Dérive vs. Drifter

Concise and easy to follow, Sadler’s article deconstructs the term psychogeography to a substantive yet comprehendible definition for the reader. My immediate response is why didn’t we read this article before McDonough’s? Perhaps our critiques of McDonough would have been harsher and our understanding of situationist art more elusive than technical; nonetheless, there are subtle differences between the two articles which demand careful analysis.

Recalling from McDonough’s narrative last week, I noticed that he draws greater emphasis on the technicality of situationist art rather than engage the reader through a more informal but elementary description of the same much like Sadler achieves. McDonough place greater emphasis on terminology and their influence when portrayed in a situationist painting or installation whereas Sadler focuses on deriving interpretations to individual situationist works then simplifying these analyses for general study by the novice reader. Methods of style and diction are distinct in both articles; McDonough’s jargon-rich writing is directed more towards artistic scholars than Sadler’s, which I find glosses over the technical composition of situationist art and, instead, provides a more generic image of the same.

Yet, Sadler’s commentary is not entirely subordinate to McDonough’s in proficiency of analysis; rather, it is complimentary. Sadler presents a functional recapitulation of situationist art that outlines its general themes which McDonough’s article consolidates. Sadler’s article seeks to digest psychogeography as presented in the following, “the sublime could induce new flights of fancy…reshaped by the Enlightenment’s progeny, modernism. If we felt frustrated at the effort required to put them all together, we had missed the point” (76).

Throughout his article, Sadler stresses that, despite its overwhelming and oftentimes indistinct elemental structures, psychogeography should and can be appreciated without extensive knowledge in the field. He adopts the term “drifter” in order to situate a character behind the situationst work and attempt to foment objective and subjective interpretations by the speculator, and then underlines the interconnectedness between the two approaches to urban exploration. Sadler provides the following claim in order to encompass the purpose behind situationist maps, “[they] attempt to put the spectator at ease with the city of apparent disorder, exposing the strange logic that lies beneath its surface” (82).

Sadler uses the term “drifter” to represent the character in a situationist map while McDonough uses “derive”. What is the difference between the two terms and which is more used today?

Also, Sadler claims “ambiance” as a precursor for artists to envisage of psychogeography. How is ambiance different from emotional attachment or sensory appeal? And, what are its representations, if any?