Why self-writing and the hupomnemata?

In the paragraphs ahead I explain how writing is central to the question of personal blogging. I briefly summarise Michel Foucault’s theories of self-writing and propose how they might be used to develop an understanding of self-creation through personal blogging.

The central question of my thesis is “What is a blog?” It’s a question that asks ‘by what means did the term blog come into existence?’ It also begs a further question: what is a blog, to whom?

The definition of a blog is contingent on the relationship of the to the blog.

A person who has never blogged will define a blog quite differently to someone who is an experienced blogger. Indeed, within the population of bloggers a blog means something different to each actor. For example, someone maintaining a corporate blog might see a blog as a branding tool whereas to a struggling mum there blog might be a creative outlet.

My response to this range of potential definitions is to limit my field of inquiry to ask: what is a blog to those who maintain a personal blog? There is any amount of commentary about business blogging and I have no inclination to add further to the swill of opinion on the matter.

By focussing on the experience of personal blogging – writing, linking, commenting, maintaining – I can potentially unfurl what blogging is as a project of self-creation.

So when I talk about blogging I talk about personal blogging; and by personal blogging I mean a blog that’s written in the first person, that records the everyday and the mundane, that reveals the personal and reflects on the past so as to create meaning in the present.

The subject of a personal blog, then, is the self.

Personal blogs contrast to other forms of blogging where the subject is an Other. The other may be a person or it may be an inanimate object, such as blogs about cars and pets and search engine optimisation.

I recognise, though, the potential for a blog to contain elements of the personal in the guise of – to coin a phrase – an object blog. For example, a blog about a pet may in fact be a blog about the relationship between the pet and the self. And with the contemplation of the self-pet relationship the blog begins to include the primary markers of a personal blog:  the existence of a first person narrative and a significant degree of self-revelation that include descriptions of thoughts, perceptions, emotions and bodily sensations.

It is this self-revelation I want to analyse. To do so I intend using Michel Foucault’s technologies of the self as a toolkit for understanding what is taking place on a personal blog.

Foucault, in Technologies of the Self (1988) and Ethics: subjectivity and truth (1997), outlined a range of means by which individuals took care of the self (epimelésthai sautou) (1988, 19). This care for the self involved various practices (askésis) that “involve the progressive consideration of self, or mastery over oneself…through the acquisition and assimilation of truth…It is a set of practices by which once can acquire, assimilate, and transform truth into a permanent principle of action” (1988, 35).

For Foucault, epimelésthai involved taking definite and purposeful steps; activities directed toward taking care of ones health and well-being (25). The principle activity for the care of the self is for the “soul to know itself”. It is, in Foucault’s view, activity that is important and leads to care of the self, not the more benign attitude of “know thyself” (gnothi sauton) (19).

To take care of oneself, then, involved various ascetic practices. It is here that Foucault found, in Hellenistic culture, the importance of writing as an important technology (tecchné) for living a good life.

Foucault detailed two primary forms of self-writing: the hupomnemata and letters or correspondence.

The hupomnemata were records made primarily as a memory aid. “They constituted a material record of things read, heard, or thought, thus offering them up as a kind of accumulated treasure for subsequent rereading and meditation” (??, 1997). And while the hupomnemata served as a memory aid its more important role is to serve as a “framework” (??) of ascetic practices. Whilst personal in nature, Foucault maintained they do not “constitute a “narrative of oneself”…[their] intent is not to pursue the unspeakable, nor to reveal the hidden, nor to say the unsaid, but on the contrary to capture the already-said, to collect what one has managed to hear or read, and for a purpose that is nothing less than the shaping of the self (??).

And it is this capturing and recording of the said, read and heard that is at the heart of what takes place on a personal blog. But this is no ordinary recording of life. Rather, it is a “subjectivation of discourse” (??), a means by which a blogger draws together disparate life experiences and establishes an identity and a relationship with themselves.

Blogging, however, can be distinguished somewhat from the hupomnemata. Most notably, a blog usually has an audience; and the awareness of an (often unknown) audience makes for a particular style of writing. Foucault noted that both the hupomnemata and correspondence work similarly on the writer. Both are productive of the self.

Whereas the hupomnemata was often a document that served the writer alone, correspondence acted as a “way of manifesting oneself to oneself and to others…[making] the writer “present” to whom he addresses it” (??). Being present to another, then, becomes a way for a writer to place himself or herself in view of the other’s subjectivizing gaze. Correspondence, then, becomes a means by which “one opens oneself to the gaze of others and puts the correspondent in the place of the inner god” (??).  But, in the case of correspondence, the gaze is two-way; the writer and the reader exchange positions as part of the communication process.

And correspondence or letters work at the level of the banal. The writer is “constituting oneself as an “inspector of oneself,” and hence of gauging the common faults, and of reactivating the rules of behavior that one must always bear in mind” (??).

The interplay between the gaze of the other and the gaze of the self as created through the process of correspondence becomes an important development in the art of living (tekhê tou biou).

It is here that I see most value in Foucault’s concept of self-writing. Although the hupomnemata helps us to understand the self-productive nature of some blog post, it is when these are turned over to the gaze of the audience that they become correspondence or letters.  Not only is the writing productive of the self but it also allows the presence of the reader and the writer to be experienced by one another; and that is made particularly so through comments whereby the writer becomes the reader and vice versa.

References

Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the self. In L. Martin, H. Gutman & P. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Press.

Foucault, M. (1997). Self Writing (R. Hurley, Trans.). In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Ethics : subjectivity and truth. New York: New Press.

Heather Armstrong (Dooce), August 2005 :: Rebecca Blood: Bloggers On Blogging: “Some days I feel my website writing itself”.

What I find interesting here is Armstrong’s reference to her website having a life of its own. Such an understanding of a blog is anticipated by Foucault in that he suggests that self-writing isn’t the revealing of the self but in fact the self being expressed.

Self-writing is likened to the digestion of food. It’s all very well to read many books but at some point the bee must return to the hive and turn the pollen into food. Put another way we must stop eating and digest our food (what we read) so that it becomes a part of our soul and serves to shape who we are.

Stultia: A kind of mental agitation which has one jumping from one idea to the next without ever settling. Has a future focus which the hupomnema resists through fixing acquired elements. “The hupomnemata contribute one of the means by which one detaches the soul from concern for the future and redirects it toward contemplation of the past” (Foucault, 1997, p. 212).

The hupomnema is a way to gather together disparate thoughts and ideas and create from these heterogeneous elements one’s own truth.

Unification is achieved through the author digesting what is read and written so that concepts become flesh and blood. They are no longer memory but have changed the soul of the author. (p. 213)

In the hupomnema one does not simply regurgitate what is written – much as I’m doing here – but rather makes it one’s own through reflection. Nevertheless a genealogy is present in that one can see the genesis of one’s identity through the writing in much the same way as one’s ancestors can be known by one’s face. (p. 214)

Thinking about this as it relates to Armstrong we can see her emergence through her blog. The history of her identity is knowable through her writing.

The hupomnema is more in the style of a personal journal or an account book of what is happening in one’s life. Correspondence is something a little different. Both are similar in that they create a reading of what is written. As I’m writing this I’m also reading it (just as when I’m speaking I’m also listening) and this acts as much on me as on the receiver of the communication.

In the process of both teaching and writing we also learn so writing is both benefit to the writer and reader. Which reminds me of the saying “the teacher teaches what he/she needs to learn the most.” No truer is that than it is for me this semester. I’m tutoring in Dreamweaver and have never used the programme. Steep learning curve here I come.

Correspondence is more than an extension of the huomnema, a training of oneself. It’s a way of manifesting ourselves to another, of being present to the reader – almost as if physically present in a face-to-face meeting – and a way of the writer gazing upon the reader through the content of the letter and in turn offering oneself to the gaze of the reader. There exists a reciprocity of both gaze and examination. My, how much fun would Foucault have with the Internet. (p. 216)

An observation. Correspondence works differently to surveillance in that the authoritative gaze goes in one direction and is, at least as understood as a panopticon, internalised. With correspondence though their is a mutual gaze of authority. Power flows in both directions through the internalisation of the mutual gaze. Blogs, or might we say self-publication on the Internet, are much more akin to correspondence in that there exists in the writer an ever-present sense of an other, an audience, whether that audience is intended or otherwise.

Finally, the letter is a way of presenting to another all that can be said about everyday life, a reviewing of one’s everyday life as a form of self-examination. “[I]t is a matter of bringing into congruence the gaze of the other and that gaze which one aims at oneself when one measures one’s everyday actions according to the rules of a technique off living” (p. 221).

Armstrong’s blog contains much of the banality anticipated by Foucault’s concept of the letter. Nappies, bowel movements, drinking, drugs all form part of the complete (almost) revelation of the self to the gaze of botht the self and the other. Over the longer term we can see evidence of the reconcilliation of gazes to which Foucault refers wherein Armstrong writes about matters that were, up until the point of writing, previously unknown by the readers – her family and her supervisors. Through the process of her writing she came to be seen in a congruent manner by both herself and her readers.

Foucault, M. (1997). Self writing. In P. Rabinow (Ed.), Ethics: subjectivity and truth. New York: The New Press.

It’s fascinating to see that Ellen Simonetti appears to be going through something of an identity crisis. She’s changed the name of her blog to Diary of a Human Being. I find it interesting because it plays to much of what I’m reading in Technologies of the Self. I note that she claims to be self-censoring the interesting stuff out of her posts and yet she persists in creating a self through her writing.

Michel Foucault (1998): “This contact between the technologies of domination of others and those of the self I call governmentality” (p. 19).

In ToS Foucault was more interested in the latter.The Greeks believed it was important to take care of oneself but this was replaced by the now more common concept of know thyself. But in ancient times knowing oneself came out of taking care of oneself. This has occurred possibly due to the Christian idea of self renunciation being essential for salvation. We are also conditioned to accept external rules as the basis of morality rather than something internal. Additionally, since Descartes, self-knowledge is important for the development of the thinking subject.

Epimelesthai: An activity that involves taking care of ones health and wealth. “Taking pains with oneself” (p. 25). What is the self to which Alcibiades was to be concerned? The question really becomes, rather than “what is the self?”, “what is the plateau on which the self might be found?”. When we take care of the body we don’t take care of the self. It’s taking care of the activity of taking care of the soul that is care of the self. (p. 25) How can we take care of the soul? First, we must know what it is by looking into a mirror. We must contemplate the divine element of the soul which will then give us the right rules for action. Writing was seen in ancient Greece as an important technique of taking care of the self.

“Taking care of oneself became linked to constant writing activity. The self is something to write about, a theme or object (subject) of writing activity. This is not a modern trait born of the Reformation or of romanticism; it is one of the most ancient Western traditions. It was well established and deeply rotted when Augustine started his Confessions” (p. 27).

This style of writing marked a shift to a new experience of self that involved introspection. Writing and vigilance were connected. A new range of experiences were opened up as a result. 

Anachoresis: As in the retreat of an army, a retreat into oneself, a spiritual retreat, a retiring into the self to uncover, not faults but to “remember rules of action, the main laws of behavior” (p. 34). 

Askesis: A Stoic technique, “not a disclosure of the secret self but a remembering” (p. 35).

Stoics believed the truth was in the logoi, the “teaching of the teachers”. You remember what you hear and convert that into rules of conduct and a subjectivity based on this truth. It’s not a renunciation of the self or of reality but a progressive working on oneself through the “acquisition and assimilation of truth” and allows one to access the reality of this world rather than some future reality (p. 35).

Truth is tested by melete (meditation), a form of remembering certain truths and arguments so as to have them available during (real or imagained) dialogue and gymnasia (testing oneself through bodily training).

Christianity is both a salvation and confessional religion. One must believe certain truths and dogma and show that you believe them and accept institutional authority. (p. 40) Individuals must know who they are so they can confess their sins and weaknesses to God or another. 

Exemologesis: The public recognition of the fact of ones Christianity and faith, the recognising oneself as a sinner seeking penitence. (p. 41) “The acts by which he punishes himself are indistinguishable from the acts by which he reveals himself.” Exemologesis “rubs out the sin and yet reveals the sinner” (p. 42). The thinking behind this revealing behaviour is the appeasement of the judges by being contrite and the way a person should face martyrdom before relinquishing his faith. “The theories and practices of penance were elaborated around the problem of the man who prefers to die rather than to compromise or abandon the faith. The way the martyr faces death is the model for the penitent. For the relapsed to be integrated into the church, he must expose himself voluntarily to ritual martyrdom” (p. 43).

*Interesting aside here in relation to Armstrong who had a similar defiance after being fired. It appears that her ritual martyrdom may have been performed in an attempt to be (re)-integrated back into the folds of the secular church (main-stream society); and we could analyse her pre-dismissal interview with her immediate manager as a way of being offered penance but accepting the offer. A bit speculative possibly but worth considering.*

“Penance is the affect of change, of rupture with self, past, and world. It’s a way to sho that you are able to renounce life and self, to show that you can face and accept death. Penitence of sin doesn’t have as its target the establishing of an identity but serves instead to mark the refusal of the self., the breaking away from the self: Ego non sum, ego…It represents a break with one’s past identity. These ostentatious gestures have the function of showing the truth of the state of being of the sinner. Self-revelation is at the same time self-destruction” (p. 43).

Exemolgesis is not verbal but, rather, ritual and symbolic and the truth about the self is imposed by violent dissociation and rupture, whereas in the Stoic techne self-knowledge is achieved through memorising rules.  

Exagoreusis (p. 42-49): a Christian tradition based on obedience and contemplation; a continual verbalisation of thoughts to the master; all aspects of ones life is addressed in this techne; attempts to still the consciousness through awareness of thoughts that lead to, or away from, God. We must be like the miller who sorts the good grains from the bad or the money changer who examines and weighs coins to determine their value. The way to know if a thought is “good or “bad” is to tell all to a master, a “permanent verbalization of our thoughts” (p. 47);

“By telling himself not only his thoughts but also the smallest movements of consciousness, his intentions, the monk stands in a hermeneutic reations not onlyy to the master but to himself” (p. 47).

*Armstrong may have performed a similar act through creating her readers as a master and continually expressing her inner thoughts on her blog to her reader-masters and therefore being guided to the “right” answer. It appears that Penelope Trunk is on a similar path.* Everything that can’t be expressed becomes a sin and therefore the techne relies on a vigorous and all-encompassing confession.

The common theme between exomologesis and exagoreusis is that one “cannot disclose without renouncing” (p. 48). In the latter the permanent disclosure of self and permanent obedience to master renounces the self but it is possible to use this constant verbalisation of the self as a means to create a new self. *Which is what I contend was Armstrong’s project.*

Foucault, M. (1988). Technologies of the Self. In L. Martin, H. Gutman & P. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Press.

In Technologies of the Self Foucault states:

“[In ancient Greece] it was generally acknowledged that it was good to be reflective, at least briefly…Writing was also important in the culture of taking care of oneself. One of the main features of taking care involved taking notes on oneself to be reread, …and keeping notebooks in order to reactivate for oneself the truths one needed. Socrates’ letters are an example of this self-exercise” (p. 27).

Foucault continues:

“Taking care of oneself became linked to constant writing activity. The self is something to write about, a theme or object (subject) of writing activity…this is not a modern trait born of the Reformation…it is one of the most ancient Western traditions” (p. 27).

And then:

“This genre of epistles shows a side apart from the philosophy of the era. The examination of conscience begins with this letter writing. Diary writing comes later” (p. 30)

Foucault refers here to what he later describes as the hupomnema, the writing of the self into being.

Foucault, M. (1988). Technologes of the Self. In L. Martin, H. Gutman & P. Hutton (Eds.), Technologies of the self. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Press.