Chapter 3: Authenticity in Different Degree of Displacement Architecture
3.1 Transformation of Leisure Space
3.1.5 Different and Repetition in Leisure Space and Its Activities
The image and perception of miniature park was not limit only in the small scale duplication, in 1989 the Street of America was open in Disney World. The Streets of America were two intersecting streets with sets and facades designed to look like New York City and San Francisco. New York Street came first and was part of the original version of the Backlot Tour when the park first opened May 1, 1989. Both streets reflected the architecture of their respective locations were layered with props and details. For instance, there was a faux subway stairwell, newspaper racks, themed window displays, and even simulated traffic sound effects. Even though the streets were mainly places to explore, take photos and shopping.
Figure 62 Street of America, New York (Left) San Francisco (Right) in Disney World Retrieved fromdisney.fandom.com/wiki/Streets_of_America
Even the Street of America were closed in 2016 but the idea of repetition of the iconic and monumentality architecture in live size model was ignite by this part of the Disney World Amusement Park. The duplication and displacement of architecture in leisure and tourism development in Las Vegas and other parts of the world later on had followed the same strategy of the Street of America.
▪ Everyone already knows how "thought" is to be defined.
▪ Common sense and good sense guarantee this knowledge and understanding.
▪ Recognition of an object is determined by the sameness of the object.
▪ Representation can appropriately subordinate the concept of difference to the Same, the Similar, the Analogous, and the Opposed.
▪ Any error that occurs in thinking is caused by external rather than internal mechanisms.
▪ The truth of a proposition is only determined by whatever is designated by the proposition.
▪ Problems are only defined by their solutions.
▪ Learning is only a means of gaining knowledge.
Each of these eight postulates or models of thought may become an obstacle to the understanding of pure difference and complex repetition. (Deleuze, 1968)
As repetition indicates a relationship between a "repeater" and a "repeated," so too does difference imply a relationship between a "differentiator" and a "differentiated."
"Differentiation" is the determination of an idea's virtual content, whereas "differentiation" is the materialization of an idea's virtual content as distinct aspects or sections. To differentiate something is to actualize it. Every proposition has a dimension of expression and a dimension of designation, explains Deleuze. Expression is the dimension of sense, and designation is the dimension of truth or falsehood. These two dimensions of logical function are not independent of each other, because expression must establish the relation between a proposition and whatever truth or falsehood is designated by that proposition. Thus, the truth or falsehood of a proposition must be grounded in the sense of that proposition. (Scott, 2012) Thus, "differentiation" may be a problem-solving technique. It may be a process in which the solution to one problem is combined with the solutions to other problems to provide a more global and integrated solution.
Figure 63 Leisure space is defined from the difference and repetition of Heterotopia space and the image from monumentality and iconicity of the architecture.
- Pure Difference in Leisure.
Diversity may be distorted if it is made to fit to the constraints of representation. Any phrase that reduces pure difference to the absence of the sameness cannot positively convey it. An idea's similarity, comparability, analogy, or antagonism to another idea can be validated by representation. As a result, variation is viewed by representation as a contradiction to the concept of similarity. Using representation, it is impossible to claim that two things are the same when they aren't. Difference and repetition may only be viewed as representations of the sameness, likeness, resemblance, and equivalence of things. Simulating intricate repetition, such as that marked by differences, disguises, displacements, and variability, is impossible using representation.(Price, 2019)
Since reality is constantly changing, Deleuze contends, the notion of perpetual recurrence by Nietzsche validates the essence of pure difference. The endless recurrence of all things confirms the existence of difference and repetition. Differentiation and sameness are at the core of the perpetual return, which can be viewed as a circle. The everlasting return leads to numerous centers of meaning, giving depth to the world of difference, as difference becomes a divergence or decentering. Even while an item or perception can be depicted, it lacks the richness and breadth of the universe of difference.. (Scalambrino, 2011, p. 52) If the center of the circle of representation is the sameness, then difference is at the outer edge of the circle. It doesn't matter whether
there are an endless number of representations of an object; they all converge at the same point at which the object's identity is represented.
Deleuze associates difference not with indetermination but with determination.
Deleuze opposes Aristotle's entire classification system, which is based on the notion that Being is ambiguous. Deleuze sees in Aristotle a theory that reduces difference to the separation of "generic identities from the flow of a continuous perceptible sequence." This means that, according to Aristotle, difference (and here it becomes evident that Deleuze means "division") is not primary. It is merely a mediator, subject to the identity of concepts, the opposition of predicates, the drawing of comparisons in judgment, and the perception of similarity. As viewed by Deleuze, Aristotle's concept of difference and reality as disaster have been lost. According to Aristotle, difference is nothing more than the disintegration of continuity into a sequence of similarities and impenetrable gaps between analogical structures. (Scott, 2005)
Deleuze seeks a more open conception of difference, the perception of difference beyond restriction and opposition, a "deeper actual aspect" as potential multiplicity. At this point, Deleuze begins to affirm pure difference as preceding negation, as the moment when identity is consumed. The purpose is to immediately perceive difference as the (univocal) being of the sensible. Plato and platonic division receive the final word in this chapter. Deleuze believes that Plato constructed difference as division.
Plato's theory of division is considered more radical because it does not establish differences within a single species or genus. Out of Plato's concept of phantasm, Deleuze fashions a new concept: simulacrum. In Difference and Repetition, simulacra are invited to rise and affirm their rights; and for the purposes of critique, it became otiose in wider applications. (Mayell, 2014) There are either one or two sides of a fundamental split in Plato. The Idea and only the Idea sits on one side of the division, while copies and simulations sit on the other side.
Social Instrument View of Leisure
In contrast to the antiutilitarian perspective of leisure, the social instrument view (Neulinger, 1981) sees leisure as a method of fostering personal development and assisting others. According to this viewpoint, recreation should serve a purpose. This idea might result in a stressed attitude toward leisure in which achievement during leisure activity is overemphasized. When the focus is on the outcome rather than the experience
itself, recreation can take on the characteristics of labor. In support of the social instrument viewpoint, it aids in preventing uses of leisure time that hinder healthy self- development. The desire to use leisure to serve others is likely to result in a higher level of volunteerism and community involvement, which is a desirable and likely outcome of the social instrument orientation to leisure.
Leisure as Transformation
This perspective is comparable to the social instrument perspective. According to Edginton and Chen, leisure offers the best opportunity for obtaining new experiences, knowledge, skills, and attitudes. It is a period for self-reflection in order to reinvent, refocus, revitalize, and transform oneself or be transformed. Leisure has been described as a range of activities that individuals undertake in their free time, irrespective of their age, status or class. (Edginton & Chen, 2008) It is an opportunity for individuals after completing their immediate necessities of life to choose and engage freely in an experience intended for personal satisfaction and skill development. (Hansen, Larson, & Dworkin, 2003) It is essential to seek out new information, new abilities, and new perspectives in order to facilitate the kind of positive transformation required to adapt to the fast-paced, ever- changing environment in which we live. What leisure activities would you consider transformative?
Leisure as a Symbol of Social Class
The notion of leisure as a marker of social class differs significantly from the views of leisure as a social instrument and as a transformative force. According to Veblen (Kraus, Piff, & Keltner, 2009), leisure can be considered as a marker of social class because the possession and use of free time is one of the most obvious indicators of wealth. In support of this concept of leisure, it can be claimed that the most apparent indicators of high socioeconomic status in contemporary culture include owning boats and elaborate swimming pools, indulging in adventurous world travel, attending spectacular parties, and dining at the finest restaurants. All of these indices pertain to leisure, proving Veblen's claim that leisure serves as a sign of social class.
This negative perspective of leisure has less relevance in contemporary society than it once did. People with a lower socioeconomic status often have more free time than those with a higher socioeconomic status. During various historical times, the lower
classes worked long hours and had very little free time, but the nobility was free to engage in a range of leisure activities. In addition, the recreation behavior patterns of people from diverse socioeconomic classes are far more comparable in modern society than they were in the past. Rich and poor may partake in the same sports (such as swimming) today, with the primary distinction being the type of facilities or equipment used (e.g. private pool versus public pool). Consequently, the concept of leisure as a marker of social class does not appear to be as relevant now. Nevertheless, the leisure-related benefits connected with money are likely remain the major motivation for aiming to a higher socioeconomic standing.
Holistic View of Leisure
The holistic view of leisure recognizes that leisure and labor are so intertwined that they cannot be separated. (Edginton, Jordan, DeGraaf, & Edginton, 2002) According to the holistic perspective, components of leisure are present in the workplace, the educational system, and other social spheres. Because leisure is so intertwined with work and other parts of life, a comprehensive explanation or definition of leisure must include examine the concepts of time and work.
A research by Shaw provides support for the holistic idea that elements of leisure can be found in numerous domains of life. Using a 48-hour diary and interviews, 120 participants rated their subjective leisure time, daily free time, and time spent on recreational activities in Shaw's study. The findings showed that leisure can be enjoyed while working and other necessary chores, and that not all leisure time or free time is necessarily regarded as leisure. Average daily subjective leisure time was 7.26 hours, compared to daily averages of 5.26 hours free time and 3.22 hours recreation, suggesting that two hours per day of leisure occur outside free time and more than four hours per day of leisure occur outside of recreation time. Approximately 8% of leisure time and 15%
of free time were categorized as non-leisure activities. Holistic perspectives are valid in the belief that work, education, and leisure are at least somewhat intertwined. This study provides evidence of this. (McLean et al., 2012)
Regarding the comprehensive view of leisure, it is worthwhile to explore the following questions. Will the comprehensive perspective on leisure be the most frequently held in the future? Greater acceptance of the holistic viewpoint may result in a more
humanistic vision on life, in which concern for others supersedes concern for material goods. How widely recognized is the holistic perspective of leisure today?
Several additional conceptions of leisure are mentioned in the literature, but they are not included in this chapter. For the purposes of this book, leisure is defined as free or unobligated time, during which individuals may choose to engage in positive, beneficial activities or bad, harmful ones. After examining several notions of leisure, what is recreation? Why would anyone complain of boredom, lack of drive, or "being in a rut" if there are so many recreational activities to choose from? Clearly, the issue is not a lack of opportunities, but rather a lack of understanding or awareness of them. As mentioned in the following chapter, there is an increasing demand for leisure education in today's society in order to increase people's awareness of their leisure options.
- Repetition Generates Authenticity.
According to historical surveys, "repetition for its own sake" is not for the sake of original truths or realities, but rather for the pleasure of repetition itself. It's fascinating to see how habit and memory are able to condense elements or a series of instances into serial forms while discussing the active and passive syntheses of habit and memory.
Repetition's novelty comes from a variation in the way we perceive it (what Husserl would call an intended consciousness). Contraction is the essence of all things and people, and it is the sum of physical and temporal contractions. A passive "larval subject" is "composed"
of "thousands of habits, contractions, contemplations, pretensions, presumptions, and satisfactions," according to Deleuze's definition of the term. As long as the dissolved self
"continues to declare the glory of God," "that is, of what it contemplates," "contains," and
"possesses," it is unchanged. (Price, 2019)
When it comes to the pure past, habitual synthesis is mixed with more passive synthesis of memory, which is marked by three paradoxes: its contemporaneity, the coexistence of its past and present, and its prior existence. Since of this, the pure past is never present because it is always there with the original sense of belonging that it had before. An event known as caesura, which in Greek and Latin means "stopping" or
"breaking," is one that causes a picture to be ripped apart into unequal parts and creates new possibilities for temporal succession as well as the dissolution of ego and a pull toward an elevated image in which everything is repetition. To sum up, time has broken its circle, and the "once and for all" of order can only be found in the ultimate esoteric circle
in the past-present-future moments of the past-present-future time. It is the future that is reproduced, not the past. (Scott, 2005)
For Deleuze, the most important aspect is the simultaneity and contemporaneity of all the divergent series, i.e., the fact that they all coexist and are not merely sequential from the present's vantage point. To proclaim the triumphant glory of the simulacrum and other demonic images, their lived life in opposition to the good image that would pretend to resemble what the original contract might have. According to Deleuze, the "important point" is "the simultaneity and contemporaneity of all the divergent series, the fact that they all coexist," and not merely sequential when viewed from the present. As in the preceding chapter, Deleuze concludes this one with Plato and the Sophist, reversing him to sing the conquering glory of the simulacrum and other demonic images, their lived existence against the "good" picture that would pretend to resemble an original.
According to marketers, image is worth a thousand words. They communicate a great deal of information quickly and are highly persuasive. Even though we are aware that images may be manipulated and that a plethora of technology exist to do so, it is extremely tempting to see processed images as accurate representations of reality. When we view images, we behave as what psychologists refer to as naive realists. Only with contemplation do we realize that the described burger could not be that juicy, the lingerie model could not be that thin, and the politician on the campaign poster must be older than how he appears.
Chapter 3 of Difference and Repetition is where Deleuze departs from Plato and the Sophist to develop his own concept of difference in opposition to what he terms "the image of mind." By this, Deleuze refers to epistemologies of representation and recognition, the type of image that represents something else or by which one might recognize something in relation to something else, such as when the same object is recognized as the same or similar based on the coordination of two distinct faculties. The image of thought presupposes that cognition has a relationship with the real. (Bamford, 2006, p. 61)
Deleuze contends that the diverse faculties are not connected in or by a single subject or cogito,4 contrary to the notion of common sense (a sense in common through which the separate faculties of sensation, feeling, memory, imagination, and cognition are drawn together). In the philosophy of recognition (the picture of thinking), all faculties concur regarding the subject object. On these distinct branches of a single cogito, distinction is "crucified." (Bamford, 2006, p. 62) Differential or splitting-away theory of the faculties is central to Difference and Repetition. Departing from the philosophical orthodoxies of representation and recognition, conformity, and the mundane, what Deleuze finds in repetition as pure mind evokes thought without a clear or stable image (i.e. the image of thought), without a clear and stable relation to the true.
In the philosophy of pure difference and pure repetition, there is no unity of thinking and no unified concept of cognition. Readers of religion will search for this specific motif of revelation, that moment, the "contingency of an encounter," the occurrence in which "something in the world drives us to consider," the sensation of which eludes any dogmatic representation of cognition. It might be anything, including Socrates, a temple, or a demon. (Bamford, 2006, p. 62) This item would be "grasped in a variety of affective tones: awe, love, anger, and sorrow," perceived but unrecognized, causing confusion and issues for the person. This unexpected and unsettling intensity of an "encounter" should alert readers of religion to the rhetoric of revelation in modernist religious thought, a style of religious thought with its roots in Nietzsche.
- Pure Difference, Complex Repetition and Architecture of Displacement.
Those of pure distinction and intricate repetition. It illustrates the relationship between the two notions, with difference meaning divergence and decentering and repetition implying displacement and concealment. Difference and Repetition describes how a philosophy of difference might signify difference a positive concept. Difference is not simply the negation of sameness; it may have a meaning independent of sameness, and repetition may be independent of the sameness of any particular occurrences or actions. Difference may be inherent to the essence of each concept, and each concept
4 Deleuze holds that no thought is free of sensation. The cogito cannot be self-
evident, because sensation always extends to a multiplicity of further conditions and caus es.