Spur was subject to prosecution and was convicted "in the name of moral order".[1][2]
The Spur group joined and collaborated with the Situationist International, a restricted group of international revolutionaries, between 1959 and 1961. After a series of core divergences during 1960–1, the Spur members were officially excluded from the SI on February 10, 1962.[3] The events that led to the exclusion were: during the Fourth SI Conference in London (December 1960), in a discussion about the political nature of the SI, Spur group disagreed with the core situationist stance of counting on a revolutionary proletariat;[4] the accusation that their activities were based on a "systematic misunderstanding of situationist theses";[3] the fact that at least one Spur member, Lothar Fischer, and possibly the rest of the group, were not actually understanding and/or agreeing with the situationist ideas, but were just using the SI to get success in the art market;[5] and the betrayal of a common agreement on the Spur and SI publications.[6] The exclusion was the recognition that the Spur group's "principles, methods and goals" were significantly in contrast with those of the SI.[2][7] This split however was not a declaration of hostilities, as in other cases of SI exclusions. A few months after the exclusion, in the context of Judicial prosecution against the group by the German state, Debord expressed his esteem to the Spur group, calling it the only significant artistic group in Germany since WW2, and at the level of the avant-gardes in other countries.[1]
Guy Debord remarked that while between 1920 and 1933 "Germany incontestably had the highest rank in the elaboration of art and, more generally, the culture of our era", from the post-war era to 1960, "Germany has been characterized by a total cultural void and by the dullest conformism". The Spur journal was a flourishing exception to such void and conformism, as it was, for the first time in decades, an artistic group that manifested a certain freedom of investigation, and as an "extremely worrisome symptom", this group was almost immediately the object of police and juridical persecutions.[1] Helmet Sturim, Dieter Kunzelmann, Heimrad Prem and H.P. Zimmer each received 5 months in prison.
The Spur group was the first German group after the war to reappear on the international plane, to make itself recognized as an equal by the cultural avant-garde of several different countries, in the real artistic experiments of today; whereas the artists and intellectuals currently honored in Germany are only retarded and timid imitators of imported, old ideas.
Debord noted that Western Europe and the Scandinavian countries, had another level of intellectual tolerance, that such a trial was, at that moment, unthinkable in Paris or Copenhagen. That clumsy affair had already harmed the reputation of the Federal German Republic. Debord asserted that the pretext by which the Spur group was brought to trial, was "to make the Spur group, and all those who wish to pursue the same route, succumb to the ambient conformism."[1] Debord ridiculed that trial to the prosecutions of Baudelaire and Flaubert for pornography and immorality in the 19th century France:[1]
For a very long time [thereafter], one could only refer to these [French] judgments as evidence of the scandalous imbecility of the judges. It is necessary to think of them today. Before history, artistic liberty always wins its trials.
Relations with the Situationist International
The Spur group collaborated with the Situationist International, a restricted group of international revolutionaries, between 1959 and 1961, when the Spur members joined the SI. After a series of core divergences during 1960–1, the Spur members were officially excluded from the SI on February 10, 1962.[3] After this, despite the two organizations having a "sufficiently large objective opposition between their respective principles, methods and goals," Guy Debord expressed esteem to Spur, considering it the highest expression of German art and culture of post WW2.[1] However, after the exclusion and split, the two groups remained distinct and separated, and each was only responsible for its own autonomous actions.[2]
The first contact with the Situationist International happened through Asger Jorn. Jorn, one of the most prominent members of the SI, discovered the SPUR-paintings at a gallery managed by art dealer Otto Van de Loo.[5] Later on, the Spur members come to join and became members of the Situationist International, forming the majority of the members of the German section of the SI.[8]
A major point of divergence come up from the Spur group during The Fourth SI Conference in London (December 1960). The discussion of a report by Attila Kotányi, leads to posing the question: "To what extent is the SI a political movement?" Various responses state that the SI is political, but not in the ordinary sense. The discussion becomes somewhat confused. Debord proposes, in order to clearly bring out the opinion of the Conference, that each person respond in writing to a questionnaire asking if he considers that there are "forces in the society that the SI can count on? What forces? In what conditions?" This questionnaire is agreed upon and filled out. When, a day later, the Spur members present a joint response to the questionnaire, in which they reject the concept of a proletarian revolution, it generates a sharp debate:[4]
This very long declaration attacks the tendency in the responses read the day before to count on the existence of a revolutionary proletariat, for the signers strongly doubt the revolutionary capacities of the workers against the bureaucratic institutions that have dominated their movement. The German section considers that the SI should prepare to realize its program on its own by mobilizing the avant-garde artists, who are placed by the present society in intolerable conditions and can count only on themselves to take over the weapons of conditioning.
This position was critiqued by Debord, Nash, Kotányi and Jorn. The majority of the S.I. seems to be against it, and the Spur members are asked to formalize their position so it can be brought to a vote. But, when the Spur group return from their deliberation, they retract the preceding declaration.[4] Debord starts to suspect that the Spur members were not actually understanding and/or agreeing with the situationist ideas, and that they were instead using the SI to get success in the art market.[5] As a consequence, during the Fifth SI Conference held in Gothenburg, Sweden, 28–30 August 1961, Asger Jorn (signing himself as "George Keller") proposed to unify the S.I. publications in the various countries (including Spur) as a single journal, to be translated in four editions in English, French, German and Swedish. The reaction of the Spur members to this proposal was mentioned in the conference report:[6]
The German situationists who publish the journal Spur agree to the project in principle, but prefer to postpone its implementation until the time is right; such that the majority of the Conference abstains from voting on a question rejected by the situationists most directly concerned. They stress the urgency, already made evident by the Conference, for them to unify their positions and projects with the rest of the SI. Kunzelmann declares that this discussion could advance quickly on the basis of Vaneigem's report, which would be studied more closely in Germany. Nonetheless, the Germans commit themselves to propagating and elaborating situationist theory as soon as possible, as they have begun doing with issues #5 and #6 of Spur. On their request, the Conference adds Attila Kotányi and J. de Jong to the editorial committee of Spur in order to verify this process of unification.
Despite Spur agreement to add Attila Kotányi and Jacqueline de Jong to the editorial committee[9] of Spur, the following issue #7 was printed five months later without Kotányi and de Jong's knowledge. The issue #7 featured considerable divergences with the SI ideas, marking a distinct regression from the preceding #5 and #6 issues. These events led the following month, February 1962, to the exclusion from the SI of those responsible.[6]
The arguments for the exclusion, declared in a letter on February 10, 1962, were that "fractional activity of this group is based on a systematic misunderstanding of situationist theses",[3][6] that they were using the Situationists to succeed on the art market[5] and that to achieve this they had "perfectly disregarded the discipline of the S.I.".[3] On the accusation of using the SI to "arrive" as artists, Spur member Dieter Kunzelmann admitted that it applied for sure to Lothar Fischer, but rejected that it was true for the other Spur members present at the Fifth SI Conference in Gothenburg.[5]
Related Research Articles
The Situationist International (SI) was an international organization of social revolutionaries made up of avant-garde artists, intellectuals, and political theorists. It was prominent in Europe from its formation in 1957 to its dissolution in 1972. The intellectual foundations of the Situationist International were derived primarily from libertarian Marxism and the avant-garde art movements of the early 20th century, particularly Dada and Surrealism. Overall, situationist theory represented an attempt to synthesize this diverse field of theoretical disciplines into a modern and comprehensive critique of mid-20th century advanced capitalism.
Guy-Ernest Debord was a French Marxist theorist, philosopher, filmmaker, critic of work, member of the Letterist International, founder of a Letterist faction, and founding member of the Situationist International. He was also briefly a member of Socialisme ou Barbarie.
The Letterist International (LI) was a Paris-based collective of radical artists and cultural theorists between 1952 and 1957. It was created by Guy Debord and Gil J. Wolman rejoined by Jean-Louis Brau and Serge Berna as a schism from Isidore Isou's Lettrist group. The group went on to join others in forming the Situationist International, taking some key techniques and ideas with it.
Psychogeography is the exploration of urban environments that emphasizes interpersonal connections to places and arbitrary routes, and follows a loosely defined urban practice known as the dérive. It was developed by members of the Letterist International and Situationist International, which were revolutionary groups influenced by Marxist and anarchist theory as well as the attitudes and methods of Dadaists and Surrealists. In 1955, Guy Debord defined psychogeography as "the study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behavior of individuals." As a practice and theory, psychogeography has influenced a broad set of cultural actors, including artists, activists and academics.
Asger Oluf Jorn was a Danish painter, sculptor, ceramic artist, and author. He was a founding member of the avant-garde movement COBRA and the Situationist International. He was born in Vejrum, in the northwest corner of Jutland, Denmark, and baptized Asger Oluf Jørgensen.
Ansgar Elde was a Swedish artist famous for his work in ceramics.
Jørgen Nash was a Danish artist, writer and central proponent of Situationism.
Lothar Fischer was a German sculptor.
Hans-Peter Zimmer was a German painter and sculptor. He was born in Berlin and studied at the Academy of Fine Arts, Munich.
Heimrad Prem was a German painter born in Roding, Oberpfalz. From 1949–1952 he studied decorative painting at Schwandorf and then studied painting with Josef Oberberger and sculpture with Toni Stadler at the Akademie der Bildenden Künste, Munich until 1956. While studying painting with Ernst Schumacher at the Hochschule der Künste, Berlin, he formed Gruppe SPUR with Lothar Fischer, Helmut Sturm, and Hans-Peter Zimmer. After meeting Asger Jorn, SPUR joined the Situationist International.
Helmut Sturm was a German painter.
Raoul Vaneigem is a Belgian writer known for his 1967 book The Revolution of Everyday Life.
The dérive is a revolutionary strategy originally put forward in the "Theory of the Dérive" (1956) by Guy Debord, a member at the time of the Letterist International. Debord defines the dérive as "a mode of experimental behaviour linked to the conditions of urban society: a technique of rapid passage through varied ambiances." It is an unplanned journey through a landscape, usually urban, in which participants drop their everyday relations and "let themselves be drawn by the attractions of the terrain and the encounters they find there". Though solo dérives are possible, Debord indicates
that the most fruitful numerical arrangement consists of several small groups of two or three people who have reached the same level of awareness, since cross-checking these different groups' impressions makes it possible to arrive at more objective conclusions.
The Second Situationist International were a small group of situationists who broke away from the Situationist International (SI). Jørgen Nash identifies the first manifestation of the group as a leaflet signed by himself along with Jacqueline de Jong and Ansgar Elde, shortly after the group Seven Rebels was formed at Situationist Bauhau at Asger Jorn's farm Drakabygget in southern Sweden.
Michèle Bernstein is a French novelist and critic, most often remembered as a member of the Situationist International from its foundation in 1957 until 1967, and as the first wife of its most prominent member, Guy Debord.
Attila Kotányi was a poet, philosopher, writer and architect-urbanist.
Ken Knabb is an American writer, translator, and radical theorist, known for his translations of Guy Debord and the Situationist International. His own English-language writings, many of which were anthologized in Public Secrets (1997), have been translated into over a dozen additional languages. He is also a respected authority on the political significance of Kenneth Rexroth.
Report on the Construction of Situations is the founding Manifesto of the Situationist International revolutionary organization. The pamphlet was published by Guy Debord in June 1957, and the following month the organization was founded, at Cosio d'Arroscia, Italy.
The Situationist International's interpretation of the Paris Commune of 1871 was influenced by their collaboration with Henri Lefebvre with whom they had been in contact since the late 1950s. Lefebvre’s writings on revolutionary romanticism and everyday life were important influences on the early SI. In the early 1960s Guy Debord, Attila Kotányi and Raoul Vaneigem agreed to assist Lefebvre in his preparations for a book on the Commune. The results of their brainstorming sessions were written down in 1962 by the SI in their “Theses on the Paris Commune.” After Lefebvre published his respective notes on their collaboration, in a 1962 piece entitled “La Signification de la Commune,” the two parties had a falling out as the SI ostensibly disagreed with the journal in which he published. Both the SI and Lefebvre published extensively on the feud in the following decade.
↑ Galimberti, Jacopo: Redefining the Individual in West Germany: Spur's and Geflecht's Authorship (1957–67), Art History, Taylor & Francis, n° 1, vol. 98, 2016, ISSN1467-8365.
↑ Galimberti, Jacopo. "The Spur Group, Détournement and the Politics of Time in the Adenauer Era". The Oxford Art Journal. 39 (3).
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
