SPACES AND CLASSES
Foucault opens this chapter with the following:
For us, the human body defines, by natural right,
the space of origin and of distribution of disease: a space whose lines,
volumes, surfaces, and routes are laid down, in accordance with a now familiar
geometry, by the anatomical atlas. But this order of the solid, visible body is
only one way - in all likelihood neither the first, nor the most fundamental -
in which one spatialises disease. There have been, and will be, other
distributions of illness (p. 3).
We can start by asking who is the
us Foucault refers to in the opening? Is it a
royal 'us', i.e. Foucault himself? Is it 'us' as contemporary people reflecting
on our origins? Or is it 'us' as a set of French thinkers and philosophes? The
ambiguity seems deliberate and is part of Foucault's careful construction of his
text. Just as the Preface opened with an image form the past, so this chapter,
the first of the book, opens with a challenge. Foucault appears to be asserting
a space which we inhabit. I think he is referring to 'us' as contemporary
people who see our bodily origins through the lens of a history of the body,
medicine, and above all of medical knowledge.
Foucault starts this chapter with the notion that
the body is a point of origin. Foucault is not afraid to use this sort of
notion which is quite different from how some postmodernists would see it.
There is a debate over the notion of the
originary
which is introduced here although you will find a much
fuller treatment in other sections on postmodernism.
Foucault starts with the observation that our body
is the space in which disease inhabits in the sense that it is here in the body
that we locate disease. We do so through what he terms an anatomical
atlas. The analysis of this atlas will occupy us during this chapter and
also in the next. Again this is typical of Foucault's textual construction to
introduce terms without detailed explanation and then to explore them later. We
have to do our own form of referencing in reading a Foucault text! To explore
this further visit the following page
Anatomical
images
Foucault makes the point that there may be more than
one way by which to consider the 'spatialisation' of disease. But Foucault goes
straight on in the next paragraph to tell us that this will be a
structural analysis when he writes
When will we be able to define the structures that
determine in the secret volume of the body, the course of allergic reactions?
(p. 3) At first glance Foucault seems to be just concerned with how
allergic reactions spread. But his purpose is far more incisive than that. He
begins to question the very term 'geometry' which carries a range of meanings.
Foucault expects us to know that Descartes studies of geometry and other
branches of mathematics were aimed at establishing a form of foundationalism, or
firm basis from which to ground knowledge of human beings. If we do not have
that sort of knowledge then we miss some of the impact of Foucault's text. If
Descartes' ideas are unfamiliar to you a short overview of the key points can be
found at the
Descartes
workspace which will provide you with sufficient knowledge to see how
Foucault is using classical French philosophy.
SPACE AND CONFIGURATION OF DISEASE
Foucault makes the point that to talk of the 'body'
of the disease is not the same thing as to talk of the 'body of the sick
person'. They are often superimposed but that is only an historical accident.
Or rather, as he notes, it is only recently that they have been superimposed and
we need to detach ourselves from this. Those of you who know Talcott Parsons
'Sick Role' essay will know that there the body and the disease are treated as
one. For Foucault it is the period of 19th century medicine that constitutes
the period when the two were brought together.