Situationist Space

Thomas McDonough compares two types of maps, The Naked City and the Plan de Paris; the first being fragmented, descriptive, social and concrete and the latter being being whole, descriptive, mental and abstract. The Naked City portrays real perceptions of space and direction with arrows and connected fragments representing 'unities of atmosphere' in the city. This map is representative of the fact that people never see the the entire city as it is displayed on the Plan de Paris. The new cartography challenges the strictness of the map and the homogenity of the urban system proving that maps should be mapped according to social relations. The real map reminds the McDonough of the Haussmannized Paris where class lines are drawn between the poor and rich. The Naked City shows these distinctions hidden by the homogeneity of the Plan map. This reminds me of Jameson's criticism towards periodizing and its habit of homogenizing society and art, not allowing diversity or the reader to debate and form their own opinions on the subject.

McDonough also talks about the different thoughts of geographers Vidal and Redal; Vidal creating an academic map and Redal a psychogeographic map. While Vidal believed that geography was permanent, independent of social relations, "constant and invariable" and Redal believed that geography correlated to society and its changes. He saw that geography was different everyday and altered according men's actions. Although Debord had the same intentions as Redal, he had a slightly different opinion. He believed that space changed, but it could also be moved around to form "new 'unities of atmostphere'". While The Naked City is free and open to expression, the Plan is restrictive and imposes one "correct" view on its readers.

Later McDonough begins talking about the Situationists and their 'theater of operations'. He compares the derive to the flaneur. According to the Situationists the derive was a walker that would take a journey that was niether dependent on "consumption of the city nor factors of chance" but rather the blindness of a everyday person. The gazer becomes a tourist without a map; he percieves and transforms his surroundings into his own meaningful spaces. While the flaneure does not fragment or disrupt the city and follows completely by chance. These two are similar in the fact that they both allow heterogenity to occur.



Questions:
What does the author mean when he says that the Vidal's map is more masculine than feminine? How is a "feminized space" perceived?

What is Debord's disagreement with the Surrealists? What does protests against means-end rationality mean?