This article explores the benefits of an encounter between Foucault's and Bourdieu's different conceptualisations of power. The two approaches to power are considered by contemporary research to be irreconcilable, but this article claims that, by engaging both understandings, it is possible to draw a more nuanced map, one which is especially suited to research in power and discourse in educational fields. The article draws on the controversy between Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and Schrödinger's wave image (later formulated as Schrödinger's cat paradox) regarding the nature of the atom as an analogy to show why both conceptualisations are needed in order to understand the nature and manifestation of power. Does power operate as a hierarchy within the field, shaping the practices and habitus of the agents through various forms of capital (Schrödinger's wave image)? And is power distributed across fields and is it only through an archaeological and genealogical analysis that it is possible to get a glimpse of power, which is as elusive as Heisenberg's matrix theory (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle)? Analysing educational fields through an approach drawn from Bourdieu, the article applies sociology-specific methods to measure, quantify and visualise power on a contemporary, manifested and present level. Using a Foucauldian approach, it analyses the history of the present in order to understand how the above dilemma came to be and how it is distributed across various discourses, institutions and practices. It is argued that, when analysing power, a destabilised marriage between Foucault and Bourdieu is needed.
Representing PowerPower is both a visible and invisible force. In one movement it shifts forms, changes representations and tries to evade the gaze of the viewer. In the other movement it makes its appearance very visible, articulate and violent. Power is both resistance and domination, locked in an intricate dance. Educational research needs a methodology that is equipped for gazing upon both movements: the visible and the invisible, the articulate and the silent, the immeasurable rationality and the measurable capital.The number of studies of power has exploded since Foucault's authorship (Rabinow & Rose, 2003), and power has become a topic of interest throughout the academic field. This article proposes the analogy that the representation of power has been ascribed the same importance as the quantum had in 1920s physics. Deleuze (2006, p. 59) writes that: 'power is a relation between forces, or rather every relation between forces is a "power relation"'. Power has become the 'relational essence', or the rudimentary concept, throughout social space, akin to how the quantum was the innermost working of the atom. The quantum was the key to explaining new advances in physics and became the philosopher's stone early in the twentieth century. Similarly, through an exploration of how power behaves and is manifested, the contemporary claim is that we can begin to understand how society works and ...
