111.
(see Version 1.1 of this card)
Heterotopias of luxury, of a strictly artificial necessity, contain subdivisions of play and game, existing within their allotted times and spaces, which are in turn subdivided. The space of play contains separate worlds of literature, art, theater, cinema, even spaces for sexual play. These are now just ‘special topics’, ruled off from any larger ambitions for remaking the world. Aesthetic play tried again and again to break out of its heterotopia, to take the derangement of the senses into the streets, and again and again it failed. Guy Debord: “For Dadaism sought to abolish art without realizing it, and Surrealism sought to realize art without abolishing it. The critical position since worked out by the Situationists demonstrates that the abolition and the realization of art are inseparable aspects of a single transcendence of art.”* It was not to be. The heterotopian space of the art world abolished Debord’s Situationists instead by realizing ‘Situationism’ entirely within the confines of the playpen of art history.
(All comments will be moderated)
(All comments will be moderated)
minor proof point: final sentence on this card is repeated at end of card 114.
loving the work! sm x
View all comments in the book
(All comments will be moderated)
what exactly is the definition art being mobilized here and subsumed by game in a purely instrumentalized capacity? art as graphic and representational? writing as narratological? it feels as if there is some unaccounted for slippage between a notion of art that might accommodate the conceptual and the kind which is overtaken and used by the game. it may be that conceptual art has been subsumed by “games” of a sort, but these are arguably games of a different sort than those being discussed here. in the very free play of allegory in the text, there is a danger in losing sight of which register a given concept is being deployed in.
View all comments in the book
(All comments will be moderated)
(All comments will be moderated)