Toward an Anthropology of Ambient Sound

Christine Guillebaud

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN:
  9781138801271
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317625926
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Anthropology
• Index: Social Sciences

This volume approaches the issue of ambient sound through the ethnographic exploration of different cultural contexts including Italy, India, Egypt, France, Ethiopia, Scotland, Spain, Portugal, and Japan. It examines social, religious, and aesthetic conceptions of sound environments, what types of action or agency are attributed to them, and what bodies of knowledge exist concerning them. Contributors shed new light on these sensory environments by focusing not only on their form and internal dynamics, but also on their wider social and cultural environment. The multimedia documents of this volume may be consulted at the address: milson.fr/routledge_media.

Part I
Listening into Others

1
Noising the City

Revealing Popular Neapolitan “Soundciabilities” in Pyrotechnical Practices

Olivier Féraud

Daily social postures, as can be observed in most popular areas of Naples, often show particular sonic intentionalities. Sonorous attitudes demonstrated in interactional situations in public spaces where inhabitants convene and converse from windows, balconies and streets illustrate the community’s sociability strategies. A set of these invisible sociability strategies can be unveiled by listening to the place they occupy in the public space. This kind of “soundciability” is the subject of this chapter, as observable in the Neapolitan context.

Even if many current studies deal with human perceptive dimensions of the sonic environment, their methodologies rarely properly attest to an ethnographical approach. Deep and close observation performed over a relatively long period of time of the way people practice, listen to and produce their sonic environments lets us tackle some social and cultural aspects to which neither classical acoustical nor psycho-perceptive approaches give access. Using categorical questionnaires or quantitative evaluations, these approaches usually focus on individuals’ perceptive processes, or are limited to quantitative measurements of acoustical phenomena, giving priority to experimental protocols that ignore or do not give enough importance to the sociocultural dimension of the sonic relation between people and their environment on one hand, and between people as sociocultural groups on the other hand.¹ The ethnographical approach lets us focus on the fact that the sonic dimension of many human contexts can often be an explicit mark of social organization and social relations. Despite the development of the anthropology of senses that, among other things, pointed to an occularcentric worldview (Howes 1991), and in spite of audition being considered as a less minor sense than olfaction, touch or taste in the Western system of thought, sound has only recently been taken into consideration in social and cultural studies. The introduction of sonic preoccupations into anthropological field research (Feld 1994, Ricci 1999) is closely linked to the popularity of the term “soundscape”. Originating in an eco-art background (Schafer 1977, Truax 1978), soundscape was developed later within the artistic field (Dauby 2004) and the sound ecology field.² The term is now quite widespread in different fields, such as perception of environment (Amphoux 1994), psychoacoustics (Dubois et al. 2006), bioacoustics (Oba 2006), environmental acoustics, urban studies or history of senses (Corbin 1994, Fritz 2000, Gutton 2000). Following the epistemological positions of these studies, soundscape can be used as a theoretical or methodological tool, or as a concept, in order to reveal a variety of qualitative aspects, such as assessment, identification, spatial positioning, meaning or aesthetic reception.

Even if these ambient studies attest to a real attention to human reception of ambient sounds, the term “ambiance” is often used as a global sensitive perception of environment (Tixier 2011)³ mixing different senses and representations without really taking into account the actor’s sociocultural heritage. One could venture to say that the fact that these studies hardly surpass the individual level of perception hinders them from being considered as anthropological approaches. Furthermore, statistics never truly deeply reach social and cultural aspects. The problem may stem from the term “soundscape” itself. From a Shaferian “point of view”, listening to the “sounds of the world” would be equivalent to the contemplation of a panoramic viewpoint. Considering the relatedness between “soundscape” and “landscape”, the term inevitably induces a frontal positioning; it places the individual as a spectator in a position of contemplation. Although such a listening experience would be possible in a concert hall, listening to a recording represents only an isolated aural experience. It does not properly represent the everyday human sonic experience of surrounding sounds. In his criticism of the term “soundscape”, Tim Ingold compares sound to light more than to vision, recalling that sound “is neither mental nor material, but a phenomenon of experience” (Ingold 2007). Following this position, we do not hear a soundscape when we listen to our surroundings. In the same way light immerses, “sound is not the object but the medium of our perception. It is what we hear in” (Ingold 2007). This question of the frontality of the sonic perception focuses on immersion by pointing out the fact that we “hear in” more than we “hear something”, as a commingling within a context.

Following this position, it is possible to affirm that just as being an inhabitant of a popular Neapolitan area implies taking part in the social environment and the interrelations, it also implies being a part of the sonic environment. Living in such a place as a part of the social web necessarily induces actively taking part, whether through sounds or silence, exuberantly or discreetly, in the social strategies of interaction. Within the popular Neapolitan context, such “soundcial” (socio-sonic) postures can be revealed by focusing on two types of notable sonic postures that show a particular investment of the acoustic and social space. The first type, in a microsocio-logical approach, is intrinsically linked to the daily outdoor life in popular areas: everyday interactional situations that imply the use of loud, or “public”, voices both in the domestic context and during vocal interactions with street sellers.⁴ The second is a sonic action linked to celebration: the popular practices of fireworks and firecrackers.⁵ Popular pyrotechnical practices can be considered as loud sonic actions that confront the urban sonic dimension convening a large audience, denoting demonstrativeness and expressivity. I would like to focus precisely on these pyrotechnical practices that involve particularly loud sonic action.

This reflection shall be carried out by discussing the term “noising”, considering it as a way of investing spaces through actions using loud sound as a medium. A definition of “noising” can be found in the Urban Dictionary as “the act of people causing a nuisance or making a noise”.⁶ “Noising” appears as an interesting term to express the way people intentionally use sounds as actions, to diffuse something other than exclusively sound, in a large space (in the sense of social—or public—space). Considering “noising” in this way provides an occasion to explore “noise” in terms that go beyond its simple negative connotations. Indeed, even if the term “noise” has been questioned by many authors,⁷ in most studies as well as, more generally, in the Western-oriented cultural history (Schwartz 2011), “noise” usually carries negative connotations, by referring to acoustic pollution and nuisance. Noise can be all the unwanted sounds masking what should be correctly heard or listened to, or what we do not usually pay attention to but is nevertheless disturbing or embarrassing. In this reflection, I suggest that we should cease framing noise “through a restrictive geometry of appreciation” (Schwartz 2011), but rather consider it as a porous sonic phenomenon involving people, intentionality and sociability.

Considering the way other Neapolitan sociocultural groups hear and stigmatize sonic environments of the Neapolitan popular areas as a dual pollution, that is sonic pollution as well as social pollution, it is easily understandable that noise is generally a question of judgment, an opinion projected toward others.⁸ Observations from the popular area inhabitants’ “point of listening” (Chion 1985) reveal that the sonic environment not only results from social disorganization and incivility but also from an intention, and that this intentionality is aimed more at producing loud, rather than disturbing, sounds. In French, the translation of the word “noise”, bruit, derives from the verb bruire, which means to produce sound. However, bruit or bruire is also linked to the idea of rumor, as in the first verse of this seventeenth-century French song: “Vostre bruit et vostre grant fame me fait vous amer plus que fame.”⁹ As Michel Chion (2007) relates, in classical French literature, like in Molière or Racine, “the term bruit […] does not refer to a sound, even less to an animal cry, but to news, fame, reputation, honor (or dishonor), quarrel or rumor…” We will retain this meaning, considering that noising, in such a popular Neapolitan context, does not entail making untimely noises but rather a way of making oneself public, as a commingling with the social network. The aim of this reflection is to reveal what can be expressed behind the loudness of such social postures. We will not only explore what Michel de Certeau (1994) calls “ways of doing”, but also listen to some Neapolitan “ways of noising”.

Firework Practices as Acts of Noising the City

Fireworks let us see how intentional sonic acts can be extended to the level of the city. Popular practices of fireworks exemplify social, ritual and emotional ways of being noisy in the streets, of making the streets noisy and of noising the city. A strong taste and a shared interest for fireworks are clearly present in the Neapolitan context. Fireworks are experienced as a properly traditional way of expressing celebration. More generally, fireworks are claimed as a Vesuvian tradition by all Neapolitans who feel a sense of cultural belonging to their region, in reference to the Neapolitan craft industry, the Neapolitan pyrotechnical reputation and the historical background.

• Document 1: In the street [2’26”]. Olivier Féraud 2008. A boy expressly goes into the streets after the New Year’s family midnight festivities to use fireworks. For many people, fireworks have to be used down in the street. It is a way of investing and appropriating the street as the space of noise at this moment.

The practice of firecrackers (called botti) and fireworks (commonly called fuocchi) has increased in the last decades, even if some public security awareness campaigns have recently tried to curb it. Traditionally used during the New Year’s celebrations and for religious processions, firecrackers have progressively come into competition with fireworks in various celebration frameworks, such as marriage or baptism. The firecracker lover’s attraction to more powerful explosives, linked to the immoderate use of fireworks among the popular classes, has provoked a loathing sentiment within the middle class. Oral testimonies easily associate firecracker noise to noise pollution, delinquency, incivility and social, economic and cultural instability. Yet, firecracker lovers insist on different values, such as pleasure, emotion and courage. For young firecracker lovers who consider themselves as street boys, firing impressive and noisy explosives allows them to experience and confront the fragility of the body with the potential destructive danger of fire, power and loudness. During this experience of explosion, sound and smoke, the skin, ears and nose are challenged through something that represents a set of cultural values experienced as a way of living the image of a popular Neapolitanity tinged with economic instability, social violence and traditionalism. Through the botti and fuocchi dialectic, distinct realities coexist. Observing these different practices in their own settings reveals divergent relations with the sonic environment and the public spaces.

Fireworks and Firecrackers: Some Collective Representations

Before pursuing further, it is important to return to the crucial distinction between fireworks and firecrackers. This distinction is technical as well as socioeconomic and cultural. Classical fireworks, called fuocchi (diminutive

Figure 1.1 Boys discussing after having fired a big candela romana in the street around 01:00 a.m. on New Year’s night in the Quartieri Spagnoli.

Photo: Olivier Féraud (2005).

of fuocchi d’artificio), are first of all used and appreciated for the art of light. That is the reason why they are also called luce colorate (colored light). Loud sound is, of course, also an important dimension. But unlike fire-crackers, the aural appreciation is not the noisy aspect of the sonic production. As domesticated noise, fireworks produce a structured configuration of whistles and well laid-out detonations, which are coordinated with the light choreography.

A third designation is Bengali. The visual fireworks are often considered as less local than firecrackers. On one hand, this denomination reminds us that, in popular thinking, fireworks were first a Chinese invention. Bengali is also a hazy “orientalist” reference to the actual Neapolitan Chinese market without taking into account any precise geographical origin.¹⁰ The Chinese community actually occupies a large part of the economic scene in Naples, which is one of the biggest commercial ports in Italy. Inasmuch, the majority of the family-used low-cost fireworks are Chinese products. Traditionalist discourses criticize this market, insisting on the popular and accessible nature of this product that encouraged some abusive uses, like F1, a 55-year-old man employed in the social administration: “[…] a few years ago, families called the pyrotechnist out for important fireworks… now everything is Chinese products!”

Critics also point out security arguments, denouncing the cheap quality of these Chinese products, compared to the historical Neapolitan firework i...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of Figures
• List of Tables
• List of Audiovisual Documents
• List of Contributors
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: Multiple Listenings: Anthropology of Sound Worlds
• PART I Listening into Others
• PART II Sound Displays and Social Effects
• PART III Sound Identity and Locality
• PART IV Sound Arts and Anthropology
• Afterword: The Sonic Attunement of Social Life
• Index