RE: [microsound] Re: grabbing people with a statement

[Christopher Sorg <csorg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: ---------------- --------------- [mailto:blove666@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Language gets
> meaning from who is using it.  If you dont understand the sound
> "densha" as
> a word it has no meaning.  Mike put it well when he wrote "Sound
> is abundant
> with meaning, but only when the meaning is supplied by the listener."
> Removed from its context one can realize that sound and language have no
> meaning.  If it serves no function to us all we can do is listen.

Well, that's a nice, general thing to say about anything.  Even paintings
have no meaning (except that ascribed by the viewer) when they are taken out
of context.  That most certainly does not mean that sound (and images) have
no meaning.  They still have meaning, of course.  Why else would people
create silly lists called IDM and microsound if the sounds had no signifier?
I think it's just a ridiculously nieve notion that sound can be removed from
context or that you can compose without regard to social structure (well,
you could try :).

Of course, this does remind me of this David Sedaris story.  He tells a
story about how he is living in France, and how everything that the French
say must be so intelligent, so philosophical.  Once he learns some of the
language, though, he finds out just how banal and average the conversation
truly is.  I feel sick, what happened at work, etc, etc.  What is
interesting, is that either way you interpret the sound, within or without
the culture, it's still a socialized, a learned perception of sound.  He
assumes that (my interpretation) French culture is full of high art and
philosophy, so the French "sound" is the sound of intelligent conversation.
To the French, it is merely small talk.  Regardless, there is an assumption
and an understanding of sound that presupposes the sound itself.

I do not think that many of us are lucky enough to approach sound without
any presuppositions (I do think that good listeners try).  One might be
tempted to say that meaning is "supplied by the listener" but there is an
encoding process going on by the producer of sound as well.  I do not think
that social or aural interference suggests there is no meaning supplied by
the producer.  It's a two way street.  It exists whether you recognize it or
not.

Nighty-night, rabbit....

__________________________________________
Christopher Sorg
Multimedia Artist and Instructor
The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
http://csorg.cjb.net
csorg@xxxxxxxxx


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.314 / Virus Database: 175 - Release