Basic Banalities

BASIC BANALITIES A brief History of the Situationist International
THE SITUATIONIST INTERNATIONAL 1957 - 1972
The Avant-garde Days (1957-1962) During the first year of their existence the situationists issued a few tracts and expelled a few members. To summarize in a few points: Olmo, Verrone and Simondo were expelled over a row around a text on Experimental Music which Debord had accused of 'right-wing thought'. Rumney was expelled a bit later for failing to complete a psichogeographical report on time. Ironically he had mailed his essay off two days before being notified of his expulsion from Paris. A one-member German 'section' was founded. 'Section-man' Hans Platscheck was expelled one year later. In April 1958 the 'International Assembly of Art Critics' was due to take place in Brussels. A 'situationist proclamation' attacking the critics and what they stood for was produced and distributed to the assembly. This first SI action is pompously described as "a necessary direct attack" in the first issue of Internationale Situationiste (June 1958), the magazine of the group. Ironically, in the same town and during more or less the same time, Jorn's paintings were exposed as part of '50 dans l'Art moderne', an exhibition of up-and-coming new artists. That exhibition marked the beginning of Jorn's huge commercial success. From this moment onwards the movement and its individuals would almost entirely be financed from the sales of its paintings directly or indirectly. Gallizio exhibited his 'Industrial Painting' at the Notizie Gallery, Torino in May '58, followed by a second exhibition at the Montenapoleone Gallery in Milan, and his first Parisian one in a street. Faced with the embarrassment of commercial success of Gallizio's paintings, the situationists attempted to describe it as a defensive attempt by the commercial art world. Their 'response' was to quadruple the price. The Italian section launched a campaign for the release of the painter Nunzio Van Guglielmi from a lunatic asylum. Guglielmi had been arrested for an attack on Raphael's 'The Wedding of The Virgin'. Jorn praised Guglielmi for assailing the false artistic ideals of the past The German group Spur (meaning Trace or Trail), which Jorn met in 1958, joined the SI and became its German section. Together with ex-COBRA Constant the group developed the concepts of play and pleasure, central to the SI program. Under Constant and mainly with the participation of the Dutch section, the Bureau of Unitary Urbanism, composed by a team of artist, architects and sociologists, carried out studies towards the construction of unitary ambiances. April 1959: The film Sur le passage des quelques personnes a travers une assez corte unite de temps by Debord was released. During the same month, the 3rd Conference of the SI took place in Munich (the first one was the founding days and the second took place in Paris shortly after). Some divergence emerged between Debord and Constant over Unitary Urbanism (UU). Debord insists on UU as being a mere instrument, and envisages a revolutionary creativity separated from existing culture. Constant insists on the central role of UU as an alternative means of a liberated creation and does not see the pre-conditions for a social revolution. The problem is not resolved and one year later Constant resigned and the Bureau will be moved to Brussels under the direction of Kotányi. In May of the same year Gallizio exhibited at the Réné Druouin Gallery in Paris a unitary environment made of rolls of Industrial Painting. Jorn exhibited Detourned paintings at the Rive Gauche Gallery in Paris. Constant exhibited models for buildings of Unitary Urbanism at the Stedelijik Museum, Amsterdam. In 1960, following another 3 exhibitions, Gallizio and Melanotte were expelled for collaborating with ideologically unacceptable forces. Nevertheless the SI will recognised the personal merits of the painter when he died suddenly in 1964. September 1960, the 4th Conference was held in London. One of the central questions debated was to what degree is the SI a political movement and which forces could it count on. The German section expressed doubts about the revolutionary potential of the working class, too accustomed to commodities. However, after a response by Debord, who underlines how in advanced capitalist countries wildcat strikes have multiplied, the group retreated its motion. The Conference also decided on the introduction of a new organization model. Up to that point the SI had been a 'federation' of national sections. Although the annual conference was still the organism competent for the theoretical debates, a Central Council was introduced. During that conference a Manifesto was also adopted, shifting the basic program of the SI away from Unitary Urbanism and towards the liberation of play. Liberated playful activities superseded the old division between imposed work and passive free-time The question of play is the question of the organization of free-time, considered by the situationist as just another form of work in advanced capitalist societies. The liberation of the free-time is the basis for the revolution of everyday life. Martos sees these months as a turning point for the SI . He sees their whole story as a progressive maturation going from a critique of art, then expanded to a critique of everyday life then expanded to a critique of the whole society and its revolutionary consequences. He forgets to mention though, that this process is undertaken mainly by the French section, who then tried to re-direct the whole group accordingly. The French elaborated a political thought mainly out of the influence of Henry Lefebvre's 'Critique of Everyday Life'. Debord and Vaneigem both attended Lefebvre sociology classes at Nanterre University during the academic year 1957-58, subsequentely developing a friendship/collaboration with the philosopher which will ended in accusations of 'selling-out' a few years later. Debord had also started to collaborate with the post-trotskist group Socialisme ou Barbarie, founded in 1949, and even took up membership for a while. Debord took into the SI some of the group's theories, such as the re-definition of proletariat to identify as proletarians all those that have no control over their own life. The group also defined Soviet society as mere State capitalism, with a society divided between the ruling bureaucrats and alienated proletarians. The progressive radicalisation of the French section was progressively dividing the group. The situation seemed now to have got even worse with Jorn's resignation . He resigned on April 1961, his position in the group having become more and more embarrassing following his huge success in the commercial art world. At the opening of the 5th Conference held in Goteborg (Sweden) on 28-30th August 1961, Raul Vanaigem (whom had joined the SI earlier that year) said that: "there is no such thing as situationism or a situationist work of art...such a prospective doesn't mean anything if not directly linked to revolutionary practice, to the will to change the use of life. [...] Our position is that of combatants between two worlds -one that we don't acknowledge, the other that does not yet exist." The position of the German 'Spur' group (supported by most of the Scandinavians) on revolution and art were quite different from Vaneigem & friends. As it had already emerged from the previous Conference, the group didn't believe the workers were dissatisfied enough to hold any revolutionary potential. It also had different opinions on the realisation and suppression of art envisaged by Debord. The Conference adopted a resolution by Kotányi proposing to call all the artistic creations by members of the SI as anti-situationist , but ended without any of these controversies being resolved. Six months later the whole 'Spur' group was expelled by the Central Commitee . In March 1962, the scandinavian section broke away from the SI and announced the formation of a 2nd Situationist International. They grouped around Nash (Jorn's younger brother) and a farmhouse in Southern Sweden, named Drakabygget (the Situationist Bahaus) which would became the base of all the activities of the group. From The Schism to The Revolt (1962-1968) The Sixth Conference of the SI held in Anvers on the 12-16th November 1962 attempted to re-define and re-organise what was left of the group after the schism. It began by 'excluding' the 'Nashists' (ironical term, considering they had already left by themselves). Then it tried to define precisely its relations with external organisations. Moreover the Conference abolished the national sections structure and the French magazine became the most important publication of the group. The SI also proclaimed its theory as the best practical theory for leaving the 20th century, and honoured itself for having never given in to personal success. Jorn continued to support both the SI and the 2nd SI. The two SI both depended on Jorn to survive financially and were thus quite happy to ignore this collusion. Jorn was the only ex-situationist who was not attacked or denigrated by Debord. The 2nd Situationist International, which was quickly joined by the members of Spur, organised exhibitions and actions including the decapitation of the statue in Copenhagen harbour. They published the magazines 'Drakabygget' and 'Situationist Times' but their activities slowly ceased within a year. Without the contribution from its 'artistic' side the (1st) SI seems to have dropped all experimentation and practical research into the aspects of the directly lived, to concentrate on a more political line. The SI shifted its efforts towards the attempt to construct a modern revolutionary theory and reduced its activities to the production of the magazine and various tracts. The Seventh Congress took place in Paris in July 1966 almost four years after the previous one (a tangible sign of the power shift from the Congress to the Central Committee). The debated subjects where things like the organisation of revolutionary groups, the development of the relations between the SI and contemporary revolutionary forces, revolution and underdeveloped economies and so forth. They also carried on orchestrating various scandals. Martin was especially good at this and he even got in trouble with justice in Denmark for the publication of some political-erotic comics. Some of those publicity stunts gained the SI a small number of ' fans'. In 1966 such a group, found themselves elected on the board of the Student Union of Strasburg University thanks to the indifference of their fellow students. They contacted the SI and asked them for help 'to do something'. The SI suggested that they write a critique of university and society in general. The pamphlet 'On the Poverty of Student Life - considered in its economic, political, psychological, sexual, and particularly intellectual aspects, and a modest proposal for its remedy' was printed and distributed. Mainly written by the situationist Mustapha Kajati the pamphlet starts with a critique of the student life to extend to a critique of society at large. Printed with Student Union's funds the pamphlet caused a huge scandal and the authors were put on trial for the misuse of Student Union money. The SI popularity rocketed. Critics of the SI saw the Strasburg scandal as a lucky shot at the right moment, which allowed the SI to get to the May 1968 events with a good degree of popularity amongst students. In 1967 four Alsatian situationists are excluded for having formed a secret current within the group to contrast the alleged leadership of Debord and the Parisians. Being Alsatian the excluded joined some of the students of the scandal of Strasbourg disappointed with the SI for not taking them on board after the scandal. In 1967 Debord's book La Société du Spectacle ('The Society of Spectacle')and Vanaigem 'Traité de savoir vivre á l'usage des jeunes générations' ('The Revolution of Everyday Life') were published. The works completed the elaboration of the concept of spectacle, which had begun almost ten years before and had been carried through all the SI's life. Debord's book is full of detourned pieces of other's writing, particularly Hegel's. It is a very contort and voluntarily cryptic piece of writing, especially if read in isolation from other situationist texts. But if it is put in the context of the whole situationist experience and theory, it is a very lucid and valid analysis of modern day capitalist society. Briefly, capitalism has superseded its production phase and domination of the exploited class through starvation is a thing of the past. In countries where capitalism has reached its advanced phase, dominion is obtained through the commodification and alienation of work and free-time. Society as a whole has moved from a production phase, to a spectacular one, where almost every bit of 'real life' has been alienated into a spectacular form: "everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation". The spectacle, mustn't be confused with its most obvious container, the mass-media. For Debord the whole of our life is dominated by the Spectacle. "The Spectacle is not a collection of images, but a social relationship among people, mediated by images" The concept is in many ways a mere re-elaboration of the young Karl Marx's work on the alienation of the worker, updated for a new form of capitalism based on consumerism rather than production. While modern technology has ended the natural struggle against the forces of nature, the social alienation in the form of a hierarchy of masters and slaves has continued. The majority of the people are still treated like passive objects and not active subjects by the ruling minority. After degrading being into having, the society of the spectacle has further transformed having into merely appearing. The result is an appealing contrast between cultural poverty and economic wealth: Who wants a world in which the guarantee that we shall not die of starvation entails the risk of dying of boredom? From The Revolt to the Split (1968 - 1972) The events of May '68 were the most important turning point in the story of the SI, and while they saw some of their theories proven, they were also a 'shock' that the organisation was never able to handle. The post-war boom had boosted French economy in the late sixties but unemployment and low-wages were rife. Resentment had already shown itself in 1967 in some major strikes. Students were also starting to protest about overcrowding and inadequate facilities. The 'troubles', which had started at the Nanterre University outside Paris quickly spread to the central Sorbonne Universtiy and then to other campuses. The students fought with the police and called for the workers to join the revolt. Barricades were erected and, despite the opinion of the official unions millions of workers went on strike, literally paralysing the whole country for weeks. The revolt reached its peak when Prime Minister Charles DeGaulle left Paris, only to come back the day after, having gained the Army support if it came to the worst. An election held a few weeks after showed a huge support for DeGaulle and the acceptance of all the reformist demands of the workers 'cooled off' the last of the revolt. The situationists, together with other 'revolutionaries' were part of the Occupation Committee at the Sorbonne, from where they issued cries for the immediate realisation of the Worker's Council. The SI's role in the revolts is open to debate. Their influence was undoubtedly there and they certainly can be held responsible for some of the most beautiful slogans of the period. After May '68 the SI's popularity was higher than it never had been. Hundreds of people were calling themselves 'situationist'. Those people, later called pro-situs, often had just a very vague idea of what the SI was and had been, but were eager to blindly embrace its theories swarming the French section with request for membership. Debord gave up his place as director of the magazine. At the Eight Conference held in Venice in 1969 pro-situ fervour was extremely high: Half of the participants used three-quarters of the time to strongly affirm the same vagueness just affirmed by the previous speaker [...] each one of these comrades had the only aim of demonstrating of being as situationist as the others The Conference approved another statute, in which the SI is described as an international association of individuals equal in all the aspects of its democratic management [...] the majority decisions are executed by all, the minority has the duty of splitting if it thinks that the opposition is about a fundamental matter" After the Conference a lengthy debate opened within the group. The aim was to re-define a direction after May 68, which, according to the situationists, had proven their theories right, but their methods unprepared for the events. During this process ridden with exclusions and resignations, the publication of the magazine was suspended. However, the SI seems to sink deeper and deeper in a contemplative mud as the year goes by. The 11 of November 1970 Debord and others announced their will to break-up with the SI. Vaneigem resigned 3 days later dooming the last 10 years of situationist active as complete failures. In 1972 a bitter attack titled A propos de Vaneigem is issued as answer and published in La veritable scission dans l'Internationale (The Veritable Split in the International). Written by Debord and Sanguinetti the book is the last publication by the group. It contains a very optimistic view of the new 'era' as a consciously revolutionary one, where the language of the power has become furiously reformistic. The pamphlet also contains a virulent attack on the pro-situs; the situationists had always attacked the idea of becoming just another dogma, another -ism, from the very first days of their foundation and now despised the idea of becoming a 'movement'. It is a clear demonstration of dishonesty [...] to accuse the SI of constituting a dominating organisation when we have gone to great lengths to make it almost impossible to become a member of the SI [...] we have never traded on our 'intellectual prestige' by frequenting any bourgeois or intellectual circles [...] or by competing with all the leftist sects for the control or admiration of the miserable student public [...] In reality it is because we shock certain people by refusing contact with them, or even their requests for admission to the SI, that we are accused of being an 'elite' and of aspiring to dominate those we don't even want to know! The pamphlet grandiosely concludes that there is no longer any need for an International because now the situationists are everywhere and their aims are everywhere.