Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-04T01:44:19.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Unsound Phenomenologies: Harrison, Schaeffer and the sound object

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 November 2015

Mitchell Herrmann*
Affiliation:
Oberlin Conservatory, OCMR 1335, 135 W. Lorain St, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA

Abstract

As Jonty Harrison himself acknowledges, a significant body of acousmatic music exists which has, directly or indirectly, challenged aspects of the Schaefferian theory from which acousmatic music first developed (Harrison 1995). Few pieces, however, have so clearly and deliberately confronted Schaeffer’s notion of the ‘sound object’ as Harrison’s Unsound Objects. Harrison does more than merely reject Schaeffer’s definition of the sound object through the use of expanded compositional strategies. Rather, he both employs Schaeffer’s methodology and subverts it, systematically demonstrating the potential and the limitations of Schaeffer’s epoché and its product, the sound object. The result is what might be aptly termed the ‘unsound object’: a sonic entity which both demonstrates and defies Schaeffer’s ideals, and exemplifies the rich ambiguities which can arise from the compositional exploitation of referentiality and association, in addition to the intrinsic, morphological characteristics emphasised within Schaeffer’s reduced listening. Throughout his engagement with Schaefferian theory, however, Harrison never abandons the fundamental musical radicalism at the heart of Schaeffer’s project: positing ‘concrete sound material’, rather than ‘abstract concept’, as the basis for the language of electroacoustic music (Chion 1983: 37).

Type
Articles
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

Barrett, N. 2007. Trends in Electroacoustic Music. In N. Collins and J. d’Escriván (eds.) The Cambridge Companion to Electronic Music. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chion, M. 1983. Guide to Sound Objects. Trans. J. Dack and C. North. Paris: Institut National De L’Audiovisuel.Google Scholar
Emmerson, S. 1986. The Relation of Language to Materials. In S. Emmerson (ed.) The Language of Electroacoustic Music. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischman, R. 2008. Mimetic Space – Unravelled. Organised Sound 13(2): 111122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, J. 1995. Unsound Objects (1995). On Articles indéfinis. Montreal: Empreintes Digitales, IMED-9627-CD.Google Scholar
Harrison, J. 2014. Lecture delivered at Stetson University, DeLand, Florida, USA, October.Google Scholar
Hirst, D. 2013. Connecting the Objects in Jonty Harrison’s Unsound Objects. eOREMA 1. www.orema.dmu.ac.uk/?q=content/connecting-objects-jonty-harrison%E2%80%99s-unsound-objects (accessed 13 January 2015).Google Scholar
Kane, B. 2007. L’Objet Sonore Maintenant: Pierre Schaeffer, Sound Objects and the Phenomenological Reduction. Organised Sound 12(01): 1524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kane, B. 2014. Sound Unseen: Acousmatic Sound in Theory and Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, S. J. 2010. A Critique on Pierre Schaeffer’s Phenomenological Approaches: Based on the Acousmatic and Reduced Listening. Paper presented at Pierre Schaeffer Conference: mediART in Rijeka, Croatia, 7 October. http://reddoorsound.com/files/PS_Phenomenology_KIM.pdf (accessed on 13 January 2015).Google Scholar
Landy, L. 2007. Understanding the Art of Sound Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merleau-Ponty, M. 2005. Phenomenology of Perception. Trans C. Smith. London: Taylor & Francis e-Library (orig. pub. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962).Google Scholar
Moran, D. 2000. Introduction to Phenomenology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nattiez, J. J. 1990. Music and Discourse. Towards a Semiology of Music. Trans. C. Abbate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, J. 2002. High Spirits with Jonty Harrison. 21 stCentury Music 9(1): 14.Google Scholar
Russell, M. 2006. Husserl: A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Schaeffer, P. 2004. Acousmatics. Trans D. Smith. In C. Cox and D. Warner (eds.) Audio Culture: Readings in Modern Music. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar