The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

Kevin D. Vinson 1 a, E. Wayne Ross 2 b

Abstract ARTICLE HISTORY: In this paper we set out to accomplish several goals. Received March 2013 Primarily, we seek to re-interpret Guy Debord’s (1967) Received in revised form June 2013 work The Society of the Spectacle in light of modern-day Accepted June 2013 schooling, principally within North America (although we Available online June 2013 recognize the global connectivity inherent in any current discussion of formal education). In addition, we aim to utilize Debord’s conceptualizations as a series of means and mechanisms by and through which to examine (1) various threats posed against the ideals of publicly supported KEYWORDS: schools and (2) modes of resistance, particularly what we term “dangerous citizenship,” via which committed The society of the spectacle advocates might challenge the possible consequences of Separation Schooling such threats, consequences including disciplinarity/ Dangerous citizenship deterrence, anti-democracy, oppression, anti-collectivity, North America and inauthenticity.

© 2013 IJSCL. All rights reserved.

1 Senior Lecturer, Email: [email protected] (Corresponding Author) Tel: 604-822-2830 2 Professor, Email: [email protected] a University of the West Indies, Barbados b University of British Columbia, Canada 2 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

1. Introduction that the imaginary could become real at any time. (Marcus, 1997, p. 109) hat happened was this: I got an image in my head that Robert Penn Warren and Greil Marcus present Wnever got out. We see a great distinct, yet related notions of image, one of many things and can remember a great which (Warren’s) indicates a certain pessimism many things, but that is different. We get with respect to “reality,” the other of which very few of the true images in our heads (Marcus’s) signifies a certain optimism in of the kind I am talking about, the kind terms of “the imaginary”. For Warren, image, which become more and more vivid for rightly or wrongly, is what mediates and us as if the passage of the years did not enhances the meanings of lived experience— obscure their reality but, year by year, between, that is, what is and what was, or what drew off another veil to expose a exists and what has existed. It negotiates the meaning which we had only dimly relationships between the present and the past. surmised at first. Very probably the last For Marcus, image (at least in his interpretation veil will not be removed, for there are of the work of Stuart Smith) mediates the not enough years, but the brightness of connections between present and future— the image increases and our conviction between what is and what might become. For increases that the brightness is meaning, Warren, image attempts to (or might) “beat” or the legend of meaning, and without reality; for Marcus, it attempts to (or might) the image our lives would be nothing “become” reality. For both, image advances its except an old piece of film rolled on a singular, pragmatic, and fundamental and spool and thrown into a desk drawer necessary purposes. among the unanswered letters. (Warren, 1946, pp. 118-119) Undoubtedly, images serve both positive and negative ends. The image surely and He wasn’t the real thing, but he sure was productively helps us to make sense of and to a good imitation of it, which is frequently provide meaning toward our lived and better than the real thing, for the real experienced worlds. On the other hand, image thing can relax but the imitation can’t functions to discipline and deter, to teach—if afford to and has to spend all the time not even force—us to adopt and engage in being just one cut more real than the real certain thoughts and behaviors and to shun and thing…. (Warren, 1946, p. 140) avoid certain other thoughts and behaviors. Image, thus, is simultaneously a potentially Now tricksters rule, sharps who can liberating and conformative (and extraordinarily guess your weight and tell your secrets. contextualized) conceptual entity. It—image— The carnival has arrived in Smithville, links, granting due accord to Warren and just as it does in [Stuart] Smith’s Heaven Marcus, the past, the present, and the future. and Earth Magic, the sixty-six-minute animated film he made between 1957 In any event, and perhaps especially because and 1962. There he set dancing countless of its past-present-future (i.e., temporal) images clipped from the same sources as conjunction, image maintains a privileged the illustrations in the Anthology [of place in contemporary Western/global society, American Folk Music] booklet; as on the especially with respect to (1) critical opening side of “Songs”, every image understanding and (2) critical action. Given was less a representation of the real than today’s numerous and multiple societal/ a symbol of the imaginary, of the notion political/economic/cultural/scientific/philosop hical/pedagogical (etc.) circumstances, image 3 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

to a large extent characterizes and offers a lens We maintain here that first, given several key through which to interpret the present state of recent socio-pedagogical developments, image affairs—the dominant status quo, for instance, has displaced any meaningful sense of lived if ultimately nothing else. As we argue, it does reality in terms of understanding schools and so in part via the comprehensive workings of education (and all that both encompass). We the spectacle and spectacular society (including, look primarily, in Image and Education, at as a social institution, schooling). popular culture (e.g., films) and the media reporting of statistics (e.g., test scores). We In this paper we set out to accomplish several place this phenomenon—these phenomena— goals. Primarily, we seek to re-interpret Guy within the broader contexts of the increasingly Debord’s (1967/1995) work The Society of the visual nature of society (i.e., the need and Spectacle (especially Chapter 1) in light of desire to see and be seen; see, e.g., Dowd, modern-day schooling, principally within 2002a, 2002b; Rich, 2000, 2003). Our questions, North America (although we recognize the in effect, were why and what does this mean? global connectivity inherent in any current discussion of formal education). In addition, The why question we answer in terms of the though, we aim to (through, for example, the merging or convergence of “surveillance” vantage point of our previous work; e.g., (following Foucault [1975/1979], the “panoptic” Vinson & Ross, 2001, 2003) utilize Debord’s and “disciplinary” observation of the many by conceptualizations as a series of means and the few) and “spectacle” (following Foucault mechanisms by and through which to examine [1975/1979] and Debord [1967/1995], the (1) various threats posed against the ideals of disciplinary observation of the few by the publicly and governmentally supported schools many and the image-based mediation of all and (2) modes of resistance , particularly what social/capital-induced relationships). (We relate we term “dangerous citizenship”, via which these concepts to the union of “voyeurism” and committed advocates might challenge the “exhibitionism” and interrogate, within this possible consequences of such threats, light, such developments as two-way consequences including disciplinarity/deterrence, Webcams, “reality” TV, the USA Patriot Act, anti-democracy, oppression, anti-collectivity, etc.). Both surveillance and spectacle, we and inauthenticity (as we have previously argue, are visual means of discipline and discussed; see Vinson & Ross, 2003), but also deterrence (i.e., getting people to think and and particularly those peculiar to the behave and to not think and behave in spectacular society (following Debord, particular ways—and, as we suggest, are both 1967/1995). meaningful only vis-à-vis questions such as who decides, why, and in whose interests, etc.) 2. Image and Education and, together, create the setting(s) within which image attains its extraordinary and In our prior work, most especially Image and somewhat recently constructed prominence. Education: Teaching in the Face of the ew We suggest as both cause and effect of the Disciplinarity (Vinson & Ross, 2003; see also outstanding place and eminent methodical Vinson & Ross, 2001), we explore in essence milieu of image and its station the related the relationships among image, surveillance, conditions of technological change (e.g., 24/7 and spectacle. Most directly, however, we TV, security cameras, the Internet), globalization consider the concept of image as a way of (e.g., multinational corporations), and making sense of contemporary Western/global standardization (i.e., what we call the “will to (namely and specifically US) schooling. standardize” and the “standardization imperative”—in the USA see the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Race To The Top 4 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

and standards-based educational reform more 3. Separation Perfected: The Society of broadly). Further, we take on as background the Spectacle Re-examined and as potential interpretive frameworks the ways of understanding embodied within the Guy Debord was unquestionably the best disciplines of cultural studies (Storey, 1994, known member of the Situationist 1996, 1998), visual studies (Mirzoeff, 1998, International (SI), a predominantly French 1999), film studies (Dyer, 2000; Freeland & association of often loosely affiliated radicals, Wartenberg, 1995; Hill & Gibson, 2000; thinkers, artists, propagandists, provocateurs , Nelmes, 1999; Perez, 1998), and media studies and agitators. Most active during the 1950s (Gitlin, 2002; Keane, 1991; Luhmann, 2000; and 1960s, generally today the SI is McLuhan, 1994; Sardar & Van Loon, 2000). remembered, if at all, for its participation in We consider as well the associated social and apparent, or at least alledged, instigation philosophies presented by Mikhail Bakhtin of the Paris “events” of May 1968 (Jappe, (1981, 1984) on the chronotope, Roland 1993/1999; Marcus, 1989; Plant, 1992). The Barthes (1977) on the “rhetoric of the image”, SI, however, especially in terms of the work of Daniel Boorstin (1961/1992) on the “pseudo- Debord (but also of Raoul Vaneigem, event,” Jean Baudrillard (1995) on “hyperreality” 1967/2002, & others), encompasses a more and “simulacra and simulation”, and Marshall rigorous, comprehensive, and distinctive McLuhan (1964/1994) on the thesis that “the program than many scholars know. medium is the message”. Debord (1967/1995) presents his fundamental In light of these various and complex settings, and most distinctive and significant view in we pursue as well the meanings of image- the very first line of The Society of the based discipline and deterrence with respect to Spectacle: “The whole of those societies in (1) everyday life (e.g., Brown, 1973; de which modern [i.e., capitalist] conditions of Certeau, 1984; Jackson, 1968/1990; Lefebvre, production prevail presents itself as an 1947/1992, 1968/1971; Perlman, 1969; immense accumulation of spectacles . All that Vaneigem, 1967/2002), (2) resistance (e.g., once was directly lived has become mere dérive, detournement, la perruque, critical representation” (p. 12). For Debord, this media literacy; see Debord, 1958/1981; implied as the principal and defining Debord & Wolman, 1956/1981; de Certeau, characteristics of modern, spectacular society: 1984; McLaren, Hammer, Sholle, & Reilly, (1) image, (2) passivity/spectatorship/contemplation, 1995), (3) potential consequences (discipline/ (3) commodification, and, most especially, (4) deterrence, anti-democracy, oppression, anti- separation. In effect, these attributes form collectivity, inauthenticity; see, e.g., Baudrillard, within The Society of the Spectacle four 1995; Dewey, 1916/1966; Foucault, 1975/1979; interrelated and interdependent themes. Freire, 1970; Young, 1992), and (4) our overall and summary conceptualizations of With respect to image, though arguing its image-power and controlling images (Vinson importance, Debord (1967/1995) maintained & Ross, 2003). that “the spectacle is not a collection of images; rather, it is a social relationship In the end, it is within and according to these between people that is mediated by images” introductory and hermeneutic environments (p. 12), one in which, in fact, the related that we reconsider the work of Guy Debord “phenomenon of separation is part and parcel (1967/1995) in The Society of the Spectacle of the [negative] unity of the world, of a global and its relevance vis-à-vis the theory and praxis that has split up into reality on the one practice of contemporary public schooling (see hand and image on the other” (p. 13). especially Debord’s chapter 1). (Though, for Debord, there was no absolute 5 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

distinction between spectacle and “real” In terms of passivity Debord (1967/1995) experience; that is, the image-reality insinuates that for the spectacle “reality dichotomy persists within both spectacle and unfolds in a new generality as a pseudo-world concrete life). Within this setting, the apart [alienated from the individual and the dominant, capitalistic “autonomous image” social, in that all contact is image-mediated], represents the zenith, such that it maintains solely as an object of contemplation” (p. 12). complete control over appearances, means and “The spectacle is by definition [therefore] ends, needs and desires, and the fabrication of immune from human activity” (p. 17); it “is the good (most, if not indeed too, the material reconstruction of the religious simplistically, think advertising). The illusion” (p. 18), a focus on the “out there,” spectacle necessitates a commodification of and “a technological version of the exiling of social life—humanity as a mass of seeing human powers in a ‘world beyond’…” (p. 18). objects/objects to be seen—such that—given In essence, what Debord asserts here is that in not only the power of image but also the the society of the spectacle—a world of image, interlocking and reinforcing demands of commodification, and separation—reality separation, capitalism, and passivity—having becomes the “absolute denial of life” (p. 18) becomes appearing/appearance, being becomes and a system of gazing and objectification; it appearing/appearance, and nature and virtue exists as but contents meant to be become appearing/appearance (in contrast, for commodified by commodifiers, seen by seers, example, to earlier, pre-capitalist periods when spectated by spectators, contemplated by being initially became having). The visual contemplators, and non-lived by non-livers. (alienating and commodity-laden) usurps the “All that once was directly lived has become active in its totality, the individual and the mere representation” (p. 12). For as, a la the social, all serving/served by the economy. spectacle, “the real world becomes real images, mere images are transformed into real In spectacular society, even individual and beings—tangible figments which are the social “language [comprises no more than the] efficient motor of trancelike behavior” (p. 17). signs [images, representations, and appearances] This, then, is a “reality” where “all activity of the dominant organization of production— [thus, for Debord, freedom] is banned” (p. 21). signs which are at the same time the ultimate end-products of that organization” (p. 13.). The spectacle-commodity status boils down, in For, according to Debord, the means and ends part, to Debord’s (1967/1995) notions that the of the spectacle are one and the same—the spectacle is (1) “the very heart of society’s real power of consumption-based commodity unreality”; (2) “epitomizes the prevailing capitalism. Here, the “prevailing conditions of model of social life”; and (3) “serves as total production” rule, at least to some extent, vis-à- justification for the conditions and aims of the vis their re/production of/by the various mass existing system” (p. 13). For it, the spectacle, information and entertainment media (i.e., “expresses…the total practice of one particular media qua mediators rooted in image, economic and social formation” and is “that representation, appearance, etc.), and their formation’s agenda” (p. 15). It is “the chief essentially “one-way” technologies of—and product of present-day society…simply the control over—“communication” (p. 19). The economic realm developing for itself—at once visual regulates in favor and as a result of the a faithful mirror held up to the production of spectacle (mutually, via image, passivity, things and a distorting objectification of the commodification, and separation), and, as producers” (p. 16). Though it, the present such, life is lived—observed , really—from an system, has the potential to eliminate all objectified and impersonal distance. commodified leisure, labor, needs, and relationships, its stock and trade is convincing 6 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

people of the “necessity” for more conglomerative perpetuation—the perpetration— commodities/commodifications (in terms, as of the spectacle. Representation (image) runs well, of leisure, labor, needs, and relationships). roughshod over lived (social and individual) This works in that life-becomes-image- experience; passive, spectatorial contemplation becomes-object-becomes-visible-becomes- overwhelms meaningful engagement; consumable. Again, life as non-life. “Life”, as commodification overruns action; and such, then involves merely the mechanical or separation dangerously trumps communicative robotic (mis)behavior of devouring images, and human/e unity. This setting, real accommodating unreal spectator-passivity, unreality/unreal reality, operates all in the working for and because of consumer- name of the spectacle and its not so strange commodity capitalism, and (re)producing bedfellow of corporate, (post)modern capitalism. alienating/alienated everyday experience. As we argue, this setup manifests clear and problematic consequences and threats for It is, for Debord, this alienating/alienated contemporary schooling (and, no doubt, for experience that provides the link between the society as a whole as well). commodity and image/representation/appearance and spectatorship/contemplation/passivity and 4. Threats separation, what Debord [1967/1995] calls “the alpha and omega of the spectacle” [p. We have examined previously a number of 20]). What matters most are the significances potential threats posed to schooling by the of (1) alienation; (2) the fact that “the reigning heightened status of gaze-based image as it economic system is founded on isolation [and] maneuvers within the ubiquitous and powerful at the same time…is a circular process settings of the merged surveillance-spectacle designed to produce isolation; and (3) that “the complex. Namely, to reiterate, we have addressed origin of the spectacle lies in the world’s loss the relevant dangers of disciplinarity/deterrence, of unity…” (p. 22). Debord here argues that oppression, anti-collectivity, anti-democracy, “[t]he spectacle…unites what is separate, and inauthenticity (Vinson & Ross, 2003). but…only in its separateness” (p. 22). The Undoubtedly, within our re-reading of The (post)modern human being “feels at home Society of the Spectacle, these conditions nowhere, for the spectacle is everywhere… remain real, current, dynamic, and robust. [and its] function in society is the concrete manufacture of alienation” (p. 23)—the Yet, there are nevertheless dangers more separation of human beings from their work, specifically connected to spectacular from one another, and from their own social schooling—those directly rooted in the and individual lives. Regarding the Debordian conceptualizations of contemporary, commodity, in this “separated system of spectacle-based society—dangers that if better production… [the] product is separation itself” understood might assist those individuals (p. 21). Regarding image, “[t]he spectacle is interested in education to not only more fully capital accumulated to the point where it comprehend schooling, but also to critique and becomes image” (p. 24). And regarding challenge it as well. From our perspective spectatorship, “the [disunified and specialized] (given spectacularization), the principal risks spectacle philosophizes reality, and turns the involve Debord’s sense of (1) “separation”, material life of everyone into a universe of that is the alienating disconnection among speculation” (p. 17). individuals and their labor, individuals and other people, individuals and themselves, and All in all, the picture Debord presents is one in individuals and their variously livable/lived which image, commodity, contemplation, and lives; (2) the authority of image; (3) separation all are intermingled within the commodification; and (4) passivity. 7 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

Debord’s critique and its attendant consequences who observe from a disconnected distance— appear, we suggest, principally via the “know” anyway. If schooling is stultifying or mechanisms of standards based educational even dead/death, so what? Of what meaning reform and various privatization schemes (e.g., via the corporate, global, technological, vouchers, corporate sponsorship/influence, standardized world? Better passive and (thus) choice, certain charter programs, etc.). pliable than critical and challenging(!?). Although we previously have dealt with other critical repercussions—again, disciplinarity, Commodification means that education and deterrence, anti-democracy, oppression, schooling become nothing more than what is inauthenticity, anti-collectivity, each of which to be produced, distributed, and consumed— continues to affect schools and societies—here bought and sold. They become things to be our focus involves chiefly the SI’s concerns seen and objectified. Test scores become with image, passivity, commodification, and merely contributors to housing prices and separation. property taxes, and housing prices and property taxes become merely contributors to The predominance of image rests first on the test scores. Location, location, location, yes; effects of the increasingly visual nature of but also schooling, schooling, schooling. The (post)modern civilization. With respect to spectacle ensures that appearance and formal education this phenomenon displays capitalism override any significant sense of the itself essentially by way of appearance and real and the bottom-line authentic. In its representation. Successful schooling, therefore, entirety, as we are by no means the first to actualizes itself according to far off seeing and point out, this situation promotes and being seen, a state of affairs no doubt remote reinforces the dominance of present, capitalist from actual experience, let along participation. economics. “Good” schools look good; “bad” schools look bad—regardless in both cases of what actually Separation suggests a distinction between the occurs within their walls and boundaries (i.e., connected and the disconnected, the apparent their teachers, students, curricula, modes of and the invisible, the imaginary and the real. instruction, assessment practices, etc.). Reality For teachers and students do a much, most of subsides under the multiple faces of media which is not reflected in the media or in test portrayals, principally those of Hollywood scores. The bulk of their efforts occur in (e.g., such well known films as Dead Poets’ isolation—as makes sense—individually, one Society and Dangerous Minds, among others) person apart from the other. Test scores mean and the press (e.g., the reporting of high-stakes individual performance, both teacher and standardized test scores, school violence, and learner. Media representations reflect, at best, drug use, etc.). We “know” an effective school single school “achievements”. In any event, when we see one, even if we never truly see instructors and students are not rewarded for one. cooperation or for their comprehensive and/or complex undertakings. Why should they be, Passivity reigns in that within this system no given contemporary circumstances? one has to (or, for that matter, logically would want to) engage the real life contingencies of In the end these problematics, particularly education. Why bother? And who cares? If test when coupled with the threat of oppression scores increase, then why teach? Why learn? and threats to democracy, authenticity, and the So what of authenticity? All is well. Why collective good, provide both a rationale for relate to others—to oneself, to one’s purposes? critical resistance and a framework for The mere contemplators—those on the theorizing dangerous citizenship, the topic of outside—and the lifeless spectators—those the following section. 8 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

5. Dangerous Citizenship nonviolent civil disobedience as a mode of civic joining in. So what to do? Against the problematics inherent in spectacular schooling we propose The second key component, critical here an admittedly idiosyncratic notion that we awareness, builds on such constructs as Paulo term “dangerous citizenship”. Certainly this Freire’s (1970) conscientization and Maxine construction builds on previous efforts in Greene’s (1978) “wide-awakeness”. Further it educational theory and philosophy, critical draws on the more recent scholarship of pedagogy, and research on teaching and critical theorists and philosophers of media learning. Nonetheless, in our view, its unique and education (e.g., McLaren et al., 1995). composition—its unique juxtaposition of Overall, its point and purpose is to enable the several strategies and tactics—justifies its range of interested stakeholders to see (1) how potentiality if not its plausible efficacy with things are; (2) that things can be different; and respect to schooling and its position as (3) how things might or should be. It is spectacle. grounded, in part, within Freire’s conception of “reading the world” and Marx’s As we construe it, as pedagogy, dangerous construction of “class consciousness” (among citizenship embodies three fundamental, other critical views). conjoined, and crucial generalities: political participation, critical awareness, and intentional The third and easily most complicated factor, action. In terms of schooling and spectacle, its intentional action , clearly could connote a underlying aims rest upon the imperatives of range of useful activities. In our usage, resistance, meaning, disruption, and disorder. however, and within the confines of the spectacle, intentional action refers most Political participation implies partaking in the directly to those behaviors designed to “traditional” rights and responsibilities of instigate human connection, the true democratic citizenship. It does not intend, engagement with everyday life, meaningful however, and should not be read to intend any experience, communication, and change. They sort of complacency or comfort relative to the seek, that is, a forceful combat against the dominant status quo. In fact, political mechanisms of image, passivity, commodification, participation might ironically insinuate non - and separation. Among these behaviors we participation. At its most simplistic political advance the SI’s techniques of dérive and participation suggests such activities as (1) detournement and de Certeau’s understanding voting; (2) acting on the feasibilities of the of la perruque. freedoms of speech, assembly, religion, the press, and so on; (3) obeying (most) laws (e.g., Dérive, literally “drifting,” implies “[a] mode those against drunk driving); and (4) of experimental behavior linked to the undermining the actions of corporate-state conditions of urban society: [it is] a technique government relative to, for example, abusing of transient passage through varied ambiances…” personal privacy and to contradicting the (Definitions, 1958/1981, p. 45). According to principles of justice, freedom, and equality Debord (1958/1981): (e.g., consider marches, demonstrations, petitions, etc.). Of course, somewhat paradoxically, non- The dérive entails playful-constructive behavior participation may be as well a form of political and awareness of psychogeographical effects; participation—an important and necessary which completely distinguishes it from the form—for instance in the actualization of not classical notions of the journey and the stroll voting as an expression of voice and [i.e., as implied by the flâneur ]. 9 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

In a dérive one or more persons during a For Debord (1958/1981) himself detournement certain period drop their usual motives for suggested movement and action, their relations, their work and leisure activities, and let themselves The reuse of preexisting artistic elements be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and in a new ensemble [via ] the two the encounters they find there. The element of fundamental laws of detournement…the chance is less determinant than one might lost of importance of each detourned think: from the dérive point of view cities have autonomous element—which may go so a psychological relief, with constant currents, far as to lose its original sense fixed points and vortexes which strongly completely—and at the same time the discourage entry into or exit from certain organization of another meaningful zones. (p. 50) ensemble that confers on each element its new scope and effect. (p. 55) On detournement, literally “diversion,” the SI wrote: Together dérive and detournement sprang from Debord and his colleagues’ “dreams of a Short for: detournement of preexisting reinvented world” (Marcus, 1989, p. 170; see aesthetic elements. The integration of also Debord & Wolman, 1956/1981; present or past artistic production into a Detournement as Negation and Prelude, 1959/ superior construction of a milieu. In this 1981) where one might “supercede dead time”, sense there can be no situationist a world of experiment and play, of painting or music [ per se ], but only a “discovering that a world of permanent situationist use of these means. In a more novelty could exist, and finding the means to primitive sense, detournement within the start it up” (p. 168). According to Marcus: old cultural spheres is a method of propaganda, a method which testifies to These means were two: [jointly] the the wearing out and loss of importance “dérive,” a drift down city streets in of those spheres. (Definitions, 1958/ search of signs of attraction or repulsion, 1981, pp. 45-46) and “detournement,” the theft of aesthetic artifacts from their contexts Detournement “involves,” according to Jappe and their diversion into context’s of (1993/1999), “a quotation, or more generally a one’s own device. (p. 168). re-use, that ‘adapts’ the original element to a new context” (p. 59). Ideally:

It is also a way of transcending the …to practice detournement—to write bourgeois cult of originality and the new speech balloons for newspaper private ownership of thought. In some comic strips, or for that matter old cases the products of bourgeois masters, to insist simultaneously on a civilization, even the most insignificant “devaluation” of art and its ones, such as advertisements, may be “reinvestment” in a new kind of social reemployed in such a way as to modify speech, a “communication containing its their meaning; in other cases, the effect own criticism,” a technique that could may be to reinforce the real meaning of not mystify because its very form was a an original element…by changing its demystification—and to pursue the form. (p. 59) dérive—to give yourself up to the promises of the city, and then to find them wanting—to drift through the city, 10 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

allowing its signs to divert, to “detourn,” gratuitous products whose sole purpose your steps, and then to divert those signs is to signify his own capabilities through yourself, forcing them to give up routes his work and to confirm his solidarity that never existed before—there would with other workers or his family through be no end to it. It would be to begin to spending his time in this way. With the live a truly modern way of life, made out complicity of other workers (who thus of pavement and pictures, words and defeat the competition the factory tries to weather: a way of life anyone could instill among them), he succeeds in understand and anyone could use. (p. “putting one over” on the established 170) order on its home ground. Far from being a regression toward a mode of de Certeau’s (1984) rendering of la perruque production organized around artisans or suggests a third appropriate form of intentional individuals, la perruque reintroduces action pertinent to the workings of the “popular” techniques of other times and spectacle. According to de Certeau (1984): other places into the industrial space (that is, into the Present order). (pp. 25- The operational models of popular 26) culture cannot be confined to the past, the countryside, or primitive peoples. All in all these practices and perspectives— They exist in the heart of the strongholds those of political participation, critical of the contemporary economy. Take, for awareness, and intentional action—introduce a example, what in France is called la multiple yet conjoined set of technologies perruque, “the wig”. La perruque is the designed to confront and countermand the worker’s own work disguised as work exigencies indicated via the spectacle: image, for his [or her] employer. It differs from passivity, commodification, and separation. pilfering in that nothing of material value Political participation and critical awareness is stolen. It differs from absenteeism in are the most direct yet the least complex; they that the worker is officially on the job. do, however, offer some (if limited) means by La perruque may be as simple a matter which to challenge the spectacle. Political as a secretary’s writing a love letter on participation can—though not necessarily “company time” or as complex as a will—furnish a mode of struggle against cabinetmaker’s “borrowing” a lathe to separation, passivity, and commodification, make a piece of furniture for his living depending, for instance, on whether, how, and room. Under different names in different why people vote and whether, how, and why countries this phenomenon is becoming they protest and/or interact in disparate and more and more general, even if manag- radical forms of civil disobedience (among ers penalize it or “turn a blind eye” on it other forms of engagement). Critical in order not to know about it. Accused of awareness—including critical media literacy— stealing or turning material to his [ sic ] proffers the possibility, at least, of pursuing own ends and using the machines for his some sense of how things are and how things own profit, the worker who indulges in could be (for good or bad). This could la perruque actually diverts time (not encompass, for example, the statuses of goods, since he uses only scraps) from image/representation/appearance,spectatorship the factory for work that is free, creative, /passivity/contemplation,commodification/con and precisely not directed toward profit. sumer capitalism, and separation, as well as In the very place where the machine he their variously threatening effects on, among must serve reigns supreme, he cunningly other things, contemporary education/ takes pleasure in finding a way to create schooling. 11 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

Yet the most important and significant of these As such it challenges separation and activities clearly is intentional action, namely, passivity/spectatorship and encourages, again, the tactics of dérive, detournement, and instead, engagement with and partaking in la perruque. Both singularly and in concert reality (as opposed to contemplation and they indicate a fundamental counterthreat to unreality). the operations of the spectacular society in all its distinctive and sundry manifestations and Detournement, first and foremost, contests problematic components and elements. image and its fundamental predominance. What detournement does, more specifically, is According to Plant (1992) the Situationist dispute authorship and the ownership of agenda involved primarily “the power to specific representations and individual/social choose, to assign value, to control what is appearances. From the perspective of offered and that which is possible” (p. 31). Its detournement, all images are open to “reinterpretation,” that is their various theory was based on the assumption that elements are available for reconfiguration and both the objective and subjective their manifold rearrangements are exposed and ingredients of a new society are already unrestricted for redoing. Image, thus the present within the spectacle, so that all spectacle, might face changing test questions, that is needed is a reversal of the re-making movies, and/or re-rendering exploitative perspective in which spectacular society or at least ascendant and controlling is lived. They insisted that the construction denotations/connotations. All to its fundamental of situations ‘begins on the ruins of the disadvantages. modern spectacle…’ (p. 31). Lastly, la perruque means re-confiscating time They, the SI, and space, using them both for our own formidable and ambitious purposes. As a envisaged a future in which the browbeating of the official company view, la creativity, imagination, technology, and perruque offers the potential that our time is knowledge developed within capitalist indeed our time, that it might be used for society would allow us to abolish work, productive and counter-dominant activities. In satisfy desire, create situations, and that we are “all in this together” (anti- overcome social and economic relations. separation) and in that it menaces the [For] the [necessary] material conditions corporate (consumer, commodity) status quo for a world of playful engagement, and requires (to some extent) the collusion of uncommodified leisure and unqualified others, la perruque offers, in some ways, the pleasure had long been achieved. (p. 31) ultimate challenge to the spectacularization of schooling and society. Dérive, detournement, and la perruque accomplish all of this. Dérive by enacting and Overall these methodologies make clear how enabling a community of like-minded drifters, the spectacle might effectively, if not finally, for example (these days) those teachers and be challenged. For the possibilities, regarding students (and, perhaps, others) committed to dérive, detournement, and la perruque as perusing and pursuing, and willing to peruse against the pitfalls of image, passivity, and pursue, various testing-oriented Websites commodification, separation, anti-democracy, (including those created and maintained by anti-collectivity, inauthenticity, and oppression, powerful corporate testing companies) and produced in novel, playful, and creatively classrooms enacting and implementing critical ways, we assert, are infinite. standards based education reforms 12 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

6. Concluding Remarks Brown, B. (1973). Marx, Freud, and the critique of everyday life: Toward a In the end, what we’ve attempted here is permanent cultural revolution. New threefold. First we’ve sought to (re)negotiate York: Monthly Review Press. the multiple and complex meanings of Debord, G. (1981). Theory of the dérive. In K. Debord’s (1967/1995) The Society of the Knabb (Ed.), Situationist international Spectacle, especially vis-à-vis schooling and anthology (pp. 50-54). Berkeley, CA: contemporary postmodern society. Second Bureau of Public Secrets. (Original we’ve aimed at delineating the potential work published 1958 in Internationale consequences of spectacularization, namely Situationniste #2) those of image/representation/appearance and Debord, G. (1995). The society of the spectacle its dominance, passivity/contemplation/spectatorship (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). New and its overwhelming of reality, commodification York: Zone Books. (Original work and its threats to communal relationships, and published 1967) separation and its challenges to connectivity Debord, G., & Wolman, G. J. (1981). Methods and social/individual unity. Lastly we have of detournement. In K. Knabb (Ed.), tried to provide a way out, meaningful and Situationist international anthology (pp. pragmatic and critical alternatives to the 8-14). Berkeley, CA: Bureau of Public functioning and power of the spectacle. For Secrets. (Original work published 1956 what it’s worth, fundamentally, we hope to in Les Lèvres ues #8) have incited and anticipated a new and never- de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of ending realm of critical, dangerous, everyday life (S. Rendall, Trans.). passionate, and non-complacent schooling, Berkeley, CA: University of California education, and society. If we have, then we Press. also have, ultimately, been pleasantly and Definitions. (1981). In K. Knabb (Ed.), positively successful. Situationist international anthology (pp. 45-46). Berkeley, CA: Bureau of Public References Secrets. (Original work published 1958) Detournement as Negation and Prelude. Bakhtin, M. (1984). Problems of Dostoevsky’s (1981). In K. Knabb (Ed.), Situationist poetics (C. Emerson, Ed. & Trans.). international anthology (pp. 55-56). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Berkeley, CA: Bureau of Public Secrets. Press. (Original work published 1959 in Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic Internationale Situationniste #3) imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and education: & C. Emerson, Eds. & Trans.). Austin: An introduction to the philosophy of University of Texas Press. education. New York: Macmillan. Barthes, R. (1977). Image/music/text (S. (Original work published 1916) Heath, Trans.). New York: Hill and Dowd, M. (2002a, January 20). Black berets Wang. rising. The ew York Times, p. 13. Baudrillard, J. (1995). Simulacra and simulation Dowd, M. (2002b, February 24). Coyote (S. F. Glaser, Trans.). Ann Arbor: rummy. The ew York Times, p. 13. University of Michigan Press. Dyer, R. (2000). Introduction to film studies. Boorstin, D. J. (1992). The image: A guide to In J. Hill & C. Gibson (Eds.), Film pseudoevents in America. New York: studies: Critical approaches (pp. 1-8). Vintage Books. (Original work Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. published 1961) 13 K. D. Vinson & E. W. Ross/ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 1(2), 2013 ISSN 2329-2210

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: Mathison, S., & Ross, E. W. (2008). The The birth of the prison (A. Sheridan, nature and limits of standardsbased Trans.). New York: Pantheon. (Original reform and assessment . New York: work published 1975) Teachers College Press. Freeland, C. A., & Wartenberg, T. E. (1995). Marcus, G. (1989). Lipstick traces: A secret Philosophy and film. New York and history of the twentieth century. London: Routledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Press. New York: Continuum. Marcus, G. (1997). The old weird America. Gitlin, T. (2002). Media unlimited: How the New York: Picador. torrent of images and sounds Mirzoeff, N. (Ed.). (1998). The visual culture overwhelms our lives. New York and reader. New York: Routledge. London: Metropolitan Books. Mirzoeff, N. (1999). An introduction to visual Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of learning. culture. New York: Routledge. New York: Teachers College Press. Nelmes, J. (Ed.). (1999). An introduction to Hill, J., & Gibson, P. C. (Eds.). (2000). Film film studies (2 nd ed.). London and New studies: Critical approaches. Oxford, York: Routledge. UK: Oxford University Press. Perez, G. (1998). The material ghost: Films Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in classrooms. and their medium. Baltimore and New York: Teachers College Press. London: The Johns Hopkins University (Original work published 1968) Press. Jappe, A. (1999). Guy Debord (D. Nicholson- Perlman, F. (1969). The reproduction of Smith, Trans.). Berkeley: University of everyday life. Available on-line at California Press. (Original work http://www.pipeline.com/~rgibson/repro published 1993) -daily-life.html. Keane, J. (1991). The media and democracy. Plant, S. (1992). The most radical gesture: The Stanford, CA: Stanford University Situationist international in a Press. postmodern age. London & New York: Lefebvre, H. (1971). Everyday life in the Routledge. modern world (S. Rabinovitch, Trans.). Rich, F. (2000, October 29). The age of the London: Allen Lane/The Penguin Press. mediathon. The ew York Times (Original work published 1968) Magazine, pp. 58-65, 84. Lefebvre, H. (1992). Critique of everyday life, Rich, F. (2003, June 15). How 15 minutes Vol. 1 (J. Moore, Trans.). London and became 5 weeks. The ew York Times, New York: Verso. (Original work section 2, pp. 1 & 8. published 1947) Sardar, Z., & Van Loon, B. (2000). Luhmann, N. (2000). The reality of the mass Introducing media studies. New York: media (K. Cross, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Totem Books. Stanford University Press. (Original Storey, J. (Ed.). (1994). Cultural theory and work published 1996) popular culture: A reader. Hemel McLaren, P., Hammer, R., Sholle, D., & Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Reilly, S. S. (1995). Rethinking media Storey, J. (Ed.). (1996). What is cultural literacy: A critical pedagogy of studies: A reader. London: Edward representations. New York: Peter Lang. Arnold. McLuhan, M. (1994). Understanding media: Storey, J. (1998). An introduction to cultural The extensions of man. New York: theory and popular culture (2 nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. (Original work published Athens: University of Georgia Press. 1964) 14 The Society of the Spectacle Revisited: Separation, Schooling, and the Pursuit of Dangerous Citizenship

Vaneigem, R. (2002). The revolution of Vinson, K. D., & Ross, E. W. (2003). Image everyday life (D. Nicholson-Smith, and education: Teaching in the face of Trans.). London: Rebel Press. (Original the new disciplinarity. New York: Peter work published 1967) Lang. Vinson, K. D., & Ross, E. W. (2001). Warren, R. P. (1946). All the king’s men. New Education and the new disciplinarity: York: Harcourt Brace. [reprint] Surveillance, spectacle, and the case of Young, I. M. (1992). Five faces of oppression . SBER. Cultural Logic, 41. Available In T. E. Wartenberg (Ed.), Rethinking on-line at http://eserver.org/clogic/4- power (pp. 174-195). Albany: SUNY 1/4-1.html. Press.