GI DEBOR (Guy Debord, ): Alkohol, maloletnice, Marks i Dada. To nikako spektakla, izrodila kombinaciju te dve forme: integrisani spektakl. Guy Louis Debord was a French Marxist theorist, philosopher, filmmaker, member of the Letterist International, founder of a Letterist faction, and founding. The Society of the Spectacle is a work of philosophy and Marxist critical theory by Guy Debord, in which the author develops and presents the concept of .

Author: Zulkisida Malataur
Country: Hungary
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Automotive
Published (Last): 19 November 2010
Pages: 235
PDF File Size: 18.95 Mb
ePub File Size: 13.14 Mb
ISBN: 825-8-80577-621-1
Downloads: 68860
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Kajigami

Debord’s awkward poetry might appeal to insecure amateur intellectuals of the Marxist persuasion, who prefer the sentiments to the ‘science’ of Marx’s work.

The Society of the Spectacle

Bernstein wrote a vaguely fictional gky detailed account of the open relationships Mochot and she had with Debord in her novel All The King’s Horses. Debord’s aim and proposal is “to wake up the spectator who has been drugged by spectacular images Same goes for specific historical events central to European Communist practices.

What is the spectacle, then? The book cover of the edition is derived from a photograph by the Life magazine photographer, J. Bordigism Communization Council communism Situationist International. To ask other readers questions about The Society of the Spectacleplease sign up. Works Can Dialectics Break Bricks?

The Society of the Spectacle by Guy Debord

To wit, the so-called “radical” situationist ethic is now a totally mainstream, mass media commodity in and of itself. I thought this was great. Debore Journal of Urban Exploration []”.

The book is considered a seminal text for the Situationist movement. Retrieved 27 December Thus it is here that the specialized science of domination must in turn specialize: Thus, Debord ‘s fourth thesis is: E sorge una domanda. I don’t want to ruin this by reviewing it in a highly analytical manner, so I’ll just say that it applies as much now as when it was written. Debord’s last film, “Son Art et Son Temps”, was not produced during his lifetime.

  AIA E201 PDF

Still, some nice turns of phrase, especially in the 50 or so statements about what the Spectacle is: This article’s use of external links may not follow Wikipedia’s policies or guidelines. In this book I found a spectacular ironic pun intendedleft communist anti-authoritarian work. It’s Re-read this bad boy for research purposes. Image at Getty Images: Part of a series on.

This schism gave rise to several factions of Letterists, one of which was decidedly led by Debord upon Gil Wolman’s unequivocal recommendation. The Society of the Spectacle is a critique of contemporary consumer culture and commodity fetishismdealing with issues such as class alienationcultural homogenizationand mass media. This is known as the reactionary effect of modern society to most efficiently make use of its space in an exponentially growing population that seeks economic welfare in cities.

When asked why he made the book into a movie, Debord said, “I don’t understand why this surprised people. What followed the general path of the baroque, from romanticism to cubism, was ultimately an ever more individualized art of negation perpetually renewing itself to the point of the fragmentation and complete negation of the artistic sphere.

The spectacle, Guy Debord says, is the social relation between people that is mediated by images news, propaganda, advertising, entertainmentI consider myself a Marxist, however S;ektakla abhor many Marxist strains particularly those pertaining to Leninism and its many offshoots Stalinism, Trotskyism, Maoism, etc.

This book describes the problem: It’s abstract and abstruse, full of dialectical jujitsu and Situationist private language, which makes it a difficult read. Sprawling isolation urbanism was then a more effective way in controlling the population.

If it was published today one could imagine it being condemned to a fate of neglect on the deord of a Marxist WordPress blog. Debord discusses at length Daniel J. Critics have stat I read this due to an interest in learning more drustvl the history of the May demonstrations in France, the history of art, and the Situationalists. Critics have stated that it is at best ‘simple ideas expressed in deliberately complex, confusing ways’.


University of California Press. February Learn how and when to remove this template message.

This integration of Debord’s world with mass media culture became a running motif climaxing with “The Society of the Spectacle”.

The definition of real has changed and with it what constitutes proof. Eerily prescient, and still a brilliant read about the alienation of labor, the advertisement of time, and the banalization of space. Zitti tutti, va in scena il Potere! Yet the broad thesis, that society has turned into a giant TV show trying always to one-up itself in absurdity and whose sole objective is to permaglue our eyes to the screen, seems to me rather prescient.

In the least industrialized places, its reign is already attested by a few star commodities and by the imperialist domination imposed by regions which are ahead in the development of productivity. Crowd manipulation Managing the news Media manipulation.

Long silences separate speaking parts. Debord traces the development of a modern society in which authentic social life has been replaced with its representation: What I think I’ve understood from it is fascinating and I think still quite relevant–if not even more so than at the time of the book’s composition.

Where Vaneigem was speaking more positively about what could be done, Debord is outlining the problem as the Situationists’ critique understood it.

In theory I love this book, in it’s actual form with words and a seeming intentional difficulty ya know to avoid being co-opted by the spectacle of the totality of consumerist society I’m only lukewarm about it. Distraught by the accusations and his friend’s death, Debord took his films and writings out of production until after his death.

But this rationalization is itself burdened by the immense irrationality of its means.