8/3/2019 Debord2005g

1/2

Letter

From Guy DebordTo Daniel Blanchard[1]13 June 1961

Dear Daniel

I believe, as you have written, that theS[ituationist] I[nternational] drawscloser to the real (complete)revolutionary enterprise. The mostrecent adherents are very engaged inthis regard. This even goes as far asoverthrowing the equilibrium of theGerman section, which has long beenour nightmare. In the last week of May[1961], at the moment that the

German journal was supposed to havecome out, it was seized at the printerfor the following reasons: violation ofthe fundamental laws [of Germany],incitement to revolution, pornography,blasphemy, perversion of youth andoffense to the personalities of theChurch. It was [in short] a question ofunitary urbanism.

After several exclusions (orresignations), which are alreadyestablished or to be expected, we

aren't without hope of soon beingdisencumbered of the aesthetes andjokers.

In July [1961], we will publish the nextissue of the French journal. I think itwill be more interesting than itspredecessor.

As for S[ocialisme] ou B[arbarie],things go well on certain sides. Thearticle by Chatel[2] is a mere detail,

although truly idiotic. As you know, Ihave defended our positions inanother text, "For a RevolutionaryJudgment of Art,"[3] which has notmet a very large response on the"official" side of the organization, butwhich has circulated well enough inmanuscript. Moreover, Chatel quit theorganization shortly afterwards, andthe polemic is over. The true difficulty,centrally and heavily resented byalmost everyone, is that it proves thatthe [S. ou B.] group has passed to a

superior stage of action, has

transformed itself into an effectiverevolutionary organization (itpossesses the theoretical base and agood number of sufficiently consciousmilitants), by breaking with the aspect

of a "circle of specialized intellectualdiscussions" that now corresponds toa surpassed effort, but has left behindclumsy habits. Which renders lessexigent the contestation of the clumsyhabits of the totality of the social lifeto which we must submit everywhere.

On this question, I have been led towithdraw from the field of relationswith the [S. ou B.] organization (copyof my letter enclosed).[4] Butunderstanding well that I remain assympathetic as possible. Moreover,three situationists are in the BelgianPouvoir Ouvriergroup. In Paris, Iremain in quite close contact with fiveor six of the young militants whoconstitute, in my mind, the mostadvanced tendency of the Frenchorganization -- this can hardly be fixedin the classical terms of politicalopposition, but we say that, if Vegarepresents the conservation of acertain theoretical antiquity in Pouvoir

Ouvrier, the comrades of whom Ispeak are obviously, on the basis ofthe texts by Chaulieu-Cardan[Cornelius Castoriadis], on the "left,"though without appreciating thecentrist (or "presidential") position,which is generally that of Barjot[Castoriadis] in the everyday life ofthe organization.

The existence of this (in fact, veryrecent) current certainly isn't the soleencouraging point in the

developments, numerical orotherwise, ofPouvoir OuvriersinceAutumn [1960]. To cite only theEnglish group, there are workers andcapacities for collective action thatare entirely admirable.

Your absence has surely made itharder to have discussions that areessential. If you had been in Paris inApril-May [1961], I think that certainpositions would have been more

easily understood inside the French

http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn1http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn2http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn3http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn4http://www.notbored.org/cornelius-castoriadis.htmlhttp://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn1http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn2http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn3http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_edn4http://www.notbored.org/cornelius-castoriadis.html

8/3/2019 Debord2005g

2/2

organization. One will now understandthem much later.

Are you returning this summer? Wewill be very happy to see you, Michele

[Bernstein] and I. The others, too.

Cordially yours,Guy

[1] Alias P. Canjuers [co-author withGuy Debord ofPreliminaries TowardDefining a Unitary RevolutionaryProgram, 20 July 1960].

[2] Sebastien Chatel, pseudonym ofSebastien de Diesbach, member of

Socialisme ou Barbarie.

[3]In which it is noted: "Drafted inFebruary 1961 after the appearanceof S. Chatel's critique of [Jean-LucGodard's] 'Breathless.' This text aimsto instaurate a discussion inside thePouvoir Ouvrierorganization, at thesame moment that comrades in theSituationist International have beenengaged in communal work withPouvoir Ouvrier. We specify that G.-E.

Debord is a member of the SituationistInternational."

[4] Letter of5 May 1961.

(Published in Guy Debord,Correspondance, Volume 2, 1960-1964. All footnotes by Alice Debord.Translated from the French by NOTBORED! April 2005.)

http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref1http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref2http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref3http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref4http://www.notbored.org/debord-5May1961.htmlhttp://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref1http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/prelim.htmhttp://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref2http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref3http://www.notbored.org/debord-13June1961.html#_ednref4http://www.notbored.org/debord-5May1961.html