Literature and Sound
7 Followers
Recent papers in Literature and Sound
Vincent Broqua, Dirk Weissmann (dir.), Sound / Writing : traduire-écrire entre le son et le sens, Homophonic translation – traducson – Oberflächenübersetzung, Paris, éditions des archives contemporaines, 2019, 356 p., ISBN :... more
Vincent Broqua, Dirk Weissmann (dir.), Sound / Writing : traduire-écrire entre le son et le sens, Homophonic translation – traducson – Oberflächenübersetzung, Paris, éditions des archives contemporaines, 2019, 356 p., ISBN : 9782813002686.
Ouvrage disponible intégralement en Open Acces sur le site de l'éditeur :
http://www.archivescontemporaines.com/books/9782813002686
Présentation :
Depuis une bonne cinquantaine d’années, la traduction homophonique — aussi connue sous le nom de traducson ou de traduction de surface (de l’allemand Oberflächenübersetzung) — a fait son entrée dans le champ littéraire international, où elle est pratiquée par un nombre croissant d’écrivains, aux États-Unis, en Allemagne, en France et au-delà. À la suite de quelques pionniers tels que Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl ou les membres du groupe Oulipo, ce genre littéraire hétérodoxe, entre traduction et création, s’est largement diffusé sur le plan international, notamment en poésie. Dans la mesure où elle entend transposer dans une autre langue les sonorités d’un texte sans se préoccuper, en premier lieu, de son contenu sémantique, la traduction homophonique peut faire l’effet d’une provocation, d’un canular. Or, en jouant le son contre le sens, le populaire contre le savant, le profane contre le sacré, cette pratique apparaît également comme un vecteur privilégié pour interroger, subvertir, déconstruire nos idées sur la langue, la traduction et la littérature.
Homophonic translation — also known as ‘sound translation’ or ‘surface translation’ (from the German: Oberflächenübersetzung) — made its entry into the international literary field a good fifty years ago at least, and is today practiced by a growing number of writers in the United States, Germany, France, and many other countries. Following such pioneers as Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl, and the members of the Oulipo, this heterodox literary genre, falling somewhere between translation and creation, has spread widely across the international map, particularly in the realm of poetry. Consisting in the transposition of the sound qualities of a source text into another language without initially addressing that text’s meaning, homophonic translation may act as a challenge, or a provocation, or even a hoax. However, by playing sound against meaning, lowbrow against highbrow, the profane against the sacred, this technique also appears as a privileged vehicle to question, subvert, deconstruct our ideas on language, translation, and literature.
Ouvrage disponible intégralement en Open Acces sur le site de l'éditeur :
http://www.archivescontemporaines.com/books/9782813002686
Présentation :
Depuis une bonne cinquantaine d’années, la traduction homophonique — aussi connue sous le nom de traducson ou de traduction de surface (de l’allemand Oberflächenübersetzung) — a fait son entrée dans le champ littéraire international, où elle est pratiquée par un nombre croissant d’écrivains, aux États-Unis, en Allemagne, en France et au-delà. À la suite de quelques pionniers tels que Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl ou les membres du groupe Oulipo, ce genre littéraire hétérodoxe, entre traduction et création, s’est largement diffusé sur le plan international, notamment en poésie. Dans la mesure où elle entend transposer dans une autre langue les sonorités d’un texte sans se préoccuper, en premier lieu, de son contenu sémantique, la traduction homophonique peut faire l’effet d’une provocation, d’un canular. Or, en jouant le son contre le sens, le populaire contre le savant, le profane contre le sacré, cette pratique apparaît également comme un vecteur privilégié pour interroger, subvertir, déconstruire nos idées sur la langue, la traduction et la littérature.
Homophonic translation — also known as ‘sound translation’ or ‘surface translation’ (from the German: Oberflächenübersetzung) — made its entry into the international literary field a good fifty years ago at least, and is today practiced by a growing number of writers in the United States, Germany, France, and many other countries. Following such pioneers as Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl, and the members of the Oulipo, this heterodox literary genre, falling somewhere between translation and creation, has spread widely across the international map, particularly in the realm of poetry. Consisting in the transposition of the sound qualities of a source text into another language without initially addressing that text’s meaning, homophonic translation may act as a challenge, or a provocation, or even a hoax. However, by playing sound against meaning, lowbrow against highbrow, the profane against the sacred, this technique also appears as a privileged vehicle to question, subvert, deconstruct our ideas on language, translation, and literature.
CALL FOR PAPERS [French and German Version: see PDF] Sound / Writing: On Homophonic Translation International Conference, Paris, November 17-19, 2016 Organizers: Vincent Broqua (University of Paris at Saint-Denis) and Dirk Weissmann... more
CALL FOR PAPERS
[French and German Version: see PDF]
Sound / Writing: On Homophonic Translation
International Conference, Paris, November 17-19, 2016
Organizers:
Vincent Broqua (University of Paris at Saint-Denis) and
Dirk Weissmann (University of Paris at Créteil)
Sponsored by
EA Transferts critiques et dynamiques des savoirs, Université Paris-8, Vincennes–Saint-Denis
Institut des Mondes Anglophone, Germanique et Roman (IMAGER), Université Paris-Est Créteil
Équipe Multilinguisme, Traduction, Création de l’Institut des Textes et Manuscrits Modernes (ITEM),
CNRS/École normale supérieure
Labex TransferS, ENS/Collège de France/CNRS/PSL
Melodia E. Jones Chair, State University of New York at Buffalo
Keynote-Speakers: Charles Bernstein, Jean-Jacques Lecercle, Jacques Roubaud
Scientific committee: Olga Anokhina (Centre national de la recherche scientifique, CNRS, Paris, France), Camille Bloomfield (Université Paris-13 Nord/UMR THALIM Université Paris-3, France), Antoine Cazé (Université Paris-Diderot, Paris-7, France), Christine Ivanovic (Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria), Jacques Lajarrige (Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès, France), Abigail Lang (Université Paris-Diderot, Paris-7, France), Sylvie Le Moël (Université Paris-Est Créteil, France), Jean-Jacques Poucel (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA), Jean-François Puff (Université Jean Monnet Saint-Étienne, France), Arnaud Regnauld (Université Paris-8 Vincennes–Saint-Denis, France), Monika Schmitz-Emans (Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany), Eckhard Schumacher (Ernst Moritz Arndt Universität Greifswald, Germany), Cole Swensen (Brown University, Providence, USA), Claus Telge (Osaka University, Japan), Jean-Jacques Thomas (State University of New York at Buffalo, USA)
For the past fifty years, homophonic translation (traduction homophonique, sound translation, Oberflächenübersetzung) has been practiced internationally by an ever-increasing number of writers from the USA, the UK, Germany, France and beyond. Following pioneers such as Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl and members of the Oulipo group, this heterodox genre (between translation and creation) has spread widely, to the point where it is among the exercises practiced in creative writing classes. Although some consider it as an unacceptable, illegitimate, and unethical practice, it is nonetheless true that such an approach to translation has acquired a crucial place within experimental writing, and notably in the poetic field.
Because it strives to transpose the sound aspect of a given text into an other language without first paying attention to lexical meaning, homophonic translation can seem as a provocation, or even a Dadaist prank, in that it deliberately breaks with the demands of transparency and questions our utilitarian relation to language. At the same time, because it refuses to consider language as immaterial and because it focuses on what Ezra Pound called melopeia – i.e. the musical properties of poetic texts that often get obscured by semantic concerns – it constitutes an exceptional vector for the analysis, deconstruction and refashioning of poetic and theoretical discourses.
Without necessarily renouncing meaning or praising non-sense, homophonic translation seeks to move beyond a restrictive conception of literary intentionality through a reappraisal of the materiality of language, in order to give language a new visibility. Moreover, homophonic translation also prompts a redefinition of the relation between an original and its translation. Via a paradoxical valorization of opacity, it disfigures the authority of the original text, leading to what Charles Bernstein calls the “revenge of the translator.” Beyond its parodic aim when it concerns great works of the western tradition (such as Jandl’s translation of Wordsworth), homophonic translation also contains a subversive and critical dimension that applies to the fields of both literature and translation. It is worth wondering, as Rick Snyder does, why a homophonic translation of Celan is dubious whereas Catullus by Zukofsky or Christopher Logue’s Iliad are ludic or “a way to destabilize a dominant poetics.”
In spite of the fact that many great poets have practiced homophonic translation, it has largely been ignored by international academic research. Thus, not a single collective book or monograph can be read on the subject. The main aim of this first international conference devoted to homophonic translation will thus be to assess the situation, starting with the literary domains where the genre appeared in the 1950s: the United States/UK, France and Germany. This geographical and linguistic framing is not intended to be restrictive, but simply offers a starting point for our transnational comparative perspective.
This conference does not intend to reach a univocal and normative definition of such a practice, but rather to reveal its various realizations through time and their links to the evolution of poetic forms and of approaches to literary translation. Indeed, purely homophonic translations are rare, and ‘orthodox’ translations done by poets show a high sensibility to the musicality of the translated text, and might even use homophonic procedures. Such intertwined relations between musicality and meaning, between creation and reproduction, between literature and translation will be at the heart of our investigations. A poetics of translation will be thus created. For some poets, it may become a politics of translation.
Another main goal of this event is to trace the genealogy of homophonic translation, of its precursors, models and inspirations, from historical avant-gardes of the 20th century to nursery rhymes and Victorian nonsense poetry, to Baroque macaronic poetry. Equally important will be the links between popular and non-popular genres, between literary research and ludic approaches to language. We welcome case studies as well as synthetic studies in a historical or theoretical perspective. We will particularly welcome propositions on the following questions and themes:
• the history and the various forms of (interlingual) homophonic translation, especially in the USA/UK, France and Germany;
• the origins of homophonic translation and its links to other techniques, forms and genres (homophonic adaptation, macaronic poetry, nonsense poetry, nursery rimes, sound poetry, bruitism, mixed language, holorhyme, etc.);
• homophonic translation and poetry writing; translating homophonic poetry-translation ; homophonic translation and multilingual literature;
• homophonic translation and popular culture (dog latin, mondegreen, soramimi, etc.);
• collective homophonic translation (poet groups, collaborative translation, creative writing teaching, etc.);
• the mutual influence of homophonic translation and other poetry translation methods, translation theory;
• homophonic translation between parody and theory;
• critical responses to homophonic translation.
Papers may be written in English, French, or German. Proposals (250-300 words and a bio-bibliographic note) should be sent before March 1st, 2016 to homophonic.translation.2016@gmail.com. Proposals will be selected before May 30, 2016.
Among the authors to be considered:
Gary Barwin, Marcel Bénabou, Charles Bernstein, Rolf-Dieter Brinkmann, Ann Cotten, Stacy Doris, Ulrike Draesner, Frédéric Forte, Christian Hawkey, Jeff Hilson, Paul Hoover, John Hulme, Ernst Jandl, Pierre Joris, Robert Kelly, Pierre Klossowski, Franz Josef Knape, Norbert Lange, François Le Lionnais, Tony Leuzzi, Christopher Logues, Léonce W. Lupette, Steve McCaffery, André Markowicz, David Melnik, bp Nichol, Oulipo, Oskar Pastior, Ezra Pound, Pascal Poyet, Stephen Rodefer, Ralf-Rainer Rygulla, Armand Robin, Ron Silliman, Julian Tuwim, Philip Terry, Chris Tysh, Louis Van Rooten, Versatorium assortiation, Bénédicte Vilgrain, Rosmarie Waldrop, Uljana Wolf, Peter Waterhouse, Louis Zukofsky…
[French and German Version: see PDF]
Sound / Writing: On Homophonic Translation
International Conference, Paris, November 17-19, 2016
Organizers:
Vincent Broqua (University of Paris at Saint-Denis) and
Dirk Weissmann (University of Paris at Créteil)
Sponsored by
EA Transferts critiques et dynamiques des savoirs, Université Paris-8, Vincennes–Saint-Denis
Institut des Mondes Anglophone, Germanique et Roman (IMAGER), Université Paris-Est Créteil
Équipe Multilinguisme, Traduction, Création de l’Institut des Textes et Manuscrits Modernes (ITEM),
CNRS/École normale supérieure
Labex TransferS, ENS/Collège de France/CNRS/PSL
Melodia E. Jones Chair, State University of New York at Buffalo
Keynote-Speakers: Charles Bernstein, Jean-Jacques Lecercle, Jacques Roubaud
Scientific committee: Olga Anokhina (Centre national de la recherche scientifique, CNRS, Paris, France), Camille Bloomfield (Université Paris-13 Nord/UMR THALIM Université Paris-3, France), Antoine Cazé (Université Paris-Diderot, Paris-7, France), Christine Ivanovic (Universität Wien, Vienna, Austria), Jacques Lajarrige (Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès, France), Abigail Lang (Université Paris-Diderot, Paris-7, France), Sylvie Le Moël (Université Paris-Est Créteil, France), Jean-Jacques Poucel (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA), Jean-François Puff (Université Jean Monnet Saint-Étienne, France), Arnaud Regnauld (Université Paris-8 Vincennes–Saint-Denis, France), Monika Schmitz-Emans (Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Germany), Eckhard Schumacher (Ernst Moritz Arndt Universität Greifswald, Germany), Cole Swensen (Brown University, Providence, USA), Claus Telge (Osaka University, Japan), Jean-Jacques Thomas (State University of New York at Buffalo, USA)
For the past fifty years, homophonic translation (traduction homophonique, sound translation, Oberflächenübersetzung) has been practiced internationally by an ever-increasing number of writers from the USA, the UK, Germany, France and beyond. Following pioneers such as Louis Zukofsky, Ernst Jandl and members of the Oulipo group, this heterodox genre (between translation and creation) has spread widely, to the point where it is among the exercises practiced in creative writing classes. Although some consider it as an unacceptable, illegitimate, and unethical practice, it is nonetheless true that such an approach to translation has acquired a crucial place within experimental writing, and notably in the poetic field.
Because it strives to transpose the sound aspect of a given text into an other language without first paying attention to lexical meaning, homophonic translation can seem as a provocation, or even a Dadaist prank, in that it deliberately breaks with the demands of transparency and questions our utilitarian relation to language. At the same time, because it refuses to consider language as immaterial and because it focuses on what Ezra Pound called melopeia – i.e. the musical properties of poetic texts that often get obscured by semantic concerns – it constitutes an exceptional vector for the analysis, deconstruction and refashioning of poetic and theoretical discourses.
Without necessarily renouncing meaning or praising non-sense, homophonic translation seeks to move beyond a restrictive conception of literary intentionality through a reappraisal of the materiality of language, in order to give language a new visibility. Moreover, homophonic translation also prompts a redefinition of the relation between an original and its translation. Via a paradoxical valorization of opacity, it disfigures the authority of the original text, leading to what Charles Bernstein calls the “revenge of the translator.” Beyond its parodic aim when it concerns great works of the western tradition (such as Jandl’s translation of Wordsworth), homophonic translation also contains a subversive and critical dimension that applies to the fields of both literature and translation. It is worth wondering, as Rick Snyder does, why a homophonic translation of Celan is dubious whereas Catullus by Zukofsky or Christopher Logue’s Iliad are ludic or “a way to destabilize a dominant poetics.”
In spite of the fact that many great poets have practiced homophonic translation, it has largely been ignored by international academic research. Thus, not a single collective book or monograph can be read on the subject. The main aim of this first international conference devoted to homophonic translation will thus be to assess the situation, starting with the literary domains where the genre appeared in the 1950s: the United States/UK, France and Germany. This geographical and linguistic framing is not intended to be restrictive, but simply offers a starting point for our transnational comparative perspective.
This conference does not intend to reach a univocal and normative definition of such a practice, but rather to reveal its various realizations through time and their links to the evolution of poetic forms and of approaches to literary translation. Indeed, purely homophonic translations are rare, and ‘orthodox’ translations done by poets show a high sensibility to the musicality of the translated text, and might even use homophonic procedures. Such intertwined relations between musicality and meaning, between creation and reproduction, between literature and translation will be at the heart of our investigations. A poetics of translation will be thus created. For some poets, it may become a politics of translation.
Another main goal of this event is to trace the genealogy of homophonic translation, of its precursors, models and inspirations, from historical avant-gardes of the 20th century to nursery rhymes and Victorian nonsense poetry, to Baroque macaronic poetry. Equally important will be the links between popular and non-popular genres, between literary research and ludic approaches to language. We welcome case studies as well as synthetic studies in a historical or theoretical perspective. We will particularly welcome propositions on the following questions and themes:
• the history and the various forms of (interlingual) homophonic translation, especially in the USA/UK, France and Germany;
• the origins of homophonic translation and its links to other techniques, forms and genres (homophonic adaptation, macaronic poetry, nonsense poetry, nursery rimes, sound poetry, bruitism, mixed language, holorhyme, etc.);
• homophonic translation and poetry writing; translating homophonic poetry-translation ; homophonic translation and multilingual literature;
• homophonic translation and popular culture (dog latin, mondegreen, soramimi, etc.);
• collective homophonic translation (poet groups, collaborative translation, creative writing teaching, etc.);
• the mutual influence of homophonic translation and other poetry translation methods, translation theory;
• homophonic translation between parody and theory;
• critical responses to homophonic translation.
Papers may be written in English, French, or German. Proposals (250-300 words and a bio-bibliographic note) should be sent before March 1st, 2016 to homophonic.translation.2016@gmail.com. Proposals will be selected before May 30, 2016.
Among the authors to be considered:
Gary Barwin, Marcel Bénabou, Charles Bernstein, Rolf-Dieter Brinkmann, Ann Cotten, Stacy Doris, Ulrike Draesner, Frédéric Forte, Christian Hawkey, Jeff Hilson, Paul Hoover, John Hulme, Ernst Jandl, Pierre Joris, Robert Kelly, Pierre Klossowski, Franz Josef Knape, Norbert Lange, François Le Lionnais, Tony Leuzzi, Christopher Logues, Léonce W. Lupette, Steve McCaffery, André Markowicz, David Melnik, bp Nichol, Oulipo, Oskar Pastior, Ezra Pound, Pascal Poyet, Stephen Rodefer, Ralf-Rainer Rygulla, Armand Robin, Ron Silliman, Julian Tuwim, Philip Terry, Chris Tysh, Louis Van Rooten, Versatorium assortiation, Bénédicte Vilgrain, Rosmarie Waldrop, Uljana Wolf, Peter Waterhouse, Louis Zukofsky…
Er(r)go…, fiasko mowy – prosimy zachować ciszę, bo cisza jest skarbnicą dźwięków, ich nasyceniem, kumulacją brzmień. A dalej: cisza aktywna, energia ciszy, cisza dźwięków, język poetycki jako muzyka ciszy, pejzaż dźwięku, milczenie... more
Er(r)go…,
fiasko mowy – prosimy zachować ciszę, bo cisza jest skarbnicą dźwięków, ich nasyceniem, kumulacją brzmień. A dalej: cisza aktywna, energia ciszy, cisza dźwięków, język poetycki jako muzyka ciszy, pejzaż dźwięku, milczenie roślin, performatywność ciszy. Wnikając w ciszę, docieramy do dźwiękowego świata i do wszystkiego, co ciszą nie jest: intonarumori – rumorarmonio, ululatori, rombator, scoppiatori, sibilatori. Szmery, szumy, hałasy, stuki, zgrzytów wycie, jęki, śmiechy, głosy ludzi i zwierząt, warkot, łoskot, huk, trzaski, skrzypienia, szurania, tarcia, świsty, syki, sapania, piknięcia i puknięcia, muzyka maszyn, brzmieniowe akordy słów, harmonia szmerów, wibracje i rezonowanie, dźwięki niechciane. Nicowanie obecności i nieobecności – fizjologia wewnętrzna, niema dramatyzacja serca i oddechu: szumy, jęknięcia, wdechy i wydechy, periodyczne pulsy. Jęknięcia, chrząknięcia, gruchanie, świsty i dmuchnięcia, ciche uderzenia górnej i dolnej wargi śpiewaczki, ciche pocieranie korpusu instrumentu.
Cisza zmienia się w grzmot. Hałas industrialny: maszyny brzmią, świszczą, wyją, huczą, łomocą, sapią, syczą, gwiżdżą, dzwonią, kują, jazgoczą, świdrują, zgrzytają, kłapią, biją, warkoczą, szumią. Muzyka jako efekt ciszy – to cisza jest tym, co daje siłę dźwiękom, czyni ciemność mniej głuchą, gdy najmniejszy szmer staje się zjawą. Milczący fortepian – sztuka hałasów i 4’33”. I kilka postaci: Gerard Manley Hopkins, Salvatore Sciarrino, John Cage, Jacques Lacan, Arnold Schoenberg, Wassily Kandinsky, Maria Pappenheim, Anna O., Georges Bataille, Maurice Blanchot, Michel Leris, Colette Peignot, Francesca Woodman, Bracha L. Ettinger, Tres, Dan Geva, Noit Geva, Gillian Wearing. Muzak. Audiosfera komunizmu: śpiewające, mistyczne ciało kolektywu, trąbka w rękach zetempowca, bzyczenie much, bełkot wroga. Na dodatek głos jako obiekt kazirodczy. Transcendencja dźwięków otoczenia, dzwonienie w uszach, tinnitus, muzyczny rollercoaster, marsz żałobny na pogrzeb głuchego, sekunda tak pełna, że nie mieści się w półgodzinie, dźwięk jako rozdźwięk, dźwiękowość naszego ciała, szum gestu, hałas przedmiotów, elektroniczny jazgot i zgiełk, pętle muzyczne, bębnienie palcami, recitale od-tworzenia, Rauty Zmian Nastrojów i w końcu balsamowanie dźwiękiem.
Przyjaźń jako cisza; cisza, która mówi, aby lepiej się ukryć, przytłumiony i poszarzały sweter, niedźwiękowy potok słów, czytanie uchem, słuchanie różnicy, słyszenie siebie. Trzeba wyjść poza granice pięciolinii. Milczenie i przemilczenie. Cisza jako władza i jako forma kształcenia ciał, uciszanie budynków, wysysanie dźwięków.
Tacet. Cisza nie istnieje. „W absolutnej ciszy każdy w końcu coś usłyszy”. Co słyszę?
Wojciech Kalaga
Er(r)go…,
failure of speech – please be silent, because silence is the treasure hold of sounds, their saturation, the accumulation of tones. And further: active silence, the energy of silence, poetic language as the music of silence, the landscape of sound, silence of the plants, performativity of silence. Penetrating the silence, we reach the world of sound and of whatever is not silence: intonarumori – rumorarmonio, ululatori, rombator, scoppiatori, sibilatori. Murmurs, humming, noises, knocking, grinding, howling, groans, laughs, human and animal sounds, drones, clatter, din, boom, crash, creaking, scraping, rubbing, wheeze, hiss, gasp, ping, pop, machine music, tonal cords of words, the harmony of murmurs, vibrations and resonances, unwanted sounds. Reversing presence and absence – internal physiology, mute dramatization of the heart and the breath: noises, moaning, breathing in and breathing out, periodic cadence. Moans, grunts, billing, whizzing, blowing, quiet strikes of the upper and lower lips of the diva, quiet rubbing of the body of the instrument.
Silence turns to thunder. Industrial noise: machines whizz, howl, boom, crash, groan, hiss, whistle, toll, hammer, clatter, grate, grind, beat, whir, hiss. Music as the effect of silence – it is the silence that gives the sounds their strength, makes the darkness less still, when the tiniest noise becomes a wraith. A silent piano – the art of noise and 4’33”. And several figures: Gerard Manley Hopkins, Salvatore Sciarrino, John Cage, Jacques Lacan, Arnold Schoenberg, Wassily Kandinsky, Maria Pappenheim, Anna O., Georges Bataille, Maurice Blanchot, Michel Leris, Colette Peignot, Francesca Woodman, Bracha L. Ettinger, Tres, Dan Geva, Noit Geva, Gillian Wearing. Muzak. The audiosphere of communism: the singing, mystical body of the collective, the trumpet in the hands of a young ZMP zealot, the buzzing of flies, the jabber of the enemy. In addition, the voice as an incestual object. The transcendence of the sounds of the surrounding, the ringing in the ears, tinnitus, the musical rollercoaster, the funeral march at the burial of the deaf, a second so full that it does not fit into half an hour, cord as discord, the soundness of our bodies, the hum of a gesture, the noise of an object, electronic clatter and clamor, musical loops, drumming of fingers, recital of re-playing, The Banquets of Changing Moods, and, finally, embalming with sound.
Friendship as silence; silence that speaks in order to hide better, a muted, ashen sweater, nonverbal torrent of words, reading with the ear, listening to the difference, hearing oneself. One must go beyond the staff. Muteness and dissemblance. Silence as power and a form of shaping bodies, the muting of buildings, the sucking out of sounds.
Tacet. Silence does not exist. “In absolute silence, everyone will eventually hear something.” What do I hear?
Wojciech Kalaga
fiasko mowy – prosimy zachować ciszę, bo cisza jest skarbnicą dźwięków, ich nasyceniem, kumulacją brzmień. A dalej: cisza aktywna, energia ciszy, cisza dźwięków, język poetycki jako muzyka ciszy, pejzaż dźwięku, milczenie roślin, performatywność ciszy. Wnikając w ciszę, docieramy do dźwiękowego świata i do wszystkiego, co ciszą nie jest: intonarumori – rumorarmonio, ululatori, rombator, scoppiatori, sibilatori. Szmery, szumy, hałasy, stuki, zgrzytów wycie, jęki, śmiechy, głosy ludzi i zwierząt, warkot, łoskot, huk, trzaski, skrzypienia, szurania, tarcia, świsty, syki, sapania, piknięcia i puknięcia, muzyka maszyn, brzmieniowe akordy słów, harmonia szmerów, wibracje i rezonowanie, dźwięki niechciane. Nicowanie obecności i nieobecności – fizjologia wewnętrzna, niema dramatyzacja serca i oddechu: szumy, jęknięcia, wdechy i wydechy, periodyczne pulsy. Jęknięcia, chrząknięcia, gruchanie, świsty i dmuchnięcia, ciche uderzenia górnej i dolnej wargi śpiewaczki, ciche pocieranie korpusu instrumentu.
Cisza zmienia się w grzmot. Hałas industrialny: maszyny brzmią, świszczą, wyją, huczą, łomocą, sapią, syczą, gwiżdżą, dzwonią, kują, jazgoczą, świdrują, zgrzytają, kłapią, biją, warkoczą, szumią. Muzyka jako efekt ciszy – to cisza jest tym, co daje siłę dźwiękom, czyni ciemność mniej głuchą, gdy najmniejszy szmer staje się zjawą. Milczący fortepian – sztuka hałasów i 4’33”. I kilka postaci: Gerard Manley Hopkins, Salvatore Sciarrino, John Cage, Jacques Lacan, Arnold Schoenberg, Wassily Kandinsky, Maria Pappenheim, Anna O., Georges Bataille, Maurice Blanchot, Michel Leris, Colette Peignot, Francesca Woodman, Bracha L. Ettinger, Tres, Dan Geva, Noit Geva, Gillian Wearing. Muzak. Audiosfera komunizmu: śpiewające, mistyczne ciało kolektywu, trąbka w rękach zetempowca, bzyczenie much, bełkot wroga. Na dodatek głos jako obiekt kazirodczy. Transcendencja dźwięków otoczenia, dzwonienie w uszach, tinnitus, muzyczny rollercoaster, marsz żałobny na pogrzeb głuchego, sekunda tak pełna, że nie mieści się w półgodzinie, dźwięk jako rozdźwięk, dźwiękowość naszego ciała, szum gestu, hałas przedmiotów, elektroniczny jazgot i zgiełk, pętle muzyczne, bębnienie palcami, recitale od-tworzenia, Rauty Zmian Nastrojów i w końcu balsamowanie dźwiękiem.
Przyjaźń jako cisza; cisza, która mówi, aby lepiej się ukryć, przytłumiony i poszarzały sweter, niedźwiękowy potok słów, czytanie uchem, słuchanie różnicy, słyszenie siebie. Trzeba wyjść poza granice pięciolinii. Milczenie i przemilczenie. Cisza jako władza i jako forma kształcenia ciał, uciszanie budynków, wysysanie dźwięków.
Tacet. Cisza nie istnieje. „W absolutnej ciszy każdy w końcu coś usłyszy”. Co słyszę?
Wojciech Kalaga
Er(r)go…,
failure of speech – please be silent, because silence is the treasure hold of sounds, their saturation, the accumulation of tones. And further: active silence, the energy of silence, poetic language as the music of silence, the landscape of sound, silence of the plants, performativity of silence. Penetrating the silence, we reach the world of sound and of whatever is not silence: intonarumori – rumorarmonio, ululatori, rombator, scoppiatori, sibilatori. Murmurs, humming, noises, knocking, grinding, howling, groans, laughs, human and animal sounds, drones, clatter, din, boom, crash, creaking, scraping, rubbing, wheeze, hiss, gasp, ping, pop, machine music, tonal cords of words, the harmony of murmurs, vibrations and resonances, unwanted sounds. Reversing presence and absence – internal physiology, mute dramatization of the heart and the breath: noises, moaning, breathing in and breathing out, periodic cadence. Moans, grunts, billing, whizzing, blowing, quiet strikes of the upper and lower lips of the diva, quiet rubbing of the body of the instrument.
Silence turns to thunder. Industrial noise: machines whizz, howl, boom, crash, groan, hiss, whistle, toll, hammer, clatter, grate, grind, beat, whir, hiss. Music as the effect of silence – it is the silence that gives the sounds their strength, makes the darkness less still, when the tiniest noise becomes a wraith. A silent piano – the art of noise and 4’33”. And several figures: Gerard Manley Hopkins, Salvatore Sciarrino, John Cage, Jacques Lacan, Arnold Schoenberg, Wassily Kandinsky, Maria Pappenheim, Anna O., Georges Bataille, Maurice Blanchot, Michel Leris, Colette Peignot, Francesca Woodman, Bracha L. Ettinger, Tres, Dan Geva, Noit Geva, Gillian Wearing. Muzak. The audiosphere of communism: the singing, mystical body of the collective, the trumpet in the hands of a young ZMP zealot, the buzzing of flies, the jabber of the enemy. In addition, the voice as an incestual object. The transcendence of the sounds of the surrounding, the ringing in the ears, tinnitus, the musical rollercoaster, the funeral march at the burial of the deaf, a second so full that it does not fit into half an hour, cord as discord, the soundness of our bodies, the hum of a gesture, the noise of an object, electronic clatter and clamor, musical loops, drumming of fingers, recital of re-playing, The Banquets of Changing Moods, and, finally, embalming with sound.
Friendship as silence; silence that speaks in order to hide better, a muted, ashen sweater, nonverbal torrent of words, reading with the ear, listening to the difference, hearing oneself. One must go beyond the staff. Muteness and dissemblance. Silence as power and a form of shaping bodies, the muting of buildings, the sucking out of sounds.
Tacet. Silence does not exist. “In absolute silence, everyone will eventually hear something.” What do I hear?
Wojciech Kalaga
More Than Meets The Ear: Sound & Short Fiction, Conference in Affiliation with the European Network for Short Fiction Research, University of Vienna, September 19–21, 2019 (Lecture).
In der Reihe der Handbücher zur kulturwissenschaftlichen Philologie 1 darf ein Band zum Thema Audiokultur nicht fehlen. Es schließt an verschie-dene Publikationen zum Thema bzw. verwandten Themen an, die in den letzten Jahren erschienen... more
In der Reihe der Handbücher zur kulturwissenschaftlichen Philologie 1 darf ein Band zum Thema Audiokultur nicht fehlen. Es schließt an verschie-dene Publikationen zum Thema bzw. verwandten Themen an, die in den letzten Jahren erschienen sind. Das gilt etwa für das Hörbuch, 2 Hörspiele und Klangkunst, 3 das Verhältnis von Radio und Musik 4 oder auch erzähl-1 Bisher wurden besprochen: Handbuch Literatur & Raum / hrsg. von Jörg Dün-ne und Andreas Mahler.-Berlin [u.a.] : De Gruyter, 2015.-VIII, 590 S. : Kt. ; 24 cm.-(Handbücher zur kulturwissenschaftlichen Philologie ; 3).-ISBN 978-3-11-030120-5 : EUR 149.95 [#4217].-Rez.: IFB 16-1 http://ifb.bsz-bw.de/bsz427268893rez-1.pdf-Handbuch Literatur & Musik / hrsg. von Nicola Gess und Alexander Honold unter Mitarb. von Sina Dell'Anno.-Berlin [u.a.] : De Gruyter, 2017.-VII, 681 S. ; 24 cm.-(Handbücher zur kulturwissenschaftlichen Philologie ; 2).-ISBN 978-3-11-030121-2 : EUR 139.95 [#6033].-Rez.: IFB 19-1 http://informationsmittel-fuer-bibliotheken.de/showfile.php?id=9563-Handbuch Literatur & visuelle Kultur / hrsg. von Claudia Benthien und Brigitte Weingart.-Berlin [u.a.] : De Gruyter, 2014.-VII, 642 S. : Ill. ; 24 cm.-(Handbücher zur kul-turwissenschaftlichen Philologie ; 1) (De Gruyter reference).-ISBN 978-3-11-028565-9 : EUR 149.95 [#3946].-Rez.: IFB 15-3 http://ifb.bsz-bw.de/bsz399475982rez-1.pdf 2 Das Hörbuch : Praktiken audioliteralen Schreibens und Verstehens / Natalie Binczek und Cornelia Epping-Jäger (Hg.).-München ; Paderborn : Fink, 2014.-260 S. : Ill. ; 23 cm.-ISBN 978-3-7705-5346-4 : EUR 34.90 [#3526].-Rez.: IFB 14-1 http://ifb.bsz-bw.de/bsz359135633rez-1.pdf-Phänomen Hörbuch : interdis-ziplinäre Perspektiven und medialer Wandel / Stephanie Bung, Jenny Schrödl (Hg.).-Bielefeld : Transcript-Verlag, 2017 [ersch. 2016].-225 S. : Diagramme ; 23 cm.-(Edition Kulturwissenschaft ; 95).-ISBN 978-3-8376-3438-9 : EUR 29.99 [#5071].-Rez.: IFB 17-1
Modern Languages Association Conference January 7-10, 2021 Toronto, Canada Sounding Resistance in Modern Austrian Literature and Culture From the dissonant melodies of Grillparzer’s “Poor Musician,” to the cacophonous... more
Modern Languages Association Conference
January 7-10, 2021
Toronto, Canada
Sounding Resistance in Modern Austrian Literature and Culture
From the dissonant melodies of Grillparzer’s “Poor Musician,” to the cacophonous “schtzngrmm” of Ernst Jandl’s concrete poetry and musical monologues of Elfriede Jelinek’s “speech scores,” sound as a mode of articulating dissent and declaring resistance is a persistent motif in Modern Austrian literature. Whether employed to challenge the status quo, to voice the individual in conflict with society, to pave new paths for self- and collective expression, or to amplify the voices of the disenfranchised, sound as resistance unsettles the familiar, offers new vocabularies for negotiating power, and creates the potential for individual and collective change. This panel seeks papers that examine such acoustic manifestations of resistance in texts (literary, performative, cinematic) from the Austrian cultural tradition. Papers might consider the following questions: How is sound embodied and represented in these works? What agency is afforded to sound and to what extent does sound make present the “unseen, the non-represented or the not-yet apparent”? (Brandon LaBelle, Sonic Agency, 2018). How might attention to sound in these works provide new ways of reflecting on the tensions, struggles and precarities of the modern world?
Please send a 250-word abstract and short cv to Caroline Kita (ckita@wustl.edu) and Helga Schreckenberger (Helga.Schreckenberger@uvm.edu) by March 20, 2020.
January 7-10, 2021
Toronto, Canada
Sounding Resistance in Modern Austrian Literature and Culture
From the dissonant melodies of Grillparzer’s “Poor Musician,” to the cacophonous “schtzngrmm” of Ernst Jandl’s concrete poetry and musical monologues of Elfriede Jelinek’s “speech scores,” sound as a mode of articulating dissent and declaring resistance is a persistent motif in Modern Austrian literature. Whether employed to challenge the status quo, to voice the individual in conflict with society, to pave new paths for self- and collective expression, or to amplify the voices of the disenfranchised, sound as resistance unsettles the familiar, offers new vocabularies for negotiating power, and creates the potential for individual and collective change. This panel seeks papers that examine such acoustic manifestations of resistance in texts (literary, performative, cinematic) from the Austrian cultural tradition. Papers might consider the following questions: How is sound embodied and represented in these works? What agency is afforded to sound and to what extent does sound make present the “unseen, the non-represented or the not-yet apparent”? (Brandon LaBelle, Sonic Agency, 2018). How might attention to sound in these works provide new ways of reflecting on the tensions, struggles and precarities of the modern world?
Please send a 250-word abstract and short cv to Caroline Kita (ckita@wustl.edu) and Helga Schreckenberger (Helga.Schreckenberger@uvm.edu) by March 20, 2020.
Related Topics