Madness and Civilization Chapter One - Stultifera Navis
In this first installment we go through Foucault’s first chapter of Madness and Civilization. Foucault traces the historical roots of social exclusion in Europe, beginning with the confinement of lepers in the Middle Ages. He argues that these practices evolved over time to include new groups, such as madmen, reflecting changing societal and cultural attitudes. By examining literature and historical practices, Foucault shows how madness transformed from a symbol of existential truth to one of oppression and confinement, similar to the earlier treatment of lepers.
In Chapter One Foucault begins by sketching the foundations of exclusion of certain groups of people in Europe. The genesis of this movement which would consequently lead to confinement of other groups began with people who had leprosy in the Middle Ages. People with leprosy were confined to ‘lazar-houses’ across Europe in places such as France, Germany, England, and Scotland. Foucault is highlighting the common heritage of confinement within Europe as common continental phenomena as opposed to separate singular events. Foucault also demonstrates how religion, in this case Christianity, played a role in justifying and encouraging this movement. As Foucault tells us, the aim of this exclusion of lepers was rooted, not in the suppression of the disease but rather in the desire to keep it a ‘sacred distance’ from society. However, as Foucault states ‘if the leper was removed from the world and from the community of the church visible his existence was yet a constant manifestation of God since it was a sign both of his anger and his grace.’ The exclusion is therefore quite necessary from the perspective of the church. This is because their exclusion in a complete paradox is what grants them their salvation. In other words, by excluding the manifestation of Gods anger and grace is the only way as Christians that society could save them. Indeed, as Foucault tells us ‘Abandonment is his salvation his exclusion offers him another form of communion.’
Soon leprosy and lepers would disappear from Europe, however these structures and institutions that were created for them would still remain. Consequently, the normative framework that allowed the exclusion of groups would evolve to exclude new groups to feed these institutions. ‘With an altogether new meaning and in a very different culture the forms would remain essentially the major form of a rigorous division which is social exclusion, but spiritual reintegration would reoccur’ in the European framework of segregation.
Before this new exclusion of madmen could occur, we have to understand the evolution of how society perceived madness. At the end of the Middle Ages where madness and the madman have become major figures. This is because the madman in their ambiguity and mockery were represented ‘a dizzying unreason of the world and the feeble ridicule of men.’ In other words, during the Middle Ages the madman was something entirely foreign. His condition did not make sense as it reflected our fragile existence. Foucault argues that the recognition of the madman in the broader swathes of society found itself within the literature of tales and moral fables. More and more within the literature would the madman gain more and more importance. The madman no longer represented ‘madness’ but rather reflected the truth. Indeed, as Foucault tells us:
“If folly leads each man into a blindness where he is lost, the mad-man, on the contrary, reminds each man of his truth; in a comedy where each man deceives the other and dupes him-self, the madman is comedy to the second degree: the deception of deception; he utters, in his simpleton's language which makes no show of reason, the words of reason that release, in the comic, the comedy: he speaks love to lovers, the truth of life to the young, the middling reality of things to the proud, to the insolent, and to liars”
Foucault hypothesises that this phenomena of the role of madness can be explained through the theme of death in plays. As Foucault tells us, up to the second half of the 15th century there existed an obsession within Europe surrounding the end of man. Human existence, Foucault argues, hinges on this inevitable conclusion that all that lives must eventually die. This existential crisis that torments the 15th century was then replaced with an asymptotic state of being – madness. By utilizing madness as a symbol to replace death, European culture effectively embarked on a mission to annihilate death. Foucault makes a poignant observation in this regard by stating, ‘Fear in the face of the absolute limit of death turns inward in a continuous irony; man disarms it in advance, making it an object of derision by giving it an everyday, tamed form’ This is because when the madman laughs, he already laughs with the laugh of death the lunatic anticipating the macabre has disarmed it. In a way, the mad can be seen as something which we envy as he ridicules and belittles what the common person is petrified by. Thus, madness in the 15th century goes through a transformation. With the help of literature madness allowed society to expose itself to the nakedness and inconsequential being human. This is because, Foucault argues, ‘when man deploys the arbitrary nature of his madness, he confronts the dark necessity of the world.’ This necessity to which Foucault alludes is coming to terms with our mortality or simply death.
Madness is now entirely transformed into something that is extraordinary. It reflects something deeper than a mere observable fact, in a literal sense then it reflects all that makes us as human – brittle and weak. The weakness of our human condition is the inevitable truth of our existence. In other words, every human being by virtue of our condition is eligible to be mad. Madness therefore is attached to our being – something that we can all become.
Furthermore, Foucault turns our attention to the themes of madness in the 17th century literature. Here, madness takes on three forms, madness of vain presumption, madness of just punishment, and madness of desperate passion.
Madness of vain presumption is an internal form of madness where the individual within himself and by his own delusions grants himself the personal qualities of which he lacks. This is an observable fact of everyday life where people justify to themselves positive qualities such as ‘I am a good parent even though I beat my children.’
Madness of just punishment is a punishment inflicted on itself in such a way that it reveals the truth. Here, the justification according to Foucault is that this madness is truthful since the sufferer already experiences what will for all eternity be his punishment. This madness can be seen in Shakespeare’s Lady Macbeth.
Finally, we have the madness of desperate passion. Foucault eloquently states that when our love is disappointed in its excess, particularly by the death of those whom we love, there is no other way out other than to succumb to madness itself. In the literature of this time, this madness can also form itself as a relief. For example, this occurs if it leads to death of the lovers as they will join once again in the afterlife like Romeo and Juliet or Mark Antony and Cleopatra.
However, beyond this point in history, the classical experience of madness will no longer proceed as an asymptomatic state of being that society constructs. It will no longer represent truth, nor will it represent a cultural fascination in the European sphere. The Golden Age of the Madman where madness as an ‘abstract concept’ had a cultural and even philosophical value, has come to an end. In its place another theme emerges. Here, in this new age, the madman has to accept a new fate. A fate that is bound and shackled in oppression. Just as the lepers were confined the madman is now also confined. This brings about the evolution of the ‘Hospital of Madmen’ or the ‘Madhouse.’
In conclusion, this chapter highlights Foucault's argument that social exclusion and confinement have deep historical roots in Europe, ever evolving yet maintaining a steady pattern of marginalizing certain groups under the guise of societal and/or spiritual justification.
As always, thank you for reading. If you have any questions or comments do not hesitate to get in touch! See you soon for Chapter 2.