Schafer did address the aesthetic, Aaron. "(He referred to the
Vancouver Soundscape Project as an example of how field
recording was used not only for aesthetic value, but [more
importantly] for social and historical value.") So that is one of his
concerns.
Of course what Schafer has missed, here, is that because sound in our
culture has relatively recently been returned to as a valued source of
inspiration, information, and wonder as one of the senses, on one side
of the coin, none of us know squat about it and what the narrative
begins to reveal. Not yet anyway. Not even Schafer (although he's gone
a long way to frame it out in a form we Westerns can begin to
understand).
We think we know something. But there's the rub. There are still
certain groups (BaAka, Kaluli, Jivaro, etc), living much more closely
connected to the natural world, who have learned to navigate through
the densest forest by subtle changes in the biophony, alone. It serves
as a virtual GPS by which they navigate from spot to spot at night
with no light to guide them. Only the soundscape. They can even
determine from the biophony what critter is down the path, what
direction it's heading, whether it's worth chasing down for a meal,
etc. And the biophony inspires their music and dance, as it once did
ours. When we get to that point as a culture, there will be lots to
celebrate. Schafer enjoins us to pay attention. That's all.
Schafer is clearly not here to judge whether or not one takes pleasure
in grabbing their LS-10 off the shelf and running into a nearby field
(assuming there's one left within walking distance of any of us) to
capture the sound of crickets or frogs or birds and knowing the name
of not a single organism or even what season it is. That's where most
of us begin/began. Nothing terrible about that. Some will latch onto
the finer details of our sonic world, embracing it as we travel and
engage. Others won't. Some will approach it in a Linnean fashion.
Other will choose to hear things as Charles Ives did.
What it is to be a "good recordist" is a solipsistic question that has
as many answers as there are recordists. Since there are not a lot of
criteria that large numbers of us would ipso facto buy into, each of
us, by default, would be the best (if, indeed, any of need to be
elevated as such).
As I point out in the narrative of my new book (paraphrasing Dorothea
Lang), "...a recorder is a tool for learning to hear without a
recorder." Thus we are perpetual students all. That's why I thought
Schafer's comment was of note. Frankly, I love the guy's provocation
to incite dialog.
Bernie
On Apr 19, 2010, at 12:15 PM, Aaron Ximm wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Bernie Krause <=
> > wrote:
>> Murray concluded that, "Technology has made it easy to record. Any
>> idiot can do it and produce an interesting document. But to produce a
>> historical recording of value takes time and patience. Many
>> recordists
>> are merely tourists in the soundscape=97unfortunately."
>
> As a frequent tourist and self-described idiot who has produced
> interesting documents, I take issue with the generalization.
>
> In fact I reject it outright, and with all due respect to RMS for whom
> I have the greatest respect, I think it inadvertently reveals a set of
> assumptions about how good investigative and documentary work can and
> should be done that are rapidly becoming antiquated.
>
> For one thing, I think there are other reasons that data-gathering to
> make recordings ~ in particular, aesthetic ones. And there is a great
> deal of potential nuance within that domain. Much of my own work is
> explicitly about the experience of being out of one's depth when
> traveling outside of one's comfort zone -- regardless of location.
> There is much that I might (and do at times) record within blocks of
> my home that is rich with cultural (not to mention, biophonetic)
> intricacies I am totally ignorant of.
>
> For my money there is great value in capturing high-quality documents
> of those things, even in the absence of my own understanding --
> precisely because I anticipate (and have indeed experienced numerous
> times first-hand) that within them others will, years later, find much
> they value -- and can explain.
>
> Small example: I recorded a private ritual taking place in the Bayon
> temple in the Angkor complex one afternoon. Sad to say I understood no
> Khmer, so the words -- both ritual and casual -- that the small
> collection of people gathered were saying were opaque to me.
> Nonetheless I thought that particular recording captured a moment
> worth listening to...
>
> Years later, finding it on my website, someone of Cambodian ancestry
> wrote me up to tell me how moved they were by the recording, and
> translated every word in it for me.
>
> To have value like this, though, recordings must be shared ~ they must
> be accessible. For me, that is the great worth of the 'net and our
> progress towards lowering the cost of sharing large quantities of our
> work freely with as many people as possible. This is not to downplay
> the legitimate question (I know this has been a challenge for you
> Bernie) of how to make a living out of one's life-work...
>
> ...but it is to say that the inter-connectedness the 'net allows means
> that it is not as Schafer contends necessary for every individual to
> acquire expertise in order to make recordings of value. To make a
> contribution, in other words.
>
> The point in sum being that expertise is not longer required to reside
> in each individual, but within the network of those with ready access
> to the network's resources -- of which raw recordings and domain
> expertise are just two examples.
>
> This list itself is a perfect demonstration of my point... :)
>
> For some of us it should be enough to be good recordists. We will miss
> what is most of interest to certain experts, but as long as we are
> diligent in at least noting what where and when we recorded, who knows
> what gems we may inadvertently uncover...
>
> aaron
>
> --
>
> quietamerican.org
> oneminutevacation.org
>
> 83% happy
> 9% disgusted
> 6% fearful
> 2% angry
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> "While a picture is worth a thousand words, a
> sound is worth a thousand pictures." R. Murray Schafer via Bernie
> Krause
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
Wild Sanctuary
POB 536
Glen Ellen, CA 95442
707-996-6677
http://www.wildsanctuary.com
Google Earth zooms: http://earth.wildsanctuary.com
SKYPE: biophony
|