Spectacle and Simulacrum?
Cyrill Duneau
would anyone here be aware of some theoretical works/essays that establ=
ish a
parallel/comparison between the situationist notion of the Spectacle an=
d the
Baudrillardian one of the Simulacrum?
Thanks,
Cyrill.
(¸.•'´(¸.•'´ `'•.¸)`' •.¸)
¸.•´
( `•.¸
`•.¸ )
¸.•)´
(.•´
`*.
*.
shooting yourself in the balls is not the way to have a happy life
Lanny Quarles
spectacle + simulacrum
http://www.eciad.bc.ca/~rburnett/Resnick.html
lately i've found the rupestrian definition a little more appealing
and fresh, and resonant of course...
it's the epi.phenomenal ourobouro69
Cyrill Duneau
Baudrillard's notion of Simulacrum. IMHO Simulacrum is not something th=
at hides
reality, Simulacrum is the reality that hides there is no reality. None=
theless I
think a parallel could be made with the Spectacle as described by Debor=
d.
Thanks again,
Cyrill.
Quoting Lanny Quarles <soli...@GMAIL.COM>:
(¸.•'´(¸.•'´ `'•.¸)`' •.¸)
Lanny Quarles
some of the writing is beautiful and provocative, but ultimately
just another morass of affectual and self-enclosed semiotic vectorings
which belong more to paper-usage statistics than an empirical modeling
of the human universe. much of it skirts the prophetic while wholly
involving itself in a host of trans-historical subjectivities whose literary
validity is unquestionable but whose scientific value would be somewhat
more oblique. In the sense that philosophy should even necessarily be
linked with the act of writing is wholly a modern understanding,
and the modern philosopher unlike his pagan or primitive counterpart,
my favorites being Diogenes of Sinope, and the Dogon elder Ogotomelli,
necessarily inhabits a curious niche which though akin to a metaphor
of a transcendent strategy is often just another bureaucrat in an institutional
and inertial ward of radicalized and reified functionaries.
lq
Talan Memmott
...against the spectacle...
i=(?) really think=(?) (in)continent/al
{[(...philosophy...)]} has run its (dis)course, some of
the wIRing is beautiful (or ugly) and provocative (or
banal), but ultimately
just another morass (or suturing) of affectual (read:
pretentious, or maybe creative, or maybe grammatological)
and (or to) self-enclosed (read: solypsistic) semiotic
"vectorings"
... circuit bending ...
which belong more to paper-usage statistics than an
empirical modeling
of the human universe.
*signifying privilege : finding the absence of use-value
...producing (only) f[r]iction...
much of it skirts the prophetic while wholly involving
itself in a host of (trans|meta)-historical
[sub|ob|ab]jectivities whose literary validity is
un...questionable but whose scientific(?) value would be
somewhat more (or less)
"oblique".
In the sense that {[(...philosophy...)]} should even
necessarily be linked with the act of writing is wholly a
modern understanding, and the modern
{[(...philosopher...)]} unlike his pagan or primitive
(read: previously modern) counterpart,
>>>MYfavorites being Diogenes of Sinope, and the Dogon elder Ogotomelli,<<<
*signifying privilege : teeter-tottering the term
"counterpart"
necessarily inhabits a curious niche which though akin to
a metaphor of a [trans|ante|de]cendent strategy is often
just another bureaucrat in an institutional
and inertial ward/world of radicalized and reified
(dys)functionaries.
...poking the suspect corpse with a sharp stick...
...where is the N.ex.i.t...
Lanny Quarles
Alan Sondheim
examples - sorry about the spellings - no books when I'm sunk down in the
sofa alan
http://www.clc.wvu.edu/sondheim/
http://www.asondheim.org/
http://www.asondheim.org/portal/.nikuko
http://www.anu.edu.au/english/internet_txt
Trace projects http://trace.ntu.ac.uk/writers/sondheim/index.htm
Cyrill Duneau
Lawrence Upton
Now we wait on the publisher
Frogt to go to the Post office
I'll do it tomorrow
L
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Sondheim" <sond...@PANIX.COM>
To: <WRYT...@LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA>
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 7:54 PM
Subject: Re: Spectacle and Simulacrum?
Lanny Quarles
my poker face is a distributed masque, that sheet for which
the covering, by then an interesting accretion by which subjects
clinged so closely to the surface of a sphere.. simply fantastic
narr.ative... thus sprach Divanosut(u)ra
Ana Buigues
I know the answer to this question.
I have read about it in books, because some people wrote about this, so=
,
yes, in books.
I also read about it on the web and in mailing list discussions.
Then I went and repeated everything that I had studied and read and put=
it
in my thesis in a summarized manner. It looked groovy.
Professors like me repeating things that I read around -- specially thi=
ngs
they happened to have read and -- most important, understand.
It depends on the situation, sometimes it is more spectacled than simul=
ated.
But this is a comparanda that only very, very intelligent people with h=
igh
intelligence can see. Not everybody can realize about the similitudes =
(not
to be confused with simulations). Another concept interesting to look =
up
would be the 'hyperreal' which has become a buzz word -- and very hot i=
n
Internet intellectual discussion forums. If you want to be hip you hav=
e to
know about these things, and yes, don't forget Lacan. Knowing about La=
can
will give you the necessary success in this competitive world (intellec=
tual
world, of course).
You can have a look at the 'critical theory trading cards' -->
http://www.theorycards.org.uk/main.htm
Ooops, it appears that neither Debord nor Baudrillard are yet in the
collection, but they are probably working on it. The mental masturbati=
on
card must be also in its way. Some of these cards can also be found in
print, which always gives more prestige to written ideas as opposed to
online stuff.
> shooting yourself in the balls is not the way to have a happy life
I think some of the cultural theorists also discussed about this, but I
can't remember now the exact bibliographic references. I don't know pe=
rhaps
Foucault's Histoire de la Sexualité and Bataille L'Erotism, might ref=
er to
this in S/M pleasures, and other marginal ways of choosing the path to
happiness. But I'm not sure, as it's very hot today and I feel dizzy a=
nd
not able to distinguished between reality and derivé.
Ana
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WRYTING-L : Writing and Theory across Disciplines
> [mailto:WRYT...@LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA]On Behalf Of Cyrill Duneau
> Sent: domingo, 18 de julio de 2004 20:11
> To: WRYT...@LISTSERV.UTORONTO.CA
> Subject: Spectacle and Simulacrum?
>
>
> Hi there,
>
> would anyone here be aware of some theoretical works/essays that
> establish a
> parallel/comparison between the situationist notion of the
> Spectacle and the
Cyrill Duneau
ulated.
Yep, definitly, the spectacle is not the simulation when one stays at a=
"basic"
level, i mean referring to the common notions usually accepted for thes=
e terms.
the spectacle is mere representation, which is, in Baudrillard's view, =
opposed
to simulation. But then in Debord one can find that the spectacularisat=
ion of
society has somehow erased the real and replaced it by the representati=
on of it
- a representation without any referrents anymore and growing out of it=
self.
Which is close to Baudrillard's idea of the Simulacrum, the veil that v=
eils
that there is nothing to unveil anymore and is also its own referrent.
Something that still remains unclear for me is if this process deals on=
ly with
society and its own image/reflection and "progress", or if it might be
something deeper in the human mind, like a -sorry for the oxymoron- glo=
balised
solipcism.
> But this is a comparanda that only very, very intelligent people with=
high
> intelligence can see. Not everybody can realize about the similitude=
s (not
> to be confused with simulations). Another concept interesting to loo=
k up
> would be the 'hyperreal' which has become a buzz word -- and very hot=
in
> Internet intellectual discussion forums. If you want to be hip you h=
ave to
> know about these things, and yes, don't forget Lacan. Knowing about =
Lacan
> will give you the necessary success in this competitive world (intell=
ectual
> world, of course).
>
> You can have a look at the 'critical theory trading cards' -->
> http://www.theorycards.org.uk/main.htm
>
> Ooops, it appears that neither Debord nor Baudrillard are yet in the
> collection, but they are probably working on it. The mental masturba=
tion
> card must be also in its way.
Well, what you call mental masturbation, and which i assume refers to s=
ome
tortuous post-modernist ways of thinking or of expression, remains IMHO=
the
only exit that the western thought had after the rise and fail of carte=
sianism
and humanism - both more closely linked that it seems at first sight, a=
nd
typically the ground for both marxist modernism and bourgeois progressi=
sm. I am
not claiming an absolute validity for post-modernist theories, far from=
that,
but i sincerely think that the (not-so) new involved paradigms can give=
us
useful tools to - huh, well, demolish post-modernism, perhaps.
>Some of these cards can also be found in
> print, which always gives more prestige to written ideas as opposed t=
o
> online stuff.
>
>
> > shooting yourself in the balls is not the way to have a happy life
>
> I think some of the cultural theorists also discussed about this, but=
I
> can't remember now the exact bibliographic references. I don't know =
perhaps
> Foucault's Histoire de la Sexualité and Bataille L'Erotism, might r=
efer to
> this in S/M pleasures, and other marginal ways of choosing the path t=
o
> happiness. But I'm not sure, as it's very hot today and I feel dizzy=
and
> not able to distinguished between reality and derivé.
>
Actually, it was a famous french footballer before he was taught englis=
h...
Vincent Fourier
and I'd like to add the following:
http://www.geocities.com/supermiembro/vincent_fourier/snip.i.html
>text starts here<
Oversimplifying and in the surface, the modern
avant-garde reacted against traditional bourgeois
society values and believed in the idea of progress.
In a sense, modernism was more revolutionary and
politically committed to social causes than
postmodernism. On the other hand, postmodernism (art
and its analysis) is sometimes seen as reckless and
accepting a "laisser faire" attitude, utilizing an
appropriation of imagery and rhetoric that seems not
to make any mordacious commentary, have no radical
ideology and accepts icons and social discourses
associated to capitalism, and/or neo-liberalism.
This, in my opinion, is not true and postmodernism is
as effective or futile as the openly red modernist
approach, and perhaps less naïve.
In any case, most of those in favor of modernist
and/or postmodernist approaches are (and were) white
Western men/and a few women. Several of these women --
Meret Oppenheim, for example -- suffered from
depression in part triggered by the prevailing
phallocentric discourse, that interestingly enough we
also encounter in the intellectual/artistic circles,
within which they tried to achieve recognition. This
crowd of modern and postmodern articulate and educated
intellectuals is constituted by academics who work
from their intelligentsia ivory towers planted in
highly developed countries, artists born to bourgeois
families, or middle/middle-high class computer geeks
with access to digital tools (some of them very
expensive) and they meditate and theorize about how
Marxist or not they are, while people in less
privileged countries ruled by corrupted governments,
whose economy is exploited by the more powerful
empires have neither the means nor the time to debate
about mo/pomo since they are fighting in the Colombian
guerrilla against the paramilitaries (and would be
happy if they could count a cell phone and a Motorola
radio as the booty of the day to better organize their
activities), and infibulated women might not give much
of a fuck about super-heavy discussions on
neo-orientalism in the metacontext of postfeminism.
<text ends here>
http://www.geocities.com/supermiembro/vincent_fourier/snip.i.html
From: Cyrill Duneau (dolmen...@FREE.FR)
Subject: Re: Spectacle and Simulacrum?
View: Complete Thread (11 articles)
Original Format
Newsgroups: fa.fiction-of-philosophy
Date: 2004-07-20 13:18:53 PST
> It depends on the situation, sometimes it is more
spectacled than simulated.
Yep, definitly, the spectacle is not the simulation
when one stays at a "basic"
level, i mean referring to the common notions usually
accepted for these terms.
the spectacle is mere representation, which is, in
Baudrillard's view, opposed
to simulation. But then in Debord one can find that
the spectacularisation of
society has somehow erased the real and replaced it by
the representation of it
- a representation without any referrents anymore and
growing out of itself.
Which is close to Baudrillard's idea of the
Simulacrum, the veil that veils
that there is nothing to unveil anymore and is also
its own referrent.
Something that still remains unclear for me is if this
process deals only with
society and its own image/reflection and "progress",
or if it might be
something deeper in the human mind, like a -sorry for
the oxymoron- globalised
solipcism.
> But this is a comparanda that only very, very
intelligent people with high
> intelligence can see. Not everybody can realize
about the similitudes (not
> to be confused with simulations). Another concept
interesting to look up
> would be the 'hyperreal' which has become a buzz
word -- and very hot in
> Internet intellectual discussion forums. If you
want to be hip you have to
> know about these things, and yes, don't forget
Lacan. Knowing about Lacan
> will give you the necessary success in this
competitive world (intellectual
> world, of course).
>
> You can have a look at the 'critical theory trading
cards' -->
> http://www.theorycards.org.uk/main.htm
>
> Ooops, it appears that neither Debord nor
Baudrillard are yet in the
> collection, but they are probably working on it.
The mental masturbation
> card must be also in its way.
Well, what you call mental masturbation, and which i
assume refers to some
tortuous post-modernist ways of thinking or of
expression, remains IMHO the
only exit that the western thought had after the rise
and fail of cartesianism
and humanism - both more closely linked that it seems
at first sight, and
typically the ground for both marxist modernism and
bourgeois progressism. I am
not claiming an absolute validity for post-modernist
theories, far from that,
but i sincerely think that the (not-so) new involved
paradigms can give us
useful tools to - huh, well, demolish post-modernism,
perhaps.
>Some of these cards can also be found in
> print, which always gives more prestige to written
ideas as opposed to
> online stuff.
>
>
> > shooting yourself in the balls is not the way to
have a happy life
>
> I think some of the cultural theorists also
discussed about this, but I
> can't remember now the exact bibliographic
references. I don't know perhaps
> Foucault's Histoire de la Sexualité and Bataille
L'Erotism, might refer to
> this in S/M pleasures, and other marginal ways of
choosing the path to
> happiness. But I'm not sure, as it's very hot today
and I feel dizzy and
> not able to distinguished between reality and
derivé.
>
Actually, it was a famous french footballer before he
was taught english...
______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca