Antonio Serrano The Subtleties and Grandiose of the Spectacle

                                                          The Subtleties and Grandiose of the Spectacle

          The society of the spectacle is this consumption of a fabricated reality, through glamorized images, that end up taking us on a thrilling ride through falseness. This ride, once belted in, is so good at pretending to be real that we quickly fade away from our true individuality. The loss of identity, however, is so quickly replaced with ‘spectacular’ imagery that we numb ourselves, or sense of self, off. This numbing will have far reaching implications, albeit negative from Debord’s point of view, that we’ll even forget what life was like that isn’t “spectacularly” related. Guy attests to this when he says things like “the loss of quality that is so evident at every level of spectacular language, from the objects it glorifies to the behavior it regulates, stems from the basic nature of a production system that shuns reality.” This production system he mentions is the commodity. 

To understand the commodity, or even see where Guy is coming from, I had to read a bit on Karl Marx’s position (a huge influence on Debord). Marx identified with the commodity as an “object outside of us, a thing by its properties that satisfy human wants of some sort...the nature of such wants spring from either the stomach or fancy.” [http://walled-city.net/an-introduction-to-the-society-of-the-spectacle/] To intertwine Debords line of thinking with the commodity as spectacle is to say that the more we value and nurture these commodities, the more distorted our realm of true wants and needs as a human race. To go even further, Debord says these distortions ultimately implant what is considered excellence in our minds.

         Advertising, from the subtleties of genius to the in-your-face campaigns, are prime examples of weighing this excellence meter. As I pass billboards from the likes of Tiffany’s and Jared’s, all sorts of comparisons get analyzed at hyper speed. I think of things like “OK. I know Tiffany’s is more expensive...so my future wife should definitely appreciate that artificial fact, right? But my budget calls for Jared’s. Besides, their advertising is geared towards to the younger crowd anyway. Will she appreciate that sort of freshness” ? These kinds of thoughts are considered crazy talk, for sure - but Debord foresaw this. This is exactly the sick and twisted kind of thinking that most men and women have come to normalize now - as well as solidify Guy’s thesis - to a certain extent. 

          An example from Jenkin’s book, comes no further then the recent Why Heather Can Write chapter. Harry Potter, a major spectacle in its own right, brings to light just how connected or converted we’ve become. Long story short: huge fans (readers) of the books ended up writing their own imaginative pieces. In this case, we’ll call these writers content creators. However, the creators of the film didn’t appreciate, or understand rather, these other rogue creators. The studios would block these writers’ websites, assuming they had final control. Little did they know how far or fast the world of convergence truly maps. The fanfare that caught wind, through these same interconnected writers - countries apart - ultimately pushed the studios into a corner, submitting their pressure. The few examples mentioned here don’t account for a millionth of a percentage of how far the converging media landscape is growing. 

                                                                                   Works Cited
 Duncan. "An Introduction to 'The Society of the Spectacle' - Walled City." Web log post. Walled City. N.p., 17 Mar. 2012. Web. 30 Sept. 2015.

Jenkins, Henry. "Why Heather Can Write." Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York UP, 2006. 175-216. Print.

Debord, Guy. "The Society of the Spectacle." (2) (Debord). Bureau of Public Secrets, 2002. Web. 30 Sept. 2015.

Present Day Madness

The Hypocrisy