Category Archives: Introduction to Sound Arts

Sound in Japan

Leave a Reply

Ryo Ikeshiro and Atau Tanaka provide a helpful insight into the different movements that make up the sound art scene in Japan in their article. They describe sound in Japan to be “aural signatures closely bound to its history, nature and culture. Initially, this brings to mind to beauty of Japanese culture, like its nature scapes. Ikeshiro and Tanaka talk of sort of instrument, shishi odoshi, bell chimes in temples, and chanting of sutra by monks. A narrative is being painted about the “nice” parts of Japanese culture.

Moving forward in the article, Ikeshiro and Tanaka speak on the influence of the Meiji Reformation on Japanese sound. To me, beginning to read this passage, I was immediately brought back to my brief time of studying colonialism in a political context last year. Based on my knowledge about the Meiji Reformation, I was expecting to be reading how, for example, the countries that were colonised by Japan had an impact on Japanese sound. However, it was only touched on to show the Western influence on Japan’s sound, with the writers of the article describing this influence as being “embraced” but “held apart”.

Japan, although has had vast amounts of changes, has still kept true to its culture even from the Edo period- marked by its development of a rich cultural peace and its upholding of its class system, including the Samurai Class. However, would Japan have been able to hold onto these small amounts of its authentic culture if its hadn’t submitted to the West’s pressure to “Westernise”? In a bid to force Japan to begin trading with the West, the US sent Commodore Perry with a fleet of “black ships” in 1853 (after many attempts from other Western states), and a Treaty of Amity and Commerce, essentially subjecting Japan to participating in Colonialism; whether that be by subjecting to Western rule, or becoming a power themselves.

So it’s very easy to see how Japan’s sound was influenced by the West, if the West held that much power over them, which began the Meiji transformation. But Japan chose the latter option; become a power themselves. To avoid becoming colonised, Japan’s nation strengthened. A policy of Sonno Joi, meaning to ‘res†ore the Emperor, expel the Barbarian’ was introduced, the second part of this phrase an indication to Japan’s first policy in its move towards reformation- to expel foreign peoples, or in Japan’s words, “barbarians”. The beginning of the Meiji period was marked by the coup of 1867.

Considering Japan became a colonial power, it’s hard not to wonder how much of Japan’s culture and soundscape is made up of those countries it colonised.

It would be a shame, however, for me to dwell too much on this omission of history in the article, as its insights into the different sound movements in Japan will be very useful going forward in my understanding of sound art.

Key Terms and Takeaways:
Wabi-sabi: the beauty of imperfection 🙂

Sound Arts in the British Context 2

Leave a Reply

When reading the Unfinished Business: A Conversation on Sound Art in the UK, a transcript of a conversation between Adam Parkinson and David Toop (the latter being the interviewee), I was able to understand better what separates the British understanding of what sound art is from other perspectives. David Toop, previously a Professor of Audio Culture and Improvisation here at LCC, is known for drawing connections between sound, listening, music, and physical art, and crossing the boundaries of how these themes interact with each other.

Sound art or, as Toop and other proponents of its scene in the 1970s would rather call it, “sound work”. The term “sound work” was preferred as it detached those involved in the practice from the art world and from music. This provokes the question; what is wrong with the art world? The most obvious answer is the exclusivity and eliteness associated with the art world. However, as time has progressed, in 2021 art is so much more understood and accessible that its become a lot more inclusive, and perhaps more comfortable to associate with the term “art”. However, exclusion and extortion still loom over the world of art. Though it could be debated that the prices of particular art pieces, exhibitions and experiences is only fair for the value of time and dedication that the artist(s) have put into their projects, there is zero doubt that this creates an immediate barrier, drawing a line of exclusivity.

Toop creates a very reasonable argument for detaching from the term “art”, but why then call it “work”? For me, the word “work” brings up thoughts of necessity rather than enjoyment, like being forced to do a job. Jobs, for the most part, require certain levels of skill, which, on the topic of exclusivity, could infer that skill is required to create sound art. This goes against my personal ethos, that art is one of our most innate functions, meaning that everyone has the ability to create it. On the flip side, the thoughts of “necessity” that were brought up could show that what differentiates sound art from music and the art world, is that sound art needs to have a purpose. Though Toop did not say this, its a nice thought to wonder on.

What Toop goes on to explain, is that in his practice of sound work compared to art, there is more value of the journey of the creation, rather than the outcome. This just goes to show, its up to you what sound art means to you, or whatever you call your practice, no matter what it may be branded as to others.

Sound Arts in the British Context 1

Leave a Reply

Brian Eno would be a key figure to look at when thinking of “generative” creation of sound, which is sound that creates itself. Here is a visual example of Eno’s method, using tapes:

Using just 4 loops, Eno is able to create a piece that is ever changing. “Always the same but always different”.

Brian Eno’s impact of sound arts from the British perspective is significant, as he is regarded the creator of the genre of ambient music. Ambient music, often categorised by its use of nature soundscapes, acoustic instrumentation, and the use of synthesisers, existed in earlier forms since the early twentieth century, with movements such as music concrete embodying the intent that ambient music aims to have. The invention and introduction of synthesisers in the 1970s allowed ambient music to be what it is recognised as today. Though Eno may be regarded as the creator of the genre, I (and he himself) would consider him more of a pioneer; giving reason for the need of ambient music, Eno proposed that music “must be as ignorable as it is interesting”.

Eno’s ideas on generative sound, however, is what I’m most interested in. In an essay taken from his published diary, A Year With Swollen Appendices, Eno describes his use of generative music as making music “with materials and processes [he] specified, but in combinations and interactions which [he] did not”. To me, this speaks to the invention of the world, and God’s role in that; he created us and the world, but what we do is up to us, and uncontrollable by God.

Why this analogy to God is relevant here, is because I’m in the process of creating a project titled Heaven Garde. It is a collaboration with my friend who, previous to this project, has had no experience creating music. The concept of the project is to demonstrate the cycles of life, and eventually, what happens at the end of it; the purpose of the project is to prove that art, in this case music, is one of our, as humans, most innate functions, and that no matter how much the “skill” has been nurtured, we can all create. If I take Eno’s ideas on generative sound and apply them to this project, not only would I be further emphasising the concept of “heaven” and life’s relation to The Creator, but it will be a new and fun technique to experiment with, that might help myself and my friend finish this project with a slight ease.

Sound Works: Brian Eno, Discreet Music (1975)
Sound Artists: Erik Satie, Pierre Schaeffer, Laurie Spiegel

Introduction to Sound Arts

Leave a Reply

Ontology: what is there? what exists?
Epistemology: How we go about knowing.

The big questions we were introduced to today were:
– What is sound art? Where does it happen? Who consumes it? Who produces it? How? Where? Why?
– How does it relate to other forms of listening and sound making?

Although these are questions we will never be able to define definitively, we started to think about how we can collectively define “sound art”. The two ideas I resonated with were:
– an expression of a concept through sound. Because of this, unlike music, sound art is not created with the intention of being pleasing to the ears, but rather to allow the listener to grasp the intended emotion and effect of the piece of art.
– sound that engages other senses than the ears; this could link closely to the condition synaesthesia, which for some can be a pleasing experience, and sound art can be a vessel for those without the condition to experience a similar sense.

Thinking on the idea of synaesthesia, I thought about my own experiences of pain synaesthesia, which isn’t pleasant at all. When describing the sensations and how disabling this can be for me sometimes, I’m not often understood. Perhaps, creating a piece of sound art, I will finally be able to communicate this experience. I would like to research into sound creating physical pain, as if this is a possibility, it is something I would like to experiment with.

Sound Works: Peter Vogel, Sound of Shadows.
Books: Rachel Mundy, Animal Musicalities: Birds, Beasts and Evolutionary Listening.