‘Old Paris Is No More’: Geographies of Spectacle and Anti‐Spectacle

Abstract

The term ‘spectacle’ has played an important role in recentcritical discussions of vision and visuality. In human geography it has often been used to designate new forms of capitalist urban development associated with display and show. This paper examines aspects of the term by addressing the critique of the spectacle developed by the situationist Guy Debord. It situates his writings on the subject back into the context of his engagements with the modern city between the 1950s and 1970s, especially in Paris, where hespent much of his life. In particular, it reads these writings in terms both of his bleak view of urban change and alienation under capitalism and of the ‘glimmers of light’ that he found in ‘the setting sun of this city.’ Debord's attachment to certain urban sites within this critique of urban spectacle was often nostalgic. Yet it can also be understood as part of his concern with challenging the ways in which urban spaces were being reconstructed, and as opening up gaps or cracks for thinking about ‘counter‐sites’ and points of political intervention.

Spectacle and Suffering: The Mumbai slum as a worlded space

“…The notion of spectacle has gained considerable currency in writing on the city (Pinder 2000;Gotham, 2005). Taking up Debord's provocation that "all that once was directly lived has become mere representation" (2002: 12), a common concern has been the idea that the production of space is dominated increasingly by images and events that reduce the novelty and potential spontaneity of urban life to set-piece, homogenised, corporatised spaces that carefully package the "experience of urban diversity, to be consumed without danger, and with limited risk of contact with social difference" (Stevens and Dovey, 2004: 359;Sorkin 1992;Gotham, 2005).…”

“…5 In this scenario people become passive spectators, voyeurs observing capitalism's duplicity and their own exploitation (Pinder 2000). Yet, the arrangement may not be so neat.…”

Urbaanit yleisöt propagandan ja brändäyksen palveluksessa

“…Debord (2005Debord ( [1967, 48) korostaa kaupunkisuunnittelua vallanpitäjien keinona ottaa haltuun luonnollinen ja inhimillinen ympäristö: muuttaa ympäristö itsensä kuvaksi ja kiinnittää ihmisten huomio tähän kuvaan aktuaalisen yhteiskuntatodellisuuden sijaan (ks. myös Pinder 2000).…”

Using the past to build a town’s image

“…However, how urban transformation processes influence the situation cultural heritage assets find themselves in is still largely unexplored in Norway. Internationally there is an ongoing debate about these complex issues (see for instance Monclus and Guardia [8], Bontje and Mustard [9], Butler [10], Evans [3], Pinder [4]). …”