Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:47:28.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Corporeality of Music and Sound Sculpture

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2015

Vadim Keylin
Vadim Keylin*
Affiliation:
State Institute for Art Studies, Moscow, 5 Kozitsky pereulok, Moscow 125000, Russia
*
*Email: key.linn@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article aims to sketch a theory of sound sculpture, one that would explain the variety of forms this artistic practice might take on and define it in relation to other art forms. My hypothesis is that in order to do this we must focus on the traits of sound sculpture connecting it to music rather than on those separating the two. A useful instrument to analyse this connection is Harry Partch’s concept of corporeal music. In contrast to Western classical music, which he viewed as abstract and devoid of life, Partch envisioned a music that would emphasise the physicality of sound-making and engage the listener on a more visceral level. Investigating a number of works from all parts of the sound sculpture spectrum, I argue that all the various practices that comprise the art form present the core traits of Partch’s musical ideal (physicality of music, audience engagement, and unity of the sonic and the visual) to a substantial extent. Analysing sound sculpture in light of its connection to music brings to the fore a number of musical issues for which this new art form provides a new perspective. Among these are the agency of the composer and the listener, the function and nature of a score, as well as the role of technology in music-making. These issues, along with the general idea of corporeality of music, compose a discourse that transcends the boundaries of different subgenres of sound sculpture, allowing for theorisation of the art form as a whole.

Type
Articles
Information
Organised Sound , Volume 20 , Special Issue 2: Sound Art and Music, Historical Continuum and Mimetic Fissures , August 2015 , pp. 182 - 190
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baschet, B. 1975. Structures Sonores. In J. Grayson (ed.) Sound Sculpture. Vancouver: A.R.C. Publications.Google Scholar
Baschet, B. and Baschet, F. 1987. Sound Sculpture: Sounds, Shapes, Public Participation, Education. Leonardo 20(2): 107–114.Google Scholar
Baschet, F. 1999. Les Sculptures Sonores. Chemsford: Soundworld Publishers.Google Scholar
Bonds, M. E. 2014. Absolute Music. The History of an Idea. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, H. 2001. Electronic Instruments. Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/08694pg4 (accessed 7 December 2014).Google Scholar
Eastley, M. 1996. Applications of Sound Art and Design to Architectural and Natural Environments. Contemporary Music Review 15(3–4): 143–150.Google Scholar
Gertich, F. 1999. Klangskulpturen. In H. de la Motte-Haber (ed.) Klangkunst. Tönende Objekte und klingende Räume. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag.Google Scholar
Gilmore, B. 1995. Changing the Metaphor: Ratio Models of Musical Pitch in the Work of Harry Partch, Ben Johnston, and James Tenney. Perspectives of New Music 33(1/2): 458–503.Google Scholar
Johnston, B. 1975. Corporealism of Harry Partch. Perspectives of New Music 13(2): 85–97.Google Scholar
Haskell, H. 2001. Early Music. Grove Music Online, Oxford Music Online. www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/46003 (accessed 7 December 2014).Google Scholar
Holmes, T. 2008. Electronic and Experimental Music. Technology, Music and Culture. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
LaBelle, B. 2006. Background Noise: Perspectives on Sound Art. New York and London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Licht, A. 2007. Sound Art. Beyond Music, Between Categories. New York: Rizzolli.Google Scholar
Motte-Haber de la, H. 1990. Music und Bildende Kunst: von der Tonmalerei zur Klangskulptur. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag.Google Scholar
Nelson, J. K. 1970. Harry Bertoia Sculptor. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Partch, H. 1974. Genesis of Music. New York: Da Capo Press.Google Scholar
Partch, H. 1962. Introduction to Photographs of Instruments Built by Harry Partch and Heard in His Recorded Music. Champaign: Gate 5.Google Scholar
Partch, H. 1975a. No Barriers. In J. Grayson (ed.) Sound Sculpture. Vancouver: A.R.C. Publications.Google Scholar
Partch, H. 1975b. Monophonic Just Intonation. In J. Grayson (ed.) Sound Sculpture. Vancouver: A.R.C. Publications.Google Scholar
Partch, H. 1991. Bitter Music: Collected Journals, Essays, Introductions and Librettos. Champaigne: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Pouliot, S. (dir.) 1972. The Dreamer That Remains: A Portrait of Harry Partch. On Enclosure VII: Harry Partch. St Paul: Innova, Innova 407 DVD, 2007.Google Scholar
Schulz, B. 2002. Über die Körperlichkeit des Hörens. Bernd Schulz im Gespräch mit Bernhard Leitner. www.bernhardleitner.at/texts/indexLoadItem/17 (accessed 12 December 2014).Google Scholar
Sheppard, W. A. 2001. Revealing Masks. Exotic Influences and Ritualized Performance in Modernist Music Theater. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Supper, M. 1999. Technische Systeme von Klanginstallationen. In H. de la Motte-Haber (ed.) Klangkunst. Tönende Objekte und klingende Räume. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag.Google Scholar
Taruskin, R. 2009. Music in the Late Twentieth Century. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vogel, P. 2007. Klang, Bewegung, Licht: ein Werkbuch. Freiburg: modo, Museum für Neue Kunst.Google Scholar