声波转向

IF 0.2 4区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
T. McEnaney
{"title":"声波转向","authors":"T. McEnaney","doi":"10.1353/dia.2019.0035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article approaches the sonic turn as a coherent set of methodological approaches across a variety of disciplines that begin with the publication of Emily Thompson’s The Soundscape of Modernity (2002) and Jonathan Sterne’s The Audible Past (2003), and provide an alternative to the Saussurean edict to ignore the semiotic qualities of material sound. These texts and those published in their wake proceed with an emphasis on the detail of sound as an isolated object of study, but also sound as a more general principle of selection beyond “music” or “speech”; a reorientation to denaturalize hearing and reconceive listening practices as historically contingent, material, and social techniques; the need for a media archaeology that links technology and technique without falling into “impact histories” or “media determinism.” While the sonic turn can be capacious, the polemical approach taken in this essay opposes an uncritical affective “vibrational ontology” and a poststructuralist understanding of sound as supplement. Instead, the essay highlights the importance of scholarship that situates Black, Latin American, and disability studies as central to research into how audile techniques bring together the material and the symbolic to hear how historical cultures have constructed ontologies by separating sound from language in order to create and sustain hierarchies of power between the human and the nonhuman, the abled and the disabled, the lettered and the listeners.","PeriodicalId":46840,"journal":{"name":"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/dia.2019.0035","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Sonic Turn\",\"authors\":\"T. McEnaney\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/dia.2019.0035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:This article approaches the sonic turn as a coherent set of methodological approaches across a variety of disciplines that begin with the publication of Emily Thompson’s The Soundscape of Modernity (2002) and Jonathan Sterne’s The Audible Past (2003), and provide an alternative to the Saussurean edict to ignore the semiotic qualities of material sound. These texts and those published in their wake proceed with an emphasis on the detail of sound as an isolated object of study, but also sound as a more general principle of selection beyond “music” or “speech”; a reorientation to denaturalize hearing and reconceive listening practices as historically contingent, material, and social techniques; the need for a media archaeology that links technology and technique without falling into “impact histories” or “media determinism.” While the sonic turn can be capacious, the polemical approach taken in this essay opposes an uncritical affective “vibrational ontology” and a poststructuralist understanding of sound as supplement. Instead, the essay highlights the importance of scholarship that situates Black, Latin American, and disability studies as central to research into how audile techniques bring together the material and the symbolic to hear how historical cultures have constructed ontologies by separating sound from language in order to create and sustain hierarchies of power between the human and the nonhuman, the abled and the disabled, the lettered and the listeners.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46840,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/dia.2019.0035\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/dia.2019.0035\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/dia.2019.0035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

摘要:本文从艾米丽·汤普森(Emily Thompson)的《现代性的声景》(2002)和乔纳森·斯特恩(Jonathan Sterne)的《可听的过去》(2003)的出版开始,将声音转向作为一套连贯的方法论方法,涵盖了多个学科,并为索绪尔法令提供了一种替代方案,以忽视物质声音的符号学性质。这些文本和随后发表的文本都强调声音的细节,将其作为一个孤立的研究对象,但也强调声音是一个超越“音乐”或“言语”的更普遍的选择原则;重新定位,使听力变性,并将听力实践重新视为历史上的偶然性、物质性和社会技术;需要一种媒介考古学,将技术和技术联系起来,而不陷入“影响历史”或“媒介决定论”。虽然声音转向可能很广泛,但本文所采用的辩论方法反对不加批判的情感“振动本体论”和对声音的后结构主义理解作为补充。相反,这篇文章强调了学术的重要性,将黑人、拉丁美洲和残疾研究定位为研究听觉技术如何将材料和象征结合在一起的核心,以了解历史文化如何通过将声音与语言分离来构建本体论,从而创造和维持人类与非人类之间的权力等级制度,有能力的人和残疾人,有文字的人和听众。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Sonic Turn
Abstract:This article approaches the sonic turn as a coherent set of methodological approaches across a variety of disciplines that begin with the publication of Emily Thompson’s The Soundscape of Modernity (2002) and Jonathan Sterne’s The Audible Past (2003), and provide an alternative to the Saussurean edict to ignore the semiotic qualities of material sound. These texts and those published in their wake proceed with an emphasis on the detail of sound as an isolated object of study, but also sound as a more general principle of selection beyond “music” or “speech”; a reorientation to denaturalize hearing and reconceive listening practices as historically contingent, material, and social techniques; the need for a media archaeology that links technology and technique without falling into “impact histories” or “media determinism.” While the sonic turn can be capacious, the polemical approach taken in this essay opposes an uncritical affective “vibrational ontology” and a poststructuralist understanding of sound as supplement. Instead, the essay highlights the importance of scholarship that situates Black, Latin American, and disability studies as central to research into how audile techniques bring together the material and the symbolic to hear how historical cultures have constructed ontologies by separating sound from language in order to create and sustain hierarchies of power between the human and the nonhuman, the abled and the disabled, the lettered and the listeners.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM
DIACRITICS-A REVIEW OF CONTEMPORARY CRITICISM LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: For over thirty years, diacritics has been an exceptional and influential forum for scholars writing on the problems of literary criticism. Each issue features articles in which contributors compare and analyze books on particular theoretical works and develop their own positions on the theses, methods, and theoretical implications of those works.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信