Sound in Anthropology of Senses
The first incident of listening results to capturing of the listener’s attention through the voices heard. These voices are the initial existing sources of the sounding heard, as noted by Don Ihde. Ihde further adds that a thing never happens solely but it does so within a field, which is a bounded and limited context. The same case is applicable to sound, which is heard within a bounded context. This context is referred to as an auditory field. A field occurs as a fringe that surrounds what is focal or explicit. The field is an existing structures within which all things present themselves (Ihde, 2007).
According to Casey O’ Callaghan, sounds are best conceived as a certain kind of events, but not as physical properties of objects that are normally thought to be sound sources, nor pressure waves traveling through a medium. A unified perceptual account of many pervasive sound phenomena inclusive of transmission through barriers, destructive and constructive interference, is provided by this Event View of sounds. As Jacques Attali notes, life is full of noise, with the exception of death, which is solely silent. He notes that there is no important event or aspect is achieved without the presence of noise. Judging the society more by its sounds is fundamental (O’Callaghan, 2009).
Attali further advances that music is a recent invention among sounds. Music has intensely invaded daily life and the world in general. Today, music is inevitable, and it seems as though its importance lies in giving people a sense of security. Moreover, today’s music is also associated with money. Statistically, some countries spend more money on music compared to drinking, reading or even keeping clean. Music entails more than a mere object under study since it is a way through which the world is perceived as well as a tool of comprehension (Attali).
According to the definition given by O’Callaghan, public objects of auditory perception are what define sound. What is heard during episodes of genuine hearing is what comprises sound. Some of the properties associated with sound include timbre, pith and loudness. One essential point that O’Callaghan brings forth is the essence of genuine hearing. Victor Zuckerkandl seems to present a similar situation, but in this case, in form of melody. He notes that not all series of tones form a melody. He gives an example of a cat running over a keyboard, and describes that what is heard as a series of tomes and not a melody. A series of tones that make sense is what defines a melody (O’Callaghan, 2009). It is therefore evident that for a series of tones to form a melody, they have to be sensible. Another applicable situation is hearing of a mere articulation, consonants and vowels when someone talks a language that is unknown. On the other hand, words and sentences are heard if a person talks in a language that is understood. Hence, words are succession of articulated sounds that have meaning (O’Callaghan, 2009).
Zuckerkandl argues that the observation that something is heard in tones of music which do not align with the physical world’s general concept is undoubtedly opposed to the view that our senses function in perceiving the physical world, and that a world which is perceived via the senses is entirely physical. To clear the confusion, two theories have been devised (Zuckerkandl, 1973). The first theory is known as the pulse theory, which was originally proposed as the tone-rhythms theory by Theodor Lipps, a psychologist. As per the pulse theory a section of man’s intellectual patrimony ahs long been formed by the knowledge that numerical ratios are hidden in tonal associations. The theory sets out to prove whether the relations between tomes could result to dynamic tone qualities in a similar manner to which variation in vibration result to pitch variations. The dynamic qualities explained by the Pulse Theory are qualities of the hearer’s response and not the tone qualities (Zuckerkandl, 1973).
Another aim of the Pulse Theory was to resolve the sharp contradiction that exists between the popularly accepted principle that the external world and the material world perception of material processed and sense perception are one and the same thing and the simple facts of melodic hearing. The theory failed to further explain how some body sensations that are highly refined correspond to air vibrations that are mathematically ordered. Moreover, the basic facts of tones acting and being acted upon as well as music remain unaccounted for. The problem has further become more complicated owed to the fact that efforts to establish a physical counterpart to tone qualities that are dynamic have proved futile both when tones are considered individually and when considered on relation to one another (Zuckerkandl, 1973).
The second theory that Zuckerkandl examines is the Theory of Associationism. It would simply be impossible to have music if the human ear was incapable of perceiving dynamic tone qualities in distinctions that are most delicate. According to associationism, there is nothing in the physical world that conforms to the forces’ play in tones because these forces are active in the hearers and not on the tone itself. The forces originate from the hearers, particularly, in the feelings aroused by hearing the tones. For example a Chinese who has no idea of the Western music will not have the ability to detect even the tiniest trace of the dynamic qualities of the tones present in Beethoven melody. Such an individual lacks the experience needed to relate tones presented in a Western music piece such as the Beethoven melody (Zuckerkandl, 1973).
While Zuckerkandl examines the Pulse and the Associationism theory, O’Callaghan reviews the three theories of sound. The first theory was postulated by Locke, who held the view that sounds are properties associated with bodies. To be specific, he claimed that sounds are qualities that are secondary in nature, implying sensible qualities which are linked to bodies in virtue of figure, size, number and movement of their parts. On what O’Callaghan terms as the property view, when an objects vibrates at a given frequency and amplitude, it possesses a sound (O’Callaghan, 2009).
The second theory of sound is the view of physicists and auditory scientists, which is slightly distinct. The view hold that a disturbance that moves through a medium such as water or air as a longitudinal wave compression is what is referred to as sound. Through vibrating objects lead to production of sounds, the sounds themselves are classified as waves. When a sound is heard, bodies or properties of bodies are not hard immediately but what one hears is a series of differences in pressure that make up a wave disturbance within the surrounding medium. Aristotle held a similar view, claiming that sound was a given motion of air. Aristotle further advanced that a sound is caused by a striking that takes place in air (O’Callaghan, 2009).
Hence, the wave view holds that sounds comprise of waves. A given sound is a series of waves formed through a disturbance and moving through a given medium. When a people hear a sound, the sound is heard to be situated at some distance in a particular direction. Under normal circumstances, sounds and not their sources tend to have a dismal location. This phenomenon is referred to as externalization, from the auditory science perspective. It is however important to make a distinction that unlike waves, sounds are not perceived to move through the air. Sounds are heard to be approximately close to the where the events causing them are located. Sounds are not waves if auditory experience is unsystematically illusory in reference to the perceived sound locations because they are not perceived to be located in a similar location to waves (O’Callaghan, 2009).
The phonological claim of sound having a location is under stringent opposition. The opposing view holds that sound are heard as having timbre, pitch, loudness and duration but not location. It is rather common for ordinary events entirely lacking spatial properties to be located somewhere and act as sources of audible qualities. Rather than mistakenly perceiving the locations of sounds, people lack the ability to perceive their location (O’Callaghan, 2009).
In an attempt to avoid the dilemma presented above, wave theorists hold that sounds are heard to have located sources and not heard to have locations. To get this picture, sounds should be perceived as waves, which have sources and hence, sounds are heard to be generated by heir specific sources, and not themselves to have locations. It is solely the sources which are perceived to possess locations. An account of the phenomenology that is consistent with the wave view is provided by the above description. This is however not the case with the wave theorist (O’Callaghan, 2009).
The third theory was proposed in the concept of the Event View. It holds that sounds are certain events of a particular kind. In these events, an object in motion disturbs a surrounding medium, setting it in motion. The crashings and strikings are the causes sound and not the sounds. Similarly, the waves in a medium are the effects of sound and not the sounds themselves. Conceived sounds have properties such as loudness, timbre, pitch, spatial locations and duration. This is the main reason why they are often mistaken for actual sounds rather than the effects or causes of sound (O’Callaghan, 2009).
O’Callaghan also examines sound from he property view. This view defines sounds as properties of things such as tuning forks, bells and whistles. To be more specific, vibrations of material objects lead to creation of sounds. Another postulation held by the property view is that sounds can be present without a medium of transmission. This implies that it is possible for sounds to exist in a vacuum in a similar manner that objects can possess color in the dark. The only requirement for an object to have sound is vibrating it in the right way. It is thus clear that if sound happens to be absent in vacuums, the property view fails to stand (O’Callaghan, 2009)..
Another aspect of sound that is worth examining in detail is the auditory field. An extensive description of this field has been presented by Ihde. According to his view, a field is a particular form of opening to the world (Ihde, 2007). It may also refer to a given perspective held towards the world. Hence, the field as a phenomenon allows a clear understanding of the world. Investigation of an auditory field at the secondary level requires a survey of the structures and shape of the auditory field in terms of its opening to the world. In isolating the characteristics of this field, it is first essential for there to exist attention towards something (Ihde, 2007).
The auditory field needs to connect with a set of determinations of the visual field in order to create differences in dimension. First of all, the auditory field, defines as a shape does not appear to limit itself to forward orientation. As a field shape, one either notices the surrounding sound in an embodied positionality or hears all that surrounds them. Looking at the shape of an auditory field, it is evident that the field-shape of sight is much smaller than the auditory field shape as a surrounding object (Ihde, 2007). The auditory field would have to be conceived as a sphere within which one is positioned, were it to be modeled spatially. However, the extent of the sphere remains indefinite as it advances towards a horizon. All in all, the auditory field-shape is that of a surrounding shape when viewed as a field (Ihde, 2007.
Among the fundamental intetions of Attali is theorizing through music. This results to drawing of unacceptable and unusual conclusions regarding music and the society. This is perhaps the reason why music is hardly listened to. Attali notes that music originated in ritual murder, which was viewed as a minor type of sacrifice to initiate change. In this perspective, music was considered to be an attribute of political and religious power, which symbolized order. Music further contributed to creation of spectacle and capital. Viewed as a commodity, music illustrates societal evolution. This is illustrated through deritualization of a social norm, repression of a body’s activity, specialization in practice, selling it as a spectacle, generalizing its consumption and making sure that it is stockpile till it loses its sense of meaning (Attali).
Attali thus implies that music lacks innocence since it is unproductive and unquantifiable. A rough sketch of a society under construction is provided by music. In this society, the informal is consumed and produced in large quantities. For a society to exist there is the need for it to structure its integral differences. Additionally, for a market economy to develop, it is essential to eliminate mass production differences. This contradiction is the key behind the self-destruction of capitalism, in the context that a deafening life is led by music. Music has become a locus of repetition and a tool of differentiation (Attali).
While Attali examines the importance that music holds in the society, Ihde, attempts to give a positive aspect of musical ecstasy experience based on the way a gestalt is formed by a musical sound. The sense of the separate and discrete individuals is what disappears in the symphonic presentation. The whole orchestra united in sound is the instrument that sounds (Ihde, 2007). Larger unities than individuals as such are maximized by the surrounding, penetrating quality of sound. Ihde also examined the auditory aura. To illustrate this, he gives an example of the usual babbling traffic, where there is a directional and encompassing ambiguous richness of sound. This leads to revelation of a specific form of shape, which may be referred to as the auditory aura (Ihde, 2007).
The experience of music is more like the experience of auditory aura in that, it intentionally allows the rushing over of sound, letting out the musical presence. It is however different from the musical experience owed to the fact that it does not lead to the temptation to become disembodies, and allow oneself to be carried away beyond instrumentation. Part of the way in which hearing within the auditory field is structured lies in the ambiguity of the auditory aura, when the speaker is directly facing another person (Ihde, 2007).
Another important point that Ihde notes is that fact that continuity of presence is applicable to all perceptual experience and not limited to auditory presence. It is possible for one to continue seeing even with the eyes closed. Closing the eyes closing the surrounding object, and the auditory field does not become empty, but instead, it turns back or even reddish. Therefore, fields are presences that are constant but never at one given point empty. They are instead filled as a plenum. There is a continuous presence of sound to experience. The presence in question is also an invading and penetrating presence, which penetrates the listener’s awareness. Similarly to noise, the form of penetration can be shattering and even at times painful. An example of a piercing sound that Ihde gives is a sudden scream at the moment of highest tension in a movie. He notes that this form of sound upsets his composure (Ihde, 2007).
In comparison to Ihde’s view on continuity of presence, Zuckerkandl stresses on the difference between the outer world and the inner world. He defines the outer world as the bodies’ world as well as the unbroken association between them. This is slightly related to Ihde’s view on continuity of presence even after a physical disconnection from the physical world by closing eyes. Zuckerkandl adds that the outer world is the world met in the sense perceptions. The inner world on the other hand has been defined as the mind and its states’ world. It is an immaterial world clouded with feelings, thoughts, decisions of the will and fantasies. Human beings have immediate experiences of the things mentioned. The inner senses’ perceptions, equilibrium sense or the muscular sense are mere corporeal phenomena perceptions (Zuckerkandl, 1973).
Generally, Zuckerkandl adds to the understanding of anthropology of senses, especially the auditory and visual senses. He notes that discoveries in the realm of the audible are tonal systems. He talks of the music that the human ear discovers as the human eye discovers the great phenomena of earth and heaven. In regard to adding to the understanding of music, Zuckerkandl terms music as well as a natural phenomenon, which is manmade (Zuckerkandl, 1973).
O’Callaghan’s information is also useful to the anthropology of senses since it clearly classifies sound on the basis of different view. A popular view is the event view which acts as a substitute to the picture according to which sound occupies air and moves in form of waves. He further notes that sound waves are proximal causes of sounds and nit sounds. This view gives an account of the definition of sound in an attempt to escape the confusion concerning the location of sounds. This means that sounds and stationary and distally located relative to their origin without considering them to be properties pertaining to material things (O’Callaghan, 2009). Ihde contributes to the understanding of anthropology of senses by examining the auditory field, which is a boundary or scope within which all sounds fall or occupy. Ihde further illustrates the field-shape of sound. He notes that it is sphere-shaped and omni-directional in nature. This sphere is ratified, variably full in both relativity and ratio (Ihde, 2007).
Finally Attali adds to the understanding of the anthropology of senses by distinguishing three strategic roles of music by power. In one zone, it appears that music is produced and used in a ceremony with the aim of making people forget the general conflict. In the second zone, music is used in an attempt to make people believe in peace and harmony of the world. This implies that they are made to believe that there is order instead of violence as well as a sense of legitimacy in commercial power. The final zone is the use of music in an attempt to create silence. A mass production of syncretic and deafening form of music leads to censoring of all other noises produced by humans (Attali).
References
Attali, Jacques. Noise: The Political Economy of Music. Theory and History of Literature, Vol. 16. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press
Ihde, Don. 2007. Listening and Voice: Phenomenologies of Sound. StateUniversity of New York Pr
O’Callaghan, Casey. 2009. Sounds and Perception: New Philosophical Essays. OxfordUniversity Press
Zuckerkandl, Victor. 1973. Sound and Symbol: Music and the External World. Bollingen Series, XLIV. PrincetonUniversity Press
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
