Week 7 2017

Milica kindly provided me with additional comments that made it into a revised version of the PhD proposal.

The latest version can be accessed here: phd-proposal-feb15

The corresponding draft assessors response can be accessed here: assessors-response-ghm-feb-2017-15

Reflection

In preparation of the document I found myself going back to earlier versions and realised that some of the writing in the comprehensive versions of the assessor response will become the chapters.

If everything goes alright I can commence with the data collection in Canberra in mid March in Canberra, ideal temperatures too, and in Germany end of May, June or July.

The shut-up  and write question is useful to complete tasks.

Papers and conferences

Lisa and I are co-authoring on a paper on design process of healthy environments and meaningful engagement with children. This will be presented at the Spaces and Flow conference on 12-13 October 2017 http://spacesandflows.com/2017-conference

Also my paper presentation at the International Play Association has been accepted. I will present my early findings and the PhD concept http://canada2017.ipaworld.org/themes
The abstract can be accessed here: play-and-the-city-ipa

Literature

Debord, G. (1994) The Society of the Spectacle. Zone Books. New York.

‘THE WHOLE LIFE of those societies in which modern conditions pf production prevail presents itself as an immense accumulation of spectacles. All that once was directly lived has become mere representations.’ p. 12

‘In a partial way, reality unfolds in a new generality as a pseudo- world apart, solely as an object of contemplation….The spectacle in its generality is a concrete inversion of life, and, as such, the autonomous movement of non-life.’ p. 12

‘THE SPECTACLE APPEARS at once as society itself, as a part of society and as a means of unification. As a part of society, it is that sector where all attention, all consciousness, converges. Being isolated -and precisely for that reason -this sector is the locus of illusion and false consciousness; the unity it imposes is merely the official language of general separation.’ p. 12

‘ THE SPECTACLE IS NOT a collection of images; rather, it is a social relationship between people that is mediated by images.’ p. 12

‘It is by far better viewed as a weltanschauung that has been actualized, translated into the material realm- a world view transformed into an objective force.’ p. 13

The spectacle is ‘the very heart of society’s real unreality. In all its specific manifestations- news or propaganda, advertising or the actual consumption of entertainment -the spectacle epitomizes the prevailing model of social life….In form as in content the spectacle serves as total justification for the conditions and aims of the existing system. It further ensures the permanent presence of that justification, for it governs almost all time spent outside the productive process itself.’ p. 13

‘The language of the spectacle is composed of signs of the dominant organization of production- signs which are at the same time ultimate end- products of that organization.’ p. 13

‘lived reality suffers the material assaults of the spectacle’s mechanisms of contemplation, incorporating the spectacular order and lending that order positive support. Each side therefore has its share of objective reality. And every concept as it takes its place on one side or the other, has no foundation apart from its transformation into its opposite: reality erupts within the spectacle, and the spectacle is real. This reciprocal alienation is the essence and underpinning of society as it exists.’ p. 14 –-> play can be one of those eruptions!

‘IN A WORLD THAT really has been turned on its head, truth is a moment of falsehood.’ p. 14

‘Understood on its own terms, the spectacle proclaims the predominance of appearance and asserts that all human life, which is to say all social life, is mere appearance. But any critique capable of apprehending the spectacle’s essential character must expose it as a visible negation of life- and as a negation of life that has invented a visual form for itself.’ p. 14

‘For the spectacle, as the perfect image of the ruling economic order, end are nothing and development is all- although the only thing into which the spectacle plans to develop itself.’ p. 15- 16

‘The spectacle is the chief product of present- day society.’ p. 16

‘For the spectacle is simply the economic realm developing for itself – at once a faithful mirror held up to the production of things and a distorting objectification of the producers.’ p. 16

‘The spectacle is by definition immune from human activity, inaccessible to any projected review or correction. It is the opposite of dialog. Wherever representation takes on an independent existence, the spectacle reestablishes its rules.’ p. 17

‘The spectacle is hence a technological version of the perfection of separation within human beings.’ p. 18

‘SO LONG AS THE REALM of necessity remains a social dream, dreaming will remain a social necessity. The spectacle is the bad dream of modern society in chains, expressing nothing more than its wish for sleep. The spectacle is the guardian of that sleep.’ p. 18

‘BY MEANS OF THE SPECTACLE the ruling order discourses endlessly upon itself in an uninterrupted monologue of self-praise. The spectacle is the self-portrait of power in the age of power’s totalitarian rule over the conditions of existence. The fetishistic appearance of pure objectivity in spectacular relationships conceals their true character as relationships between human beings and between classes; a second Nature thus seems to impose inescapable laws upon our environment. But the spectacle is by no means the inevitable outcome of a technical development perceived as natural;on the contrary, the society of the spectacle is a form that chooses its own technical content.’  p. 19

In the course of this development all community and critical awareness have ceased to be; nor have those forces, which were able – by separating – to grow enormously in strength, yet found a way to reunite.‘ p. 21

‘THE GENERALIZED SEPARATION of worker and product has spelled the end of any comprehensive view of the job done, as well as the end of direct personal communication between producers. As the accumulation of alienated products proceeds, and as the productive process gets more concentrated, consistency and communication become the exclusive assets of the system’s managers. The triumph of an economic system founded on separation leads to the proletarianization of the world.’ p. 21

‘OWING TO THE VERY SUCESS of this separated system of production, whose product is separation itself, that fundamental area of experience which was associated in earlier societies with an individual’s principal work is being transformed -at least at the leading edge of the system’s evolution- into a realm of non-work, of inactivity. Such inactivity: it remains in thrall to that activity, in an uneasy and workshipful subjection to production’s needs and results; indeed it is itself a product of the rationality of production. There can be no freedom apart from activity, and within the spectacle all activity is banned- a corollary of the fact that all real activity has been forcibly channeled into the global construction of the spectacle. So what is referred to as “liberation from work,” that is, increased leisure time, is a liberation neighter within labour itself nor from the world labor has brought into being.’ p. 21-22

THE SPECTATOR’S ALIENATION from and submission to the contemplated object (which  is the outcome of his unthinking activity) works like this: the more he contemplates, the less he lives; the more readily he recognizes his own needs in the images of need proposed by the dominant system, the less he understands his own existence and his own desires. The spectacle’s  externality with respect to the acting subject is demonstrated by the fact that the individual’s own gesture are no longer his own, but rather those of someone else who represents them to him. The spectator feel at home nowhere, for the spectacle is everywhere.‘ p. 23

 

Impact session seminar 16/02/2017

get onto research gate, google scholar citation and research edu

be sure about the operational definitions: proximity, counter factual, precision

–> make a case and tell a story (drop methodology and literature review)

 

 

Advertisements

Week 38: 31st Oct- 4 November 2016

Week 37 was predominately used to catch up with work and get up to speed after the conference in Quito, Ecuador.

I’ve learned at the conference that in particular my preliminary research had already an impact in cities (city of Gervais in Oregon, USA) through our Perspective Statement on Right to the City: 2016-10-08-gervais-planning-and-design-document

–> this proofs that the play research in already useful in a applied context, even before finalised.

Highlights of this week:

  • confirmation of my paper presentation at the American Association of Geographers Conference in Boston, in April 2016. Given my co session presenters have a focus on emotion in urban spaces, I was urged to change my abstract. (see under the Link)
  • Still waiting to hear back from the IPA conference (paper abstract submission here)
  • Received feedback on funding proposal for DAAD/ Universities Australia –> unsuccessful. Need to investigate new ways to fund the research trips.
  • preparation of my presentation for the Play Symposium in Canberra on the 10th November. Focus on play in cities and not just for children. Presentation can be accessed here: play-symposium-uc-greg-mews
  • Received the kind invitation to present my PhD research at TEDx in Wellington as part of the city partnership with TEDx Canberra. 13- 16 November 2016.
  • Preparation of my presentation for my confirmation seminar. The meeting with Andrew was very constructive. I need to focus on structure that works for broader audience, but also caters to the needs of the academics.