Tuesday, May 9, 2006

The society of the spectacle

The Society of the Spectacle
(H Κοινωνία του θεάματος)

By Guy Debord


In societies dominated by modern conditions of production, life is presented as an immense accumulation of spectacles.

Everything that was directly lived has receded into a representation.

The images detached from every aspect of life merge into a common stream in which the unity of that life can no longer be recovered. Fragmented views of reality regroup themselves into a new unity as a separate pseudoworld that can only be looked at. The specialization of images of the world evolves into a world of autonomized images where even the deceivers are deceived.

The spectacle is a concrete inversion of life, an autonomous movement of the nonliving.

The spectacle presents itself simultaneously as society itself, as a part of society, and as a means of unification. As a part of society, it is the focal point of all vision and all consciousness. But due to the very fact that this sector is separate, it is in reality the domain of delusion and false consciousness: the unification it achieves is nothing but an official language of universal separation.

The spectacle is not a collection of images; it is a social relation between people that is mediated by images.

Understood in its totality, the spectacle is both the result and the project of the dominant mode of production. It is not a mere decoration added to the real world. It is the very heart of this real society’s unreality.

In all of its particular manifestations — news, propaganda, advertising, entertainment — the spectacle represents the dominant model of life. It is the omnipresent affirmation of the choices that have already been made in the sphere of production and in the consumption implied by that production.

Separation is itself an integral part of the unity of this world, of a global social practice split into reality and image. The social practice confronted by an autonomous spectacle is at the same time the real totality which contains that spectacle. But the split within this totality mutilates it to the point that the spectacle seems to be its goal.

In a world that is really upside down, the true is a moment of the false.

Considered in its own terms, the spectacle is an affirmation of appearances and an identification of all human social life with appearances. But a critique that grasps the spectacle’s essential character reveals it to be a visible negation of life — a negation that has taken on a visible form.

The spectacle presents itself as a vast inaccessible reality that can never be questioned. Its sole message is: “What appears is good; what is good appears.”

The passive acceptance it demands is already effectively imposed by its monopoly of appearances, its manner of appearing without allowing any reply.

The spectacle is able to subject human beings to itself because the economy has already totally subjugated them. It is nothing other than the economy developing for itself. It is at once a faithful reflection of the production of things and a distorting objectification of the producers.

When the real world is transformed into mere images, mere images become real beings — dynamic figments that provide the direct motivations for a hypnotic behavior.

As long as necessity is socially dreamed, dreaming will remain a social necessity.
The spectacle is the bad dream of a modern society in chains and ultimately expresses nothing more than its wish for sleep. The spectacle is the guardian of that sleep.

The fact that the practical power of modern society has detached itself from that society and established an independent realm in the spectacle can be explained only by the additional fact that that powerful practice continued to lack cohesion and had remained in contradiction with itself.

The root of the spectacle is that oldest of all social specializations, the specialization of power. The spectacle plays the specialized role of speaking in the name of all the other activities. It is hierarchical society’s ambassador to itself, delivering its official messages at a court where no one else is allowed to speak. The most modern aspect of the spectacle is thus also the most archaic.

The social separation reflected in the spectacle is inseparable from the modern state — the product of the social division of labor that is both the chief instrument of class rule and the concentrated expression of all social divisions.

In the spectacle, a part of the world represents itself to the world and is superior to it. The spectacle is simply the common language of this separation. Spectators are linked solely by their one-way relationship to the very center that keeps them isolated from each other. The spectacle thus reunites the separated, but it reunites them only in their separateness.

Workers do not produce themselves, they produce a power independent of themselves. The success of this production, the abundance it generates, is experienced by the producers as an abundance of dispossession. As their alienated products accumulate, all time and space become foreign to them.

The forces that have escaped us display themselves to us in all their power.

Though separated from what they produce, people nevertheless produce every detail of their world with ever-increasing power. They thus also find themselves increasingly separated from that world. The closer their life comes to being their own creation, the more they are excluded from that life.

The spectacle is capital accumulated to the point that it becomes images.

Critical theory must communicate itself in its own language — the language of contradiction, which must be dialectical in both form and content. It must be an all-inclusive critique, and it must be grounded in history. It is not a “zero degree of writing,” but its reversal. It is not a negation of style, but the style of negation.

The very style of dialectical theory is a scandal and abomination to the prevailing standards of language and to the sensibilities molded by those standards, because while it makes concrete use of existing concepts it simultaneously recognizes their fluidity and their inevitable destruction.

This style, which includes a critique of itself, must express the domination of the present critique over its entire past. Dialectical theory’s mode of exposition reveals the negative spirit within it.

“Truth is not like some finished product in which one can no longer find any trace of the tool that made it.”

This theoretical consciousness of a movement whose traces must remain visible within it is manifested by the reversal of established relationships between concepts and by the dιtournement of all the achievements of earlier critical efforts.

Ideas improve. The meaning of words plays a role in that improvement. Plagiarism is necessary. Progress depends on it. It sticks close to an author’s phrasing, exploits his expressions, deletes a false idea, replaces it with the right one.

Dιtournement is the flexible language of anti-ideology. It appears in communication that knows it cannot claim to embody any definitive certainty. It is language that cannot and need not be confirmed by any previous or supracritical reference.

On the contrary, its own internal coherence and practical effectiveness are what validate the previous kernels of truth it has brought back into play. Dιtournement has grounded its cause on nothing but its own truth as present critique.

The element of overt dιtournement in formulated theory refutes any notion that such theory is durably autonomous. By introducing into the theoretical domain the same type of violent subversion that disrupts and overthrows every existing order, dιtournement serves as a reminder that theory is nothing in itself, that it can realize itself only through historical action and through the historical correction that is its true allegiance.

The point is to actually participate in the community of dialogue and the game with time that up till now have merely been represented by poetic and artistic works.

When art becomes independent and paints its world in dazzling colors, a moment of life has grown old. Such a moment cannot be rejuvenated by dazzling colors, it can only be evoked in memory.

The greatness of art only emerges at the dusk of life.

The official thought of the social organization of appearances is itself obscured by the generalized subcommunication that it has to defend. It cannot understand that conflict is at the origin of everything in its world.
The specialists of spectacular power — a power that is absolute within its realm of one-way communication — are absolutely corrupted by their experience of contempt and by the success of that contempt, because they find their contempt confirmed by their awareness of how truly contemptible spectators really are.

In the spectacle’s basic practice of incorporating into itself all the fluid aspects of human activity so as to possess them in a congealed form, and of inverting living values into purely abstract values, we recognize our old enemy the commodity, which seems at first glance so trivial and obvious, yet which is actually so complex and full of metaphysical subtleties.

The fetishism of the commodity — the domination of society by “intangible as well as tangible things” — attains its ultimate fulfillment in the spectacle, where the real world is replaced by a selection of images which are projected above it, yet which at the same time succeed in making themselves regarded as the epitome of reality.

(Για την εντρύφησή μου στο θαυμαστό αυτό φιλοσοφικό/πολιτικό έργο ευχαριστώ πολύ τον Κ.(FD), που δεν διαβάζει αυτό το blog, διαβάζει όμως το άλλο μου, στον path).


par-i-saktos said...

σου προτεινω να διαβασεις αν δεν το εχεις ηδη κανει το "Διασκεδαση μεχρι θανατου" του Νηλ Ποστμαν, απο τις εκδοσεις Δρομεας...

par-i-saktos said...

σου προτεινω να διαβασεις αν δεν το εχεις ηδη κανει το "Διασκεδαση μεχρι θανατου" του Νηλ Ποστμαν, απο τις εκδοσεις Δρομεας...

LAWAL said...

hola gracias por el comentario
me doy cuenbta que te interesa nuestro idioma y obre todo te interesa el arte, somos un grupo musical que hace musica con raices folckloricas chilenas y latinoamericanas yo en particular me intereso ademas pr la pintura y dentro de ello por la cottiente surrealista
bueno gracias por rl comentario

Loreley-lucyluce said...

@par-i-saktos,καλησπέρα. Δεν το έχω διαβάσει, θα φροντίσω να το προμηθευτώ.
Σού συστήνω κι εγώ το εξαιρετικό "The shadow out of time", του H.P.Lovecraft. Κυλοφορεί και στα ελληνικά από τις εκδόσεις ερατώ με τίτλο "η σκιά πέρα από τον χρόνο".

Loreley-lucyluce said...

@lawal hola. Muchas gracias por tu commentario, tambien. Soy encantada que tu interesas las pinturas surrealistas. Feel free to use them!
Me gustas musica latinoamericana muchisimo.
Hasta luego