This argument is one that transcends the audio world. I work as a visual artist
most of the time and
the same ideas are tossed around there. Is photoshop acceptable? How much can
I edit before it's not
photography anymore.
One thing that carries over from the other disciplines and needs to be of
concern is media "elitism".
Are the people who are so concerned with the "purity" of a thing trying to
elevate their vision of it
to a point of unobtanium for others? Purity cost money. Not unlike the quality
of equipment used.
Danny
On Jan 13, 2012, at 7:45 AM, Robin wrote:
> This is indeed a most excellent discussion!
>
> John Hartog wrote:
>
> > I believe the natural rhythms and voices in a
> > recording, aside from anthropogenic, can promote
> > consciousnesses in appreciation for natural
> > ecosystems better than a recording with
> > anthropogenic sounds included.
>
> I am not sure even that is true. An awareness of how the biotic and abiotic,
> human-centred and non-human-centred sounds interact might instead be more
> informative. I have engaged in this issue in some of my compositions. And I
> believe the recording that kick-started this discussion could be considered
> an example of this in practice.
>
> I have issues on a philosophical basis with drawing lines in the sand, since
> I for one believe the wind should always blow. However, in case any should
> read me as being too confrontational, I will make it clear that I do not have
> any objection to the conservationist project *in practice*, since it is a
> necessary corrective to the dominant hegemony of "growth" and globalisation.
>
> freitojos wrote:
>
> > For 2000 years all the species where respected
> > and protected even when hunted and the man was
> > sharing is production with the other species.
>
> I would be very careful ascribing Utopian attributes to tribal and other
> previous (so-called "indigenous") cultures. In point of fact, these were
> responsible for some of the largest species extinctions on the planet. And
> the cultures often lived in a constant state of hostility and warfare with
> both each other and their environments. The Western European valorisation of
> such societies is part of the myth of Nature, Eden, Paradise, etc. There was
> no pure, unspoilt state from which we came.
>
> Eric Leonardson wrote:
>
> > I seem to recall Steven Feld told us, in 1993, a
> > nature environments record label would have
> > released his field recordings from the rain
> > forests of Papua New Giunea, only if it hadn't
> > been "ruined" by the sounds of the indigenous
> > Bosavi people.
>
> An interesting test case! For if we wish to exclude all sounds made by Homo
> sapiens from "nature recordings", the label was correct in their criticism.
> If, however, we wish to include the Bosavi inside the perimeter of "nature",
> then we engage in racism pure and simple, since we are applying different
> criteria of acceptance to their culture and ours.
>
> The "third way" would be for us to establish aesthetic criteria that could be
> applied regardless of the source of the sound. I wonder if any nature
> recording labels, soundscape artists, and so on have attempted this?
>
> Dug Winningham wrote:
>
> > i am sure most of us have seen/heard this attenborough clip, i am curious
> > what category this bird's anthropogenic vocal recording would fall into?
> >
> > http://www.metacafe.com/watch/520900/amazing_lyre_bird_mimics_everything/
>
> Dug, that bird makes lyres of us all.
>
> -- robinparmar.com
>
>
Danny McCarty
Monolith Media, Inc.
4183 Summit View
Hood River, Or 97031
415-331-7628
541-399-0089 Cell
http://www.monolithmedia.net/
http://www.danielmccarty.com/
http://about.me/yodmc
|