The Situationist International emerged from a fusion of several artistic groups.
The result was a group that sought to redefine revolutionary praxis. While heavily
influenced by avant-garde artistic movements and Marxist theory, the Situationist
International renounced artistic bohemianism and traditional Marxist-Leninist
parties, proposing instead a critique of capitalism that weighted heavily in
favor of the spontaneous realization of the revolutionary potential of everyday
life.
Karl Marx
Georg Hegel
Georg Lukács
Karl Korsch
Guy Debord
Asger Jorn
Michele Bernstein
Henri Lefebvre
Cornelius Castoriadis
Claude Lefort
Constant Nieuwenhuis
Raul Vaneigem
Marleau Ponty
Mustapha Khayati
Andre Breton
Isidore Isou
Marxism
Council Communism
Syndicalism
Various dada and surrealist-inspired revolutionary groups
Socialisme ou Barbarie (Socialism or Barbarism)
London Psychogeographical Association
Letterist International (LI)
Movement for an Imaginist Bauhaus (MIBI)
Provos
CoBrA
Gruppe SPUR
CrimethInk
Reclaim The Streets
RTMark
Guerrilla Girls
Whirlmart
Direct Action
Social Parody
Détournement
Culture Jamming
Psychogeography
Dérive
Unitary Urbanism
Web homepage:
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/
Email: rebunk@situationist.cjb.net
Snail mail: n/a
Spokespersons: n/a
Mostly Paris, France; with congresses also held in Munich, Germany; Venice,
Italy
1957-1972
The Situationist International formed as an underground group out of a meeting
of three small artistic groups (the Letterist International, Movement for an
Imaginist Bauhaus, and the London Psychogeographical Association) in a bar in
Cosio d'Arroscia, Italy, in 1957. It was there that Guy Debord emerged as the
dominant personality of the group, with the suggestion that it should be named
‘Situationist International.’
From 1957 to 1962, the group formulated a number of significant concepts (unitary
urbanism, dérive, détournement, and décomposition). It
attracted many prominent artists and theorists into its ranks, even though,
as former members T.J. Clark and Donald Nicholson-Smith observe, the Situationist
International “never ‘recruited’ members”. [1] According
to many accounts, the membership of the group never exceeded more than twenty.
Nevertheless, the group managed during this period to attract members from Algeria,
Belgium, England, France, Germany, Holland, Italy, Sweden, and the US, [2] thus
attaining international status. It is possible to attribute its ‘rotating’
membership to the group’s “policy of aiming for constant agreement
on key matters,” [3] which often resulted in ad hominem attacks among
the members and consequent expulsions from the group. Nevertheless, during this
period the situationists were active in theoretical as well as artistic work,
often capturing public attention with modes of action aiming to scandalize and
provoke the public, as well as the orthodox Left.
From 1962 to 1966 the life of the group was characterized by splits and more
internal disagreements. In 1962, a rival Second Situationist International was
established. As Peter Wollen argues, the breakup “can be characterized
as a split between ‘artists’ and ‘political theorists’
(or ‘revolutionaries’)”, based around Debord’s insistence
“that art could not be recognized as a separate activity, with its own
legitimate specificity, but must be dissolved into a unitary revolutionary practice.”
[4] The split effectively put an end to the earlier artistic endeavors of the
group.
It is not until 1967, however, that the group regained a public presence. That
year two major texts outlining Situationist theory were published: Debord’s
The Society of the Spectacle and Vaneigem’s The Revolution of Everyday
Life. Furthermore, various creative actions committed by members of the group
won the Situationist International media attention. Perhaps the greatest year
for the group was 1968 when the uprisings that shook Paris were characterized
by forms of creative resistance which “were far more in tune with the
SI than with ‘Vietnam Committees’ and calls for university reform.”
[5] As Peter Wollen notes, “their contribution to the revolutionary uprising
was remembered mainly through the diffusion and spontaneous expression of situationist
ideas and slogans, in graffiti and in posters… as well as in serried assaults
on the routines of everyday life” [6]. The situationists were active participants
in the events, acting as ‘mentors’ of revolution who promoted workers’
councils without attempting to gain any power in them. In 1969, the group published
the last issue of its journal L’Internationale Situationniste and held
its last conference in 1970 in Wolsfield and Trier, East Germany. More internal
disagreements, expulsions and splits followed, with the group dissolving in
1972. Its total membership never rose above 70.
An excellent chronology can be found at:
http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/chronology/chronology.html
The existing framework cannot subdue the new human force that is increasing
day by day alongside the irresistible development of technology and the dissatisfaction
of its possible uses in our senseless social life.
Alienation and oppression in this society cannot be distributed amongst a range
of variants, but only rejected en bloc with this very society. All real progress
has clearly been suspended until the revolutionary solution of the present multiform
crisis….
Under the existing dominant society, which produces the miserable pseudo-games
of non-participation, a true artistic activity is necessarily classed as criminality.
It is semi-clandestine. It appears in the form of scandal.
So what really is the situation? It's the realisation of a better game, which
more exactly is provoked by the human presence. The revolutionary gamesters
of all countries can be united in the S.I. to commence the emergence from the
prehistory of daily life.
Henceforth, we propose an autonomous organisation of the producers of the new
culture, independent of the political and union organisations which currently
exist, as we dispute their capacity to organise anything other than the management
of that which already exists.
“Situationist International Manifesto”
From L’Internationale Situationiste 4, June 1960
Available at: http://www.notbored.org/si-manifesto.html
The analysis of contemporary society carried
out by its own theorists (Debord, Vaneigem, and Lefebvre among others) motivated
the Situationist International to distrust not only the images and representations
of contemporary life but also the traditional modes and expressions of dissent.
Thus, the situationists supported what would have appeared to other Leftist
radicals as ‘apolitical’ forms of resistance: riots, vandalism,
and other criminal acts. They also, however, attempted to give theoretical backing
and to formulate forms of direct action that sought to disrupt the routine obligations
of contemporary life. These included creative acts of revolt guided by the principles
of détournement – “the reuse of preexisting artistic elements
in a new ensemble”. [7] An example of this method involves the use of
comic strips in order to supply new texts/messages. The situationists also advocated
alternative modes of knowledge construction (i.e. the drawing of maps based
on impressions derived from the principles of pychogeography) which were conceptualized
as types of knowledge that undermined the spectacle-representation of urban
spaces.
Although the Situationist International are often embraced by anarchist theorists
and activists, [8] the situationists themselves identified explicitly with Marxism.
As former members T.J. Clark and Donald Nicholson-Smith note, “we persist
in thinking that these texts [written by various members of the Situationist
International] are classics of Marxist analysis.” [9] Nevertheless, the
situationists were never orthodox or party-line Marxists. A year before the
founding of the group, many of its future members witnessed the Soviet suppression
of the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. This event signaled the beginning of the New
Left, as many communists broke ranks with the French and other Communist Parties.
It was in the shadow of post-war French Marxism that many engaged with classical
revolutionary theory rediscovering, mainly from Karl Korsch, the principles
of council communism.
Council communism formed the backbone from which many situationists were able
to launch a critique of not only the spectacular reification of daily experience
under capitalism, but also of the communist bureaucratic class. Inherent in
council communism is the notion that all parties should be rejected and that
the revolution should be carried out by working class organizations (i.e. councils)
that embrace the principle of self-management. The councils, however, should
not seek state power, but should, on the contrary, seek to abolish all bureaucratic
and statist forms. Although in this way “council communism appeared as
a Marxist reformulation of syndicalist ideas”,[10] we should note that
“[u]nlike some anarchistically inclined groups, the SI did not believe
that the concept of a vanguard had to be exorcised utterly”. [11] Thus,
although the situationists along council communist principles refused to assume
direct leadership over organizations that embraced their ideas during the events
of 1968, they nevertheless attempted to fulfill a vanguadist role by bringing
“theoretical support to already existing movements.” [12]
It is not fair, however, to reduce the situationists to the role of being just
advocates of council communism. They engaged with many theoretical strains that
crossed fields such as geography, art, and politics. Many of their members (notably
Debord, Vaneigem, and Lefebvre) were also active contributors to social theory.
It is from them that many organizations and groups today (CrimethInc, Reclaim
The Streets, RTMark, Guerrilla Girls, Adbusters, Whirlmart, etc…) derive
critiques of the all-encompassing, spectacle-driven logic of contemporary capitalism,
which commercializes desire while denying its authenticity. It is also from
the situationists that many inherit the belief that revolutionary action should
be primarily creative action, hinging on festivals and parades and not on the
monotony and stifling regulation of rank-and-file and party organizations.
Everyone from the French National Student Union, to ‘fake’ social
critics, pseudo-revolutionaries, culture heroes, and capitalism in all of its
spectacular guises, is the enemy. Bureaucratic communist organizations and Marxist
parties are also the enemy.
Internet: maintained on behalf, but not by the original group http://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/
Print: no longer in print, 12 issues of the journal L’Internationale Situationniste;
numerous books, posters, pamphlets, catalogues, periodicals,
Other: art exhibitions, graffiti, experimental films, street manifestations/
constructions of situations.
Le Monde portrayed them as a scandalous group of fanatics whose “snarling
extravagant rhetoric is always detached from the complexity of the facts.”
[13] Other popular publications also did not hesitate to depict the situationists
in a similar light. When not denouncing the Situationists as lunatics, some
attempted to discredit them from the start, without bothering to take a closer
look. An article in Le Nouvel Observateur, for example, states, "Situationism
is, of course, no more the specter that haunts industrial society than was communism
the specter that haunted Europe in 1848." [14]
For an extensive selection of media representations of the Situationists International,
see: http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/blindmen81.htm
Mostly non-violent, non-branded tactics aimed at recapturing the lost-authenticity
of contemporary life. The situationists advocated creative disruptions of the
spectacle that involve direct action, protest, education, and even playing the
system.
1. The attack on Professor Bense
When: 1959?
Where: Museum of Ethnology in Munich, Germany
What: The Situationist International affiliated SPUR group announced an exhibition
of ‘Extremist-Realist’ art at which Professor Bense, a Leftist philosopher
and mathematician, was scheduled to talk. Bense was deliberately left unaware
of the invitation. In his place, the audience found themselves staring at a
green suitcase placed atop of a podium. Andrew Hussey explains the event:
“[a] tape recorder hidden inside the suitcase was switched on and a voice
claiming to be Bense explained that although urgent business compelled him to
be in Zurich, history had demanded that he also give his important talk on the
‘new art of the future’ here in Munich, albeit in cybernetic form.
The audience settled down, and the green suitcase gave a cough, prefacing a
learned disquisition which veered between German, Latin, French and garbled
quotations from Marx and Hegel. The suitcase announced that it would also give
a talk ‘in Hegelian’… the professor’s rhetorical skill
was such that the Munich intelligentsia could hardly stop themselves from giving
him a rousing reception. Bense was furious, the Munich public humiliated whilst,
much to Debord’s glee, the term ‘Situationismus’ entered the
German language for the first time.” [15]
2. The “Strasbourg Scandal”
When: 1966
Where: Strasbourg, France
What: A few Situationist International sympathizers got elected as leaders of
their campus chapter of the National Student Union. They used the organization’s
funds and resources to print and release a situationist pamphlet entitled Of
Student Poverty and afterwards “propose the self-dissolution of the union
on the grounds that it was nothing but a mechanism for integrating students
into an unacceptable society.” [16] The pamphlet was rapidly circulated
around campuses in France. Many of its slogans would eventually appear as graffiti
during the events of 1968.
Although they resulted from the fusion of several groups, the situationists
did not affiliate well with others. As Jappe notes, the situationists “believed
themselves to be the sole voice, at least in France, of a revolutionary theory
adequate to the new era.” [17] We may conclude that as a result of their
stance of theoretical purity, the situationists “had absolutely no part
in this universe. They had no relationship with academia, participated in no
round-table discussions and attended no cultural meeting, wrote articles in
no periodicals other than their own, and were never heard on radio or television.”
[18] Nonetheless, the situationists did attempt to expand the realm of their
influence. Debord traveled throughout Europe tirelessly promoting situationist
ideas. As a result, sections of the Situationist International opened in other
countries. The revolutionary inspired artistic SPUR group registered its affiliation
with the situationists, but during the second phase of the Situationist International
(see History) it was purged.
R. Berman, et al. (1991). "The Society of the Spectacle 20 Years Later:
A Discussion." Telos, 86, pp. 81 - 102.
A. Bonnett. (1989). "Situationism, geography, and poststructuralism."
Environment and Planning, 7, pp. 131 - 146.
B. J. Macdonald. (1995). "From the Spectacle to Unitary Urbanism: Reassessing
Situationist Theory." Rethinking Marxism, 8, (2), pp. 89 - 111.
T. F. McDonough. (1997). "Rereading Debord, Rereading the Situationists."
October, pp. 3 - 14.
D. Pinder. (1994). "Subverting cartography: the situationists and maps
of the city." Environment and Planning, 28, 3, pp. 405 - 427.
P. Wollen. (1989). “The Situationist International.” New Left Review,
174, pp. 67 – 95.
R. Fraser, et al. (1988). 1968: a Student Generation in Revolt. London: Chatto
& Windus.
A. Hussey. (2001). The Game of War: The Life and Death of Guy Debord. London:
Jonathan Cape.
A. Jappe. (1993). Guy Debord. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
K. Knabb. (1981). Situationist International Anthology. Ed. K. Knabb. Berkeley:
Bureau of Public Secrets.
Available online: http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/index.htm
The Situationist International archives:
http://www.nothingness.org/SI/
http://www.psychogeography.co.uk/
1. T.J. Clark and D. Nicholson-Smith. (1997). “Why Art Can’t Kill
the Situationist International.” October, 79, pp. 15-31.
2. A list of members can be found at: http://www.fact-index.com/m/me/members_of_the_situationist_international.html
3. T.J. Clark and D. Nicholson-Smith. (1997). “Why Art Can’t Kill
the Situationist International.”
4. P. Wollen. (1989). “The Situationist International.” New Left
Review, 174, pp. 67 – 95.
5. A. Jappe. (1993). Guy Debord. Los Angeles: University of California Press,
p 83.
6. P. Wollen. (1989). “The Situationist International.”
7. Situationist International. (1959). “Détournement as Negation
and Prelude.” L’Internationale Situationniste, 3, available at:
http://library.nothingness.org/articles/SI/en/display/315
8. “The SI was also influenced by anarchism which it regarded as the ‘most
advanced form of proletarian revolution’ in the form of the anarchists
of the Spanish civil war.” Available at: http://www.jahsonic.com/SI.html
9. T.J. Clark and D. Nicholson-Smith. (1997). “Why Art Can’t Kill
the Situationist International.”
10. P. Wollen. (1989). “The Situationist International.”
11. A. Jappe. (1993). Guy Debord. Los Angeles: University of California Press,
p 93.
12. Ibid., 95.
13. K. Knabb. (1981). Situationist International Anthology. Ed. K. Knabb. Berkeley:
Bureau of Public Secrets, p 382.
14. Available at: http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/blindmen81.htm
15. A. Hussey. (2001). The Game of War: The Life and Death of Guy Debord.
London: Jonathan Cape, p 136.
16. A. Jappe. (1993). Guy Debord. Los Angeles: University of California Press,
p 82.
17. Ibid., 83-84.
18. Ibid., 84