Heterotopias, non-places and other chiasmi

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.60056/CCL.2024..169-180

Keywords:

Dismaland, Disneyland, heterotopia, dystopia, chiastic structure, non-places

Abstract

This paper investigates the dichotomy between Dismaland, a dystopian inversion of Disneyland, and Disneyland as an enduring bastion of joyous illusion. Through the lenses of heterotopia, non-places, and chiasmus, it explores how their coexistence authentically grounds one while estranging the other. Banksy's inadvertent use of а chiastic structure in transforming Dismaland is analyzed for its reorganizational logic, and challenging norms. Drawing on Lefebvre, Foucault, Rancière, and Nikolchina, the paper examines cultural representations, spaces, and social relations. The analysis extends to non-places vs. heterotopias, emphasizing Dismaland's resistance to non-place classification. The paper advocates for heterotopias, like Dismaland, to challenge norms and foster alternative cultural production, critiquing interpretations of Situationist theories and proposing Rancière's spatial occupation. The conclusion explores how chiastic structure and heterotopian thinking fuel Dismaland's revolutionary potential, challenging predetermined environments, and underscores art's transformative role in societal evolution towards a renewed existence.

Author Biography

  • Nataliya Atanasova, Sofia University "St. Kliment Ohridski"

    Nataliya Atanasova is a PhD candidate in Philosophy at the University of Sofia “St. Kliment Ohridski”. She has completed her Bachelor's degree in Theory of Art at the University of Padova in Italy and her Master's degree in Visual Culture at the University of Westminster in London. Her research interests focus on the intersection of philosophy, visual culture, and technology, with a particular emphasis on contemporary and digital art. Nataliya is interested in exploring radical perspectives within these fields, which offer new and innovative insights into the relationship between art, technology, and society. Her PhD thesis is titled “Catastrophic Imaginaries and Revolutionary Aesthetics: The Situationists’ Aftermath in Contemporary Political Art”.

References

Augé, M. (1995). Non-places: Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity. Verso Books.

Baudrillard, J. (1994). Simulacra and simulation. University of Michigan Press.

Bishop, C. (2012). Artificial hells: Participatory art and the politics of spectatorship. Verso Books.

Debord, G. (2002). Report on the construction of situation: Guy Debord and the Situationist International: Texts and documents (T. McDonough, Ed.). The MIT Press.

Debord, G. (2014). The society of the spectacle (K. Knabb, Trans.). Bureau of Public Secrets.

Debord, G. (1964). Questionnaire SI. Internationale Situationniste, (9), from https://www.cddc.vt.edu/sionline/si/questionnaire.html

Foucault, M. (1984). Heterotopias, of other spaces. Architecture, Mouvement, Continuité, (5), 46–49.

Gumpert, S. S. (2002). Advertising art that advertises itself as art that hates advertising: Jenny Holzer and the truisms of Times Square. Journal of American Studies of Turkey, (16), 77–88.

Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution [Kindle edition].

Isar, N. (2005). Undoing forgetfulness: Chiasmus of poetical mind—A cultural paradigm of archetypal imagination. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 1(3).

Lyotard, J.-F., & Lindsay, C. (1987). Notes on legitimation. Oxford Literary Review, 9(1–2).

Mudie, E. (2013). Disaster and renewal: The praxis of shock in the surrealist city novel. M/C Journal, 16(1).

Nikolchina, M. (2013). Lost unicorns of the velvet revolutions: Heterotopias of the seminar. Fordham University Press.

Nikolchina, M. (2014). Inverted forms and heterotopian homonymy: Althusser, Mamardashvili, and the problem of “man.” Boundary, (1), 79–100.

Nikolchina, M. (2016). Heterotopian homonymy [Video presentation of the concept – 17 mins]. Glossary of Common Knowledge: Commons, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YX-oDEmKknw

Perniola, M. (2004). Art and its shadows. Continuum Press.

Rancière, J. (2004). The politics of aesthetics: The distribution of the sensible (G. Rockhill, Trans.). Continuum Press.

Rancière, J. (2017). The senses and uses of utopia: Political uses of utopia. In S. D. Chrostowska & J. D. Ingram (Eds.), New Marxist, anarchist, and radical democratic perspectives (pp. 219–232). Columbia University Press.

Rancière, J. (2008). The emancipated spectator. Verso Books.

Stob, J. (2014). The paradigms of Nicolas Bourriaud: Situationists as vanishing point. Evental Aesthetics, (4), 23–54.

Vaneigem, R. (2012). The revolution of everyday life (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Rebel Press.

Žižek, S. (2023). Too late to awaken: What lies ahead when there is no future? Penguin Books.

Downloads

Published

2025-11-06

Issue

Vol. 10 (2024)

Section

I. Dystopia Traditions, Genre Dynamics, Directions of Transformation

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This license enables reusers to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. CC BY-NC includes the following elements:

 BY: credit must be given to the creator.
NC: Only noncommercial uses of the work are permitted.

How to Cite

Heterotopias, non-places and other chiasmi. (2025). Colloquia Comparativa Litterarum, 10, 169-180. https://doi.org/10.60056/CCL.2024..169-180