Category Archives: Text Sound

Text Sound Poetry

Away in a Manger

[play]Away in a Manger (2004)

If you like this piece, please consider donating to Shelter, a charity that deals with homelessness in the UK.

In 2004, back when I was doing my MA, I had just devised algorithms for automated cutting for Text Sound Poetry. I was mostly using these on political pundits, but when the holidays came around, I thought I could have my mac’s internal voice read some hymn lyrics and then do some cutting. The computer brightly proclaimed, ‘I love you, Lord Jesus!’ and I felt giddy with horror.

My partner at the time listened to it and said it was too cynical. So it sad on a hard drive for these last 11 years. It probably is too cynical for Christmas, but it’s not altogether out of place for this project.

This track is part of a larger project, ’12 days of Crimbo’, which will raise funds for homeless and/or LGBT charities.

Play

Are You a Feminist (Part 2)

[play] Are You a Feminist (Part 2) (2007)

I started making recordings for this piece well before I made the piece, when I recorded two women in Paris answering the question “Est-que ce tu es une feministe? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas?” (Are you a feminist? Why or why not?) Then, uncertain how to proceed with the material, I let it sit on my hard drive for over a year until Sula, one of the voices, contacted me asking if I wanted to play some music at ETC, a feminist hacker con.

Rather than do the piece entirely in French, I asked the same question in English to some of my American friends and then in German to some of the con attendees. All but one of the participants was put on the spot with the question. Part two uses the voices of Solène, Anna, and Aileen.

Some of the paramteres of this piece are controlled with a game pad.

Play

Are You a Feminist (Part 1)

[play] Are You a Feminist (Part 1) (2007)

I started making recordings for this piece well before I made the piece, when I recorded two women in Paris answering the question “Est-que ce tu es une feministe? Pourquoi ou pourquoi pas?” (Are you a feminist? Why or why not?) Then, uncertain how to proceed with the material, I let it sit on my hard drive for over a year until Sula, one of the voices, contacted me asking if I wanted to play some music at ETC, a feminist hacker con.

Rather than do the piece entirely in French, I asked the same question in English to some of my American friends and then in German to some of the con attendees. All but one of the participants was put on the spot with the question. Part one uses the voices of Kendra, Nick Dave and Sula.

Play

Savage Beasts

Savage Beasts
2005

To the right of Rush Limbaugh on the prison torture issue, there was Michael Savage, who advocated increasing prison torture and sticking lit dynamite in the anuses of Arab detainees. (Savage May 10-11, 2004)

I found a similarly racist clip from a morning show on NBS called Imus in the Morning, which was showing pictures of Palestinians mourning the death of Yassir Arafat. One of the voice-overs from the Imus show was calling the Palestinians “animals” and was advocating dropping “the bomb” on them and killing everyone. The other co-hosts laughed along with this idea. A week later, they played a clip of someone pretending to be General Patton, speaking about a real event in which an embedded reporter had just filmed footage of a US Marine shooting an injured, unarmed Iraqi insurgent. “Patton” used the term “raghead,” and the phrase “bearded fatwa fairy.” (Imus in the Morning) Imus’ racism was thus clearly linked to his homophobia. During the Arafat sequence,, one of the male voices said something about the “fat pig wife of [Arafat] living in Paris.” Another commentator, noting the emotion of the Palestinians said, “It’s like the worst Woodstock.” Hippies are liberals are feminists are Palestinians are ragheads are gay are women are Iraqis are French. Alien others are thus interchangeable. Every group is standing in for every other group. And while they laughed, one of the commentators kept repeating “animals” and “kill them all.”

As I worked on the piece, I became discouraged. NBC was forced to apologize for the content of the Imus show (“MSNBC apologized for racist commentary on Imus”), but the piece only reminded me of the left’s failure to turn torture into a mainstream issue. I decided that offensive statements about the desirability of torture were not enough to support the piece, as clearly, not enough people would care. Also, “here’s a guy saying something offensive” seemed too weak to carry a piece.

I decided to focus on the laughter. I looped the laughing track and played violent phrases from Imus and Savage on top. Thus the Imus men laugh hysterically at themselves and at Savage. The entertainment value of genocide, violence and torture is thus highlighted.

Play

Lock Up Your Children

Lock Up Your Children
2005

This piece explores the controversy surrounding Buster the Bunny. In one episode of this children’s show, the cartoon rabbit goes to visit a Vermont family headed by two moms. He says hi to the moms once in an extremely brief scene. This caused a controversy as the United States government withdrew funding for the show.

This piece uses clips of the controversy being discussed on Frontline, of Bill O’Reilly and other pundits discussing the controversy, and of Fred Phelps preaching some gospel truth.

Il y a un emission pour des enfants aux Etats-Unis que s’appelle “Buster the Bunny.” Une fois, le lapin animé, Buster, est allé au Vermont et a vu une famille lesbienne avec des enfants. Il a dit «bonjour» aux mères dans une scène breve. Il y a eu une grande dispute et le gouvernement a donné une réprimande à PBS.

Ce morceaux contient des extraits des nouvelles à propos de cette dispute, la voix de Bill O’Reilly (un présentateur), et de Fred Phelps qui prêche le vérité de l’évangile.

Play

Coulter Shock

Coulter Shock
2004

The piece starts with Anne Coulter’s unaltered quote, calling Clinton a scumbag, which is then followed with re-ordered phrases from her many media appearances. The second part of the piece takes a snapshot of the last pass of word reordering. That snapshot is broken into grains all of equal size. The play back algorithm plays back the grains in a moving window, making her stutter. On the second pass, the grains are four times smaller and the window is five times bigger. This goes on in a loop of decreasing grains and increasing window for about six minutes, until only the timbre of her speech remains audible.

More Information

Play

Rush to Excuse

Rush to Excuse
2004

Rush to Excuse applies granular synthesis to a 47″ sample of Rush Limbaugh’s radio oratory. There are two processes involved. The first cuts Mr. Limbaugh’s voice into hundreds of samples of equal length. These samples, or grains, are then analyzed to determine the average pitch for each. The second process cuts the same clip into unequal pieces based on silences, or pauses in speech. I mix the output of these processes together, repeating the first process several times with longer and longer grains. Content and pitch material are then juxtaposed.

In the sample used, Mr. Limbaugh excuses torture at American-run Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and mocks the Geneva Convention. He describes a photograph of a naked prisoner being threatened with a dog, and justifies it by claiming there’s no actual assault, the prisoner is merely being frightened. As it happens, a subsequent photograph shows the actual attack. On being apprised of this later in the program, Mr. Limbaugh offered a correction and a weak apology.

I use pundits as source material for text-sound composition both to explore the sounds of the human voice and to highlight the words and meanings in political speech. It’s harrowing work sometimes, but somebody’s got to do it.


Additional offsite comments for this piece

Play

Scitilopolitics

Scitilopolitics
2003

I read about an acoustical phenomenon where when researchers divided up recorded speech so that each consonant and vowel sound was separated, and then played back the recorded speech with all of the parts in correct order, but with each sound reversed, listeners were unable to detect the reversal. I decided that it might be interesting to write a piece that would make people aware of this phenomenon by crossing the threshold of inaudible reversal and audible reversal. I used a short speech that George Bush gave on terrorism and destroying American culture. The speech was nominally about terrorism, but on repeated listening, it became clear that it was more about causing American culture to shift rightward, to criticize Hollywood and to push the idea of individual responsibility instead of socialized responsibility. Because of the repeating of the speech, which gradually breaks down, the friendly experiencer listens carefully, grasping at meaning. The subtext is brought to the surface in that way.

The second part of the piece uses this process but in reverse. It uses a lesbian separatist philosophy text, Lesbian Philosophy: Explorations by Jeffner Allen (Palo Alto: Institute of Lesbian Studies, 1987). I picked out four phrases related to violence and terror. The ideas expressed were as radical as Bush’s but from the opposite ideological spectrum. I run the algorithm in the opposite direction, because I take the opposite view of the words. Allen also talks about violence, terrorism and victim hood, but unlike Bush, her words are ultimately empowering to her reader, giving her readers freedom instead of taking it away. Her viewpoint is equally extremist, but exists in reaction to what Bush proposes.

I found that the second movement made the piece much more bearable. Listening to George Bush talk about destroying culture for five minutes made me very tense, but the soothing voice of Jessica Feldman reading about women uprising acted as an anecdote to Bush.

Play