| ||| | || | | | ||| || ||||| || ||||||||||||||||||||||
f i l m - p h i l o s o p h y
electronic salon
| ||| | || | | | ||| || ||||| || ||||||||||||||||||||||
Santiago Cucullu
Notes on Debord
Guy Debord
_Comments on the Society of the Spectacle_
Translated by Malcolm Imrie
London and New York: Verso, 1998
ISBN 1859841694
Though _Comments on the Society of the Spectacle_ is a short book, it is an
elaborate one, almost labyrinthine. It has dead ends and walls of varying
heights. Often credited as having been one of the founding members of the
Situationist Internationale, Guy Debord was also the author of numerous
books and films including _The Society of the Spectacle_ and a film bearing
the same title. In 1984 allegations of his involvement in the death of his
friend and dealer Gerard Lebovici, allegations which were contested and
proved unfounded, led him to disallow the screening of his films in protest
from 1984 until his suicide in 1994. This book is a barrage of statements
regarding the state of things which Debord refers to as the 'spectacle', a
concept which he began to outline in 1968 and further elaborated on in this
book.
The introduction states that this book is to be appreciated by only a small
few. Half of these people are agents working in support of the dominating
spectacle and the other half are agents working to undermine the
spectacle's dominance in modern society. Because of this, the overall
meaning must be deciphered by an active reader willing to mine the various
chapters. In the face of such obstacles, this book marks a gesture of the
highest order. It is an urgent book. And it's presence in the world is
inescapable. There is a sense of nostalgia that goes along with the book as
well. But nostalgia is not an accurate term because it denotes a sort of
longing for a world long gone or forgotten; in this case one cannot place
the sense of lose. The book is often a list of violation upon violation on
the human citizen. This veteran's message is in dire need of readers who
will consider and incorporate it into quotidian life. As Debord outlines,
ours is a time when world surveillance may exist, and the outlook for
global domination by a sinister yet familiar other is looking up.
Throughout the book, however, there is a tone of resistance, and I was
reminded of many different people, ideas that emanate from them, and a
thinking which they represent for me: Virilio, M. Mclaren, Gnrl. Custer,
Aquinas, L. Blisset, Felix Guattari, J. L. Borges, Geronimo, Cmndnt.
Marcos, Severino Di Giovanni . . . a procession of thinkers and fighters.
Writing can veil concepts, and to summarize or provide a subjective
interpretation of _Comments on the Society of the Spectacle_ may be an
injustice, however well intentioned. The prose is a mix of irony, dread,
flamboyance, realism, and warning. There are few answers given, and many
questions are voiced. Is it agreeable to have information constantly
mediated and broken down in to bite-sized messages, easily digestible and
inoffensive? Has the infiltration of the spectacle within an atrophied
hierarchical system (where a McGyvered 'spectacular government' directly
controls the viewer), in a scenario attuned to _Halloween 3_ [1] meets
_1984_ become, not only believable, but acceptable? The reader's position
is constantly challenged. These barricades are often symbolic and one may
take heart from Debord's anticipatory preface. [2]
>From the start the reader may sense that they are being disavowed. On the
eighth page Guy Debord adds a theoretical detail to his earlier
formulations. [3] He provides a third form to the notion of the spectacle
introduced in _The Society of the Spectacle_. The 'integrated' spectacle
appears as a result of what Debord says is a 'rational combination' of the
two forms which he wrote about in 1967 (the 'concentrated' and the
'diffused'). These forms, which 'float above real society' and particularly
the shown strength of the 'diffuse form' (what Debord cites as an
'Americanization'), have imposed a 'globally' integrated society of the
spectacle, possibly paving the way for the annihilation of a democratic
humanistic world. Property is part and parcel of the driving forces
inherent in the society of the spectacle, furthering the relevance of this
book in the very world that Debord rails against. Illustrative of the
mechanics of a society which venerates the spectacular, the integrated
spectacle 'introduces an all encompassing, decentralized, and interminable
'modernization' of contemporary society; which manifests itself through . .
.. *the combined effects of five principle features: incessant technological
renewal; integration of state and economy; generalized secrecy;
unanswerable lies; and eternal present*.
The historical framework becomes destroyed and reconstructed
instantaneously. Through the 'integrated spectacle' history is rewritten to
include any possible dissent. This manipulation serves to construct and
direct terrorism. Any state of being, short of being assimilated by the
'integrated spectacle' should be construed as suspicious.
Sometimes assimilation, however, can be a wonderful thing. Many have walked
this road. It is no doubt a warm feeling; like wetting the bed. The formal
Los Angeles County Hospital now houses a shining testimonial to the very
paths leading toward assimilation into the spectacle. [4] The likes of Tom
Cruise, Kirstie Alley, and John Travolta have been forged by, and follow
such a sign. In a sense they are residents of a village or township who
have come to realize the limits of the physical self and readily sacrifice
kinds of reactive spirits for the betterment of a community. [5]
Debord declares the spectacular society to be irrational and illogical. It
must continually reinvent itself and relies on the unassuming consumer [6]
to readily forget sanctioned inconsistencies; incongruencies in the
mechanics of the state apparatus. A co-dependent relationship becomes
solidified with every exchange. He contends that the decadence of
contemporary thought evidently lies in the fact that spectacular discourse
leaves no room for any reply. Next up on the spectacular chopping block is
the notion of individual identity. An individuality consigned to a 'global
village' quickly becomes eradicated. '*Villages unlike towns, have always
been ruled by conformism, isolation, petty surveillance, boredom and
repetitive malicious gossip about the same families.*' This book
continually stresses the corroborating power of an economy based on
anti-human ideals. Value has passed from the realm of need and ethos, to a
scale founded on desire and seduction.
So, what is left? After such a hail opposing the current state of affairs
and a seemingly irreparable course towards global destruction, one is left
gasping for breath. Trying to keep the head and the trunk above water,
clutching at the body as if it were the site of these jutting, sharp pains
seemingly emanating from the spleen; the purpose of which is enigmatic.
Minneapolis College of Art and Design, USA
January 1999
Footnotes
1. Also known as _Halloween 3: The Season of the Witch_; a commercial lures
consumers into buying halloween masks that turn the user into a fiend.
2. 'However desperate the situation and circumstances, do not despair. When
there is everything to fear, be unafraid. When surrounded by dangers, fear
none of them. When without resources, depend on resourcefulness. When
surprised, take the enemy itself by surprise.' Sun Tzu, _The Art of War_.
3. The element of the integrated spectacle for me becomes one of the most
interesting points addressed by this book. Implicating the reader in the
spectacle through ownership of the book avoids a direct critical attack on
either Marxism or capitalism. At the same time _The Society of the
Spectacle_ is revisited.
4. Not that being a scientologist is a bad thing, I just question the
moneys involved in attaining 'clarity'.
5. I just couldn't resist a little irony. I can not of course do justice to
Debord, but a key element is his sense of humor, e.g. 'Cervantes remarks
that 'under a poor cloak you commonly find a good drinker.' Someone who
knows his wine may often understand nothing about the rules of the nuclear
industry; but spectacular power calculates that if one expert can make a
fool of him with nuclear energy, another can easily do the same with wine.
And it is well know, for example, that media meteorologists, forecasting
temperature or rainfall for the next forty-eight hours, are severely
limited in what they say by the obligation to maintain certain economic,
touristic and regional balances, when so many people make so many journeys
on so many roads, between so many equally desolate places: thus they can
only try to make their name as entertainers.' (17)
6. An element of the 'diffused spectacle'.
© Film-Philosophy
*****************
Santiago Cucullu, 'Notes on Debord', _Film-Philosophy: Electronic Salon_,
22 January 1999
<http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy/files/cucullu.html>.
***************
Send your thoughts on this article and its subject to:
[log in to unmask]
***********************
To read previous _Film-Philosophy_ review articles, go to the salon's homepage:
http://www.mailbase.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy/files
********************************
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
