An idea is starting to form at this point in regards to my portfolio, but before I attempt to put it into words I thought I’d make a blog post on all of the practitioners that have inspired and directed my interests over the last few weeks. Annea Lockwood and her sound maps of various rivers has been something I have continuously returned to. After having visited Tolworth Court Farm Fields, I feel as if I am beginning to hear her works in a new light. In an interview with Cathy Lane, Lockwood describes the patterns and textures of rivers as ‘phrasings’ that are “not quite repetition but feels like it.” Could this be a reason why we are so magnetised to such sounds. A synergy we could entertain here is that we start life in amniotic fluid, and life itself too began underwater – although one we should approach with caution if we have learnt anything from Despret’s book. Interestingly so, Lockwood references an old Peruvian custom of taking patients who are mentally ill to sit by rivers for days. And yet it is not only rivers that have this calming effect on our temperament. The crackling sound of fire, birdsong, rain – all of these also produce the same sensations, some studies even proposing that certain naturally occurring sounds even reduce our blood pressure. Whether we equate these effects with evolutionary associations of safety, or the “soft fascinations” of natural stimuli posited by Attention Restoration Theory, the expressive force of nature is undeniable.
Listening again to ‘A Sound Map of the Danube’, every trickle, ripple and swell of water reveals the architecture of the riverbed itself, as well as the geological features of the surrounding landscape. Lockwood highlights that the cultural differences in the environment also feed into its intrinsic characteristic sound. Recognising this reminds me of Despret’s conclusions regarding differences, as a vehicle to connect. The soundscapes Lockwood creates prompts us to, not only reconsider the source of each sound, but to continue tracing these sources back as far as our imagination might allow us. Her sustained engagement with the River Hudson also gave way to conversations with those whose lives were inextricably linked with the river. Hearing their personal stories and memories, I imagine, increased her ability to honourably embody all the facets of the river within her recordings.
When I started this course I used to struggle to understand how a collection of recordings, or abstract composition, could carry any tangible meaning. Looking back I now realise that I approached listening with quite a detached mindset that separated the art from its creator. I think I understand that now art is not meant to be experienced in isolation. At least in the context of field recording, it is the field recordist that is changed through their experiences, acknowledgement of differences, and introspection into the multiple modes of knowing and being in the world. It is the creator that brings their affections, influenced by these changes, to their art. And through direct and indirect interactions with an audience, the opportunity of an expanded sensibility is offered; If not immediate, it is most likely kickstarted by the very process of coming to terms with some perceived absurdity and, one hopes, the drive to make sense of it. Art in itself, is an invitation to engage with the myriad of experiences and interactions that brought it to life, and the visual or sonic component is perhaps only the surface of its figurative river, and not something we can experience in isolation from process.
Jana Winderen is another sound artist that has repeatedly found her way into my research. I was made aware of her work earlier this year when looking into ecological sound artists and her installation The River at the Natural History Museum, made in collaboration with sound specialist Tony Myatt, is one that I have been meaning to visit for some time now. Her use of hydrophones and the piezo technique that utilises contact microphones, is again reminiscent of the ideas explored in Living as a Bird. By this I mean that these microphones give us new ways to explore material resonances, environmental changes and bioacoustics, increasing our intimacy with the natural world in a way that pays tribute to subjectivities outside of our own. Jana Winderen states herself in her own interview with Cathy Lane: “What I decided I really wanted to do was to go out there and to find the best recordings from the very smallest creatures, like an insect eating a leaf, for example; to seek out the sounds that we do not notice or cannot perceive.” In listening to her recordings, people are made aware of these intangible sounds, and maybe stimulated to seek out the same – I feel that the growing accessibility of hydrophones and contact mics make this endeavour all the more important!
Winderen readily admits that she is very much drawn to interesting sounds, as opposed the everyday mundane, something that I have read Lockwood say too. In doing so, do we forget to recognise sounds of the everyday as important tools for reflection? I guess this is something that might require more research to unpack. Either way, we are driven by our aesthetic sensibilities, and in honouring that, I feel can lead one to their most authentic work. Her work has come a long way since she began field recording, having acquired increasingly expensive microphones that surpass the shortcomings of cheaper equipment and their noisier preamps and narrower frequency spectrums. Her work involving recordings of bats, whales and dolphins have allowed her to explore ultra-sonic animal communication, outside the human range of audibility. This reminds of the presence of bats at Tolworth Court Farm Fields, something I had overlooked up until now. During my time field recording for the Wadhurst Conservation Team, I had the pleasure of joining ecologists on a Bat Survey, familiarising myself with different kinds of bat detectors. I wonder whether I could reach out in the next few weeks to borrow one for a weekend or so.
Lastly, Winderen also mentions that her composition process is not one that begins in front of her computer, but in the choices she makes out in the field such as microphone placement, guided by her sensibilities. Thinking in terms of layers, she records multiple perspectives of the same location in order to get a fuller picture. Lane challenges her on this, asking – “But if you are choosing to pursue a criterion of sounding ‘good’ or of beauty then are you, to the extent that you do that, also leaving behind a more documentary focus, one that reflects the place where the sounds were recorded?” My response to this would be that Winderen’s compositional process is one that is guided by sensitivity and respect, and so even if she is guided aesthetically as opposed to pure realism, the very nature of her aim to create connections as opposed to divisions make her resulting work less susceptible to misinterpretation – perhaps in the same way that a naturalists affections for bird life arises from observations of their differences in behaviour, if we once again refer back to Despret’s book. Winderen states herself that the extent of her processing only happens in the field – her choice of microphone, how she uses them, where she places them, when to push record – and not manipulated in software, out of the need to respect the sonic material and the bodies they originate from. I am excited to return to Tolworth Court Farm Fields, guided by both Lockwood’s and Winderen’s techniques.
I have now booked a slot to go see Winderen’s installation at the Natural History Museum in order to directly experience her work, but also to get a better idea of how to display my own work in a gallery setting.
