Michel Foucault in his essay "The order of speech," read at the College de France highlights very interesting to some control procedures of the mechanisms of exclusion of these parole.Rende then explicit control mechanisms of speech through procedures that depotenziano.L author 'debate is where he is a danger in speaking of the people and the proliferation of indefinite speeches. All 'inside of a company producing a discourse is controlled, selected so that they can avoid danger. All who live at 'internal appresoche companies can not talk about anything under any circumstances, you can not treat each topic. From here emerges the figure of the Fool or the man who guided by 'instinct (rather than by rationality), comes out by those controls on speech, the talk of a madman can undermine the power of others: Since the Middle Ages the insane is he whose speech may not operate normally, or at least with the same ease as that of others, so much so that the His word is considered void. A demonstration of what is said Foucault says
"Madness, since the classical age, was the naked truth, however, the man who put them in an area where it was neutralized and pale as canceled"
Often the words fear of crowds summoned to the point of inducing extreme solutions in order to "eradicate" the "virus". In the Middle Ages the insane were burned at the stake, over the centuries it was customary to close them in prisons or in special medical facilities. But with the common goal of always being checked for a sort of "quarantine", away from the community, to avoid possible infection through their words. course, it is clear that the procedures dealt with by exclusion Foucault (forbidden, partage, the will to truth) have some relevance with the desire and power: Who decided that the speeches of fools should pass without trace and others should be repeatedly cited with a frequency almost ritual? is highlighted even more the fear that the crowd forward at the expense of those who operate these exclusions in order to create a community of thinkers, or people who think a "sense Single (company address). That's why still the "Fool" is not seen in a good position compared to the systems of mass communication: It 's the one who is there to have a poor knowledge of consumption and fast, but one who seeks to get rid of these mental restrinzioni that results from certain speeches.
Barthes, in "The pleasure of the text," says the two notions of pleasure and enjoyment out of context Lacan (for a movement from conscious to unconscious) and proittandole to a universe of discourse that belongs to the area of \u200b\u200bNietzsche and Sade. It is stated in the "Pleasure of the text ":" The writer's pleasure (and his reader) accepts the letter, give up use has the right and power to say it: the letter is his pleasure, he is obsessed. The writer of enjoyment (and his reader) starts the text sustainable, the text impossible: you can not talk "about" such a text, you can only speak "in" it, in its own way, get into a desperate plagiarism, hysterically affirm the void of enjoyment. " Barthes also makes the difference between the text of pleasure and enjoyment of the text:" text of pleasure: the one that meets, gives euphoria, what is the culture, tied to a comfortable practice of literature. Text of enjoyment: the one that puts in a state of loss, that that discomfort (perhaps ad nauseam), shakes the assize historical, cultural, psychological, the reader, the consistency of his tastes, his values \u200b\u200band his memories, puts a strain on his relationship with language. " Opposition radical would be: the pleasure is produced by the repetition, the enjoyment is the product of the event is early, everything breaks loose at once. The pleasure of the text is the euphoria, satisfaction, and enjoyment is the shock; enjoyment in the subject loses the consistency of his ego. If you can not hide the pleasure and dry up the sources of enjoyment, this is because it is unspeakable, because it occupies the place, however the enjoyment is in-speakable. To define the pleasure of the text must also define the text, and we can define it as: the space of a rare speech from which every scene is missing, the text is not a dialogue, it's like a small island, shows the asocial nature of pleasure. At the scene of the text the reader encounters himself and his thoughts, he encounters the language in its founding moment and not imposed. Barthes also implements a search for what is around the work, to the text. The text should give the test to be desired, this test is the writing, which defines it as: the science of the pleasures of language. It also analyzes the desire to read according to their own preferences, dislikes and motivations associated with this activity. Following its analysis can be groped the reconstruction of a typology of the pleasures of reading. Firstly there is the fetishist who will agree with the text cut, with the splitting up of quotations, with the pleasure of the word. The obsessive would have the pleasure of the letter, of the languages \u200b\u200bout of phase, the meta-languages. The paranoid consume or produce texts winding, as stories developed reasoning, restrictions secret. The hysteric is one who takes the text at face value, which comes into play without content, which is no longer the subject of any critical examination. Apply also his investigation of signs and literature with this brings to light the fact that the writer is suffering from the effects of his writing, as it is dragged by a current, which moves and turns. So the language of novels, poems reveals itself through the desire that he writes is owned and ends thrown on the scene of the page as a cuttlefish bone on the beach.
"The Order of the speech" is the text with which Michel Foucault held the inaugural lecture at the Collège de France, (December 2, 1970) in which he faced the favorite themes of "exclusion procedures "affecting the speech. In the texts of "History of Madness in the Classical" (1961) and "Birth of the Clinic" (1963), Foucault through extensive archival research reconstructs the system of madness by opening a new conception of the relationship between "reason-unreason" and is the gradual marginalization of mental illness and the final subjugation of the "mad" men of reason.
"In a society like ours, you know, of course, the procedures of exclusion". Of the three great systems of exclusion that affect the speech, that is, the forbidden word, the partition of madness, and the will to truth, I will do what the madness: the so-called "partage"-partition between reason and madness. The term derives from the Latin follis madness, expression of an onomatopoeic word that literally means "bellows", "leather bag" or "balloon" and indicates, by metaphor, an empty-headed person. The term insanity is defined in the first place is the plight of people with severe mental illness, or a momentary lapse of reason. By extension, the term refers to all forms of stupidity, lack of wisdom and inability to judge well. The madness is attributed also to any behavior that results from a strong disturbance produced by the senses, as is the case of an exasperated, vibrant passion of love, or an unbridled desire (to love to distraction).
Fool is the one living on the edge, do not fit in the group and in the category in which social habits and the force of common sense classify everyone's life, his painful and heartbreaking reality, even forced to suppress his feelings of love.
Even in the song "I'll give her a rose," the singer Simon Webbe and analyzes the theme of Fools writes:
*************** will give you a rose A red rose to paint everything A rose for every tear from your console and a rose to be able to love ... ... My name is Antonio and I'm mad I was born in '54 and I live here since I was a child I thought of talking with the devil
So I have closed forty 'years in a mental hospital I am writing this letter because I can not speak ... ... I'm like a piano with a broken key The agreement dissonant orchestra of drunks And day and night are alike In the dim light that pierces the opaque glass me because I'm afraid I'm still under For healthy society we have always been rubbish stinks of piss and sawdust This mental illness and has no cure .... . ... The question marks are crazy sentence without Thousands of spaceships that do not return to base are puppets hung out to dry in the sun I crazy are apostles of a God who does not want them I manufactures polystyrene snow with my condition is that they are left alone Now take a telescope measured ... And look distance between me and you ... who is more dangerous? ... not like the medical records crammed in the last Of all my memories to fade ... ****************
analyzing words, we understand how the singer should describe the role that the fool in our society and how it looks in the eyes of others, and wants to show us how once again that only fools have understood the true meaning of the masculine noun "love". For centuries the word of the insane or was not accepted or understood and was regarded as a source of truth, sometimes ignored and dropped into silence, and for this he can tell us something profound truth about man, can show himself as a "prodigious reserve area. " Foucault through his research has sought to understand how the mad were approved, rejected and excluded from society because the madness in society was and is still a form of separation between individuals arising from a basic cultural attitude ; worked in liberating the insane from an identification given by common sense and medicine and the institutions involved at a later time to justify and explain the effects of this opposition. Foucault examined and analyzed the methods and institutions that classify as crazy as this, investigating the specific institutions mandated to contain the madness that represent the emergence of a new form of the edge of unreason ( Deraison ) or mental hospitals. Today this "word" puts us in ambush, and the role of the doctor give ear to the word of maintaining a neutral break.
The crowds since the different periods has had various assignments, the ancient Greeks considered two meanings of the concept neutral: in the first sense was a form of insanity due to human weakness, while the second was considered of divine origin and was in a frenzy of enthusiasm or inspiration, often in classical Greek literature, the crowd was determined by the divinity, or ecstatic possession punishment for crimes or sins, his figure in the Middle Ages was seen in the many stunts and carnival folk electing a witness to a truth hidden and unacceptable, and the crowd was interpreted as the result of possession of a magical origin, astrology, love, or demonic. Humanism was looking at the crowd through an eccentric look and detector to turn to in search of a sense of things. The study of human mental illness reached its zenith in the twentieth century psychiatry and the insanity of the last century, attributed to a machine more efficient, not more integrated in its environment, no longer able to create social and economic values. Today, the situation of institutions where people live has changed Codest and Garfunkel the singer describes his experience through the centers visited and contrasted the current situation in the former asylum centers, saying that these structures in the lives of patients: "They are especially important because they are accepted, they have a chance to socialize and to undertake the normal range. In the cases I've seen, for example, people have their own room where they can put their personal belongings: it will seem trivial, but this is a way to recover their dignity and identity, when compared to the depersonalization of which they were victims in the old asylums. So how can you give them, through therapeutic activities and rehabilitation, to find means to communicate their experience and mend a broken relationship with the world. Visiting different centers, I realized how art can be useful. Paint or sculpt it enables them to form a pure, natural, in a mood they are experiencing at that moment. " Is there a different aspect of art that Cristicchi wanted to highlight: the contiguity between the artistic sensibility and that of someone who is mentally disturbed, which emerges from the meeting had kerosene with Alda Merino, one of the greatest Italian poets contemporary, recently deceased, who spent long periods of his life in an asylum. "I had read his works and I had a reverence for him. It 's a person who has a great charisma and at the same time, it has a great culture. When he speaks of giving you big emotions. Of course you realize that listening has a sensitivity that we "normal" will never know! And above all, listening to understand that is not crazy. " Finally the other side of the psychiatric centers, experience of those who work there in there, "people to be able to emotionally cope with such complex situations have been put on a kind of armor. But despite this, all share a tremendous passion for what they do. "
One of the most fascinating books of Michel Foucault is the ordre du discours , "The Order of Discourse", read by himself at the Collège de France in December 1970. Foucault explains his method, work projects, the scope of its investigation. Above all, examine procedures for inspect, select, organize and distribute the production of speech.
But what is truth in the Sermon?
The Sermon is not a system of signs that refers to something else, but ' practice that systematically form the objects mentioned in ': it is therefore self-sufficient, self-regulating and is not attributable to a cause or a single fund external to it, nor to an empirical or transcendental subject, nor to the economic and socio-historical, nor the spirit of the times. The speech, however, is part of a network of relationships of power that permeates every society: it is a practice that depends on power, but that also generates power. A power that every individual tries to take over, that's how the French linguist defines the speech. The production of speech in any society is controlled, selected and organized through the procedures for exclusion: interdict the partition and then the will to truth .
The interdict : when you do not have the right to say everything, we can not talk at all times, in fact anyone who can not talk about anything, that's why taboo object, ritual circumstances and preferential right of the subject speaking. These are the three types of interdict crossing each other give rise to a more dense grid, for example, now is when it comes to sexuality and politics, as if the speech is apparently linked to the desire and power. But it is not obvious what the desire, but the Speech is what you fight, and the power of that seeks to take possession.
Partition (right-madness): think of the opposition between reason and madness. In the Middle Ages the word of the crowds was not taken into account, because he had no logical sense, or were attributed to the strange powers, to announce the future, seeing the world with wisdom and ingenuity. But today the word is heard and deciphered the crowds, through institutions (mental hospitals, care homes, psychiatric hospitals, etc. ..) that allow doctors and psychoanalysts to help and listen to their patients. Madness then today is no longer seen as a negative element.
will to truth (true-false) principle of which Foucault devoted himself more. In the sixth century the Greeks believed that the "true discourse" was the one for which there was respect, which had to submit, because it was pronounced by those who ruled, saying the power and which attended and executed. A century later, things began to change, the truth was no longer in what the speech was, but what he said, that is, towards the utterance itself and its meaning. In fact, now is the will to truth and is supported by institutional practices such as teaching, publishing, etc ... by the way in which knowledge is deployed in a company, how it is promoted, distributed and allocated.
Over the centuries, many scholars, philosophers and linguists have tried to understand what the real truth of the discourse, theorising ideas about work, but even today the truth of the Sermon is volatile. The speech becomes our object of desire, the men trying to reach his understanding, his truthfulness, but you can never understand, despite being analyzed, if a speech is true or false, because it fails to give us and make us fully understand its magnitude. One Voice, we know that is real, because it is really spoken by someone, but you can never be sure if the statement is true or false.
Besides these, there are other methods of control and delimitation of discourse, where the speeches tend to control themselves. Are procedures that do not work as principles of classification, sorting and distribution but want to master a dimension of discourse that Foucault calls event and appropriate.
remarks in the society there is a difference between the speeches, those who "say" but do not stay, come when they are laid, and those that remain, that gives rise to new acts, which are ritually transmitted, which vary, which are taken up and cited (as do our cultural system: legal and religious texts, literature, scientific books etc. ...). The comment must be said for the first time what had been said and repeat what had never been detto.Il comment is a discourse that is not born by chance, from a text also says different things, but once again the source text. In comment "... the new is not what is said but in the event of his return."
L 'author : Foucault does not intend to author who writes or reads a text, but' The author 'as a principle of grouping of discourses, as the unit of origin of their meanings'. The function of the author goes beyond what is present and the materiality of those who actually writes a work, depending on the era in Europe, the author has given the status of truth to his work only by virtue of its signature or did not bother to disclose its size, as literary texts of the Middle Ages. The principle of limiting the discussion to his individuality, seeks to give coherence to the infinite possibilities dl language.
Another limitation principle to recognize is the discipline, the organization of the disciplines, however, opposes both the author comments that, for a variety of reasons, not individualizing discipline, is defined by a range of objects and methods, it is repetitive, but instead require new sentences. But not everything is what discipline is about something real. For example in medicine, is not formed everything that can be said of the true disease, a disease that belongs to the first proposition, must meet strict conditions of truth, and have to go through a plan of specific objects (conceptual or technical data, acceptable metaphors). So a sentence before they can say true or false, to belong to a discipline, it must be the truth.
have passed Twenty five years after the death of Foucault, and he had been able to make predictions about the future analysis of their time. Today the procedures of exclusion, no more hesitation, in the sense that they can no longer carry on conversations because of many changes for example just think of the last twenty years with the explosion of the web, now considered the largest mass communication, capable of changing the customs and way of talking about society. With the internet it is impossible to control and organize the speech of every individual who carries on the web. Foucault spoke of individuality, today's mass.
A young boy tells his father: "Papa, 'What is politics?" Dad: "Son, my policy is not a very easy thing to do, but at the same time the way most 'easy to go with when the' trick is to reach its goal, its own self-interest or if you want save his own conscience. " Son:" Yes, but the road difficult or easy way, politics as such, is it? " Dad:" Nowadays politics is first of all corruption, selfishness, indifference and pride while also it should be honest, 'humility', a sense of duty, absolute dedication, full availability 'in the service of every citizen. " Son:" Papa,' loyalty 'or corruption, indifference, or availability,' you tell me about all this but I want to understand what exactly is meant by the term policy and why now is a thing we always talk on television, radio, newspapers, everywhere and especially what it means to do politics, in short, what is it? Why I'd like to enter this world. " The father:" My son, at first seems easy but I assure you that our company 'is now overwhelmed and disorientated by a number of charlatans, events and campaigns that do nothing but deceive people and this' so the drag in this dirty game, in this vicious circle in which they are completely subverted those principles which should be authentic and universal values \u200b\u200bof an entire country, a club that never closes. "
Foucault, speaking of the speech, said that the production of it has to be selected, controlled and organized through a series of procedures such as exclusion, which prevent the dangers and certainly not reduce the speech mechanism in pure, pure materiality '. In this dialogue is clear, on one hand the desire for a child completely inexperienced and immature to know what it means to political and other the extreme vagueness of the father, who through a series of preambles, allusions, comparisons, is merely evading the question that is posta.Attraverso this conversation as I wanted to show it is not the first case in which there is a tendency to circumvent this kind of talk, indeed are many areas in which it is apply the exclusion principle and policy, together with sexuality ', fits perfectly in these areas. The process of 'exclusion is applied in cases where there is no talk about that person, on that subject, are However, linguistically possible but not in that place and at that moment, in essence it is a NO, there are more then discorsi.La 'clear and known process of elimination is that of' forbidden: you do not have the right to say anything in any circumstance, because the discourse is not simply the result of a desire but also what 'that you fight, is that power which we took possession. Another principle that Foucault considers is the one of the partition, this finds its best expression in follia.Sin times more 'old fool was in fact the one whose speech did not have the same dignity', as important as other forms of speech, because his words were not just rejected uttered, or rather what were the very words' to which the crowd was considered that, but had never met nor heard, words were empty, with no effect, pure noise. Today everything 'does not exist anymore' because the words of a fool are not considered void, if anything, they put fear that you try one way or no.Cio 'although not shown, however,' the old partition is not valid, just think the dense network of institutions in which physicians, psychoanalysts, for example, are able to listen and understand these words to suspect that the principle of partition can 'be applied to different lines and with results that are not the stessi.Poi there are several partitions, which are not only modified but continuous movement, supported by a whole system of institutions that require or reconfirm. If there arises the question of what type of partition that supports our desire 'to know, he came to what is the third and also the most' important point that Foucault takes into account: the will 'of truth. 'By this' refers to our desire' to know or more 'precisely what' that deserves to be known as true. Since the days of ancient Greece in fact, the true discourse, what had to be respected and feared, what we needed to submit was that made by those who had the right 'to do so and to comply with' the ritual richiesto.Col time this willingness 'of truth' did not lie more 'in what' the speech that was or did but in what 'he said finally the truth' step 'then by' act of enunciation enunciation itself, in relation to his own oggetto.Tra Hesiod and Plato, for example , had established a certain partition that had separated the true discourse from the discourse falso.Nel nineteenth century, however, there 'a will' of truth 'which is different for both forms brought into play, both for items covered from that culture classica.Questa willingness 'of truth' drew plans possible objects, which imposes the knowing subject to a certain position, a certain function (see more 'to read, make more' that comment), since the large partition Plato, therefore, the will ' became to know the history of objects to be known, the history of the functions of the knowing subject, the history of capital investment and instrumental knowledge. Today everything has changed, just think of the economic system, economic practices by XVIsecolo onwards have sought to rely, to rationalize on a theory of wealth and production, just think of it as a prescriptive set as the criminal justice system has tried its foundations not only in a theory of law but also in knowing the sociological, psychological and medical, because the very word of the law can not 'be allowed in our society' if not by a discourse of truth '. Because the truth' does not lie more 'in the speech that was or did but in what 'he said, in the wish' to say there is nothing but the desire and willingness potere.La 'of truth' is therefore a machine intended to exclude, which our society 'often ignora.Oggi fact this principle is confirmed by a whole institutional system, such as education, the publishing system, the system of books and not just because you can not 'conceive of the fact that knowledge is reduced to a shelf of books, this principle is also confirmed the way in which knowledge work is shared and valued in a society '. Thus the presence or' absence of a certain type of speech are due to the result of a community of interest 'and not the' exclusion or saying partizione.Concludo that, I believe that the structures and linguistic practices are an unattainable limit and make possible the 'anarchy more than they can do any other structure sociale.Secondo my point of view, each institution must always go to work across languages, as the potential 'language is incomparably more' high than any other.
the order of discourse, "the methodological principles"
L ' discourse analysis aims to show the order, and never simple but always unique and differentiated mobile, which oversees the production of discourse, the objects they generate, the subject positions that are involved. It is aimed at investigating the function of speech and not the structure itself and not even considered for the identification of speech in the sense that it would be concealed. But most will leave the possibility speech by all instances of that control and regulate it direction according to the criterion of the will to truth, excluding those speeches that in some way disturb the established order, destabilize the instances of power that organize a distance. Is not just the texts considered canonical, but also of legal documents, statistical tables, institutional regulations, or the anonymous but powerful speech in which you can recognize the bundle of complex relationships and the possibility of linking different speeches to the demands of power. You can not grasp the meaning and relevance of the analysis of the speech given by Foucault when the melt from its political significance, the spirit emancipation of the restless, the legacy of which he complains. L'Ordre du discours with (1970), Foucault proposes a set of principles which inspire the 'discourse analysis for practical flexible: the reversal, discontinuity, specificity and outer.
Reversal : recognize the positive role traditionally ascribed to the notions of author, work, discipline, will to the truth of instances of control and rarefaction of discourse, the devices regulate the proliferation of discourses second limits, order and measure recognizable.
discontinuity : recognize that beyond the control instances there is a single speech and simple, these repressed, and to which we must return the word, just as there is only one instance of the controlling power in one place and one second order (in this case the reference is critical Marxism, and it is this horizon in the eighties that the analysis of the speech will find wide use in cultural studies).
Specificity : the speech is not a simple reflection of reality but as it is drawn. The type of processing depends on the integration of speech in a certain order or exclusion, regularity or rarity of his appearances in different areas or contiguous.
externality: the analysis is not directed at speech as a mere manifestation of a meaning, a thought to interpret, but proceeds "to its external conditions of possibility".
The research inspired by these four principles articulated in two different perspectives, but among them the critical and genealogy. "On one hand all critical which puts into practice the principle of reversal: to try to identify the forms of exclusion, restriction, African, to show how they developed in response to such needs, as we are modified and moved, which have exercised restraint, in which measures have been circumvented. On the other hand, the whole family which puts into practice the other three principles of how they came through in spite of or with the support of these systems of constraint series of speeches, what was the specific rules of each, and what were their conditions of appearance, growth and change. " The analysis of the discourse seems to offer the finest tools to interpret cultural phenomena linked to the contemporary: the academic specialization and its effects of fragmentation and distortion of cultural diffusion, and the television as a form of production and control instance of popular culture, and cultural identity at the time of globalization, the power relations that underlie the scientific discourse, with particular attention to the emerging new technologies and the renewal of forms of power to control internet.Non new media as it is possible to close the list of cultural studies inspired by Foucault and discourse analysis. But we must also detect the use of a perspective that we might call methodological or reflexive, defined Critical Discourse Analysis.
Foucault's Order of the speech are three great systems of exclusion that affect conversational and communication between individuals: forbidden word, the partition of the madness and the will truth. As the power of speech means that people are trying to take over. In our society there are procedures for exclusion, the most obvious is that interdiction. It is well known that no one has the right to speak at all in any circumstance or context. Foucault, in fact, tends to emphasize the most often taboo as sexuality and politics. There is another principle in our society of exclusion has its roots in the past (from Ancient Greece through the Middle Ages) on social and political exclusion of the mad, almost a partition of madness. For example since the Middle Ages the insane was seen as the possessor a dark and forbidden knowledge, able to see reality more mysterious secrets that hide or religious revelation. Often associated with the figure of the magician and the wise, the fool was he who uttered a speech which did not produce any effect, social or political it was, at the same time, however, his words were attributed strange powers, such as saying a hidden truth or to announce the future, like a mystic oracle unconscious. There was no middle way, the word of the insane or was considered as a "reason more reasonable than that of reasonable people" or falling into the void without being taken into account, making the individual object of scorn and derision by the other members of the community. Just the word of the crowds accomplish this partition where opposing reason and madness, a forerunner of the modern combination of "genius and recklessness." Foucault sounder development of interpretations of madness until the modern concept of mental illness, highlighting the creative force of madness that Western societies have traditionally repressed. The word of the crowds was not taken into account, fell to nothing, rejected just uttered, any talk was not relevant, piece of a mosaic carrier of prejudice and hypocrisy. A crowd was recognized or labeled as such through his words, they were the place where it makes the partition, but as I said they had never met nor heard. The words of the crowds were the manifestation of his madness, the place in which you reach the partition between the sensible el'insensatezza. Even today, for Foucault, there are mechanisms of partition, but they are operated on the basis of new institutions, with new effects. The crowds will listen and decipher through a network of psychologists, psychoanalysts, physicians 'reinforcement of learning' until recently sanctioned in places such as psychiatric hospitals. The procedures for exclusion were already in the Greek poets of the sixth century, was highlighted as the true discourse, one for which there was respect and fear, that which had to submit, was that speech from those who could. In our society still exists this form of repression, where not everyone has the right to speak, where even today the speech should be spoken by those in law, who has power, who "reigns", even if you want to believe that right there is, in this regard Foucault in the order of discourse is the old principle greek: arithmetic may well relate to the democratic city, as it teaches the relationship of equality, but only the geometry should be taught in oligarchies, because it shows the proportions in the inequality. What matters, therefore, is how the company promotes, distributes and allocates the power to know why the word is. Today we also have expanded the number of people speaking, to have increased the number of speeches, it has expanded the freedom of having moved the boundaries of control and exclusion, the mad are no longer isolated, but their folly can "speak" personally expressing his elementary truth, the madness or reduces man to his primitive desires and its simpler mechanisms, and at the same time, a true end of man, as he shows how far they can push the passions and the life of society.
ADDRESS THE TRUE OF FOUCAULT.La truth exist? In order to read the speech of Michel Foucault (French philosopher born in 1926) I focused on the theme of banned, that is the fact that you can talk about whatever you want and in any event. The fact speech production is controlled, selected, distributed through procedures that are intended to remove the powers and dangers, and these are precisely the banned procedures. Among the major systems of exclusion that affect the speech, including the banned word, the partition of madness and truth against falsehood (partition historic in terms of our desire for truth and knowledge), is it struck me the most. The question of truth is something very difficult to define, but one thing is sure that today as in the past, it is almost always a truth veiled facade. Foucault was very influenced mainly by the works of Heidegger and Nietzesche, so I want to remember what they thought about that. The problem of truth through all the thought of Nietzesche last phase of his thought is a particularly tough, nihilistic, "the truth might be a quixotic, a little quirky eccentricity, but also something far more dangerous, a principle hostile to life, an occult will to die. " Even Heidegger took the essence of truth," if we were, maybe there is such thing as absolute truth, absolute essence. But we are men, and we have a truth among men. Accessible to people " . Foucault speaks of will to truth, that meets the standards of truthfulness, it puts the viewer from a perspective that meets certain parts of truth, "The true discourse can not recognize the will to truth through it trying to that will not mask the truth. " Looking back in history one can not remember how the truth has been manipulated, especially during Nazism and fascism, as the media are monopolized, often censored by force to make sure that penetrate into the head of the population "their truth", that is the will to truth of which Foucault speaks. This does not mean that now is not the same, in fact what we feel, are rivers of words each time different and often contradictory. Looking back on all the talk that every day we hear a small part is true, or better, likely because it is so, the plain truth is risky to say, we must make it acceptable velarla. We must not delude ourselves, thinking of living in the whole truth, that everything we see, hear, read pure and simple truth. Take, for example in reality, they are a sort of glass case, where everyone and everything is watched around the clock, but what we see is truth? "In reality we must be careful about what transpires, we have to maintain their sense critical, because what we know for sure is that what we see is reality, as the name suggests, is a reality because the people who are in it are real, they live in there in real time and space, but we're not sure what say, think or do is true or if it's all a hype .. If truth exists everywhere you are never sure, but what man can do is be confident in themselves and believe in what he thinks.
ENJOYMENT OF THE TEXT: THE LANGUAGE AS CAMEL, THE LION AND CHILD
"The text must give proof of his desire the reader. The writing is the science of the pleasures of language: its kamasutra"
According to Roland Barthes's hedonism text must be claimed against the intelligentsia: "It's the old myth of the reactionary heart against the head, the feeling against the reasoning." The task of the artist, Debussy said, is to try humbly to please, as Oscar Wilde says, "the artist who creates beautiful things."
The text must then seduce the reader. You configure the preference here, by Barthes, the Dionysian nietzscheiano than reason. Nietzsche attributed to Euripides in fact guilty of having eliminated the tragedy, and then art, the Dionysian element in favor of moral values \u200b\u200band intellectualising; criticized Socrates and his mad presumption to dominate their lives by reason, because "the rationality at any cost is a disease. "
Dionysus was the god of the exaltation of the vital values, irrationality, passion, and then of artistic creativity.
Barthes distinguishes between two types of pleasure of the text: the pleasure (what, coming from the culture, satisfaction and fulfillment) and enjoyment, which could be regarded as the appeal to a higher grade, emotional pathos led to its excess. The enjoyment entail major changes, a lack, a sadness, because in it the subject (reader-scittore) loses the consistency of his ego: "the spirit of the text is its willingness to enjoyment." In this design resembles that of the enjoyment of the Kantian sublime, catteristico of a beauty so intense and overwhelming, to cause together two contrasting feelings such as repulsion and attraction.
The enjoyment derived is an expression of his instincts, and has an anti-social nature.
The criticism focuses more on the texts of pleasure and never on those of enjoyment, because the pleasure is unutterable, the enjoyment is indescribable, the latter can not be judged as right or wrong, because it goes beyond the text itself. Send a text of pleasure is impossible, intractable and far removed from any criticism, so you can not argue about such a text but only in it. "The pleasure of the text can not be any argument. Not being able to say, the pleasure is in being put on a general explained the reasons, none of which can be definitive." It is therefore so seeker free and unpredictable, which is outside the control of its own creator. Hence the failure establish a science of pleasure as a critical principle.
language, since part of the doxa, human nature, would inevitably be contaminated by social life and for this topic.
Unlike the text (provided it is not a meta-language) is atopic, neutral, at least in its production, precisely because it is free from any political or moral standard and is a sort of super sociolinguistic, Barthes defines the perverse enjoyment of text is necessarily as perverse "enjoyment no one can bring in a mass culture." The subject of eroticism also see the destruction of culture and revels in his downfall.
However, it is decreed the foreclosure of the pleasure of the text, in favor of cultural conformity, or the rationalist critique of the signifier. But the pleasure of art, being free from any moral cultural, political or religious, must be justified before it, as it is pure, counts with the innocence of becoming, beyond good and evil. "Look at the good and righteous! Who they hate more? He who breaks their tables of values, he who violates that swoon, but this is the one who creates." (Nietzsche).
Just in the absence of extrinsic reference language text has its maximum Dionysian explosion of pleasure.
But the nihilism of the language in Barthes goes well beyond the extra-references: seeks the destruction of language and the syntactic structures of their fees ... "The writer is the one who plays with the body (language) parent, to glorify, embellish, or quartered, take it to the limit of what, the body can be recognized: there will come to enjoy the disfiguration of language and the public cry scandal. "
Devoid of any causality or purpose (even that of pleasure), which could be an obstacle to the affirmation of self, enjoyment becomes the textual evidence of the crisis and the death of the traditional language.
E 'to the point where it was born from the ashes of "a new state of matter philosopher's language," which is no longer a language, but the language: the language of the enjoyment that goes beyond the language of the text and the reader, when he takes pleasure is comparable to an anti-hero who creates a new sense of the literature.
According to Saussure, language is a sign consisting of the arbitrary correspondence between signifier and signified, and this may be true in the language as a social tool, but not in the text, which is atopic, and his enjoyment is not dependent on its meaning content (since it is pulverized with the collapse of certainties), but the sensuality of significance. For Barthes, the two terms are presented as synonyms: the enjoyment and meaning and the significance and enjoyment, which exceeds the value of meaning.
"The meaning is a stone in his mouth to the signifier" (Jacques Lacan)
According to Barthes the most perverse of the readings is tragic: "I feel pleasure to be told a story that you already know the end," because the real enjoyment in the tragedy lies not in the ephemeral epistemic satisfaction, but in the emotion of reliving the dissolution of history.
"Alas, there will come a time when most men do not hurl the dart of his desire beyond human
and the string of his bow will have unlearned to vibrate"
In "The order of discourse", text of inaugural lecture at the Collège de France viewed 2 December 1970, Michel Foucault acknowledges in his speech a material reality pervaded by considering the powers and dangers that can not grasp it instinctively. The Foucault's thesis makes explicit control mechanisms, selection, organization and distribution of speech production in every society. This is done through certain procedures that weakened the materiality of discourse and which relate to the desire and power.
Among the procedures except the first is Interdict. taboo rituals, the right to speak or not something exclusive to expose a subject: these are the types of prohibited speech not that make the accessible to anyone anywhere. This is because the speech is not only a manifestation (or denial) of a desire, but it is an element of struggle in the play of opposing forces, or in the dynamics of power. Itself is a power (examples posed by Foucault: Regions of sexuality and politics). Another procedure is the exclusion partition and / or rejection of the insanity. "It 's interesting to note that for centuries in Europe or the word of the crowds was not intended, or if it was, was heard as a word of truth" (p. 11). Even today, for Foucault, there are mechanisms of partition, but they are operated on the basis of new institutions, with new effects.
A third level is that the true against false. true and false concepts are contingent on history, always in motion, supported by institutions that also use coercion to impose the "truth" acceptable. It is not in the level of the proposition which Foucault situates the partition true / false, but on a larger scale, one that considers the will of truth men over the course of history. Historically, for example, Foucault cites the sixth-century Greece, where the speech was true if it was pronounced by the authority empowered according to a canonical ritualization, a century after the speech was true based on what he actually said. E 'the desire to know what changes, and that puts the viewer from a perspective that must meet the standards of veracity. Speaking of "our" society, Foucault says, ".. This will to truth, like other systems of exclusion, based on institutional support: it is reinforced and reconfirmed together, everything from a thickness of practices such as pedagogy, of course, as the system of books .. " (p. 15). What matters, therefore, is how the company promotes, distributes and allocates the knowledge (and truth). The discourse of truth, the will to truth, institutionally sanctioned, press on the other speeches because of the word power. In summary
Foucault believes that in every society the production of discourse is controlled, selected and organized so as to avert the dangers and powers. Reflecting on, we will soon realize that this same discourse can be true even within a company, a bit 'particular: the family. Basically it is nothing but a "small company" that seeks to ensure the harmonious development of its members. Like any company, consists of a small group of people with some specific characteristics, it is (or should be):
• The primary site of growth and education (healthy growth and responsible)
• The place of loving relationships and modes of communication
• The place of social mediation of the individual against the broader social community.
But often the family does not correspond exactly to this description. In particular, the reflection sull'interdetto that Foucault talks about, you can find full consistency with reference to an ancient phenomenon that only recently came out of the shadows: the violence in the family.
daily dramas are consumed in the silence of the home. Walls should wrap our intimacy in an emotional hug and reassurance that protects from any external threat. It happens, however, more often than you might think, what the hell are hiding within these walls. family violence is certainly a phenomenon that has long been omitted with the complicity of cultural traditions or, more precisely, the inequality of "biological" gender subordination which places the woman in relation to man. We are talking about a patriarchal culture that survives in this denying women full independence. So much so that even today some "masters men" do not accept that his girlfriend, wife or both, cut the laces of their power and control. In short, freedom of women is considered an unbearable insult. A wound that debases and triggers the spring of aggression.
The perpetrators of these abuses are not necessarily drug addicts, alcoholics or marginalized, and it would probably be easier to allocate cases to the context of mental health problems, but the truth is that in most cases, these patients in that category of people "for good", to which one places trust, sometimes by brilliant career and with their respective roles in society. Well kind gentle, wise and educated, in words that certainly condemn the violence. Yet when you consider it legitimate raging with fury uncontrolled for trivial reasons and the wife, partner or former partner. Maybe with children are also victims or spectators. is not easy to escape from this spiral of violence that breaks the woman's personality and makes it sink in a daily painful and traumatic. Many victims, in fact, instead of taking the reins of their lives, trapped in this web, maybe self-blame.
Fear is the first reaction to this type of problem. The fear of not being understood or even believed to lead women to withdraw into themselves. Do not forget that for a long time, women have not found the courage to come out for harassment on these because of that burden of "feminine virtues" that were attributed to the fairer sex as the "natural" carrying capacity. So the specter of shame and guilt continues to hover in the female world that is released by the male. Then, a few found the strength to speak out against these tragedies, and when they do, in very few cases we arrive at a condemnation of the violence. Not to mention the fact that, if the woman does not have an adequate system of protection around him, the complaint may trigger a rise in attacks endangering his life. then, "download" the companion is not easy. So much so that victims who go in their centers were born to be helpful, although the subject of repeated harassment, there are rarely with a suitcase, and nearly all have the effect of psychological balance really crushed that hampers their ability to see possible solutions.
is why most of their only chance to see how the long path of suffering and silent or, in the words of Foucault, the ground Interdict.
... I'm trying, day and night do not ever rest my limbs, I'm trying to find the "book books ", the total book that collects all of this building the other infinite, but can not find it, at least until now my search is proving futile, but I opened it, peeled, read hundreds of books, thousands of words or nonsense; letters that followed one another without any logical order, full pages of items, some of commas ... Brancolo sun still in the dark .... "
The Library of Babel: romance, yes, but with aspects of reality. For Borges, the library is a place where they are enclosed in hexagonal rooms all possible books of 410 pages in an "orderly chaos. Fantastic story yes, but philosophically important: the eternal return. In its infinity, the library always has a return to the origin. The books are stored in this library of 410 pages with a finite sequence of characters. In the books there is a constant repetition. The eternal return is a closed loop in which the universe is reborn according to the cycles of time and repeats eternally its course, while remaining himself. Nietzsche before Borges: "[...] in a finite system with an infinite time, any combination can be repeated many times [...]"
This library, then, may not have counterparts in Reality: repetition, lies and truth are together, there is no uniformity in the bottom, then the books have no valid information.
And instead, there is the Library of Babel: a database in which all knowledge is contained and explained. Internet, the greatest means of mass communication, easy to use. All you need is a computer and a network to navigate in this sea world without leaving their desk. The links are based on statistical criteria of availability and not on those criteria so as to be completely deterministic often considered to be more chaotic, on the other hand, processes are distributed rather than centralized. Many nodes are connected together in different ways and through different path . This type of connection can be understood in light of the reasons that in sixties dictated the birth of the Internet (then called ARPANET ): create a network of decentralized computers that could withstand a nuclear attack on the part of ' Soviet Union . A decentralized network that would survive many attacks since the structure of communication is organized at different levels According to this structure, TCP occupies the upper level than IP. Above and below these two protocols will work for others, and others are placed at their own level.
Richard Matthew Stallman gives a meaningful definition of the World Wide Web: " The World Wide Web has the potential to develop into a ' encyclopedia universal covering all fields of knowledge and a comprehensive library of courses for the training. " And the main point is this, the World Wide Web is like a veritable encyclopaedia of public access that resides in a large library that is the internet. A library is easy to move when ordered to find what is most useful to our lives. From culture to fun at one time click: every word is found, any field of knowledge is discussed and explained, there is no danger of getting lost in this sea, and the navigator, a novel Ulysses, also can travel to faraway places , visit ancient sites and then return. The developing world is in the hands of a computer network that allows us to do incredible things and wonder if Borges would have enjoyed surfing the Internet, or if you would feel a sense of anguish to browse this Book sand with incalculable number of pages, where it is not easy to find neither the first nor the last ...
Reflecting well on the essay Roland Barthes, "Le plaisir du texte of 1973, I would compare to the" pleasure of the text "the joy of music: the pleasure we experience in listening to a song is the same that you feel when you read a book, a story, a story. Music also stimulates the brain regions that regulate feelings of pleasure as euphoric sexual excitement or the thrill of pleasure. Barthes in his essay, he compares "the pleasure of the text with" carnal pleasure "according to the philosopher writing can be approached to the Kama Sutra text. It is the science of the pleasures of language, a set of practices. The writing generates text, considered as examples of " ars erotica", because they wish to try the reader must ensure that the reader, to read a text, a song, a poem, try pleasure. For Barthes a text is read with pleasure if it was written in pleasure. The role of the writer is this: to write, if only because he feels like, in order that he is in the pleasure of writing to enhance the pleasure of the reader. A goal is not easy to hit, because even a written text in pleasure, can not send anything to the reader (the pleasure is very subjective). The reader goes task of seeking pleasure in a text creandosi " space of enjoyment." the contrary, if the text is boring we tend to say that it was written out of any enjoyment. It will be a text that stutters, as if the writer, writing, had made a speech to infants (one of the reasons why a simple text stutters about the need to write the writer).
We have mentioned the comparison between the "pleasure of the text with" carnal pleasure. " Barthes calls "the most erotic part of the body, is not that where the suit is unfolding?". What does it mean? tells us that the pleasure we are given by the 'intermittently. If the body can enjoy, for example, when we are faced with an 'appearance-disappearance, when we see that the skin that shines between two leaders, as one of the gloves and the sleeve, between the shirt and pants, etc.. (I see / I do not see). In the case of the text wants to tell the reader feels pleasure when a text skip descriptions, considerations, explanations, as if trying to speed up a strip-tease, to get to see the sex of the dancer is like abolishing the suspense narrative is that it makes us feel with my heart in my throat and pushes us to read a book until the end to know how the story ends. Yet this is precisely what gives us the pleasure of reading a text: the number of scratches that the reader does.
Returning to the comparison I want to expose, we can say that the "comparison-relation" that exists between the writer and the reader, may be there between the artist and the listener. The music can create in us pleasure, can get bored, can be heard with little attention or what Barthes, as regards the text, called " suspense fiction", for example, this can happen when you listen to a new song, and it creates excitement because we are in a sense, will be curious to know how the chorus, or the second stanza, or the end of that particular song.
What they do not coincide between reading a text and listen to a song, regards to skip some parts. It is unlikely that we can skip parts of a song, unless we fail to listen because we are too distracted or bored because the song there. We think in this case the "text stuttering" proposed by Barthes to readers: a song can get bored, so it encourages us to listen carefully to the lyrics and the music of the song. We will say then that he can "babble", probably because the artist who did not write it consists in pleasure. A song that gives us pleasure excites us, makes us relive the beautiful moments of our lives as if we were immersed in a dream. is as if, while listening to that song, we entered into an unreal world, where nothing makes us feel bad, we can only "then" say that we are surrounded by the deepest pleasure. The music, like pleasure, satisfaction, and euphoria, and satisfaction.
also Barthes, in "The pleasure of the text, makes a distinction between pleasure and enjoyment. The enjoyment is lacking, it is a loss, disturbs the reader who loses consistency of its "I". Thinking back to music in all its forms, the enjoyment is the same which comes from dance while dancing one "unifies" so much that you quit, as is often said, by " normal limits." The dance can thus be linked to the enjoyment with it because you lose the consistency of his own "I". In this case, specify that the relationship is between music and the dancer (or dancers), not more of the artist 'el' listener.
Finally, Barthes considers the text of pleasure as a speakable text, unlike the text of enjoyment defined, as well as text unspeakable, unbearable and impossible text. In fact, you can move on the first criticism, but the second can not be discussed.
Reflecting on the folly means reflect on the notion of identity, how we perceive things, on what is the reality. Madness is not just discomfort or illness: with its categories, it provokes and challenges our worldview. To say that what true madness is quite an arduous task, yet many have tried to give a valid meaning and the term. In the past and present, the madness has manifested itself in many of its small ways: through the genius scientists, the verses of poets, the melodies of the musicians, the bright colors on the canvas of the artists, the rash of powerful.
But today the term "madness" has a more common simply to indicate who rebels against the order of social life to give vent to the passions, feelings, instinct, the pure irrationality. This term is entered then become part of everyday language and can no longer be kept out of the real world as a manifestation of diversity, as an enemy that threatens the identity of ognuno.Dalla reality of today can be seen as the ' Man is born from the encounter between truth and madness, and how the world runs tirelessly to something that is not moved by the unbridled desire for power, conquest and victory.
"From the depths of the Middle Ages the insane is he whose speech may not operate as that of others, understood that his word is considered as null and void, having neither truth nor importance ... (" From 'order of discourse " )
With these words, spoken in 1970 at the College de France, Foucault explained one of the procedures' s exclusion of discourse: the partage (partition and rejection of the insanity) or the opposition between reason and madness.
"It 's interesting to note that for centuries in Europe or the word of the crowds was not intended, or if it was, was heard as a word of truth. '(' From 'order of discourse ").
The words of the crowds were, and are the manifestation of his madness, the place in which you reach the partition between the sensible el'insensatezza. Even today, for Foucault, there are mechanisms of partition, but they are operated on the basis of new institutions, with new effects. The crowds will listen and decipher through a network of psychologists, psychoanalysts and doctors ("armor of knowledge") sanctioned in places such as psychiatric hospitals. Michel Foucault, who was born in 1926 in Poitiers, he studied philosophy and psychology at the Ecole Normale Superieure Paris. He then worked at French cultural institutes and in 1970 he was appointed professor of the history of systems of thought at the Collège de France. He died in Paris in 1984. The interest of Foucault, in principle, focus on epistemology: the problem is to identify the historical conditions under which the disease and madness have been set up as objects of science, giving rise to psychopathology and clinical medicine, closely related to the construction of indoor (the clinic and the asylum), which establishes a relationship of domination between doctor and patient. And these are precisely the issues that Foucault addresses in his first successful works, History of Madness in the Classical (1961) and Birth Clinic (1963). "Madness is the exclusive language - that against the code of the tongue pronounced words without meaning (the" senseless ", the" imbeciles, "the" insane "), or speak words that sanctify (the" violent ", the "furious"), or what passes banned meanings (the "libertines", the "stubborn"). The changes are not really produced only with Freud, when the experience of madness has shifted to the final form of the language ban. He then ceased to be errors of language, uttered blasphemy, or meaning intolerable (In this sense, psychoanalysis is really the great removal of disqualifications, as saying Freud himself) appeared as a word that wraps itself up, saying, below what it says, other things of which the same time, the only possible code: esoteric language, if you will, because it retains its language into a word that in the end does not say other things that this implication. must therefore take Freud's work for what it is, it does not discover that the madness has taken over a network of meanings in common with the language every day, thus allowing to talk about the flatness of everyday psychological vocabulary. It displaces the experience European folly to be located in that region dangerous, transgressive always (and therefore still prohibited, but in a particular mode) is that of languages \u200b\u200bthat involve themselves, in their statement stating that the language in which it lay down. Freud did not discover a sense of lost identity; irruptive has interpreted the figure of a signifier that is absolutely not like the others. This thing should have been sufficient to protect his work from all the psychologizing interpretations with which they covered the last fifty years in the name (mocking) of the "human sciences" and their units asexual. "
In this reading, taken from "History of madness in the classical age, "Michel Foucault is concerned with certain features of European history of madness, with particular emphasis on the contribution given by Freud to the problem.
It 'important to understand, all this talk of the Treaty, like the crowd does not deter the individual from himself but gives him a share of a reality that is outside the rules and canons of decency, it is a reality that hides in the depths of the soul is the essence of the spirit.
Roland Barthes, author of "Le plaisir du texte " (title Italianate in "The pleasure of the text"), affirms the existence of a science of the pleasures of language, that is writing, but first it is necessary to reveal a difference between enjoyment and pleasure. Pleasure is a fulfillment, and enjoyment is as a sort of faintness, loss. If you judge a text according to the pleasure, you can not say that it is good or bad, you can not make no criticism and no list, because "for me" is neither subjective nor essistenziale but is Nietzschean. A text is never a dialogue, then there is no risk of possible attacks, blackmail, it establishes only a kind of island, displays the asocial nature of pleasure and enjoyment of the shocking glimpse of the truth. Behind a text are not passive figures (readers) and active figures (writers), much less a subject and an object. The text has a human form, is a part of our erotic body. It chooses us, we want, through a series of invisible patterns (such as vocabulary, readability, etc.). And communicates to us was a calm and excluded. In the midst of it there is always the author, like his presence and I need his figure. The pleasure is not an element of the text, but it is a drift, that is something revolutionary and asocial that can not be adopted by any community. E ' outrageous as it is atopic, not because it is immoral. The pleasure of the text is outrageous and atopic eczema, is not spoken, a fiction. All the lyrics I write have to want, should give me proof of want, and it is the writing, the science of the pleasures of language, its Kama Sutra. But remember that a French person in two does not read and therefore deprived of reading not only renounces those canons of ideal beauty and perfection expressed by greek and Roman civilization, but especially one devoid of pleasure.
"If it were possible to imagine an aesthetic pleasure of the text, include: writing out loud" (Roland Barthes, The pleasure of the text, p. 65).
"Writing aloud is not expressive scope is not the dramatic inflections, intonations malignant accents complacent, but the grain of the voice, which is a mixture of erotic tone and language, and therefore may be too 'it, like the diction, the field of art: the art of conducting his own body "(p. 65).
Writing aloud is phonological and phonetic but his goal is obviously the language, a text that has a chance to feel the grain of the voice with all the sensuality of consonants and vocali.Bisogna ensure that feel the breath, we see the magnificent movement of the lips in order that the voice and writing is fresh. For Barthes, "the voice, the embodiment of speaking, lies in the articulation of body and speech." The task of heading is to act as an intermediary, from articulation of body and speech. Each report is necessarily love his voice, because there is no science that can exhaust our voice. The grain of the voice is that indefinable quality that makes each item unique because it brings track of the body that produces it, of our lives. The words must be spoken and understood especially, listen, without passing through the ear. ancient rhetoric included a forgotten part: the actio, given the dominant factor in the efficacy of expression of the speaker. Cicero, in the world of Latin, is the greatest theorist of saying. The purpose of oratory, are probate, the delectare and Flectar , for which prefigures the purposes of the research of persuasion and consensus may be, from a social point of view and political agreement as a true instrument of domination, that is, as the technique of manipulation of consensus and persuasion. The rhetoric is two operzioni through the mind and the soul of the audience: to convince (fidem facere ) and move ( animun movere ). In fact, with the probe the speaker tends to prove the truth of his thesis, in short, tends to convince the listener, and the means of communication best suited to perform this action is to adopt a simple style, floor, resigned and discursive. The delectare , however, is designed to delight for which the speaker tends to captivate the listener with aesthetic messages, and then to produce conivolgimento consent. For this reason, the speaker tends to use an ornate, that is rich in figures of speech. With Flectar, Finally, the speaker tends to bend the minds arousing strong emotions in the audience using a style sublime, pathetic, engaging and captivating. In addition, a speaker, in addition to holding these styles and know how to use it appropriately, it must be in possession of a large culture. Cicero was a master in the art of modulating the tone of voice and gestures change, which appeared spontaneous, but that had been studied carefully.
Today the word has an extraordinary importance, we live on words. And in a society like ours, speech production is controlled and selected, of course, what would happen if it was free? To the surface all the unrest barely suppressed anxiety towards what the discourse is in its material reality what delivery, the concern behind this activity to alert the powers and dangers that could hardly imagine, the anxiety in the suspect that could hide a misuse of the word .. wars, battles, rulers, battles ... precisely to avoid such danger will perform the procedures for checking and delimitation of discourse, which today are known as the three great systems of exclusion that affect the speech: the forbidden word, the partition of madness and the will to truth. In the second principle of exclusion, rejection & partition, is tackled a subject that has its roots in the Middle Ages and still today is considered the object study of different disciplines ranging from science to the field of mass media: the crowd
A man shouts: "I am the master of the world, from this moment on, I obey because I have power of life and death ..." Two people listen to what he says; <> application the first <> replies the second.
How do you answer that the man who cries is really crazy? Imagine to continue the dialogue between two people, the answer "he's crazy," could follow such an application <> <> Too often we use the adjective "crazy" for define a reality alien to us, to behave differently from ours, but something tells us that in reality we are not crazy? The folly is now defined as madness, insanity, or as a state of advanced fanaticism. The opposition between reason and madness has always been an object of study, research, criticism, and still remains a fascinating subject & mysterious at the same time, this is because you do not have the opportunity to learn in depth the crowd without being trapped in it. The madness of crowds was recognized through his words, they were the place where it makes the partition, but had never met or heard. In our society you do not have the right to say all we need to take into account the circumstances and content of the speech, because through this we will not only express our thoughts and our desires, but striving for power. This is a truth that we often tend to forget, what would happen if it took power in the word? We find ourselves in an untenable situation, we would be discriminated against and considered a nullity, we would be different, we would be treated just as the treaty was "crazy." How the crowds was recognized, except by the company and internship? On the basis of what criteria are decided on his madness? Within that grid was trapped? From the depths of the Middle Ages was the crazy one who could not to be able to give a speech, not for failure but for the psychological violence that was forced to endure, his word was in fact null and void, without any meaning, deprived of any importance, his word did not exist, but even worse was that it was not recognized no truth, all the talk of the immense crowd was nothing but noise. For centuries in Europe the word of the crowds was granted a strange power, to proclaim the truth hidden, to know the future, and even the great ability to completely naively what the wisdom of others could not see any way. There is therefore an important reversal, the crowd was not one to mock and to be removed, but was the one to fear because his was a word of truth. But despite this, the crowds, in one way or another was not anyone, in both cases his word, once uttered or rejected or struck by a secret reason, did not exist. Time to move towards a radical change in the concept of madness is between the sixteenth and seventeenth century. When, in literature, Cervantes and Shakespeare, shows human beings grappling with new social orders, political, symbolic. Where consent order boundaries become uncertain, jagged, shimmering, the surplus is no longer easily identifiable and classifiable, then it is not ritualized and more controllable. The excess is kind of passion in a world where there is more code friendly. The excess in a world where religion is no longer a shared sacred order. An excess of reason is in a world where reason is detached from the order of ethics. Now, a wild is called to restore order now dissolved: Don Quixote of the cavalry, the Hamlet of the human condition itself: "The world is out of square: that damn fortune to be born to put it back on track." And this is also the time when the advent of modern science opens a different state of subjectivity. Will their science to reduce the madness of illness and create practices of internment and exclusion of all forms of excess. born a different way of seeing the madness, a new "feel" that rejects it and locks up. Born total institutions, which exclude it from everyday life and shared, reduced to silence, and medicalization are trying to get rid of that question puzzling and disturbing, the truth of inaudible that madness seems to put on the human condition. As Foucault pointed out succinctly: "The madness you can not find in the wild. The madness exists only within the company, do not exist outside of the forms of sensibility the island and forms of repulsion that exclude or capture. Thus, one can say that in Middle Ages, then during the Renaissance, madness is on the horizon as a social fact aesthetic or newspaper, then in the seventeenth century., Starting from the inside, the crowd through a period of silence and exclusion. It has lost that aspect of the event, the revelation that he had at the time of Shakespeare and Cervantes (for example, Lady Macbeth begins to tell the truth when it becomes neutral), and becomes a mockery, false. Finally, the twentieth century. takes up the madness, reduces it to a natural phenomenon, linked to the truth of the world [world in the sense of natural-organic and non-human]. From this positivist were to take possession result, first, that any derogatory philanthropy manifested in psychiatry against the crowds, on the other, the great opera that we find in the poetry of Nerval until Artaud, and that is an effort to return experience of madness depth and power of revelation that had been destroyed from within. " These words of Foucault enable us to highlight how the madness is now split into two different representations: one is a classic concept and literary, the other a modern and scientific.
Today, we think the issue is finally closed, that Today we are too far ahead of these ideas have still "primitive." But how do you really reacting? Consider the almost normal insanity? madness and normality are not two situations which exclude each other, there are two opposites between the two because there is always the possibility of moving and in some sense the madness is set to normal. In this sense, psychiatry comes to help and try to explain their internal structures and very complicated. The ego is in between two worlds, a world outside and an inner world, the world outside is what comes from others, not themselves, is the world of experience where there are things in where there are dangers. Here there are also others to whom we feel sympathy or antipathy, often immediate, and there are ties, friends or enemies. In relation to this world we suffer injustices and frustrations you feel. All of the outside world is the social theater, the company also lists us and we pretend that it does what it requires. It must fit in the sense that it must also active in calarvisi. And dive in it's unavoidable, though often this world is not very attractive. the other hand there is the inner world, which is equally if not more complicated than the outer. Here they lived, ideas, resentment, feelings of being misunderstood. Here are the dreams. This is the inner theater, which is also a world of fear without an object. Within it there are unpleasant memories. And a lot of data which we have no awareness that there are an absentee. There are subliminal signals, data that is associated in an unconscious way. But this being marked in an unconscious experience is also present in adults. This is the world which may be the desire to not exist. The inner world is an unknown world within us, but also outside there is largely unknown. And we are caught between two worlds, fragile places between desire and action. It seems as though the crowds is a prisoner, prisoner of himself, and seems to reflect a bit 'all us. Rousseau said "Man is born free and everywhere is in chains."
From 1904 to 1978 for the Italian legislation mad and define who is "dangerous to himself or others and a public scandal." The treatment of the insane provided first and then prevent the danger. But since Freud has also developed the treatment of care through the floor. A word in the statement, that exchanged within the same code. In fact, if the codes are different, as often happens, do not communicate. The word thus in the transference that is a halo, affective communication, which is a total communications system. And it is the affective communication that it is possible to understand the unsaid. In this there is the gesture and gaze, which are common to all intents and purposes, as evidenced by the quiet in which consist of participation in the rituals of "primitive." This report is a cover, which is different from explaining. A bill is in fact explain, understand one another. Understanding means to go-take-with these forms and refer to a form of embrace. Understand, however, above all, involves keeping the piece. While the explanation tends to divide. So when there is transfer the generic word change, just pass the word-link. This is complicated phase where "word" is to communicate, is an element of awareness that we have. L 'absence of this bond is solitude, the solitude of that mass is "being as if it were transparent." There is madness in the long history of psychiatry, that the seventeenth century. is committed to studying and treating the insane. The madness of the big paintings nosographical, manuals of psychopathology, clinical schools of thought. We have the madness in total institutions. And then there's something else. As another folly. The madness of the great literary and drama. The madness of Hamlet, King Lear, Don Quixote. Before the madness of Orlando. Long after the madness of Pirandello's Enrico IV. Among very different, but in any case the same side. On the side of the writing that never ceases to ask. the crowds between the two, then. Between the clinic and the field of art. We could say, madness as you come into an institution dedicated to the care and treatment and the sparkle of madness told by the artistic genius. We then the same object but on two different registers. Now the question is to try to give answers to what that difference. Foucault gives us a first indication about the literature. The madness in literature has a function of revelation, of truth. When the characters of literature are crazy, they are to say or show the truth. A truth which may embody only from that position and that other characters can not occupy. Yet something does not come back. The madness does not tell us only the truth, shows us, painful. What emerges on the side of clinical and institutional practice is far from the madness in his artistic side, philosophical, existential, the madness that can open to the fundamental truths of existence. More often in clinical practice one is faced with people suffering from their condition with devastating effect in the body and in the management of everyday life. It seems then that literature and art in general has to do with the truth that madness can to show, while the clinic has to do with the consequences of this condition. Real consequences that fall within the body, suffering and who need to be addressed. Literature and the clinic seem to look at two different aspects of madness. Our guess is that you may have groped a synoptic approach in the clinical field and bring the question of truth that literature and art in general explore, and on the other hand groped to recognize and deepen their share of suffering and the price the mad pay for his "choice" of freedom, a price that often makes the "freedom" a prison.
not take much to realize that the old partition is still valid. The example of psychiatry shows him exactly. What has changed is the network of institutions, no longer a society of the Middle Ages that criticizes the discourse of the madman, but a society that allows someone to listen to this word, treat it and study it without mercy. The partition otherwise acting today, in different lines and even the effects are different. In reality the problem of insanity, despite the extensive studies conducted over the centuries by scholars and scientists first and then, still remains undefined, a phenomenon contours are unclear, a mystery, like all the most important events of human existence. Perhaps, from this point of view, it should us all a reminder of the past. Give more space in our lives means the madness now, accept that there are people who think differently from us, who see a different world view, means to feel compassion for the suffering, but also to acquire open-mindedness, flexibility, capacity to enter into contact with others and, above all, with the other that lives within us, with our shadow issues that we struggle to accept, because they collide with our routine and functionality of our daily roles. It means to tolerate and encourage dissent. Do not forget that the hardest and authoritarian attitudes towards madness are those adopted in countries with a dictatorial system. Not forget that in the former Soviet Union were detained in a mental hospital all those who expressed their dissent to power. Often it was of great intellectual value, which was given after the Nobel Prize. And the diagnosis of insanity were made by psychiatrists accredited by the international scientific community. As we Basaglia, even Foucault in France, advocated the cause of the closure of mental hospitals, knowing that was not enough to end the lives burned within its walls, silent holocaust consumed in the name of science, to obtain from a review of his relationships with figures of madness and, more generally, of the discomfort. To this we must add that science today is become more demanding, more tank, even cleaner, even if it is more invasive than it was the 'asylum institution. Today the company is to be threatened as a total institution, where too many people, in an effort to better manage their moods, they prefer, the social relationship, the use of the pills daily, until robots become more chemicals to 'height of their performance in the deep silence of their souls. We are good at pointing the finger and say "you're crazy", perhaps we are less able to open our minds and try to understand .. it is obvious that the madness makes us afraid, because we do not know, but this does not have the right to discriminate people and end their lives. We learn from the past, do not make the same mistakes over, because if we did it first in the name of science .. what we do today? In the name of fear? There's a little 'madness in all of us, groped and it is useless to deny it, repress this aspect .. the fear is that it can be treated as he treat him? The crowds? We need to change things, because every word has its importance, has its truth, because it is inconceivable to think that the speech is just noise .. Changing this could change the condition of all .. Because the speech is not simply what is a desire, not only what which translates struggles or systems of domination, but this is why, through which we struggle, is the power of that seeks to capture.
