The
inauguration events of 2017 afford the attentive listener an opportunity to
attend to sounds that extend beyond the realm of what is traditionally
considered music, but that are important nevertheless, perhaps even more so
than musical performances by individuals and ensembles. Here I am addressing the
ambient sounds associated with the proceedings, i.e. the
unintentional/unplanned or situational sounds that are audience- or
location-generated and that can subliminally yet powerfully contribute to the meaning
of the event. (Curtin 2010: 220) These sounds can transform the performance or
speech into an interactive experience, depending on the context.
The most
obvious of such sounds are those of approval, in the form of applause,
cheering, or laughter, and they may occur at any time during the inauguration
event, from approbation of the marching bands in the parade to responses to the
swearing in ceremony. These sounds tend to be affiliative (collective) rather
than individual, and can occur after, during, or before the musical performance
or speech, functioning as corporate expressions of affirmation. (Bull 2006) However,
applause can also serve “as a vehicle for audience empowerment” (Heim 2016:
31), hence redirecting attention towards the listeners as performers
themselves. As such their sounds take an active role in shaping the event
experience. The audience can also withhold approval, as much through silence as
through vocal expressions of displeasure.
The sonic communication
of disapproval in its various manifestations has always contributed to the
political scene, but it acquired a potentially new level of significance at the
party conventions of 2016, both of which featured prominent displays of
displeasure through booing. Research has revealed that, as a form of collective
behavior, booing differs from the spontaneity of applause: “booing is usually
delayed and is coordinated primarily by audience members monitoring each
other’s conduct so as to respond together.” (Clayman 1993: 110) Other sounding
forms of disapprobation depend on its degree, starting with murmuring and
sporadic boo-calls (or whistles in European contexts), through corporate booing
and individual shouting, to attempts to shout down—silence—or heckle the
performer or speaker. All of these expressions rely upon the primary tactic available
to audiences to vent their dissatisfaction: sound.
It is
unlikely that any of the musical performances connected with the inauguration would
experience sonic disruptions of the kind described above. However, other
interesting sound-related phenomena may occur, such as the unintentional
collision of music from adjacent marching bands or different aural
perspectives—points of audition—afforded by the microphone placements of the sound
team for the indoor events. And the applause itself can vary in quality,
depending on length, dynamics, and volume, the intensity and duration
indicating level of approval.
The
listener should pay attention to all of the sounds described above, as well as
any that may be heard alongside the outdoor events, such as sounds from the
environment (bird song, wind, traffic noises, sirens) or that encroach upon the
proceedings like protester chants and reporter commentary (coverage of the
parades and indoor activities). It will be interesting to observe the oratory
of the speeches, especially Trump’s, since he will undoubtedly use a number of
identified rhetorical devices to draw applause, including naming (supporters or
opponents), expressing gratitude, taking a position, making a joke, and
explicitly asking for applause. (Bull & Miskinis 2015: 522-23)
Listening
to the sounds surrounding the inauguration should make it a more meaningful
experience for anyone among us, whatever their political affiliation.
REFERENCES
Bull,
Peter. “Invited and Uninvited Applause in Political Speeches.” British Journal of Social Psychology 45,
no. 3 (2006): 563-78.
Bull, Peter and Karolis
Miskinis. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology 34, no. 5 (2015): 521–38.
Clayman, Steven E.
“Booing: The Anatomy of a Disaffiliative Response.” American Sociological Review 58, no. 1 (1993): 110-30.
Curtin, Adrian.
“Defining and Reconstructing Theatre Sound.” In Theatre and Performance Design: A Reader in Scenography, edited by
Jane Collins and Andrew Nisbet, 218-22. New York: Routledge, 2010.
Heim, Caroline. Audience as Performer: The Changing Role of
Theatre Audiences in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Routledge, 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment