Situationists

This movement began in 1957 and was essentially groups of people getting together to create situations or environments which brought social and political issues to surface. It was a very politically charged movement, and at its core was a strong anti-capitalist sentiment. They sought to comment on the empty illusions of consumer culture. Buying new nail polish or a couch might not make you happy and your life complete, yet this is what the people were being led to believe. Situationists were very successful in creating a buzz: from creating discussions with pamphlets to influencing wildcat strikes in France. On the spectrum of political art movements, this movement’s emphasis was much more on the politics..

Situationists are said (here) to believe that what they were doing should take the place of art, transforming it from an activity separate from everyday life and into the fabric of our day to day. I think that if they were to succeed in that goal, the new state of being wouldn’t be art at all, because isn’t an important defining characteristic of art its ingredient of specialness? Perhaps they felt that too much art was ruled by capitalism or that the illusions of art were harmfully deceptive in the same way as advertisements. Or that art that is not politically charged is not worth anything. I argue that in our lives we need a certain amount of art which doesn’t force a specific message. We need this other realm of aesthetics or specialness or whatever you want to call it to escape into. I believe that political art is very important, but so is it’s opposite. Even if its just a doodle or artfully arranging your tabletop, art can and should exist without a political message.