How can a persisting and truly global interest in Foucault\u2019s thought \u2013 from Europe to Japan, through the United States and Brazil \u2013 be explained? To become the eloquent and inventive critic of the many projects associated with the \u201cWestern\u201d world to which he belonged, Foucault had to first grapple with the elusive outlines of modern thought. By criticizing approaches that tried to present \u201cthe subject\u201d as a clear object of study, and instead highlighting those that sought to explore the different practices of subjectification, he made \u201cothers\u201d understandable to the \u201cWest\u201d \u2013 and the \u201cWest\u201d understandable to the rest of the world. However, the relationship between Foucault\u2019s works and the \u201cWest\u201d \u2013 its canon and its various intellectual endeavors \u2013 is far from straightforward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One particular place where this question can be fruitfully asked is Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), where Foucault stayed for some years at the beginning of his career (he worked on his thesis, later published as The History of Madness, in Warsaw in 1958), and where his works enjoyed lasting influence among scholars and intellectuals. The question remains open as to whether, and to what extent, Foucault\u2019s conceptual tools can be applied beyond so-called \u201cWestern Europe\u201d, the primary context of his reflections. Were Foucault-inspired analyses carried out in CEE liable to produce a distorted image of the region? And how might rethinking Foucault from the vantage point of CEE shift our perception on both his oeuvre and the so-called \u201cWest\u201d? Finally, how was Foucault\u2019s own thinking shaped by CEE thought and his encounters with the region?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Over the past thirty years, scholars both from CEE countries and those working on issues related to this area have produced numerous books, articles, and studies influenced, either primarily or partially, immediately or mediated by Foucauldian perspectives, which opened up conceptually new horizons. Many of these publications have become benchmarks in their respective disciplines (Maria Todorova, Alexei Yurchak, Stephen Kotkin, Stephen J. Collier, and many others). What were the reasons for this interest? As Foucault\u2019s popularity in CEE coincided with major political upheavals and new challenges, could this reception be considered a search for intellectual alternatives to the political thought which supposedly undergirded previous communist regimes? Was it hoped that Foucault\u2019s thought could provide a new social perspective? Was he supposed to inspire academics from Central Europe in their concerted retreat from Marxism-Leninism?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
It appears that the vicissitudes of the reception of Foucault in the CEE context give rise to a paradox: though Foucault militated against system-building, insofar as he was cast as a promising alternative to the former keystones of social theory, he became inducted to academic textbooks as a classic of social thought even more surely than in France. Who, and with what intent, were the intellectual actors in introducing him to the academic communities in the region, by way of translations, special issues of academic journals or textbooks? Furthermore, our symposium aims to inquire about the particular modes of Foucault\u2019s reception in CEE academia, as well as in public discourse and activism. What were the intermediaries, the channels, and the \u2018stopovers\u2019 on the way by which his thought travelled to CEE? Was it a Foucault from Paris or Berkeley, a Foucault in French, English, German, or Italian? Might it have been Rabinow\u2019s or Agamben\u2019s Foucault?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Whatever the reason for Foucault\u2019s pervasive presence, it may not be an exaggeration to say that sometimes scholars from the region draw on Foucault\u2019s ideas without even realizing it. His influence is so deeply embedded in academic discourse that some of his concepts have migrated in various fields where they are used almost uncritically. In our view, a more comprehensive reflection on Foucault\u2019s methodologies and their application to CEE issues has yet to be thoroughly undertaken. Hegel \u2013 Foucault\u2019s philosophical archenemy, whose influence he never entirely escaped \u2013 argued that any method worthy of the name must, to some extent, follow the activity of the object itself rather than imposing a framework upon it. Foucault, too, embraced this perspective, adapting his approach to suit the problem at hand rather than forcing reality into predetermined structures. This is a crucial lesson to keep in mind when transferring ideas and concepts from one cultural and social context to another. While such a transfer is certainly possible, the transformative work it requires is far less obvious and considerably more demanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this regard, the 100th anniversary of Foucault\u2019s birth presents a unique opportunity to reflect on past contributions, current developments, and future directions of Foucauldian approaches to CEE issues. As the event is the result of a collaborative effort between three institutions across two cities, we have decided to divide it between Prague and Warsaw. The first two days will take place in Prague, followed by a break before continuing in Warsaw. However, this division is not only spatial and temporal but also thematic. Prague will host participants presenting papers on epistemology, philosophy, gender, and aesthetics, while Warsaw will focus on discussions surrounding power, governmentality, and ethics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We want to discuss together, for example, but not be strictly limited to, the following topics:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Critical reflections on how Foucault\u2019s concepts (e.g., power, biopolitics, governmentality) have been applied and transformed in CEE scholarship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Evaluations of the strengths, limitations, and effects of Foucauldian methodologies in interpreting CEE social, political and historical realities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Methodological challenges of transferring Foucauldian concepts across different cultural and social contexts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Prospects for future uses of Foucault\u2019s ideas in CEE contexts: new fields, emerging issues, and conceptual adaptations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Dialogues and intersections between Foucault\u2019s approaches and major CEE thinkers (e.g., G\u00e1sp\u00e1r Mikl\u00f3s Tam\u00e1s, Karel Kos\u00edk, Jan Pato\u010dka, Witold Kula, \u00c1gnes Heller, Evald Ilyenkov, Zygmunt Bauman, Julia Kristeva).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Intellectual agents and institutions that mediated Foucault\u2019s reception: translations, academic journals, textbooks, public discourse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n How CEE intellectual traditions might challenge, supplement, or transform Foucauldian frameworks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Foucault\u2019s engagement with the East-West divide; Foucault and the Cold War.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The proposal should include a short abstract (200 words max.), a title, affiliation and a few lines of biography, and possibly a preference for location if papers fall into both thematic strands: Prague (epistemology, gender, and aesthetics) and Warsaw (power, governmentality, and ethics).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Host Institutions Organizing Committee: <\/strong>Mateusz Chmurski, Isabel Jacobs, Ji\u0159\u00ed R\u016f\u017ei\u010dka, Rados\u0142aw Szyma\u0144ski, Laurent Tatarenko<\/p>\n\n\n\n Contact Email: <\/strong>foucault100ece@flu.cas.cz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n Deadline for submission:<\/strong> November 15, 2025 Date and Location:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Prague (June 1\u20132, 2026) and Warsaw (June 4\u20135, 2026)<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/strong>The Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences<\/em>
Centre fran\u00e7ais de recherche en sciences sociales en Prague (CEFRES)<\/em>
Centre de civilisation fran\u00e7aise et d\u2019\u00e9tudes francophones en Pologne (CCFEF)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/strong>on the address: foucault100ece@flu.cas.cz<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n