Scan barcode
sh00's review against another edition
2.0
Как говорит автор - это эссе о методе в плохо структурированной области. Неделя у меня странная - постоянно откуда-то лезут разговоры о методологии, а я, вообще-то, не хотел о ней разговаривать, а хотел найти и прочитать свежепереведённую Сонтаг - как раз о болезнях. А пока она не отыщется - немного освежить понимание вопроса - так уж вышло, что Фуко много писал о здоровье, но всё это ужасно обрывочно, неполно и редко когда последовательно. Последовательность всегда приходилось достраивать самому. Здесь есть пара забавных моментов - о языке медицины (как-нибудь в контексте этого я пошучу о почерке врачей, мол, от цехового языка, понятного только "своим", почти ушли, но зато пришли к цеховым загогулинам) и о неких задатках широко известной круговой поруки.
Очень специфически, чистый структурализм, не могу просто так рекомендовать.
Очень специфически, чистый структурализм, не могу просто так рекомендовать.
muddd's review against another edition
I got about halfway through the book over about 3 weeks. I found extremely difficult to understand on my own; it seems more fitting for the book to be taught over a university semester than read for one's enjoyment.
What I did manage to understand was extremely interesting. I simply do not wish to continue.
What I did manage to understand was extremely interesting. I simply do not wish to continue.
tyler611's review against another edition
3.0
This is one of those books in which it feels like the author is intentionally obscure -- almost in a self-aggrandizing way. To use one of Foucault's favorite (or at least most frequent) criticisms against others (in this text), this book is needlessly prolix; he throws that word around like it's going out of style. Oh, wait.
In it, Foucault examines the emergence of the clinic as a teaching hospital as opposed to a hospital intended solely to cure the sick. If you're going to tackle this work, you're going to need a decent amount of outside reading, knowledge of obscure 17th to 19th century medical practices, a decent latin dictionary, and a rudimentary working knowledge of French (occasionally, when a word in English can have more than one French word that it is translated from, the translator will put the English word, and the original French word in order to clarify... it's helpful to know the meaning of the original French word). If you can't do all that, at least be a Google master.
Plan to spend at least a little time looking up Bichat, Pinel, Sauvages, and a host of other medical figures in order to understand what's happening in this book and why he references these figures.
Real genius would have been to write this book in a less pompous, more straightforward way.
This book isn't a skip in the park. You have been warned.
In it, Foucault examines the emergence of the clinic as a teaching hospital as opposed to a hospital intended solely to cure the sick. If you're going to tackle this work, you're going to need a decent amount of outside reading, knowledge of obscure 17th to 19th century medical practices, a decent latin dictionary, and a rudimentary working knowledge of French (occasionally, when a word in English can have more than one French word that it is translated from, the translator will put the English word, and the original French word in order to clarify... it's helpful to know the meaning of the original French word). If you can't do all that, at least be a Google master.
Plan to spend at least a little time looking up Bichat, Pinel, Sauvages, and a host of other medical figures in order to understand what's happening in this book and why he references these figures.
Real genius would have been to write this book in a less pompous, more straightforward way.
This book isn't a skip in the park. You have been warned.
smallredboy's review against another edition
I thought I would maybe finish this despite only up to the part I read being required for my class... I will not.
tdwightdavis's review against another edition
4.0
Foucault here offers an exploration of the birth of modern medicine in the last eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. What he is really doing seems to be exploring the epistemological change born from modern scientific knowledge, a change where the individual became key in interpreting reality and in which everything is easily and cleanly classified so long as one possesses the proper method of classification. An excellent work of critical history, but a bit too technical and dry in places. Foucault is a beautiful writer, but he can also lapse into sounding like a medical text book when he wants to.
piercer43's review against another edition
5.0
If you think you want to read Discipline and Punish, read this instead.