Of the many goals I set for myself as I began my New York experience, high on the list has been becoming involved in at least one discussion group. I tried one group on for size and beside the fact that everyone in the group seemed have been solving three-dimensional crossword puzzles in kindergarten, the goals of the group (a writing group) were not really where I wanted to go. So it was especially gratifying to be asked to join a discussion group at NYU. The multidisciplinary group made up of faculty and graduate students focuses on "sound writing," that is, writing about sound (not just music)
Ethnomusicologist Siv Lie kicked off the event with a paper on her observation of the New England Conservatory's Contemporary Improvisation program. We had all received a copy of her paper so we had the opportunity to think of questions or follow-up thoughts we might have. She began her talk with a video where CI students were asked a basic question: What type of music are you interested in? The answers ranged from blank to clever. Students in the CI program come from many backgrounds. Ms. Lie's presentation continued with marketing clip from NEC on the CI program. Lie then spoke to the beginnings of the program and its evolution over the last thirty years. She contrasted it with a more traditional undergraduate conservatory music program, which is still what most students at NEC pursue as well as the NEC jazz program. For years I have been interested in the undergraduate music curriculum with its positive features as well as its limitations. It was fascinating to hear about an innovative program. Though her paper (which she read) was short, it was imaginative, had a clear focus and was quite informative.
Ethnomusicologst Scott Spencer's paper and presentation, "Technology, Soundscapes and Cultural Representation at the Mashantucket Pequot Museum and Research Center" was much lengthier and information-filled than Ms.Lie's work although his presentation was more cursory and selective. Mr. Spencer's work was like an onion in that several layers were required to get to the core message. His presentation only highlighted what he went into in much more detail in his paper. The core of the paper, and the presentation, seemed to be effects of high tech delivery of sound in an exhibit on the sense of engagement with the exhibit. Traditionally, sound has not been a part of museum exhibits and exhibits, no matter how thoughtfully conceived, tend to leave the viewer somewhat disengaged. By incorporating sound in an interactive way with museum visitors, a higher level of engagement and immersion in exhibits might result. Bernie Krause and his company Wild Sanctuary were engaged to design a sound system for many of the exhibits at the Mashantucket Pequot Museum. Almost no expense was spared to develop that not only would allow for an ever changing and ever combining array of natural environmental sounds but would also allow sounds to be triggered the visitors.
Of course, the effects of such an elaborate system would need to be analyzed to assess the impact on the museum visitor. Beyond the "wow effect" ("Jeez, I can get the frogs to croak by simply moving into this spot or waving my hand!"), how much more internalization of understanding was taking place. Mr. Spencer discussed studies that deal with "performance-listener" interaction. Krause views museum exhibits as theatre and posits that the injection of sound into exhibits must be treated as part of a theatrical performance.
Mr. Spencer's oral presentation was very easy to follow and was essentially a "readers digest" version of his paper. On reading his paper, one thought that I had was that he might have done more to condense some of this supportive and tangential material so as not to overshadow the core message. in some respects he seemed to be dealing with several different topics rather than one central one. Both the paper and the presentation were thought provoking.
With regard to the gathering as a whole, I wish there had been time to discuss the nature of the writing in both Ms. Lie's and Mr. Spencer's papers and presentations. Perhaps future meetings will be more discussion oriented. As it was, however, it was most enjoyable and engaging.
No comments:
Post a Comment