is reflected In the process of punishment. Therefore, Foucault (1979:55) said, “We shall see later that the truth-power relation remains at the heart of all mechanisms of punishment and that it is still to be found in contemporary penal practice”. To look at the society in French before May 68, the power in Foucault’s eyes existed everywhere and people were under an invisible mental control. In modern society, power and authority were centralized and the emphasis of moral as well as code of conduct was highlighted. Gradually, people were constructed by the truth they have been told and their behaviors were affected by the social culture. It can be said that people were under an invisible spirit monitor and that is a kind of punishments insteadviolent and physical punishments to make people under painfulness.Human behaviors were influenced and constructed by social customs; educations and also the “truth” they knew. If they act opposite to the social norms or do not meet the requirements of secular content then they will be criticized for their rebellious behaviors. Thus, people try to restrict themselves and become a docile body gradually for avoiding being difference. In this case, people are playing the roles of the leading power one and the suffering power one in the power relationship at the same time. They release power to constraint themselves. In other words, they accept and made obeisance to the power which from themselves. Foucault calls this performance as a ‘gaze’. To describe ‘gaze’, Derrida (1994:136) said, “The specter weighs, it thinks, it intensifies and condenses itself within the very inside of life, within the most living life, the most Singular (or, if one prefers,individual) life. “. He thinks that people have been living in an invisible monitoring and it is from the inside of us but not from other where. Lacan also give some similar ideas of the concept of ‘gaze’. Lacan （1998）made an explanation of the effect of ‘gaze’. He points out that the ideal ego and the ego ideal are establishing in the imaginations of ‘gaze’.The objects construct a perfect image for themselves and other people through ‘gaze’ or it can be said through the authorities and restrictions from themselves. Therefore, it can be said that modern people still have no freedom and keep facing punishment although the physical tortures no longer existin developed countries. The power and authorities came from the society; education and other normative content. Those power and authorities were decorated with reasons and rationales, so that people are under monitoring but they do not know or they think it is reasonable to be ‘gaze’.  That’s why Weber（1948） said that nowadays people are living in the cage of formal rationality. Foucault and Habermas (1979 & 1987) also think that power is everywhere in the modern society and it permeates in people’s life to instead the roles of communications. To analyze the social situation before May 68 with Foucault’s thinking of micro power, it can be seen that people in French were under power and authority before May 68. Those oppressions of power not came from or relate to political issues but came from the old social culture and the systems, so that the rebels in May 68 almost are the university students and then are the workers. 

 

Foucault’s theories of aesthetics of existence and May 68 events 生存美学和68月事件的福柯的理论

 

Under the oppression and dissatisfaction, the university students finally came out to express their feeling of anger and the student movement was broke out. To some people, May 68 events were challenging the rule of everyday life and it just like a carnival but without any practical significance when rebelling the oppression. However, Foucault has a totally different idea about rebellions.Foucault (1971) thinks that the madness in other people eyes was the representation of truth, justice and the real human nature. The ‘mad people’ are called as the madness because they have courage to break the rule of secular content and challenge the power from the society. Therefore, they are the group who can see the real truth and criticize the traditions. On the contrary, the ‘rational people’ actually are the mad people. They are cheated by the society and live in the cage of formal rationality but they never aware that they are under the oppression. To escape from the oppression of traditions and secular content, Foucault (1978) thinks that people should bring arts to everyday life and use an aesthetic appreciation to rethink our life. Through keeping suspect and challenge the life then people can recreate and reform their ideal life. In Foucault’s eyes, this is the aesthetics of existence and it is the way to escape from power and control. Weber (1948) also has some ideas close to Foucault and he thinks the many things in modern life like a cage to chain people’s thinking, through aesthetic people can break through the cage. The aesthetics of everyday life is a strategy to release human nature. According to The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology (1994), the aesthetics of everyday life means to criticize everyday life with aesthetic principles and treat everything as a art object. To analyze May 68 revolution with the above ideas, it can be seen that May 68 is not a rebellion for the overthrow of regime, it also not just a revolution with simple meaning. May 68 can be seen as the aesthetic of everyday life. The university students were trying to break the traditions and the irrationals in May 68 events, and they escape from the ‘cage’ for developing their new ideology and life. Lefebvre (1991) thinks that people can free themselves from the old thinking and the trap of the rule of secular content through criticize everyday life and every things with aesthetic principles. Lefebvre’s thinking proves that May 68 revolution is a practice of aesthetic of everyday life. Because May 68 events, the university students in Paris were under the ‘punishment’ that the truth they knew, the customs they used to and the changing situations all made they feel painful. Consequently, they noticed that they should fright for something and free themselves then May 68 events started to influence the whole French and the world. Until now it can be seen clearly some effect after May 68 events and the development of aesthetic of everyday life is quietly on progress. Now young people have more opened mind and critical thinking, they have courage to challenge and criticize every things. Rebellions and revolutions are not the taboo and people finally try to think difference and act difference.To look at the poster in Paris streets, the images and slogans on the posters are reflecting nowadays French people are bringing aesthetic to their everyday life. Beside, the graffiti in Paris also is another signification to demonstrate their aesthetics of existence. De Certeau (1984) thinks that graffiti is a rebellion for everyday life; people use graffiti to show their thinking and rebellions. It is a small resistance but not the extreme revolutions. Graffiti culture is popular in many different countries; people use language or pictures to show their thinking though they are claimed destroy public area. It can be said that nowadays people practice aesthetic in their everyday life and they start to become more difference from the secular content of the society.#p#分页标题#e#

Now it is many posters about ‘rebellion’ and ‘freedom’ in Paris.

The graffiti in Paris shows people’s aesthetic of everyday life.

 

Conclusion总结

 

To conclude, May 68 events were a post-modern revolution and it successfully bring the aesthetics of existence to people’s life. After May 68, the ideology and culture of human have been changed. Most of the people start to consider their rights to rebel and their rights to revolution. Moreover, in May 68, the university students have overturn all systems such as culture, lifestyle and other specification for liberated the desirable human potential. To show opposite to traditional belief and challenge the truth that has been told to us are the actual meaning of aesthetic of everyday life.

 

Referencing文献

 

Anderson, N. (2012) Derrida: Ethics Under Erasure, London: Continuum.

Adams, K.L. & Winter, A. (1997) ‘Gang graffiti as a discourse genre’, Journal of Sociolingaistics, 1(3), p.337-360.

Derrida, J. （1994） Specters of Mars: the State of the Debt, the Work of Mourning, & the New International, Trans: Kamuf, P., New York: Routledge.

deCerteau, M.（1984）The practice of everyday life, Trans:Rendall, S., Berkeley : University of California Press.

Foucault, M. (1971) Madness and civilization: a history of insanity in the age of reason, London: Routledge.  

Foucault, M. (1978) The history of sexuality : volume 1 : an introduction, London : Penguin.

Foucault, M. (1979) Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, Trans:

Sheridan, A., New York: Vintage Books.

Habermas, J. (1987) The Theory of communicative Action, Cambridge: Polity Press.

Keller, C. &Daniell, A. (2002) Process and Difference: Between Cosmological and Poststructuralist Postmodernisms, Albany: State University of New York.

Lefebvre, H. (1991) CritiqueofEverydayLife, Trans: John Moore, J. &Trebitsch, M., London : Verso.

Lacan, J. （1998） The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis, Trans: Sheridan, A., London: Vintage.

Lyotard, J.F. (1984) The Postmodern Condition: A report on knowledge, Trans: Beunington, G. &Massumi, B., Manchester: Manchester University.

Poster,M. (1975) ExistentialMarxism inPostwarFrance：FromStaretoAlthusser, Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress. 

Nicholas Abercrombie, N.; Hill, S. & Turner, B.S. (1994) The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology, London: Penguin.

Seale,P. &McConville, M. (1968) Red Flag/Black Flag: French Revolution, London: Penguin Books.

Taylor, D. (2014) Michel Foucault, Hoboken : Taylor and Francis.

Vaneigem, R. (1967) The Revolution of Everyday Life, Trans: Smith, D.N., Glastonbury: Rebel.     

Weber, M. (1948) From Max Weber: Essays in sociology, Gerth, H. & Mills, C.W.(Eds), London : Routledge.