MINGLING SOUNDS ASSIGNMENT - ANDRE / JOE
ANDRE'S TEXT
◦ How does the sentence “The medium is the message” by Marshall McLuhan applies to your practice? Comment on this quote in the context of your own work and in regards to this transcontinental collaboration, etc.
despite the controversy about the person here and in diverse media sources, i'll try to point my thought just on this particular quote.
since by McLuhan everyone's action is considered as a medium, everyone has the power to subliminal change a project's final result (even with an act out of miscomprehension), and therefor the different approaches and intentions in art and our cultural and locational differences in our class, aswell as the limitations and barriers of education and life situations, the short timewindow of working together, etc.. should be considered as a gain for letting something interesting grow, not the opposite.
when thinking about myself, a lack of knowledge or an indifferent view of the obvious intention of things often leads me to unintended ideas, which is what i've started to looking for intentionally.
so if i have to observe the personal decisions of McLuhan, i would have to disagree with my own conclusions, the changes i could predict due to the changes in the person of McLuhan would force me to do that. and i can't do that easily. so my thoughts are detached from his appearance as a person and stand as an unintended side effect of his quote. that is all.
◦ American sound artist Bill Fontana made several pieces in which he transfers sound from one location to another. How does this locational switch change our understanding of a the space(s) in question? What new aspects of a sonic environment might emerge? What happens to our perception of a location once it is stripped from its original sounds and these are replaced by sounds from another location?
i think it gets easier for me nowadays to seperate audio and visuals, and with the whole media easier for everyone to not hear or not see something. so i have to question artistic matter of exchanging one soundscape with another without putting it in a broader context.
◦ How does an instrument through which sound is transmitted shape our expectation and the perception of it (loudspeaker, telephone, alarm-clock), in other words, what if the expectation is not met, what impact can this have on our perception?
in these three examples there are 3 different types of perceiving sound, aesthetics-communication-awareness. maybe we should look at an environment where these types blend together. take a soundscape: i hear people talking, birds singing - yet i'm not thinking i'm having a conversation, or i'm having to awnser. tones and rhythmic elements evolve, but rarely i get the desire to enhance the composition or having to dance. a distant emergency car and dogs barking - i'm not hiding behind a corner all the time.
so besides the actual sounds, the parameters and the localization or the sonic direction you have to consider the expectation as the main instrument of perceiving sound in a situation.
experiment in attachment: if a speech by someone would actually start spinning around me very fast, i would most likely just get lost in the event of a constantly changing perception of the sound and focus on either the aesthetics or the quality of the movement. change the voice into a monotonous ~0.5sec long tone in a fixed position with both short attack and release and you got your sound af emergency. this could slowly emerge into a sustaining operette voice and transforming again in "pure" speech to create a full a full circle of perceiving sound. but i'm unsure about the actual impact on our perceptions by an experiment like this, especially if your expectations are already formed in any way and you're sitting in a room with several loudspeakers and someone presses "play". also you would focus on the changes and shifts so no realistic comprehention of a situation could be generated.
while i think a conditioning and/or experiments could be fruitful on the aesthetic and communicative side, our ears for danger and awareness are more connected to a physical reaction, caused by the subconsciousness. some people wake up by the sound of their favourite song played by their mobile phone, but i doubt that several experiences of an unexpected sound of a lion shouting at you (maybe through a public sound installation), would affect the risk of surviving your next safari at all. so a general conditioning should be questionable, to say the least.
ANDRE'S VIDEO
<videoflash type="vimeo">64984544|500|280</videoflash> temporary low quality
THOUGHTS
◦ How does the sentence “The medium is the message” by Marshall McLuhan applies to your practice? Comment on this quote in the context of your own work and in regards to this transcontinental collaboration, etc.
Joe:
What stands out for me about McLuhan's text is how the effect of the unconsidered and accidental can often be as meaningful as intentional actions and ideation.
For example, the 1967 publication of McLuhan's collaboration with graphic designer Quentin Fiore contained a crucial and unexpected difference from the famed first chapter of Understanding Media. A typesetting error caused the last word of the title to be printed as as "massage" rather than "message". McLuhan was delighted at this turn of events and kept the mistake as part of the title. This inclusion of systemic error in the total consideration of meaning has obvious resonance for contemporary applications of digital technology and the embrace of digital errors.
Unintended contextual considerations also affect how the ideas surrounding media also change over time. For McLuhan, this can be seen in his depiction of cultural binaries ("civilized" vs. "tribal") as well how he assigns value to his constructions. When viewed though a contemporary lens, McLuhan's projections of cultural difference can seem problematic and for some may affect how his work should be approached.
For me, a consideration of McLuhan points up the significance of the unseen and unintended in the understanding and production of technologically mediated communication and expression.
Andre:
despite the controversy about the person here and in diverse media sources, i'll try to point my thought just on this particular quote.
since by McLuhan everyone's action is considered as a medium, everyone has the power to subliminal change a project's final result (even with an act out of miscomprehension), and therefor the different approaches and intentions in art and our cultural and locational differences in our class, aswell as the limitations and barriers of education and life situations, the short timewindow of working together, etc.. should be considered as a gain for letting something interesting grow, not the opposite.
when thinking about myself, a lack of knowledge or an indifferent view of the obvious intention of things often leads me to unintended ideas, which is what i've started to looking for intentionally.
so if i have to observe the personal decisions of McLuhan, i would have to disagree with my own conclusions, the changes i could predict due to the changes in the person of McLuhan would force me to do that. and i can't do that easily. so my thoughts are detached from his appearance as a person and stand as an unintended side effect of his quote.
◦ American sound artist Bill Fontana made several pieces in which he transfers sound from one location to another. How does this locational switch change our understanding of a the space(s) in question? What new aspects of a sonic environment might emerge? What happens to our perception of a location once it is stripped from its original sounds and these are replaced by sounds from another location?
Andre:
i think it gets easier for me nowadays to seperate audio and visuals, and with the whole media easier for everyone to not hear or not see something. so i have to question artistic matter of exchanging one soundscape with another without putting it in a broader context.
Joe:
To me, the idea of locational and temporal transference is always present in any recorded or technologically mediated sound production. As such, the idea of direct and literal translocation of a sonic (or any other) environment seems like an unreachable goal. In transferring one sonic experience to another, the aural situation is always propagated through recording, transmitting, and sound reproducing objects that change the nature and context of sound to such a degree that the exact nature of what is transmitted becomes unclear. I prefer to consider trans-localized sound as expanded collaborative sound spaces made through a collaborative effort between regional sonic events and performers, both human and technological.
◦ How does an instrument through which sound is transmitted shape our expectation and the perception of it (loudspeaker, telephone, alarm-clock), in other words, what if the expectation is not met, what impact can this have on our perception?
Joe:
The examples of sound producing objects given here seem to exemplify three distinct modes of listening: pleasure, communication, and sound of alarm or alertness.
For me, the aural expectations linked to any specific object are primarily culturally and contextually determined. For example, a wire recorder might provide vastly different expectation from those who know the function of the object and those who do not. As a result, meeting expectations implies determining and satisfying audience expectations. One approach to this dilemma is to include the personal experience and expectations of the artist as part of framework of the piece, so instead of attempting to presume a collective contextual and cultural association shared by an audience, a perspective is given that is grounded in the lived experience of the presenter and allows for varying levels of association and understanding by the audience.
Andre:
in these three examples there are 3 different types of perceiving sound, aesthetics-communication-awareness. maybe we should look at an environment where these types blend together. take a soundscape: i hear people talking, birds singing - yet i'm not thinking i'm having a conversation, or i'm having to awnser. tones and rhythmic elements evolve, but rarely i get the desire to enhance the composition or having to dance. a distant emergency car and dogs barking - i'm not hiding behind a corner all the time.
so besides the actual sounds, the parameters and the localization or the sonic direction you have to consider the expectation as the main instrument of perceiving sound in a situation.
experiment in attachment: if a speech by someone would actually start spinning around me very fast, i would most likely just get lost in the event of a constantly changing perception of the sound and focus on either the aesthetics or the quality of the movement. change the voice into a monotonous ~0.5sec long tone in a fixed position with both short attack and release and you got your sound af emergency. this could slowly emerge into a sustaining operette voice and transforming again in "pure" speech to create a full a full circle of perceiving sound. but i'm unsure about the actual impact on our perceptions by an experiment like this, especially if your expectations are already formed in any way and you're sitting in a room with several loudspeakers and someone presses "play". also you would focus on the changes and shifts so no realistic comprehention of a situation could be generated.
while i think a conditioning and/or experiments could be fruitful on the aesthetic and communicative side, our ears for danger and awareness are more connected to a physical reaction, caused by the subconsciousness. some people wake up by the sound of their favourite song played by their mobile phone, but i doubt that several experiences of an unexpected sound of a lion shouting at you (maybe through a public sound installation), would affect the risk of surviving your next safari at all. so a general conditioning should be questionable, to say the least.
JOE VIDEO
<videoflash type="youtube">HXC3LwJgoOE&|500|280</videoflash>