[-empyre-] Sound Art: Curating, Technology, Theory
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Thank you to everyone who participated in the past week's topics and posts -- it was a thought-provoking series of conversations! And a special thanks to Renate and Tim who co-manage empyre and invited me to be guest moderator. Along with everyone else, I look forward to next week's discussion. Best wishes, Jim Jim Drobnick and Jennifer Fisher Editors Journal of Curatorial Studies 372 Sackville Street Toronto, Ontario, M4X 1S5 Canada (001) 416-515-0177 (tel/fax) j...@displaycult.com jef...@yorku.ca http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/journals/view-Journal,id=205/ http://www.facebook.com/JournalOfCuratorialStudies ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Sunday, 22nd: Sound Art: Curating, Technology, Theory
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Today we have an opportunity to revisit any of the questions or comments that have been posted over the past six days. Also, what topics deserve more discussion? What topics have been left out? Here is a look at what we've addressed so far over the past week: -- Monday, 16th: Sound Curating and Exhibitions -- Tuesday, 17th: Sound Art and Its Cultural Context -- Wednesday, 18th: Sound Art, Technology and Innovation -- Thursday, 19th: Hearing and Listening -- Friday, 20th: The Sonic Work, New Media, and Theory -- Saturday, 21st: The Disciplinarity of Sound Art Are there any final thoughts from the core participants? Best wishes, Jim___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Friday, 20th: The Sonic Work, New Media, and Theory
--empyre- soft-skinned space-- Thanks for the discussion yesterday -- it feels like we've just scratched the surface! For today, the topic is The Sonic Work, New Media, and Theory, and will involve questions by David Cecchetto, Christoph Cox and Seth Kim-Cohen. This series of inquiries address the ontological and/or socially-constructed aspects of sound art, how its works are circumscribed by or reconfigure the genre of media art, and how it may generate new theoretical paradigms: 1) David Cecchetto: Mark Hansen notes that the term “new media” has both a plural and singular sense: plural in that the novelty of every medium waxes as an incipient innovation before waning into the sedimented form of the medium itself; and at the same time singular in that for the first time in our history, media […] has become distinct from its own technical infrastructure” (p. 172). What novel affordances are offered by aural practices—in the broadest sense—in the context of this second, singular, newness? Might aurality, for example, conjure alternative sensitivities to these ubiquitous data flows and rhythms of change? Or does such a claim slide too easily into an essentialized understanding of sound? (Mark Hansen, “New Media,” in Critical Terms for Media Studies, ed. by Mark Hansen and W.J.T. Mitchell, University of Chicago Press, 2010). 2) Christoph Cox: How can we move beyond the phenomenological and poststructuralist approaches that have thus far dominated thinking about sound? 3) Seth Kim-Cohen: In “What Is An Author?” Foucault writes, “A theory of the work does not exist, and the empirical task of those who naively undertake the editing of works often suffers in the absence of such a theory… The word work and the unity that it designates are probably as problematic as the status of the author's individuality.” Let’s take this problem seriously. Thinking the work as always otherwise suggests a certain wisdom in regard to the other: to be wise regarding the other is to be otherwise. The other, in this case, is, of course, not necessarily another subject, or even another sonic object, but a host of forces beyond the material or formal aspects of the sonic work: politics, economics, history, intention, power, gender, race, etc. In this sense, the sonic work is constituted similarly to Foucault’s notion of the author function. It cannot be ascribed as, or to, a specific entity. Rather, it designates a sort of spatial conceit, a location in which disparate components might coalesce, implying a necessarily temporary and contingent substance, founded and formed in accordance, not with its own self-contained aspects or demands, but according to the exigencies of something we might call an event, rather than an entity. My questions, then, are: What is gained (or lost) in abandoning the fictional unity of the sonic “work”? If we abandon material and formal aspects as the determinants of the boundaries of the phenomena under consideration, how do we adjudicate the jurisdiction of the work, not to mention, that of criticism, evaluation, or even, production? There's quite a bit to delve into here, but if David, Christoph or Seth would like to further elaborate, please jump in. Jim ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Thursday, 19th: Hearing and Listening
--empyre- soft-skinned space--For today, Thursday, 19th, our focus will be on Hearing and Listening. While these topics may have been addressed in the past through perceptual or phenomenological methods, the questions by Jennifer Fisher, Eldritch Priest and Salomé Voegelin hint at the affective, bodily and political forces implicitly at work during this activity. Too often it is assumed that hearing or listening merely involves a passive transfer of sensory data, as if the ear were merely a conduit for information. But it's clear that the ear is subject to socialization and bias, training and discipline, personal idiosyncracies, and influence by the surrounding environment. The 3 questions today, then, seek to reflect upon the effects of such influences when attending to audio art: 1) Jennifer Fisher: What is the significance of spatial resonance and affect when listening to sound art? How do hearing and proprioception combine in formations of resonance? How might the resonances of ambient space -- whether a museum, concert hall or other venue -- operate contextually in curating sound art? My sense is that resonance operates somewhat differently from vibration: if vibration stems from the tactile sensing of a discrete object (or its emission from a particular point in space), might resonance afford more delocalized, contextual, intensification of hearing and proprioception? 2) Eldritch Priest: Through tropes such as the often cited “the ears are never closed,” artists and theorists alike routinely posit audition as form of “exposure,” a veritable faculty that lays us open and vulnerable to the world. But as Steven Connor notes, the ear is not submissive; it actively connives to make what it takes to be sense out of what it hears.” This means that the ear not only refuses to entertain an outside -- “noise” -- but its operations seem to entail a kind of deterrence of sound” such that to hear is always to mishear. But if all hearing is mishearing, audition can only be a fundamental hallucination that works for the powers of the false. From this premise we might ask whether hearing is (in both its ordinary and Peircean sense of the term) an abduction of the “outside.” What would it mean or do, then, for sound studies—specifically sound studies in its humanistic phase -- that its organ of concern (l’oreille) is steeped primarily in “guesswork”? Does studying sound mean studying what is effectively a connivance? And if so, if audition is always making sense up, then with what, or as Neitzsche would say, with “whom” is it complicit? 3) Salomé Voegelin: What is the relationship between listening and sound art? Jennifer, Eldritch and Salomé, please feel free to further elaborate or extend your initial thoughts! Best, Jim ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Wednesday, 18th: Sound Art, Technology and Innovation
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Hi Folks, Yesterday's questions about sound in its cultural context didn't seem to gain much traction with the group -- or were there comments that didn't get through? If the former was the case, then we'll move on to the next topic, which is Sound Art, Technology and Innovation. Ryan Diduck, Paul Dolden, Anna Friz and Lewis Kaye have offered questions that address the influence of technology on sound art production, along with the pressures of artists themselves to develop new technologies. 1) Ryan Diduck: What is the relationship between users and innovations? This is an important question to consider for music making, as well as its reproduction. How are sound or music technologies -- such as formats like LPs and MP3s, or instruments like pianos and electronic synthesizers -- and their users mutually produced? To what extent do users stimulate technological innovations, or vice versa, in the sonic realm? 2) Paul Dolden: Why do cultural workers have so little impact on introducing the use of technology into the field of art music? Such as the incident of opera musicians being replaced by a digital orchestra recently reported in the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/arts/music/a-digital-orchestra-for-opera-purists-take-and-play-offense.html?emc=eta1 3) Anna Friz: Artists working with sound are judged by many of the same criteria as media artists when it comes to applying to various funding bodies, festivals, prizes and awards, and so on. Of these, to my mind the most contentious condition is that the work must be innovative. What counts as innovation for sound and audio art? Too often 'innovation' is still framed in terms of technical development and mastery, where techné is understood operationally rather than relationally and aesthetically. This can be the case whether the sound works in question use extensive multi-channel systems, self-made software, or DIY instruments. I am interested to problematize this focus on innovation, both in terms of working with sound technologies and in terms of how it effects the sound art scene, the kind of work that is programmed or supported and where. 4) Lewis Kaye: What is the status of an audio artwork when the actual sonic aesthetics of the piece are contingent on the technical system used to reproduce it? Is the technical system thus an integral element in the audio art work? If Ryan, Paul, Anna or Lewis would like to further elaborate, please do! Best, Jim ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] curating sound art
--empyre- soft-skinned space-- Online curating definitely has advantages and disadvantages, doesn't it? While the technology of mp3s and the like certainly make soundworks more easily distributable and accessible, the problems are evident in the 2 shows I mentioned in my intro yesterday -- ICA's Soundworks and Berlin's Zeigen (which wasn't an online show technically, but it functions like one when distributed on CD). Both had an overwhelming number of artists, and most of the clips were short, a minute or less. Beyond the limited expectations of what can be done in such a short time frame, I found something else arose in the listening experience. While flipping through so many contributions one after another, either in the space or at home, I found myself judging the works by how much immediate impact they offered. Works that had an emphatic oomph to them, something like on the order of Dick Higgins' Danger Music, drew my attention more than subtler works. Nuance seemed to lose out by comparison. My patience was practically non-existent when going through all the files to find the most interesting one or the next hit. Even though I knew my experience was being biased, and I had the opportunity to control it, it felt like the technology coerced my listening to a great degree. Any one else experience something similar? How is it possible, then, to counteract the downside of superficial online listening? best, Jim On 2014-06-17, at 9:51 AM, Salomé Voegelin wrote: --empyre- soft-skinned space-- It's interesting that noone has yet to mention curating sound art online where many of these bleed problems are naturally contained. I am very interested in the context of work online, less as a parallel gallery opportunity and more as a radiophonic environment off schedule. I have tried to do something in that way myself (http://clickanywhere.crisap.org/) but feel that the visual pull of the net, our staring into its virtual space, makes it important the the environment the sound work is embedded in is well designed and carefully considered in relation to the sound so we get seduced to listen rather than focus on what is not there. I actually found the bleed to be fascinating and energizing, as if to suggest that the energy and volume of these radical performance events I also do not find the bleed the main problem of curating sound, and would not go on-line to avoid it. the very opposite: the overlaps and spillages are the audio-visual context the sound work is performed in, just like the architecture of the space, color of the walls, or the lighting arrangement, they form not a distraction but the focus of listening and could be exploited and used in designing the presentation/performance rather than avoided. On Jun 17, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Timothy Conway Murray t...@cornell.edu wrote: --empyre- soft-skinned space-- Thanks everyone for such stimulating posts. I enjoyed an exhibition in Taiwan this spring on the history of sound art in Taiwan from martial law onward: ALTERing NATIVism: Sound Cultures in Post-War Taiwan at the Cube Project Space. This included footage of very loud rave events that bled into other rooms and pieces. I actually found the bleed to be fascinating and energizing, as if to suggest that the energy and volume of these radical performance events (just after the lifting of martial law)connected with and resounded through the related sound art projects in Taiwan. It's interesting that noone has yet to mention curating sound art online where many of these bleed problems are naturally contained. You might be interested in an exhibition that I did with Arthur and Marilouise Kroker for our collaborative project, CTHEORY Multimedia, called NetNoise: http://ctheorymultimedia.cornell.edu/four.php Although the pieces don't bleed into each other, they will continue to resonate in the background if users don't close their browser (a little trick we played on more naïve users of a decade agoŠ). Best, Tim Timothy Murray Professor of Comparative Literature and English Director, Society for the Humanities http://www.arts.cornell.edu/sochum/ Curator, Rose Goldsen Archive of New Media http://goldsen.library.cornell.edu A D White House Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853 On 6/16/14 2:44 PM, Andra McCartney andraso...@gmail.com wrote: --empyre- soft-skinned space-- ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
Re: [-empyre-] Post from Kevin deForest for start of week 3
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Very interesting Kevin, which raises a number of issues for curators. As in Tim's post, the bleed from one work to another can be a positive, meaningful choice in some contexts, while enclaves of pure sound may be necessary to preserve the integrity of works in another. It depends on the curatorial vision, and no doubt the buy-in by the participating artists too! Following up on the idea of mashup, Christof Migone, a sound artist and curator based in Toronto, has just completed a set of sound shows in which he describes the curating as a process of doing a mix in the gallery. Not only is it a matter of adjusting volumes, but also of choosing works according to low, high, and mid-range frequencies, not to mention adjusting for the acoustics of the space itself. This seems to me to be a quite a sophisticated method -- perhaps only possible by a curator who also happens to be a sound artist him/herself. It's interesting to note that most of the sound art group shows have been curated by sound artists (or in association with a sound artist). Is the sophistication of the trained and practicing ear, then, a prerequisite for curating sound, or have things developed to the point that non-artists (hopefully without a tin ear) can curate well-concieved exhibitions? Jim On 2014-06-17, at 2:35 AM, Kevin deForest wrote: --empyre- soft-skinned space-- First of all I’d like to thank Jim for his moderation and for inviting me. I’m honoured to be able to participate with this distinguished group and will try to keep up with the pace. I’m wondering if the inevitable bleeding of sound between sound artists presented adjacent to one another might be considered as a kind of curatorial mashup? If it might be possible to simultaneously focus on one artist’s installed work but following that tune in to the bleeding of the neighbouring work and considering the results of that mix? Curious to know if a curator of a group sound exhibition might organize the space in the same manner that a curator of a visually focused group show would put two artists next to one another in order to dialogue a theme or bring out certain aspects of each artist’s work? ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Tuesday, 17th: Sound Art and Its Cultural Context
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Thanks for the great responses to yesterday's questions! Definitely much to muse over and consider as we participate in, curate, or just experience the next sound exhibition. Tuesday, 17th: Sound Art and Its Cultural Context For the rest of today, we will shift focus from curating to cultural context, which picks up on several comments about the questionable nature of sound's autonomy. Three issues raised by the core participants addressed the inevitability of sound being embedded in a cultural, socio-political or national context: 1) Kevin deForest asks: Is it necessary for the cultural context in the production of audio art to be acknowledged as an aspect of the work? I am thinking about the cultural tourism involved in some hobbyist field recordings and the problematic of a cross-cultural capturing of sound. 2) Marc Couroux: Music’s amenability to cybernetics is underlined by information theory pioneer Claude Shannon, who defined a “singing condition” as the inability of an automata to recognize its loopy entrapment. Music’s particular affordances, vitalities, and teleological necessities could serve as a model to help ensure a preordained future through the transformation and regulation of extra-musical sound, channelling the impersonal, inhuman death drive (positive feedback) into homeostatic equilibrium (negative feedback). Noise, far from being a nuisance to such cybernetic systems, is in fact essential to periodically restart them. How might an effectively transgressive practice operate given a resolutely alien, invasive neuro-military-entertainment avant-garde? What hyperstitional, paradromic methods might hijack and mutate uncommitted affective excess, escaping the reach of capitalist territorialization? How might the viral propensities of the earworm-servitor be leveraged in order to more effectively catalyze broader phonoegregoric operations? 3) John Oswald presented a cryptic koan: Canada hear? [Among the several puns offered by this succinct phrasing, I took it to imply a question about national identity in sound art. Given the technological basis underpinning much sound production, does it make sense to consider national histories or conventions in sound art, or is it by nature an internationalist movement and sensibility?] Regards, Jim ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] start of week 3
--empyre- soft-skinned space--Dear Renate and Tim, Thank you for inviting me to coordinate week 3 of the month-long discussion on New Sonic Paths. It's been a pleasure listening in so far. For this week, the 16 core participants represent a diverse cross-section of the sound art world, and includes artists, composers, curators and theorists, from Toronto and beyond. Each day, I will introduce a few related questions that have been solicited from the core participants. Overall, the general context of the questions pertain to the post-legitimacy stage of sound practice and studies today. That is, with the “sonic turn” in art and theory secure, and its place within the worlds of museums and academia assured, what are the main issues to be discussed? This week’s discussion group will examine how innovations in sound art, curating, technology, and theory intersect and develop in the contemporary context. To start the discussion today, I draw from questions raised by Dave Dyment, Lewis Kaye and myself on curating and participating in exhibitions of sound art. 1) For myself, I've noticed how the millennium seemed to provide a watershed moment for sound art. Within the span of five years, a number of high-profile audio art shows occurred at major art institutions, such as “Voices” (1998), “Sonic Boom” (2000), “Volume: Bed of Sound” (2000), “Frequencies” (2002) and “Sonic Process” (2002). Since then, sound shows have continued to feature huge numbers of artists. Soundworks at the ICA in London (2012) included over 100 artists, and Zeigen at the Temporare Kunsthalle Berlin (2009-10) included a whopping 566 artists. While these shows operated on the premise of inclusivity, and sampled the broad diversity of audio practices, to what degree is this curatorial strategy still useful, and what might be lost or compromised in the process? 2) In a similar vein, Dave Dyment asks: How does the curation of Audio Art move forward, away from ghettoization in thematic group shows or token inclusion in larger projects (“we need something for this hallway”)? 3) Lewis Kaye's remarks echo these sentiments: At a recent conference in London, I heard David Toop suggest that curating a group sound art exhibition was impossible given the inevitable sonic conflict between the exhibited works. Such a claim, on its face, seems rather provocative. What are some strategies that curators or artists might employ to overcome the obvious challenges Toop is alluding to? [Note: Toop curated Sonic Boom at the Hayward Gallery] Dave and Lewis, please feel free to further elaborate on your questions as the conversation begins. Best, Jim ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] Curatorial Studies
Hi Folks, Perhaps another thread concerning our curatorial practice would be more conducive to a dialogue. We have just launched a peer-reviewed publication called the Journal of Curatorial Studies that seeks to be a forum for critical discussions on curating, exhibitions and display culture. The first issue is free to download at http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/journals/view-Journal,id=205/ Our editorial points out the journal’s general mandate, below, and there are several questions listed in the middle paragraph. We might also discuss the status of this emerging area of study called curatorial studies. Does it constitute a discipline? If not, should it aim to become one? What would be the advantages and disadvantages? And if it is a discipline, what should its parameters be? We look forward to hearing your comments. Jim and Jennifer __ Journal of Curatorial Studies, 1.1, 2012 Editorial Jim Drobnick and Jennifer Fisher, Editors Curating, as a field of study, often falls between the cracks of disciplinary boundaries. Until recently, it has been left to curators themselves to theorize upon their practice and the function of exhibitions. The Journal of Curatorial Studies builds upon the pioneering contributions of curators to encourage in-depth investigations from an array of disciplines. Through the examination of current and historical exhibitions, display venues in the art world and elsewhere, and the work of individual curators, the journal inquires into what constitutes “the curatorial.” While curating as a practice of arranging objects remains important, in the current context exhibitions involve more complex and unorthodox conjunctions of rhetoric and methodology. Cultural analysis, collaborative processes, institutional critique, performative interventions, networked interactivity – these are some of the strategies that are now regularly employed. This journal will explore these and other issues, such as: How has the identity and authority of the curator shifted in a decentralized artworld? How do exhibitions emphasizing experience and interactivity function as forms of research and knowledge? Beyond the so-called gatekeeping function, what are the new ideological conditions that drive the activity of curating? What connections exist between displays of visual art and those found in culture at large? To this end, the journal will feature thematic and open issues, theoretical explorations, contemporary and historical case studies, interviews with curators, artists and theorists, and reviews of exhibitions, conferences and books. The Journal of Curatorial Studies invites texts from a broad range of perspectives on curating and exhibitions. It intends to serve the international community of curators, academics whose research engages questions of the curatorial, whether stemming from the art world or other domains of contemporary culture, as well as the growing number of curatorial schools and graduate programs. We welcome a readership that encompasses a range of standpoints – scholars in art, art history, visual culture, museology and material culture studies, along with curators, artists, art critics and cultural theorists.___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
[-empyre-] NIGHTSENSE
Dear Renate and Tim, Thanks for inviting us to participate in this month’s series of conversations. To start one thread, we thought we would begin with a relatively recent project of ours, NIGHTSENSE, that formed part of Toronto’s Nuit Blanche in 2009. We are revisiting this project at this time because we are editing a special issue of Public magazine on the topic of “Art and Civic Spectacle.” NIGHTSENSE featured visual and extra-visual artworks within the shadowy world of Toronto’s financial district. Addressing the spectre of market destabilization, the invisible transmission of broadcast signals, as well as hauntings from a locale where early Toronto history has been all but erased, these projects to engaged the audience in both critical and ludic participation. NIGHTSENSE invited a reconsideration of the normal sensory economy by intensifying the subtle but powerful links between bodies, aesthetic perception and shifts in capital. (Images can be found at http://www.displaycult.com/exhibitions/NIGHTSENSE.html) The overall context in which NIGHTSENSE appeared was Nuit Blanche, which we hope list members have experienced or read about. These events last all night long in a number of cities worldwide, and typically involve thousands of visitors (1,000,000 or so in Toronto for each of the past couple of years). Artists produce large-scale performances and interventions that engage, critique and reconceptualize the urban context. Our issue of Public will address the dynamics and significance of these popular mass events. How do the monumental artworks of city-wide exhibitions relate to the diverse histories of spectacle? What are the opportunities and challenges of such events? When audience levels reach into the hundreds of thousands, what issues are raised about spectatorship and participation? What impact can curating have on mass subjectivities? We’re interested in starting a discussion based on these questions, and any others that may arise from the list. We look forward to hearing your thoughts. All the best, Jennifer and Jim Jim Drobnick and Jennifer Fisher DisplayCult www.displaycult.com ___ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
