2 Answers

  1. You see, the choice is not great at all if we are talking about publications in Russian, so you can safely read in any translation (most likely it will be the only one). Finally, there are some disputes and variations, but they do not have a significant impact on the main translations and are unlikely to have any.

  2. Excellent – “The Story of Madness” translated by I. Staf. She also has a review of “Deranged” – http://magazines.russ.ru/oz/2004/6/2004_6_29.html

    (then, plus another review by D. Goloborodko, there are excellent and accurate comments about the translation of the title http://sinijdivan.narod.ru/sd6rez3.htm)

    I can't remember whether A. Dyakov translated anything – if so, then judging by his books “Michel Foucault and his time” and “The Philosophy of Post-Structuralism in France”, you can trust his translations!)

    “To supervise and punish” in the lane of V. Naumova read in the 2nd year – – I can say with confidence that everything is clear there.)

    You should always consider,�

    a) what period of the text, if you roughen it up, is before the 1970s or after – because” after ” large-scale activism and journalistic practices, less related to work in the archives and the academy, left a corresponding imprint on its style. To varying degrees, this applies to both large-scale works and articles-interviews-notes. For example, in the” Archeology of Knowledge “(1969), there are lyrical passages here and there like”… words are wind, external babbling, the sound of wings that barely reach our ears from under the cover of serious history”, then at first it seems that a lover of Russian classical literature translated-but no, the MF really wrote that then! 🙂 A little less lyrical, but of the same kind – the textbook finale of ” Words and Things “(1966) about the fact that “…the person will disappear as the face written on the beach sand disappears.” For texts from the period before the 1970s, this is much more typical.

    b) when the Russian translation was published – for example, the 2002 edition – the first volume of Intellectuals and the Authorities anachronistically throws the word “pederasts” at the reader from the very first article “Madness and Society” (1970), as if not feeling that this almost discredits all the works and efforts of Mt. I checked the original in Dits et écrits, suddenly there are pédés (which in itself is doubtful for the context of the lecture, and not an interview with Gay Pied magazine), but no, there is prosaic homosexuels. (Translated by S. Ofertas under the general editorship of V. Vizgin and B. Skuratov).

    Volume 3-translated by B. Skuratov, under the general editorship of V. Bolshakov (2006).

    –or, for example, the translation of “The History of Sexuality”, published here in 1996 with a commentary and afterword by the translator S. Tabachnikova herself (the presence of such sections seems important and valuable), reading which, first of all, you think about the gigantic work done, and not about the shortcomings of the translation.

    If you are interested in English translations: there is a book by Afary J., Anderson K. (2004) Foucault and the Iranian Revolution: Gender and the Seductions of Islam, which contains in English translation (also compared with the original, it seemed to me very accurate) all the texts of MF reports on the Islamic Revolution and subsequent newspaper polemics (in Russian, one of the reports, “The Revolution of Bare Hands”, is in Volume 2 of “Intellectuals and Power” (2005),-the paradox lies in the superficiality, irrelevance, etc. of the study itself and the authors ' reading of the MF. As for the more popular translations of a small form, such as the Power/Knowledge collections, those who were his students at Berkeley often took part in their work, which is already a certain guarantee of quality.

    By the way, you need to be especially careful and attentive when reading if in a research article written in English, the author makes an analysis of a particular formulation (by” analysis ” we mean both the context and syntactic/grammatical/similar features). It happens that he does not rely on the original text, moreover, in the bibliography often all publications of the MF (and critical articles) are only in English, which, in my opinion, is unacceptable in a serious publication.

Leave a Reply