The Society of the Spectacle

Guy Debord's work, "The Society of the Spectacle", attempts to show us the relationship between the general public and the images that surround it. But what exactly is the "Spectacle" that Debord is talking about? In my interpretation of Debord's words, the Spectacle is the idea of images and their relation to a society which bases itself off of those images. As Debord puts it, "The spectacle presents itself simultaneously as society itself, as a part of society, and as a means of unification."(Debord, 1967) So what does he mean by this? The idea that the Spectacle is a representation of society itself allows it to always be an integral part of a functioning society.

So if its decided that the society and the spectacle are always interacting and playing off of one another, then I would argue that its fair to say that the spectacle is an important part of society. There is another large characteristic of society that is important in understanding the spectacle. That being the economy. Debord states, "The spectacle is able to subject human beings to itself because the economy has already totally subjugated them. It is nothing other than the economy developing for itself. It is at once a faithful reflection of the production of things and a distorting objectification of the producers." (Debord, 1967) Part of what Debord is suggesting here is that it is the economy in a society that allows for the exposure of the spectacle. In other words, the spectacle could not exist without the economy to support it. And at the same time, the spectacle helps to develop that economy.

So what about the commodity side of things? Debord talks a lot about the importance of commodity in the grande scheme of things. The idea of the commodity goes hand in hand with the idea of the spectacle. Debord mentions the notion of fetishism of the commodity. As Debord puts it, " the domination of society by “intangible as well as tangible things” — attains its ultimate fulfillment in the spectacle, where the real world is replaced by a selection of images which are projected above it, yet which at the same time succeed in making themselves regarded as the epitome of reality."(Debord 1967) So ultimately, as Debord puts it, the commodity rules the society. However, it does so only with the help of the spectacle. If there were no spectacle there might not be a commodity. The line "the epitome of reality" is very key here. When the society, as a whole, believes what is being shown to them is "the epitome of reality", its inclined to believe it. Thus, this furthers the economic side of things once a commodity is desired.

Debord's ideas about the economic state of things come down to a simple line. He write, "Once society discovers that it depends on the economy, the economy in fact depends on the society"(Debord 1967) What this means is that the economy could not exist without society. But, he mentions a decline of value among use. People must work to produce these things, and then consume them at the very same time. However, because there is a constant decline in value, the cycle repeats infinitely. Thus, the commodity dominates society because the economy depends on it. The commodity is the spectacle as the spectacle projects the commodity. It really operates in a circular pattern.

Overall, I think Debord's thoughts on the concept of the "Spectacle" and commodities were ahead of their time. Or rather, you could say that these ideas are timeless, as they still operate in the same fashion today. Ultimately, we as a society need the spectacle to exist. Without the spectacle there would be no commodity. Without commodity, there is no economy. It seems strange how our society has become dependent on these things; and it doesn't appear as though anything will change.