Throughout the year I’ve developed a clearer picture of the Situationists ideas and intentions. Even if this idea still remains slightly ambiguous in light of their shirking of any definition whatsoever. Their theories and methods have been significant in my attempt to define what it means to be lost in the modern city and I think it is worthwhile trying to put these links into words before I complete the course.
The first and most obvious connection between their ideas and my understanding of being lost is The Derive. I suppose my initial interpretation of this practice was that they were getting lost. It was a way of disorientating oneself by moving through unrecognised areas away from busy streets and tourist attractions. Although this isn’t entirely untrue. Further reading has lead me to believe that the opposite is actually a more accurate interpretation of the idea. Instead of getting lost, members of the group were acting tactically in defiance of a landscape they considered oppressive.
“If chance plays an important role in dérives this is because the methodology of psychogeographical observation is still in its infancy. But the action of chance is naturally conservative and in a new setting tends to reduce everything to habit or to an alternation between a limited number of variants. Progress means breaking through fields where chance holds sway by creating new conditions more favorable to our purposes.”
Guy Debord
For Debord then, the Derive was tactical and constructive, with the only element of chance caused by their inexperience of ecological science. Although this does not render the idea of being lost a meaningless one, it does bring into question my earlier ideas of losing oneself randomly in the city. Directing myself around a city in a random way is much like the Surrealist techniques of automatism and chance. And in the view of the SI, a controlled approach was more useful for exploring the world around them. In this sense, being lost is perhaps no more than a trivial way of expressing the perceived randomness of the city around me. In light of this, I have come to see the act of losing oneself as a creative act. The idea of exploring the city on foot, as discussed in my research paper, is a way of breaking away from the structures and routines of everyday life.
In terms of the work on display at the final show, I think that the interactive element of my piece goes some way towards expressing this idea. Structures are created and change as a result of a persons movement. In order to reveal the animations and see the piece develop and change, a user has to move around the space. I have to admit to not being well versed in theories around interaction and agency. But I think the pleasure in seeing the animations grow and rotate in relation to movement can be compared to the experience of seeing city spaces in a different light. In addition to this the use of acetate sheets to catch and reflect the light as it travels between projector and wall suggests that there are elements around us that we don’t see. By revealing the otherwise invisible light a more dense sense of space is created. Like the animated shapes on the walls, a user has to move to reveal this element.









































































