We see it every day. We open our eyes and we are saturated in it. We close our eyes and our minds obsess over it. We see it, and yet we believe that we can hear it, smell it, feel it, and even taste it. From the moment we are born we begin to sink ever deeper into dependency until, through our consumption of it, it consumes us. By “it” I am referring to the “spectacle” as perceived by Guy Debord in his book Society of the Spectacle, translated by Ken Knabb. The spectacle is every form of media. Debord wrote Society in 1967, yet developments in media technology and practice have only strengthened his analysis. Many of his critiques of the spectacle read as if they could have been written today.

The media creates a false world, one which the real world embraces and sustains. Debord describes the spectacle as a “concrete inversion of life, an autonomous movement of the nonliving” (7). It is concrete because it is a product of the real world. It exists in many forms, but it is dead. It has no life in and of itself, yet it produces the appearance of life. As people venture farther into the illusion, and the image of the illusion grows ever clearer, they forget that it is false and take it as real. In this way, society subconsciously stumbles into a hyper reality and is taken over by the spectacle. The spectacle informs us, directs us, and conditions us to desire it. It is programmed to ensure its own survival.

This mechanistic process is fueled by consumerism. The spectacle portrays an image of life that people aspire to attain. It sets a society’s agenda by making people desire what the spectacle exhibits. People see a personality on television or in the movies that they admire and they want to emulate him or her. People see a lifestyle and they want it to be theirs. People see products and they want to buy them. On another level, the media produces stories that people want to hear. It induces people not only to buy into it, literally and figuratively, but also to hunger for more. The economy of the spectacle is a force in itself, making it timeless.

For consumerism to sustain the spectacle, however, the people who are bound to consume it must also produce it (22). Debord sees the media, and the society of the spectacle, as an instrument of power, of capitalist control. Capitalism does not just promote in the short term but also creates the necessary conditions for the perpetuation of the spectacle. Debord comments, “The economy has come to dominate society so completely that it has proved capable of recreating the class domination it needs for its own continued operation” (57). He goes on to say that this power created by the bourgeoisie “is capable of maintaining itself even without a bourgeoisie” (57). Class exploitation is the structural product of a system which, on the surface, appears to offer its benefits to everyone.

For Debord, this society of the spectacle is nothing more than a veil of lies. It binds people to a life they are told they want and to things they are told they need. As the spectacle grows more powerful and pervasive, people become alienated from one another. Ironically, as the individual becomes more insulated within society, individuality crumbles and loses meaning. The spectacle creates the illusion of identity within the mass of society. Debord says, “as with the adoption of seemingly aristocratic first names which end up being given to virtually all individuals of the same age, the objects that promise uniqueness can be offered up for mass consumption only if they have been mass produced” (34). Individuality is packaged and sold to a society of people trying to be different, but which in the end makes them the same. Individuality depends on how you appear to others and how others define you. Each individual has a certain degree of freedom within the society of the spectacle, yet that freedom is nothing more than a vision. Debord says, “The closer their life comes to being their own creation, the more they are excluded from that life” (17). People create their identity by selecting and accumulating within the spectacle. They define themselves by what they see, what they want, and what they have, but all of these defining factors are outside of themselves and are imposed upon them.

For this reason, Debord describes the spectacle as a “visible negation of life” (9). While we continue to live, in physical essence, we move farther and farther away from the reality of living. At this point, it is hard not to think of the exaggerated dichotomy of human existence presented in the Matrix films and the questions it raises: What does it mean to live? What is real? How do we know? In the end, does it really matter?

Stepping away from abstraction and toward something more concrete, it is interesting to contemplate this book as a medium. As a translation, Debord’s commentary has passed through many filters. Ken Knabb drew from the original text, which was written in French, as well as the several other English translations available. To a certain extent, the text has evolved into its current form and taken on a life of its own. It is similar to the spectacle in that it persists. People reproduce it and add to it. Through their interpretation and translation of the text they make it their own and yet it can never be theirs. This false sense of ownership, of reality, is what characterizes the society of the spectacle.

This fundamental dilemma presented to us by the spectacle is one that we cannot overcome. It “presents itself as a vast inaccessible reality that can never be questioned” (9). While Debord attempts to do so, to a certain extent, the spectacle is unquestionable. The spectacle is born out of reality, and the vague point where it blurs into illusion exists within our heads; there is no clear point of crossing over, and therefore this subconscious drift into illusion is unique for everyone. When we begin to question the spectacle, we may come to understand it better, but it is already too late; from the moment we begin to breathe we are adopted by the spectacle, and by living we breathe life into it. We created it, we desire it, and it enslaves us. It is our inspiration, our safety net, our salvation from ourselves, and yet our curse. But why exhaust so much effort in contemplation when it is far easier to relax and let the spectacle sweep you away?