society of spectacle (film)
two 9min parts
2 min – schizophrenia may be a necessary consequence of literacy..t
the spectacle is not a collection of images.. it is a social relation between people that is mediated by images..t
3 min – it is just the affirmation of the choices that have already been made by the ruling system..t
5 min – w/o social envy .. glamour cannot exist
the spectacle is a physical negation of life.. as life is reduced to a single dimension of appearing..t
since everyone is part of it and wants to be part of it.. no one questions it
6 min – manner of appearance w/o allowing a reply.. a one way discourse.. talking back has undesirable consequences..
in the spectacle.. which is the visual reflection of the ruling econ order.. goals are nothing.. development is everything.. the spectacle aims at nothing other than itself..
8 min – as long as necessity is dreamed up by society.. dreaming will remain a social necessity
let’s get back to maté basic needs..
the spectacle is the bad dream of modern society in chains.. expresses nothing more than its wish for remaining asleep
9 min – people don’t want to wake up .. to deal w illusive world issues: environ/poverty/war.. the spectacle is also the guardian of that dream
the spectacle is the ruling order’s non stop discourse about itself..
in essence.. it’s about control
2 min – in the spectacle.. part of the world presents itself to the world as its superior..t
the spectacle is simply the common language of this separation.. this language is also what passes as our culture
the spectacle reunites the separated.. but only in their separateness
3 min – marshall mcluhan suggests that it’s the artists who have the ability to sharpen our perception. because they tend to be antisocial.. seeing their environ’s as they really are.. and today.. anyone can be an artist..t
let’s do this first: free art-ists.
4 min – it is possible to now use the spectacle’s own weapons against it by jamming the system.. the interconnectivity is what can be used to overthrow the culture
5 min – the only way the spectacle can be resisted is thru new modes of human relations..t
tech as it could be..
guy debord: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Debord
Guy Louis Debord (/dəˈbɔːr/; French: [gi dəbɔʁ]; 28 December 1931 – 30 November 1994) was a French Marxist theorist, philosopher, filmmaker, member of the Letterist International, founder of a Letterist faction, and founding member of the Situationist International (SI). He was also briefly a member of Socialisme ou Barbarie.
society of spectacle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle
The Society of the Spectacle (French: La société du spectacle) is a 1967 work of philosophy and Marxist critical theory by Guy Debord, in which the author develops and presents the concept of the Spectacle. The book is considered a seminal text for the Situationist movement. Debord published a follow-up book Comments on the Society of the Spectacle in 1988.
Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: “All that once was directly lived has become mere representation.” Debord argues that the history of social life can be understood as “the decline of being into having, and having into merely appearing.” This condition, according to Debord, is the “historical moment at which the commodity completes its colonization of social life.
The spectacle is the inverted image of society in which relations between commodities have supplanted relations between people, in which “passive identification with the spectacle supplants genuine activity”. “The spectacle is not a collection of images,” Debord writes, “rather, it is a social relation among people, mediated by images.”
In his analysis of the spectacular society, Debord notes that the quality of life is impoverished, with such a lack of authenticity that human perceptions are affected, and an attendant degradation of knowledge, which in turn hinders critical thought. Debord analyzes the use of knowledge to assuage reality: the spectacle obfuscates the past, imploding it with the future into an undifferentiated mass, a type of never-ending present; in this way the spectacle prevents individuals from realizing that the society of spectacle is only a moment in history, one that can be overturned through revolution
Debord’s aim and proposal is “to wake up the spectator who has been drugged by spectacular images…through radical action in the form of the construction of situations…situations that bring a revolutionary reordering of life, politics, and art”. In the Situationist view, situations are actively created moments characterized by “a sense of self-consciousness of existence within a particular environment or ambience”.
Debord encouraged the use of détournement, “which involves using spectacular images and language to disrupt the flow of the spectacle.”
The Society of the Spectacle is a critique of contemporary consumer culture and commodity fetishism, dealing with issues such as class alienation, cultural homogenization, and mass media.
When Debord says that “All that was once directly lived has become mere representation,” he is referring to the central importance of the image in contemporary society. Images, Debord says, have supplanted genuine human interaction.
Thus, Debord’s fourth thesis is: “The spectacle is not a collection of images; rather, it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images.”
In a consumer society, social life is not about living, but about having; the spectacle uses the image to convey what people need and must have. Consequently, social life moves further, leaving a state of “having” and proceeding into a state of “appearing”; namely the appearance of the image.
“In a world which really is topsy-turvy, the true is a moment of the false.
the idea of “updating” of the situationist critique of spectacular society is grotesque, since its not a question of repeatingthe thesis of the critique but of revitalizing the Social Critique by going beyond it.What led to the end of the situationists as an organization…
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/ludicluddite/status/1123343743522869249
Society of the Spectacle in its entirety or better yet the writings of the group around Le Encyclopedie des Nuisances than some water down version in its presentation of spectacular situationism.
Nika Dubrovsky (@nikadubrovsky) tweeted at 5:45 AM on Thu, May 02, 2019:
Guy Debord “Into The Dustbin of History”: “The story of the arsonists who, during the final days of the Commune, went to destroy Notre Dame, only to find it defended by an armed battalion of Commune artists, is a richly provocative example of direct democracy.”