Talk:The Society of the Spectacle/Archives/2013

Adorno/Horkheimer

I am deleting the section "Background, influences and detournments". Firstly, the title is misleading, not least because there is no explanation of the term "détournements" (as it should properly be spelled). Secondly, there is no evidence that Dialectic of Enlightenment actually influenced Debord. Though published in 1944/47, it remained virtually unknown until the late 1960s and was not reissued until 1969. To show up similarities (and it is these similarities that I assume the sources referenced remark upon) is merely "interesting", but when devoid of any context has no place in an article such as this. --Humphrey20020 (talk) 12:52, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Stub - recent slashing of article

I'm not fully au fait with the definition of "original research", but it seems implausible to me that a summary of the book's content, even if unsupported by third-party sources, should fall under that category. Would anyone care to arbitrate, or reinstate the recently deleted bulk of the article with confidence - or, failing that, explain why it should remain as is?--Humphrey20020 (talk) 12:57, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I consider it preferable to use secondary rather than primary sources. However, if you wish to restore the article's previous content, go ahead. I will not revert. Polisher of Cobwebs (talk) 21:02, 6 January 2013 (UTC)