ABSTRACT
Governed intellectual spaces, such as DRAaM, are the locales for intended and unintended gatherings of particular words, meanings and subjectivities. They are, as explained, the terrain of expert knowledge and facilitate a distinct sense of self. Thus, following Foucault (1982), it can be argued that institutionalised or institutionalising discourses are intimately linked to power, and through these intertwined knowledge-power dynamics they facilitate specific modes of governmentality within each of these fields. ‘Governmentality’ is a broader term than ‘government’ or more conventional definitions of governance. It is a function of various intended and unintended actions, reflections and interactions, where power is exercised, influencing the day-to-day actions of individuals, groups and institutions both directly and indirectly. Governmentality is very much a function of the structuring effects of the combined forces of discourse and power or knowledge-power, for example in constituting ‘subjects’ such as DRAaM practitioners. The word ‘subject’ therefore requires inverted commas, as there can be no truly independent agency. Based upon these first pages of introductory discussion, the implications of the foregoing as a statement of intent are summarised in what follows and thereafter developed further through discussions on matters of ontology, epistemology, methodology, analytical style and structure.
