Ventriloquism: Witchcraft or Performance Art?

__________________________________________________________________________
JOIN OUR MAILING LIST and GET “SONIC WEAPONS: The Official Stereo Thesis Music Sampler FOR FREE.” To get your FREE full-length album…click here. 
______________________________________________________________________

Ventriloquism is an act of stagecraft in which a person changes his or her voice so that it appears that the voice is coming from elsewhere, usually an object like puppet or dummy, but in cases of religious ceremony it can be a relic or holy symbol. The act of ventriloquism is also known as the ability to "throw" one's voice. The name “ventriloquism” comes from the Latin for to speak from the stomach, i.e. venter (belly) and loqui (speak).

Originally, ventriloquism was a religious practice. The noises produced by the stomach were thought to be the voices of the unliving, who took up residence in the stomach of the ventriloquist. The ventriloquist would then interpret the sounds, as they were thought to be able to speak to the dead, as well as foretell the future. One of the earliest recorded group of prophets to utilize this technique was the Pythia, the priestess at the temple of Apollo in Delphi, who acted as the conduit for the Delphic Oracle.

The main difficulty the ventriloquists faces is that all the sounds they make must be made with lips slightly separated. For the labial sounds f, v, b, p, and m, the only choice is to replace them with other sounds or letters. A widely-parodied example of this difficulty is the "gottle o' gear,” from the reputed inability of less skilled practitioners to pronounce “bottle of beer.” If variations of the sounds th, d, t, and n are spoken quickly, it can be difficult for listeners to notice a difference. This is a very interesting piece of information because what it means is that the ventriloquist has to visually and in at least 2 ways sonically deceive the audience: 1) visually, to appear not to be speaking, 2) sonically, to make coherent statements using alternate sounds for usual words, and 3) sonically, to make it sound like a voice is originating from another location than himself.

Probably the very first authentic mention in ancient times of ventriloquism is in the First Book of Samuel in the Hebrew Bible, when King Saul goes to the Witch of Endor. In the middle ages, it was thought to be similar to witchcraft, but as spiritualism led to stage magic and escapology, similarly ventriloquism became more of a performance art as it shed its mystical trappings. Interestingly, some mediums may also be extremely talented ventriloquists who use their talent at throwing their voices to hook in suckers and rake in profits by comforting someone in a time of grief. Today talking to the dead has become re-popularized that you can find shows dedicated exclusively to the subject.

Many parts of the world still use ventriloquism for ritual or religious purposes; historically there have been adepts of this practice among the Zulu, Inuit, and Māori peoples. Understanding this you can begin to imagine how certain myths containing talking rocks or trees and even burning bushes might have also been instances of ventriloquism at work. If such was the case we’d have to wonder who it was throwing their voice for the aspiring or reluctant religious leader. Some of the world’s largest religions might have actually begun this way.

The most familiar type of ventriloquist seen today is a nightclub performer sitting on a stool with a wooden dummy on his or her lap. This comedic style of ventriloquism is, however, a fairly recent innovation, which began in the days of vaudeville in the late 19th century. The vaudeville acts did not concentrate on humor as much as on demonstrating the ventriloquist's ability to deceive the audience and his skill in switching voices. To this purpose, many of the performers used multiple figures and switched quickly from one voice to another. No doubt this skill was also used by the ancient practitioners of ventriloquism.


__________________________________________________________

Related Music:

The Haunting

Dutiful Son

__________________________________________________________

Related Articles:

The Human Voice

Finding Hypnotic Words
__________________________________________________________

P.S. To support Stereo Thesis with a financial donation, click here.


Marc
http://stereothesis.com/

Ayn Rand on Music and Composition

_________________________________________________________________________

DOWNLOAD “SONIC WEAPONS: The Official Stereo Thesis Music Sampler FOR FREE.” To get your FREE full-length album…click here.
_________________________________________________________________________

“Single musical tones are not percepts, but pure sensations; they become percepts only when integrated. Sensations are man’s first contact with reality; when integrated into percepts, they are given, the self-evident, the not-to-be-doubted.”

Introduction

In 1971, Ayn Rand wrote a book called the The Romantic Manifesto. After years of writing highly successful works of fiction such as Anthem, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, she turned to writing non-fiction in order to further develop the ideas she expounded in her fiction. In The Romantic Manifesto she discusses her ideas about the fifth branch of philosophy, which is aesthetics (art or beauty). The Romantic Manifesto consists of several essays about various topics regarding the creation, interpretation, and “objective” standards of art. In one of these essays called “Art and Cognition,” she says many interesting things concerning the subject of music and indirectly composition.

Interestingly, in her most popular works of fiction the subject of music receives some attention, but not as much as in this essay. In The Fountainhead, the protagonist Howard Roark compares music with his work as an architect and in Atlas Shrugged, she gives prominence to the character Richard Halley, a great composer, to show how important music is in her world where the mind is on strike. For those of you familiar with the plot in Atlas Shrugged, you’ll remember how Ayn Rand shares some of her views concerning the nature of composition and the relationship between the composer and his audience, which alone as moral ideas should be of deep interest to all creative people.

So what I’d like to do today is briefly examine what AR’s philosophical analysis of music can teach us about composition, learn how this can illuminate your own approach to composition, and perhaps even change the way you make music.

[Note: AR = Ayn Rand]

The Basic Equation of Musical Expression

‘X’ concrete evokes ‘x’ emotion in the composer and the composer attempts to communicate ‘x’ emotion by transforming the sensations of musical tones into the percepts of a musical composition.

Or

Composition <> world view <> emotional state

Therefore, the composer must attempt to communicate with an audience in music like a mathematician must communicate through numbers and the writer must communicate with words.

Here’s a short video clip from a movie called “A Song to Remember,” a movie AR praised for its basic attitude about the nature and needs of the artist as expressed by the character of George Sand.

A Song to Remember

If you have any problems viewing this video, click here.

In Western music, we all more or less understand that there are basically 2 flavors of sound: major and minor scales along with their variations. Now in regard to the major and minor modes or scales she observes that a joyous mood sharpens, accelerates, and energizes one’s mind, while sadness tends to blur, burden, and slow it down. Keep this in mind as you write your next piece and ask yourself whether or not you’re prepared to evoke the exact response you’d like to elicit in your listener’s.

AR goes a step further and draws a correlation to the way certain emotions affect a mind’s operation in contrast with the kind of music that will produce emotions which resembles that state of mind. In other words, certain emotions cause the mind to act a specific way. Likewise, certain types of music can also either produce specific emotions or cause the mind to act in a particular way thereby producing corresponding emotions that resemble that state of mind. What this shows is that there are 3 parts to this process of designing a strong musical experience: a) the music, b) the activity of the mind, and c) the corresponding emotions. Each of these 3 parts are entry points for the composer and should considered at some time during the compositional or recording process.

Mind-Emotion Musical Experience

One point AR brings up has to do with the musical experience, which she says has to flow because the mind needs a succession of images from our mental reserve to unify the meaning of the work. In order to clarify this point she tells us that music by its very nature does communicate emotions, but not concretes (or specific existential information, facts) like a sunny day or the location of a city. The reason she says is attributed to these things being too specific to be expressed in music.

Remember AR noticed that our mental reserve is what unifies the meaning of the work and that the unification is almost entirely an emotional experience. So what we know then is that a musical experience is something largely individual and pertaining to the past. It could also pertain to an individual’s future as they dream or imagine it to be, but not usually.

Why does music make us experience emotions? Let’s first understand that what we’re talking about is music and not necessarily songs. So what we’re referring to is a succession of tones placed in an organized structure and not a melodic lyrical structure containing a message in addition to this definition of music. So why does music make us experience emotions? Music connects us to 2 essential aspects of existence and they are the passage of time and the quality or tone of an event or series of events. Music conjures up emotional experiences from our mental reserve by approximating these 2 elements from a specific event or a large quantity of similar events.

The next step AR takes is by examining how music conveys emotion and by what musical means or method. In trying to discover what some of the factors are or would be in the conceptual analysis of music, she concludes that music is different from the other arts because as a field it is lacking in a common vocabulary and an objective criterion of aesthetic judgment. She believes that the key to the discovery of an “objective criterion” lies in the distinction of object from subject in the field of musical perception. This is so important for our understanding of how music works because it precludes analysis. This is because separation of object from subject is the work which must occur before thinkers, intellectuals, and even scientists can begin dissecting music rationally.

For example, the way she shows us how the separation works in relation to musical perception is when a man listens to music it’s not clear what aspects of his experience are inherent in the music and which are contributed by his own consciousness. Her observation is everyone experiences music as an indivisible whole, as if the emotion were there in the music. As anyone who’s ever tried to share a piece of music with an acquaintance has found out, not everyone feels the same thing from the same piece of music, so it’s clear that the emotion doesn’t  transfer from the music to the individual, rather the individual brings something to the musical experience which resonates with the music itself.

Another important point AR makes is in regard to the meaning of a composition which lies in the kind of work it requires to integrate by a listener’s ear and brain. Accordingly, a composition may demand more or less activity or alertness of mind so that the listener experiences a sense of understanding, boredom, or frustration with their attempts to mentally integrate the piece into an intelligible whole. Whatever a person’s reaction to any given piece of music, his reaction will be dictated by the type of work his mind feels most at home with. In other words, a person either accepts or rejects music if or if it does not contradict his mind’s way of working.

Some people will seek out music that is complex or challenging and be excited about making it intelligible even if in their own minds. Others might seek simplicity in musical structures and harmony, if their cognitive habits are limited by mental lethargy. This partly explains why the same piece of music evokes different reactions in a variety of people. For a man whose mind is conditioned to perform complex calculations a simple piece of music will annoy and bore him, while a person whose mentally lazy will strain to grasp the musical structures and melodic configurations of a complex Classical symphony. According to AR, the difference in reaction is not solely a matter of taste, but primarily of world views.

Here are many more music quotes provided for you from the on-line version of the Ayn Rand Lexicon, courtesy of the Ayn Rand Institute. To begin reading more about music from the essay “Art and Cognition” in The Romantic Manifesto, click here.

Or click here to purchase your own copy of The Romantic Manifesto.

__________________________________

Related Music:

Geoforms

The Possibility of Joy
__________________________________

Related Articles:

Hooks and Earworms

The Essence of Music: Frequency, Timbre, and the Organization of Sound

_________________________________________________________________

P.S. To support Stereo Thesis with a financial donation, click here.

Marc

http://stereothesis.com/

Synthetic Creations of the Human Mind: Z-Machines in Tokyo

_________________________________________________________________________

DOWNLOAD “SONIC WEAPONS: The Official Stereo Thesis Music Sampler FOR FREE.” To get your FREE full-length album…click here.
_________________________________________________________________________

(Image source)

Mach, Ashura, and Cosmo are creations by Zima, a Japanese alcoholic beverage brand, as part of a new advertising campaign. The band performed their debut piece Monday, "Post People, Post Party," composed by Tokyo-based DJ Tasaka. DJ Tasaka says he had originally written a disco-electro type song before seeing how technically sophisticated the robots were. After that he said he wrote “a new song, [which was] much more complicated…but then they were able to play it." DJ Tasaka says the three robots in Z-Machines have the ability to create sounds that are impossible for three human musicians to mimic. But why?

Mach, the guitar robot, has 78 fingers using 12 picks and Ashura, the drum robot, plays 22 drums with six arms. Cosmo, the keyboard robot, was designed separately by Yoichiro Kawaguchi, an artist and professor at Tokyo University. He’s the only robot out of the three that is electrically hard wired to the keyboard. As long as the human musicians do not also possess the same qualities these robot musicians possess, then they will most certainly not be able to perform as these robots can. These details raise 2 very interesting ideas concerning the relationship between human anatomy, creativity, and the nature of art.

As discussed in earlier articles, creativity is simply the ability translate artistic ideas into physical or intellectual products via technical skill. But what if technical skill is limited by anatomy or anatomy expands technical skill? What I mean by this is what if an artist’s imagination is so great that human anatomy acts as a liability or barrier to communicating those ideas easily or clearly. What comes to mind in regard to this notion is a scene in the movie Gattaca where a 12-fingered pianist performs a piece of music written specifically for a performer with 12 fingers (6 fingers per hand). Obviously, when a musician with only 10 fingers tries to perform “Impromptu for 12 Fingers” he or she will surely fail. However, the only way for them to play the piece in any manner whatsoever is to make compromises such as altering harmonic structures (changing the voicing or size of notes within the chords), re-phrasing melodies, and possibly even simplifying rhythmic patterns.

This is just a small physical difference between 2 human beings, but in the case of comparison between a 10 or 12 fingered musicians and a 78 fingered robot, the compositional possibilities become immense. The music of each class of performer becomes extremely unique to humans and robots, but it all is based on differences in anatomy – 10 fingers vs. 78 fingers – and what each musician is capable of anatomically performing.

The other idea that was seeded in this press release was related to creativity and the nature of art. To begin the discussion I’d like to pose 2 questions:

(1)   Are we robots if we use computers to create music?

To the first question, my answer is no with a caveat. So ‘no’ we are not robots, however, we can allow ourselves to perform music robotically. (It’s actually quite ironic that we use the term “robotic” to refer to mental laziness because computers work so hard processing the information that’s programmed into them.) The reason why I’m answering in such a confusing manner has nothing to do with computers, but everything to do with faithful reproductions in music performances and recordings. Sometimes music performances of composed works can seem like a robotic reproduction or performance of music, especially when that music has been performed dozens, hundreds, if not, thousands of times. Many pop stars I’m sure get sick of hearing their own material night after night. After touring for many months, performing the same pieces has to get irritating and some performances are likely to be robot-like – just going through the motions. Similarly, modern classical composers must also find it strange that orchestras around the world want to perform their old, beloved pieces for new audiences or to update the sound quality for a recording. New renditions will inevitably fall flat because the conductors and musicians will carry on a music tradition (or bias) that cannot allow too much deviation from old versions of performances and recordings.

And…

(2)  Can what a robot plays, when it’s programmed to perform, be considered music?

Computers are not intelligent life forms, but rather are intelligent tools built to mimic the functions of the human mind. At the moment there is no artistic spark inherent in a robot or computer, which is capable of self-generated creative thinking. Therefore, every product generated by a human being operating a computer is a human product no matter how unnatural the product is. The product will be a synthetic creation of the human mind.

In music, there is as of yet no ‘Hit’ button for the instant production of hit singles on any synthesizer or music recording software that I’m aware of. Music is an artificial construct of intelligent life delineated by the orderly or deliberate arrangement of sound in time. What makes a piece of music uniquely human is not in the process of transmission, but instead in the very act of creation itself. The fact that it was created is what makes it human and not how it is communicated through or to others. Therefore, whether a music prodigy performs the notes on a music score robotically or if a trio of robots has been programmed to perform a difficult piece of music composed by a human being, what the music prodigy and the robot trio do are one and the same. So yes, when a robot is programmed to perform what it plays is music.

[Prediction: On the day when robots are capable of interpreting the symbols in a musical score and translating those symbols into live action on musical instruments, the differences between a human musician and a robot will quickly become undetectable and the new focus will center on the dimension of ‘feeling’ or injecting emotion into a piece of music.]

God’s Hands: Impromptu for 12 Fingers

I’m sure many of you have heard of the movie Gattaca and some of you may even have seen the movie. Here’s a brief video to illustrate what I mentioned earlier about music written specifically for a 12-fingered pianist. The piece was composed by Michael Nyman, a wonderful British minimalist who often writes for film. His accomplishments include writing beautiful music for the film “The Piano,” one of my favorite soundtracks of all time.

________________________________________________________

Related Music:

Automaton

Mystery Meat
________________________________________________________

Related articles:

The Perfect Partner: The Artist's Role in the Creation and Construction of Artificial Human Companions

________________________________________________________

P.S. To support Stereo Thesis with a financial donation, click here.

Marc

http://stereothesis.com/