silence, noise, music, cage. - connor chapman

Dualisms, I've noticed, are an overarching theme in this class. Sense versus nonsense at first, and it seems especially relevant when discussing sound versus silence, noise versus music, (or any medium of actual physical sound coupled against silence, really). This topic is really no difference, as evidenced by John Cage's 4'33", a controversial piece where there is nothing necessary other than to have the performer be present for the duration of the performance. The purpose of the piece is to have the listener pay attention to their environment, the little sounds. The piece, therefore, is evolving, and one can perform 4'33" wherever he or she so desires, so the piece can sound literally like whatever the performer wants. Music is generally defined as an art of organized sound, an art whose mediums are sound and silence. That definition is quite vague; can language, by that definition, not be categorized as organized, and defined be sounds and silences? Surely it's more complicated than that. Perhaps the idea behind music is that this organization is constant, and it's designated, at least more so than just verbal communication, but even so, when musical feedback is used even artfully, these lines are blurred. Perhaps the more chance is factored into conventional music, the less it sounds to us like music. Take, for example, again, feedback and John Cage's 4'33". IT could be anything. These things aren't controlled. Write down a piece of music, that's not really chance. IT was organized and devised and all that, the rest of these things isn't. Silence is merely an absolute absence of these things. 4'33" may not have the performer making any sounds him or herself, there is no silence. There is still a ringing in our heads, the creaks of the floorboards and scratching of carpet fibers beneath our feet, the twiddling of our thumbs. Humans cannot create chance. They can make things that make chance. But that's pretty much it.

I've rambled. The cognitive dissonance is proving to be too much for little ole me.