If you liked this post, you may also dig:. Unlearning Black Sound in Black Artistry: Visit this brilliance today—and often! In the early s a talking machine, contrived by the aptly-named Joseph Faber appeared before audiences in the United States. It featured a fantastically complex pneumatic system in which air was pushed by a bellows through a replica of the human speech apparatus, which included a mouth cavity, tongue, palate, jaw and cheeks. Its audiences in the s found themselves in front of a machine disguised to look like a white European woman.
Click here to read more! The term mixtape most commonly refers to homemade cassette compilations of music created by individuals for their own listening pleasure or that of friends and loved ones. The practice which rose to widespread prominence in the s often has deeply personal connotations and is frequently associated with attempts to woo a prospective partner romantic or otherwise. The time spent implies an emotional connection with the recipient. It might be a desire to go to bed, or to share ideas.
The message of the tape might be: I think about you all the time. Click here for more! My Music and My Message is Powerful: I am immersed in the loop of my pre-performance mantra:. Repeating this phrase helps me to center my purpose on amplifying the voice of a practitioner who, despite being the first African-American woman composer to achieve national and international success, faced discrimination throughout her life, and even posthumously in the recognition of her legacy.
But there were times when her musical scores were met with silence. For example, when she wrote to Serge Koussevitzky of the Boston Symphony Orchestra requesting that he hear her music, the letter remained unanswered. There was a notable intermittency in how Price was heard, which continues today. It seems most natural for mainstream platforms to amplify her voice in months dedicated to women and Black history; any other time of the year appears to require more justification.
Upon completing a Ph. He wrote and spoke like an Old Testament prophet.
Click here for more]. For those familiar with modern media, there are a number of short musical phrases that immediately trigger a particular emotional response. In each of these cases, the musical theme is short, memorable, and unalterably linked to one specific feeling: Look Away and Listen: It alternately denigrates and elevates vision: It can seem like the audiovisual litany is everywhere these days: The field of philosophy seems to argue that we need to replace traditional models of philosophical abstraction, which are usually based on words or images, with sound-based models, but this argument reproduces hegemonic ideas about sight and sound.
As I sat in the seminar, buckling under the pressure of how my colleagues probably defined sound art, Prof. Lewis gently urged me to ask: How would it change things if I did call myself a sound artist? Sound art and its offshoots have their own unspoken codes and politics of membership, which is partly what Prof.
Lewis was trying to expose in that teaching moment. Arena, a foot former ice factory, was a haven for club kids, ravers, rebels, kids from LA exurbs, youth of color, and drag queens throughout the s and s. The now-defunct nightclub was one of my hang outs when I was coming of age. Like other Latinx youth who came into their own at Arena, I remember fondly the fashion, the music, the drama, and the freedom.
It was a home away from home. Many of us were underage, and this was one of the only clubs that would let us in. Arena was a cacophony of sounds that were part of the multi-sensorial experience of going to the club. There would be deep house or hip-hop music blasting from the cars in the parking lot, and then, once inside: Growing up in Montebello, a city in the southeast region of LA county, Irene overcame a difficult childhood, homelessness, and addiction to break through a male-dominated industry and become an award-winning, internationally-known DJ.
In addition to continuing to DJ festivals and clubs, she is currently a music instructor at various colleges in Los Angeles. This only made people love her more and helped her to see how she could give back by leading a positive life through music. Last December, a renowned sound scholar unexpectedly trolled one of my Facebook posts. With an undocumented charge, the scholar attacked me personally and made a public accusation that I have misinterpreted his work in a few citations. As I closely read and investigated the concerned citations, I found that the three minor occasions when I have cited his work neither aimed at misrepresenting his work there was little chance , nor were they part of the primary argument and discourse I was developing.
What made him react so abruptly? Consider the social positioning. This scholar is a well-established white male senior academic, while I am a young and relatively unknown researcher with a non-white, non-European background, entering an arena of sound studies which is yet closely guarded by the Western, predominantly white, male academics. This social divide cannot be ignored in finding reasons for his outburst. I immediately sensed condescension and entitlement in his behavior.
Plants are the most abundant life form visible to us. Despite their ubiquitous presence, most of the times we still fail to notice them. In this article, I map out a brief history of the different musical and sound art practices that incorporate plants and discuss the ethics of plant life as a performative participant. The Top Ten Sounding Out! Eye fucking entails going beyond the gaze of the audience into a realm where you meet your inner erotic, your inner gaze. Eye fucking creates arousal, homosociality, agency, femme desire, confidence, and a queer space with a lot of glitter.
In this post, I reflect on the sonic intimacies between burlesque and boudoir photography. I am sharing part of a larger film project titled GlitterBabes , where I tell a story of how burlesque as a recreational practice empowers women to engage their sensual selves. I tell this story through Glitter Tribe Studio , the first studio dedicated to the art of burlesque in San Diego.
In fact, both the dance and photography studios I write about here have an intimate relationship.
- niklas e kimkim (Italian Edition).
- Gamete.
- You are here.
- Trop de Couteaux dans nos Dos (French Edition).
- .
- .
As a fat performer, I was particularly interested in the way that my burlesque sisters and myself would navigate topics of body confidence, sensuality and stripping. As it turned out, these practices require a practice of listening to the details of our bodies and its engagement with musicality, the rhythm of our tease s , and our awareness for how the camera can capture our corporeal erotic wavelengths both on and off stage.
The findings by Wentland and Muise share many commonalities with the way photographers in San Diego also engage the practice of Boudoir, particularly the understanding that agency is experienced along a continuum and photographers support their clients by accommodating different techniques that can silence their negative self-talk.
At Bad Kitty Photography, where both Raven and Sepia had their shoots, a layer enabling femmes to get into an affective state of sensual comfort is music. To prepare for shoots, Bad Kitty asks their clients to think about their favorite music to set the mood. On their website, they list creating a music playlist as a recommendation to prepare for the shoot.
This recommendation intrigued me and aroused an intellectual sonic orgasm. Here, music is consumed in a femme-centered space to get the model and its photographer to a state of intoxicating perversity. Beyond the music recommendation, the photographer who worked with me also used sonic techniques to help me get relaxed and comfortable. While we were choosing my outfits, I shared with Ashley, how nervous I was about not being able to make sexy faces.
I look at my photos and I see the effect it created. How does the address of speech transform the performative gesture of its utterance? Dirty talk— how my photographer engaged me in dialogue — contributed to my afloje looseness as the shoot progressed. The address of her speech, along with her gestures, made me get lost in her camera.
The former strategy runs into far more severe problems, on which I will spend much of the rest of this review. The account of the Folio text does not merit this kind of in-depth engagement simply because its arguments do not rely on factual assertions of the same kind. But his entire analysis of the Folio relies exclusively on aesthetic criteria. He moves from example to example, assessing their merits with a connoisseurial eye: He even subjects typographical marks to this treatment: In that sense, his interpretation of King Lear is not a reading of either of the surviving versions, but imagines the existence of a text that can support such an interpretation, which then becomes the basis of an editorial approach.
A newly edited, ideally realized King Lear will be one that lives up to the play as Vickers understands it, and leaves out all the lines and textual differences that complicate the picture. As literary critical methods go, this is an unusually creative approach. I am not at all convinced that this would be a good reading of the Folio, but as Vickers presents his evidence, it seems to support the case for purposive reshaping more than his own case for pointless textual vandalism.
He does not dismiss such a reading: Since he rejects the very possibility of real revision a priori , all change has to be destructive. In effect, though, Vickers ends up replicating the very critical maneuver for which he mocks the revision theorists. One major difference between Vickers and the revisionists is how they feel about something they both regard as established fact: For Taylor et al. The early modern theater, in his account, emerges as a place where dramatic works of art are treated with disrespect and a deep lack of understanding.
That would seem like an arrogant attitude if Vickers did not clarify that his understanding of how King Lear worked on the Jacobean stage relies not simply on his intuition, but also on modern performers and their statements about the play. But while his respect for contemporary theater makers is laudable, it does not solve his historiographical dilemma.
- Soundings in Kings: Perspectives and Methods in Contemporary Scholarship | Fortress Press.
- The Text Is Foolish: Brian Vickers’s “The One King Lear” - Los Angeles Review of Books!
- CONTINUE TO BILLING/PAYMENT?
- Soundings in the Theology of Psalms: Perspectives and Methods in - Google Книги?
- CALVARYS SUPERMARKET - A Different Taste A Spoken Word Poem.
- Areas of Expertise.
That modern actors or audiences find particular textual moments difficult has no evidentiary weight in a consideration of what a Jacobean actor or playing company may have considered theatrically effective. However, now that the consensus has shifted to regarding the Quarto as based on an authorial manuscript, that explanation has evaporated: The corruption of transmission did not occur in the written document from which the book was set, but in the printed book itself.
Account Options
The One King Lear offers an inventive scenario in place of the old narrative of corrupt transmission. That narrative featured a motley cast of characters note-taking audience members or bit-part players , a clear motive money from selling the text of a successful play , and a coherent theory of how lines might go missing a slow pen, an errant memory, an actor off-stage in a particular scene. But despite these apparent differences, his approach and that of the memorial reconstructionists share a central assumption: Vickers never attempts to ground this assumption in textual evidence: It is, and remains throughout, a credo, not an argument.
King Lear was far from unusual, but rather part of an industry-wide trend. As scholars lost faith in that hypothetical context, what kind of text the Lear Quarto was thought to be had to change as well. If the book no longer represented an instance of corrupted transmission, the text it contained had to be substantively what was in the document from which it was set. The question therefore became why the two versions differed as much as they did, and when the passages only found in the Folio were added.
Without accomplishing these objectives, the entire anti-revisionist thesis of The One King Lear collapses. Vickers never attempts to make a textual or critical argument for the presence of the Folio-only lines in the manuscript from which the book was set. Although it would be difficult to imagine what such a case might look like, he certainly acts as if he, unlike his opponents, had in fact made it. Print is not the work of authors, nor is it, typically, a type-facsimile of a manuscript source. The kinds of arguments Vickers and his foes want to make cannot be made on purely bibliographical grounds.
His entire case rests on his ability to show that it is more plausible , as a matter of print history, to posit that Okes cut those lines than to believe that they were added to the play in a revision. Never mind that this is a comparison between two categorically different kinds of arguments one based on the history of a craft, the other on aesthetic judgment: It alone can provide a basis for giving any credence to the notion that the Folio-only lines even existed prior to Does Vickers make his case? With regard to the wider context, not at all. He offers no systematic analysis of how other printers or even Okes himself, elsewhere in his output compressed and abridged copy to fit a specific page-count.
A scattered selection of other printed plays provides some anecdotal evidence.
Levites and Priests in Biblical History and Tradition - Google Книги
As sample sizes go, this is what one might expect from an unambitious seminar paper. Even if he had managed to gather relevant evidence in the handful of other plays he has looked at, the sample size is so small that it cannot bear probative weight. To detail why that is, a brief technical detour is necessary. In producing a printed book, early modern stationers had two distinct choices of approach: Alternatively, a stationer could set by formes.
Soundings in Kings: Perspectives and Methods in Contemporary Scholarship
As a consequence, a compositor only needed to complete the four pages of either the inner or the outer forme before printing could commence. Setting by formes allowed for a more efficient work-flow between typesetting and printing, maintaining a steadier supply of new formes to the pressmen. It also required less type: However, that efficiency came at a price. Casting off was an imprecise art, and potentially time-consuming.
Worse, if the compositor miscalculated easy to do especially in prose, with its unpredictable space requirements he might find himself with too much or too little text for the pages he still had to fill. A compositor in such a situation might stretch his copy by breaking verse lines more frequently than required by the meter, say, or inserting extra line breaks or ornaments; or he might have to compress the text to make it fit.
When setting seriatim, these problems would not normally arise: But in general, the specific need to begin and end each page at a certain point that was the major disadvantage of setting by formes did not arise when using the seriatim method. Early modern stationers used both techniques, sometimes even within the same book.
Okes himself set other play quartos by formes, including The Two Maids of Mortlake the year after Lear. Vickers labors under the misapprehension that setting the text of Lear seriatim was a strange choice. He is largely alone in this belief, even if he occasionally ascribes his own surprise to scholars who are in fact not at all puzzled when encountering plays not set by formes. This is where our detour rejoins the main road: As we saw, setting by formes could frequently create spatial complications unlikely to arise in seriatim work.
In fact, a number of the scholars Vickers cites, including John Creaser, make this very point: Even in books set by formes, though, Vickers can find almost no unequivocal examples of stationers cutting lines from their copy to solve a space problem; in the few arguable instances he can offer, the problem invariably arises from the hard boundaries created when setting by formes, and would not at all have arisen in a text set seriatim, such as King Lear. It is a story without context or historical precedent. Okes may, after all, have been a spectacular outlier. Here is what Vickers imagines must have happened: Okes provided the stationer Nathaniel Butter with a binding estimate for the cost of printing the book, based on the assumption that he could fit the text onto It is certainly true that Okes employed a number of space-saving techniques: There is no question that the Quarto is not a generously printed volume.
But neither are many other early modern printed plays. Three other books do not a corpus make. Okes repeatedly neglected to use all the space available to him. On the first page of the text, he chose to reuse the large type from the title page to begin the play: None of these decisions were dictated by rules or even conventions. There certainly was no need to repeat the title of the play on the first page, let alone in such large type.
In two cases, however, they added an extra line — demonstrating that his press could easily print pages with 39 lines of text. It would therefore have been easy, simply by adding an extra line per page, to accommodate an additional 77 lines of text. When one adds up all the additional space readily available to Okes in the Without interfering in the text at all, he could have found room for well over additional lines — far in excess of the Vickers says he was forced to cut.
Finally, as Vickers describes at length, Okes set verse as prose with some frequency; extending this practice would have been a far easier and far less invasive means of saving space than cutting lines. Okes is said to have cut 13 lines from the first sheet, and a further 12 from the second.
It thus took Okes nine pages to think of the additional and far less invasive expedient of relining verse as prose. The problems do not end there. One might reasonably ask when Vickers imagines Okes realized that his original estimate was wide of the mark. Blayney has established that the title page was printed before the rest of the book. How could Okes possibly have known this early in the printing process that he had made a catastrophic mistake?
Did he suddenly realize that the majority of King Lear was in verse, and would therefore take up more space than anticipated?
Request a Review copy
Perhaps — but if so, why would he come to that realization during the setting of the first page, which is in prose? Okes would have to be a remarkably quick study, and a shockingly overzealous editor, to surmise the consequences of his mistake in that instant and jump to as drastic a measure as simply dropping eight full lines of verse.
As it turns out, the explanation Vickers offers is more surprising still. In providing his apparently binding estimate to Nathaniel Butter, the printer therefore misjudged the actual length of the text by 14 percent. But as soon as the narrative shifts to an account of the supposed cuts to the text, we encounter a very different Okes: Perhaps needless to say, this kind of fine-tuned intervention would require a vastly more complete understanding of the relationship between copy and printed page than the relatively straightforward operation of calculating the rough estimate that Okes allegedly got so catastrophically wrong.
And there are still more problems. If Vickers is right and the Quarto really is an edited version of the same text that also underlies the Folio, then Okes did not just cut: