Editorial

Sharon Stewart, Vincent Meelberg, Jordan Lacey, Marcel Cobussen

Marcel

Every now and then JSS publishes a non-themed issue. What happens in general is that, over several months, people have submitted papers outside of a call for papers, or outside a thematic issue that is planned. After having collected enough of those papers, we start the usual (external) peer review and editing processes and publish an issue that has no focus on one theme which will be explored in depth, but one that presents the versatility and width of contemporary sound studies and/or sound art. 

Sharon

The question that sometimes arises, for me, when engaging with articles for such a non-themed issue is what one needs in order to listen and to share one’s listening experience? Fortunately for those of us interested in examining the sonic, answering this question is never straightforward: how we come into contact with the sonic and how we are able to share those experiences, the contexts and phenomena, open up endlessly rich sites of exploration.  

While becoming aware of our sonic environment, working with sound, discussing sound, sharing sonic experiences and ideas, we become aware of the technological aspect and our particular access to materials and their affordances; the sociopolitical situation we occupy, with attendant opportunities and norms that affect our own interests and biases; our own position in society, which has a direct effect on our language and what circles we are welcome to join as well as how comfortable we feel engaging with sound and sharing that engagement.

Marcel

Some keywords Sharon mentions above are technology, sociopolitics, ethics, and language. It is obvious that at least two of them are also quite prominent in JSS26: especially Andreas Helles Pedersen’s text about the DR DJ that he developed for the Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR) has a strong focus on technology. The DR DJ is a mobile app focusing on music discovery via operationalized and interrelated metadata, an app also meant to re-actualize forgotten and neglected histories of recorded music. And although Shluk’s contribution primarily focuses on their artistic work, technology is indispensable for their performances: field recording and sound processing are mentioned prominently as facilitating their artistic output. And Patryk Wasiak’s paper presents the development of the production of Hi-Fi audios and the emergence of an audiophile culture in Poland in the 1970s in a context of technological and social modernization. Wasiak’s emphasis on Hi-Fi and social modernization thereby also connects easily to the relationship between sound and sociopolitical developments, if only because the Polish created an alternative for a Western elitist consumption culture: Hi-Fi for them became an element of a young and working-class culture, building upon the values of state socialism. Anette Vandsø, Marie Koldkjær Højlund, and Morten Breinbjerg investigate and expand on the concept of “sonic citizenship,” making us aware of the way each of us contributes to our everyday (sonic) environment which also comes with a certain responsibility toward the other. In other words, producing and assessing sounds and simply listening to them is always already a sociopolitical act, encompassing performances of in- and exclusion. It is quite easy to see that “sonic citizenship” has also strong ethical dimensions, in the sense of affecting others and being affected by others (humans and nonhumans). 

What I am pondering or wondering about, however, is whether these relationships between sound and technology and sound, ethics and socio-politics are indeed the most important subjects of sound studies currently. Or, to rephrase the question: given that JSS started in 2011, do we see some changes in the way discourses on sound have developed? Have certain topics become more important at the expense of others? What new trends do we see, if any? Or, to put it differently again: which direction should JSS take in the upcoming years, if any, as we are not only dependent on authors but can also inspire authors by new calls for papers.

Vincent

The question that I believe has become increasingly more relevant is what we can do with sound. How can sound be used in order to achieve particular aims, be it social, cultural, ethical, political or otherwise? Obviously, this also requires the analysis of existing sonic environments and sonic practices, but research with an emphasis on what could be done with sound, exploring its potentialities, is one that JSS would be an excellent platform for. Combining creativity with analysis and critical thinking – a combination that ideally can also be found in artistic research – could lead to new sonic practices that I would love to see presented in our journal. 

Marcel

In that sense, both Henrik Frisk and Franziska Schroeder’s contributions to this issue might count as terrific examples. Although perhaps less about sound art than about (improvised) music, inspired by Henri Bergson, Frisk emphasizes the contribution of artistic research in knowledge production about sounds and the sonic by (re)introducing and rethinking the role intuition plays here. An interesting aspect of his essay is that he regards the role of an artist, a musician, or an artistic-researcher as one that can deconstruct the opposition between technology and intuition. In other words, a real understanding of technology in relation to sound production and music making cannot take place without an understanding from within, that is, intuition.

Franziska Schroeder’s submission is an auditory report of the start of a research project meant to explore, preserve, and archive the musical diversity of Vietnam. Schroeder’s audio paper takes us on a tour through Hanoi in which she – through an internal, situated, and embodied perspective – engages with the everyday sounds of the city. In this contribution, sound is not only an object of study but also a method through which an (urban) environment can be explored. 

Vincent

The perspective of creativity combined with analysis and critical thinking can hopefully inspire authors to think in terms of solutions rather than problems. Moreover, it would most probably also result in a more positive and optimistic tone overall, which is sorely needed in these bleak times. Not optimistic and positive in the sense of ignoring problems and issues, but in the sense of trying to come up with sonic practices and strategies to make this world a better place (pardon the mildly pathetic tone).

Jordan

The value of these open issues is that they reflect the diversity of topics and themes that sound study scholars and artists touch upon. This diversity reflects sound studies’ natural interdisciplinarity, with each discipline able to reframe their domain through sonic approaches – including experiencing, thinking, and practicing. Sound studies is unlikely to develop a canon (I hope), but rather, is likely to remain a field of thinking that is as mellifluous, diverse, and effervescent as sound is in-itself. JSS is testimony to this diversity. It has been particularly strong in two areas: First, the journal has encouraged artists to contextualize their practices and approaches via creative contributions, whether they be audio-papers, videos or creative soundscapes. It would be great to see more of these types of contributions, which I believe are a welcome alternative to the deluge of papers academics must contend with to stay “up-to-date” within their particular knowledge base. Second, JSS has encouraged international contributions with past editions on South-East Asia, Latin America, and the Balkan States and upcoming editions on Indigenous sound studies/art, former Soviet Republics, and Africa. Sound is an effective way to decenter Western privilege by understanding how different cultures understand the world when discussed through sound. Alternatively, these non-themed editions provide the field with an interesting snapshot of current issues and trends in sound studies, which should be of great interest to the reader.

Sharon 

There is a line from one of the text scores of Pauline Oliveros – the second of her “Imaginary Meditations” from 1979 – which came to me as I read through the proposals and ideas offered here:

II. Can you imagine listening beyond the edge of your own imagination?

In Marcel’s invitation to think speculatively and generatively about the direction of JSS, I certainly resonate with what is offered by both Vincent and Jordan here. On the one hand, echoing Jordan in particular, I do appreciate how JSS welcomes the deeply focused and idiosyncratic perspectives of artists exploring remarkable or uncommon sonic environments, using particular equipment, and coming across very specific problems. In my opinion, this special issue is packed with these types of perspectives. Shluk’s sounds lead us through their ear- and microphone-centered phenomenological exploration, researching theories of noise and pollution through listening and recording across Prague, collaborating toward the performance and documentary Hladiny (Surfaces). Patryk Wasiak opens our ears to part of the audiophile discourse during the period of state socialist Poland in the 70s and 80s, whose dialogues on sound tuned toward the communal social movement for the good of the people and state, in contrast to the elitist nature of such discourses in the West, designed to mark one’s affluence and refined, individualistic lifestyle. As Marcel notes, such a delicate counterbalancing of Polish Socialist and Western ideals allowed for – with much adroit tweaking of the sociopolitical system by some central players – the creation of a successful domestic manufacturing industry of high-end audio and Hi-Fi audio equipment for the domestic market in Poland. We have Helles Pedersen’s consideration of the imaginary media DR DJ and how it might still haunt /Diskoteket (the Danish Broadcasting Corporation’s digital music archive). Through the story offered in this article, the listener might imagine the interface and sounds of such an alternative future that was never realized, one that might still be floating around in our collective auditory and historical imagination. In a reverberation with Marcel’s comments: Frisk invites us to enter, through listening, into a particular way of thinking and doing composition within an artistic research lab, and Schroeder takes us with her on an improvisatory and exploratory multi-sensory journey through Hanoi as well as through (sonic) memories and reflections, traces of her relationship with Vietnamese experimental music and collaborations with artists and researchers in Vietnam. 

That being said, I would like to echo Jordan’s invitation for authors to direct their unique perspectives and interests toward making (even more) creative use of the model of the Research Catalogue (RC) exposition, going beyond static, text-based, contributions to JSS. What might an author do “otherwise,” indeed? A very quick brainstorm to add to the discussion:

• Co-compose text and audio in such a way that neither could possibly stand alone;
• Use a technological and material form and content that is being studied (such as radio or jukebox or karaoke) as a way to deliver theoretical content;
• Create a soundwalk that combines – and necessitates – walking with auditory content;
• Offer an actual exposition on the RC with a set of sonic artifacts (whether field recordings, compositions, scores, etc.) that can be digitally walked through and among, perhaps through and with proposed theoretical contexts; etc.

Marcel 

In my opinion, Franziska Schroeder’s audio paper comes quite close to what Sharon is suggesting here. Although also accompanied by an introductory text (which can also be read afterwards), the main part of her submission consists of spoken word and field recordings being merged in such a way that it combines academic and artistic work in an interesting way. Schroeder’s intellectual arguments are packed in a sonic materiality and aesthetics.

In other words, what Sanne Krogh Groth is doing with the journal Seismograf (especially Seismograf Peer), that is, inviting scholars and artists to submit audio papers, is an initiative that is worth following. 

Sharon

I also would like to chime in with Vincent’s line of thinking, noting that the possibilities of artistic researchers to become a part of interdisciplinary research teams – collaborating with researchers operating within or on the edges of the Social Sciences, Natural Sciences, and Humanities – is a dynamic area of opportunity that continues to expand. This means that I would also welcome the work of researchers who can describe how artistic research methods within Sound Studies can contribute to an interdisciplinary team addressing, for example, some of the most wicked problems (term introduced by design theorists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber in the early 70s) we are dealing with today – some common examples being global and national economic inequalities, social injustice, global climate change, (toxic and nuclear) waste, warfare and ethnic conflict, and drug and human trafficking, among others.

Finally, my personal interests in the Deep Listening practice of Pauline Oliveros and involvement in my local communities, makes me curious about the abundant ways sonic explorations, the creation of audible works, and the sharing of listening can help to strengthen communities and create sites of mutual respect, co-creation, and heartening creativity across the many divides that seem to be imposed upon us. Sound Studies resonate in so many ways with ritual, the healing arts, trauma resilience, and expressions of communal joy and sorrow. JSS has published articles about urban sound art and public installations, sound in street performances (Jamaica and Nashville), the sounds of national trauma (such as 9-11 or the sounds of post-war Sarajevo), soundwalking, soundmapping, etc. And the article by Vandsø, Højlund, and Breinbjerg in this special issue invites us to attune our ears, bodies, minds, and senses to the delicate and sonorous exchanges by means of which we negotiate our sonic citizenship, with and among the human and more-than-human actors in our environments. I would be delighted to hear more about the specific role of sound – as well as its potentialities – within community-building, including the processing of (intergenerational) trauma and working toward conflict resolution.

Hearing the reverberations of past and future contributions, we come back to the present and warmly invite you to turn your own ears toward this special issue of the Journal of Sonic Studies, number 26.