Posted by Joohn on October 22, 1998 at 05:46:27 PM EDT:
In Reply to: Am I considered a situationist? posted by Marcy on March 26, 1997 at 06:42:05 PM EST:
i can sympathise with your ah, er, situation. for the past three years or so, i've been dedicating a good chunk of my time to something i call ac/situational art, which i learned not more than four months ago, is in fact entirely just a rebirth of old situationist ideas.
but i think, though, that the situationists were weenies, and that we, the artists and poets and critics of today, shouldn't compare ourselves to them 'cause that's like buying into an idea of what we're going to end up like - what our dissent is going to sound like - and that marginalizes it. i'm saying, don't kowtow to the theory, don't ignore it either, but study it and go beyond it.
i think that if you factor in some generally accepted facts about parapsychology - group consciousness in public spectacle sitations, for instance - that we can all relate to from firsthand experience, then you've got something infinitely better than what those mostly dead recidivists that were in the SI had.
but "be" a situationist? i am reminded of old jazz musicians telling disbelieving young rationally educated white men that "there was nothing to get", that "the feeling was all". the great thing about the situation, the moment, the passage of time through it and around it, the dimple in the fabric of social space/time, it is a thing that is done, it isn't an "is" thing, it's a "do" thing. perhaps the things that you do are reminiscent of some situationism that you've seen.
if you're interested, i would suggest greil marcus' excellent history of dadaism, punk, and situationism titled "lipstick traces" - it's what i'm reading right now. he has a very interesting way of make one less ignorant.
many people think that art objects are overrated, fetishized, worshipped, or kowtowed to.
i might add that since you think that "static art" (i call it "production art" because that term implies to some degree a suite of marxist ideas about economics and politics that i think accompanies art) is boring, what do you think is an appropriate response?
beautiful moments are where it's at -
-joohn
: While I have only been researching situationism for an extremely short period, I have come to the question of my classification under this idea. I'm almost totally a believer in static art. I believe poetry is just another excuse for people to whine. I have come across the idea of social illusions. This idea very much appeals to me. I feel like all art has become is a way to be intellectual. Even books have become overrated. Ex. Portrait of an Artist. This book is put on a pedestal. To be considered intellectual, you must adore this work. Another example is Oprah's Book Club. Let's create more annoying whiners. I totally agree with this statement, "the consumer is largely a consumer of illusions." whoever wrote that site that I got all of this info in was able to state all of my thoughts on this subject. Anyway, would my beliefs of art/poetry be considered situationist beliefs or antinomianism or neither. Please respond to my ignorant ramblings.