|
index
Internet Article
(R)everse
(E)ngineering (V)irtual Fabrications
Keith
Armstrong
Fabrication:
the making by art and/or labour, an untruthful statement; to fake or
to forge the process of manufacturing. Macquarie
Dictionary
A festival based on new
fabrications, and "ideas" about music and sound (to paraphrase
executive director Zane Trow) inspires much questioning, especially
when it brings so many ideas people together. My brain started ticking
when David Toop commented to me that performance was no longer a useful
term for much of the electronic-based sound-making practices at REV.
We are in a phase of transition he suggested, before expressing his
deep disquiet about the validity of his own sedentary performance
with a laptop.
Two ideal events
to develop questions around Toops problem with performativity
were fabrique, a cabaret of electronica and sonic electro-hybridity,
and Silent Movie, a live jamming session of REV artists to Russian
Dziga Vertovs revolutionary silent, Man With a Movie Camera
(1929).
- What do the interfaces
to REVs new media instruments contribute to the performative
experience? For example, Greg Jenkins pluckable, sonic cacti
spines, Amber Hansens jangly miked-up jewellery or the ubiquitous
laptops utilsed by Pimmon/Scanner/etc. And should we need to understand
them more fully in order to accept their roles in performance?
- What are the issues
of mapping that these new instruments imply? We understand the basic
mapping of a grand piano as being a relatively clear relationship
between finger velocity, subsequent mechanics, appropriate string
tension, physical collision and focussed sound emission. We know
what the performer is grappling with, so we focus on the sonics
rather than the mechanics of the experience. But its much
harder to know quite what these R(eal) and/or E(lectronic) and/or
V(irtual) instruments are, and herein, maybe, lies a problem.
We know that the computer long ago destroyed the relationship and
fixity between inputs and outputs. Forever. Hence new performance
tools based on computers allow deeply convoluted and dynamic mappings
of input action and ultimate sonic response.
- So, on that basis,
what were the virtually invisible sound artists Scanner and I/O
actually doing up there on the roof during the installation/performance
Biospheres, Secrets of a City? Was it performative? Now youd
never ask that irritating question of the venerable Jon Rose. His
virtuoso performance of an augmented string instrument, using the
violin and bow as interface to trigger a bank of sound generators
consummately succeeded in mapping action to sonic outcomes.
- At REV it seemed
that almost any device capable of either self-generating or responsively
generating electrical impulses was being employed as a playable
interface. For example, performance sense was made through the use
of inductive, magnetic coils (Andrew Kettle) or through miniature
microphones picking up surface textures (Michael Norris). There
were the resolutely digital instruments triggered in the main by
velocity sensitive synth keys, MIDI actuators or computer keystrokes
(aka Pimmon, Hydatid, Rene Wooller etc). Somewhere in between lay
a rather clunky fish-shaped device used to trigger granular-synthetics
via MIDI (Tim Opie) and a performer in a Yamaha MIDI body suit producing,
through rather mechanical movements, a broad range of sampled sounds
([de]CODE me directed by Lindsay Vickery).
- All of these diverse
forms of gadgetry were being used by their performers to create
sounds for subsequent processing, or to actuate virtual banks of
preset and ever changeable sounds. Then of course each performances
sound mixer could completely re-affect the balance of almost everything
before we finally heard it (Richard Wilding). All this became the
means for generating REVs new sounds. Needless to say,
any attempt at reverse engineering on the part of audiences was
largely futile.
- So what might a performer
do to help those of us who care, are curious or simply need to know?
Should those players, lit only by their laptop glows, apparently
devoid of fingers and face behind their flip up screens demystify
their mappings, given their choice to perform rather than be downloaded?
(In welcome contrast, REVs accompanying installations
each had an attendant on hand to explain and demonstrate, interface,
mapping and intent).
Many might be asking by now,
is this line of questioning simply a cul-de-sac? Is the desire/need-to-know
actually a major barrier to bringing new, electronically mediated forms
to a place worthy of the tag performance'?
This question is integrally
tied to how we choose to make the transition to new performance forms.
I for one hope it will be towards the transactions so characteristic
of performance forms that acknowledge their audiences as integral.
Toop is right and, by the
way, REV is definitely pushing the right combination of buttons
to get there.
REV
Festival, Brisbane Powerhouse, April 6
*copyright RealTime; www.realtimearts.net*
|