In Sound Moves: iPod
culture and urban experience, Michael Bull examined the influence of the
iPod on modern day societal interactions. In the second section of the reading,
Bull quotes Kleist describing the “multisensory pleasure, repulsion and
contingency of city life which both assaults and stimulates his senses” (26).
By this, Bull is emphasizing how the hustle and bustle of city life can be
distracting, shocking all your senses, forcing people to “adjust to the
physical, technological and psychological demands of the city” (28). In order
to overcome this massive distraction people plug in their iPods. By blocking
out the sound of horns honking, people talking on their phones, sirens and
vendors, iPod users are given the freedom to adjust their “soundscape”.
The word soundtrack
is commonly used when describing how iPod users view their surroundings. “I
listen to music any time I can […] It [iPod] truly is my own personal jukebox,
and puts the soundtrack to my life in my pocket and at my fingertips” (3). By
blocking out any surrounding sounds, other senses are more attentive,
particularly your sense of sight. Bull states “iPod users aim to create a
privatized sound world, which is in harmony with their mood, orientation and
surroundings, enabling them to re-spatialise urban experience through a process
of solipsistic aestheticisation” (41). By this he means that iPod users have
the ability to direct their surroundings based on the moods they are
experiencing through the music they are listening to. Music has a
transformative power over the urban environment as Susan described “I start to
feel the environment in the sense of the mood of the song and can find that I
can start to love a street that I usually hate, or feel scared for no reason”,
or as Berklee puts it “the world looks friendlier, happier, and sunnier when I
walk down he street with my iPod on. It feels as if I’m in a movie at times”
(43). I can relate to this experience, especially when I think back to two
summers ago when I biked across the country. I was constantly playing music to
motivate myself to keep going, and I coordinated the music I was playing with
the difficulty of the terrain. My
favorite song to play was “Sweet Disposition” by the Temper Trap. There was
just something about that song that allowed me to transcend out of my body and
into the moment, taking more notice of the amazing scenery I was passing along
and the sensation of the wind hitting my face. My experience that summer is
largely defined by its soundtrack.
-Adali Martinez
11 comments:
I would agree that the iPod creates a bubble that isolates an individual from others around them. However, I would not agree with the last statement which Bull makes about "public space sometimes produces forms of collective recognition for iPod users, who sometimes see themselves as members of an imaginary community", or at least I would not agree with that about the present day. This is because almost everyone I know has an iPod these days. Out of all the mp3 player users, the majority of them are iPod users. If the use of iPods was not common, and a person would maybe occasionally see another person using an iPod, I could understand how that would allow them to form an imaginary community. But that's definitely not the case right now, at least in the US, and probably many other countries.
This idea of being able to create our own soundtrack's is very interesting, though and I like that there's a comparison between the iPod and the radio. It's true that iPod users don't have to listen to the government's opinions when they listen to their iPods, but almost all songs with lyrics have some kind of message they want to convey, and whether that person realizes it or not when they listen to the song, they are being shaped by it. In a way, our soundtracks show what kind of people we are--each song reflects something about us. The same for vice versa, the song is produced for the kinds of people who listen to them. And while an iPod itself may not create an imaginary community, I believe songs do. I believe that people who listen to the same songs share something in common, and this might define one type of community.
While I would agree with the general sentiment that iPod use creates a personalized soundscape, this could mean two different things, one if which I'm okay with, and the other that I'm going to have to negate due to personal experience.
When I put on my iPod (when walking around campus from class to class, for example), I will admit that it may have to do with the fact that I include myself in the idea that "contemporary consumers invariably feel a sense of discomfort when confronted with silence" (5). If I have somebody to walk from class to class with, then of course I won't use my iPod. This is not only because it would be rude according to societal norms, but also because I wouldn't even feel a desire to use it; if I have company, someone to offer conversation and entertainment to me in these otherwise dull moments, I don't need to create my own soundscape.
On the other hand, if I'm alone, I sometimes don't want to just fill the time with my own thoughts. For example, maybe something is on my mind that I don't really want to think about (schoolwork stress, for example). Or maybe I'm just really tired and honestly don't have the energy to think about anything in the five minutes between one mundane class and the next. Therefore, I use my iPod to choose what I want my world to be: "iPod users aim to create a privatized sound world, which is in harmony with their mood" (41).
Still, in the audio lecture, there was a lot of talk about people experiencing a sense of being just with themselves and their own thoughts while walking around plugged into their iPods. In my experience, this is just not the case. I use my iPod to get away from my own thoughts, to ease boredom and save energy. I don't feel a heightened sense of self, but rather a heightened sense of my surroundings. While listening to music, "the world looks friendlier, happier, and sunnier" (43), if the music is positive, for example. It could also look sadder depending on what I'm listening to. The use of my iPod alters my perception of what is around me, not what is going on in my own head. There seemed to be a lot of discussion of the latter in the lecture, many people having reported that walking around with their iPods gave them "me-time." I'd argue that it's exactly the opposite, but in a way that one wouldn't typically expect or guess.
The Bull article heavily focuses on the idea of soundscape, and how this tactic is used to overcome the distractions of the bustling city. Various people described the intention behind turning on their music, as well as the instances for which they would be courteous enough take off their headphones, or even just pause their music. All of these examples bring to light the concept of “privatization of public space,” in which although one may be sharing a common space and time with another individual, each experience is made separate and distinct based upon the creation of a soundtrack to one’s own world. Control seemed to be the driving force behind the interaction with music. One portion of the article that I found a bit ironic was the excerpt, “For many iPod users the pleasure of the city comes from not interacting with others who 'disrupt' and 'distract' their energy but rather from listening to music, which may remind them of what it is to live in a city” (Bull 37). So although these people have the opportunity to interact directly with their surroundings because they actually live in the city, they choose to use the music as a means for them to feel this authentic experience. At the end of the article, the idea of a family inhabiting a common space but still left to oneself seemed a bit discouraging. I agree with Adali in hoping that this type usage will not be substituted for human interaction.
In tying this back to the “mobile” lecture that we had on Thursday, I can say that I shared a similar experience to the people in this article, although certain instances did surprise me. When I see people walking around with their headphones, I do presume them to be either focused on a task, or wanting to remain undisturbed. As I walked to the library, I acknowledged one person that I knew by a wave and a smile, and continued about my way. However, when I got inside the library and encountered 2 other people, they attempted to have full conversations. My earphones did not display the sense of a desired privacy to the onlooker. To turn this around, I feel like this concept could be implemented as decoy tactic, where your headphones are in your ears, and yet silence is what resonates from your ear buds. No music is playing, so you are therefore interacting with the world around you without others actually knowing. Whatever happens as a result of this may be due to people in the surrounding area assuming that you are not engaged.
I agree with most of the comments addressing Bull's analysis of iPods, creating the "soundtrack of one's life". The idea of "wearing" an iPod and "dressing" our surroundings is quite accurate. I also agree it creates an "imagined community" of insular individuals, wearing "Beats by Dre" or the famous white earphones.
However, what Bull doesn't address enough - and I believe is fundamental - is the specific consumption of music born with the iPods. This object, although very ergonomic and "sexy", is the musical equivalent of a Mac Donald's restaurant or of a television remote (to be more measured): thousands of songs that we just "zap", in most of the cases not waiting for the end of the song. The de-materialized music, ultra-compressed into a mp3 file, is not about quality, but rather about enjoyable consumption; the song can be switched by a simple shake of the device - we would not want to overwork ourselves by pressing a button. What I mean to say is that the iPod is not only a revolution in 'how' we listen to music but also in 'what' we listen. In the vast majority of the downloaded songs and #1 artists in the various Billboards, genres do not exist any more: the only thing that counts is the quick consumption of the 'easiest' song. The mediocrity of the "Justin Biebers" in the music industry is also a result of the mp3-player culture, where we 'have' to listen to thousands of throwaway songs on our devices. Maybe this phenomenon happened before too, but I feel as though the mp3 players have amplified it. There is something that I cannot understand: as access to music becomes easier every day, bad music it at its zenith whereas independent artists struggle always more. Maybe it is because iPods encourage this purely "distractive" culture of the music medium - in its form and content: on Thursday, we all felt the oddity of having to concentrate on what we listen on our iPods - we are not used to it.
The idea of having a "soundtrack" to our life and environment is probably interesting and exciting - but what happens if that soundtrack is the same for everyone?
- Ayan Meer.
I agree with many of the posts that the iPod is able to create a personalized soundscape, but just as some posts acknowledge- I kind of have a problem with the way in which iPods isolate the listener from their surroundings. I personally do not like the way people walk around campus with their iPods in. I think its annoying and unnecessary. However, I contradict myself when I put my iPod in to run. I use the iPod while I work out, specifically, to motivate me and create the sort of soundtrack that Bull suggests to alter my mood. I do find that the iPod is detrimental to those individuals who constantly have their iPod in, because they are isolating themselves from social interaction. Other posts addressed this issue of isolation, and I agree that I hope this medium does not substitute for human interaction. On the other hand, I really enjoy how the iPod can allow me to escape my stresses and worries for a little and surround me in an atmosphere that I can personally choose, whether I want that to be getting excited to do something with loud, fun music, or if I want to relax with slow, melancholic music. Overall, I do think that the iPod is the most individually transforming and affective medium we have studied so far.
I agree that iPods create a “sound bubble” that isolates individuals from others around them. When walking around and hearing any noises like cars honking, sirens going off, other people talking on the phone etc..it is deficiently a distraction. People use iPods to create a “sound bubble” so they don’t have to listen to these surroundings. "iPod users aim to create a privatized sound world, which is in harmony with their mood" (41). People want to pick their favorite songs and own style of music to help set the mood for the day. They don’t have to be listening to commercials or government opinions or songs they do not like when they listen to their iPods like they would if listening to the radio
It seems that almost everybody you see has something plugged into their ear. Should I walk around with a headphone in my ear plugged into my phone or iPod playing music in order to fit in with society today? I personally never got an IPod. Do I need to? No, I don't think so. I have my computer and my phone that has music on it so I can listen to what I want on my own time. I like listening to the radio and tuning into classic rock stations and be surprised at what song they choose next rather than going through the time and effort to find a song. I have a style of music that helps me define my sound world but I don't choose what plays next. All day tomorrow I will have headphones on to see if it is really worth walking with music and is socially acceptable. Will it create a better environment for me and help me through the day? I will soon see.
In the reading, it states a user saying, “When I leave the house I check my pockets for four things: my wallet, my keys, my mobile phone, and my iPod. I never go out without all four on my person (1).” My roommate and my friends at home have said those exact words. The IPod has become a necessary need in their lives. They need their wallet because they need money through the day to pay for lunch dinner and other things. They need their keys to drive their car and get back into their apartment or house. They need their phones to stay in touch with their job and family and get messages. Then they need their IPods to listen to…music. Really? Is it that important? Not to me.
-Chase Winter
I think it is really interesting how you never fully realize how much of an enclosed enviroment Ipods actually create. The invention of noise-cancelling Bose headphones has furthered this enclosure that the listener experiences. As far as this concept of an imaginary community that is mentioned in the Bull article, I agree with Winnie's comment.
Because the Ipod has become so common, the imaginary community might've been more prevalent when the Sony Walkman first came out two or three decades ago. Because the product was still new, people mightve seen others using it and given special nods or gestures to them.
The idea that the music people listen to shapes them is also very valid. Music producers have agendas that have become very apparent, especially in the last few years. Politically charged lyrics of Green Day and The Dixie Chicks are example of how artists infuse thier work with messages to be consumed.
I completely agree with Bull’s statement, “iPod users aim to create a privatized sound world, which is in harmony with their mood” (Bull, 41). I think this statement could stand alone as a description of an iPod’s purpose, and is similar to two old advertisements for Apple products. Both the “Think Different” and “1984” commercial stressed individuality and a break from the norm. Both commercials emphasized personal expression at the expense of community assimilation. Therefore, I disagree with Bull’s argument on iPod listeners being part of an imagined community. It’s not as if people are walking around campus with their iPod’s on, nodding or smiling at other people just because they happen to have headphones in as well. If the only thing I have in common with someone is that we both own and listen to an iPod, I would never consider myself to be part of his or her “imagined community”. I think describing all iPod listeners as an imagined community is akin to saying that every person on the planet is part of an imagined community. Yes, we are all people and we all live on Earth. But we are divided into subgroups by geography, skin color, language, etc. Yes, that person on campus may own an iPod, but we may have different versions of the iPod or like different kinds of music. I think Winnie makes a great point in her blog post when she says that owning an iPod may have made someone part of an imagined community ten years ago, but now, that no longer applies. I think the more interesting point to consider here, is that the “imagined community” of the iPod may have been dissolved by it’s own expansion and evolution.
-Daniel Gergen
Like many of my classmates, I also took issue with Bull’s theory that “public spaces sometimes produce forms of collective recognition for iPod users, who sometimes see themselves as members of an imaginary community,” (64). This quote seemed to contrast particularly with another point made by Bull when he states “For many iPod users the pleasure of the city comes not from interacting with others who ‘disrupt’ and ‘distract’ their energy but rather from listening to music, which may remind them of what it is to live in a city,” (37). Considering these two messages, one could reach the muddled conclusion that iPod users experience a sense of collective recognition and imagined community with other individuals whom they do not interact with and who supposedly “distract” and detract from their personalized experience of a city. To me, it seems that the only thing relevant about an imagined community of iPod users is that users may seek comfort in the fact that their solitary and isolated mode of existence is one that is also experienced by many others around them. To me, this is rather depressing, and in general Bull’s article struck an upsetting cord within me, reverberating due to the thought that media and technology may so easily compartmentalize and isolate our existence from one another. What is wrong with the natural soundscape of a city, or utilizing all five senses while one navigates throughout her day? What do we have to fear or disdain about natural noises or passing interpersonal interactions? In the future, I will certainly think before whipping out my phone or iPod to serve as an excuse to avoid saying hello to someone I don’t particularly care for, as I do not like the idea of a culture where technology detracts from our experiences of each other and the world around us.
Bull said that people use ipods to "harmonize with their moods", which is what I primarily use my ipod for as well. I never leave my house without my ipod, as it provides me with more than just musical comfort. I listen to it walking to and from class so that I am in a good mood when I learn. I also use it before bed to help me fall asleep, and before games to pump me up. Ipods affect my day-to-day productivity a tremendous amount and I can almost say that I need it in my life. The other blogs all mention various aims and uses for ipods, none of which is incorrect in any way. I believe that they provide the listener with whatever they choose to be affected by in any medium. Entertainment, escape, distraction, and motivation are all ways in which people use an ipod, myself included. It can function in any way possible, which makes it much more impactful to the listener's life. Ultimately, soundscape seems to be the best word for the phenomenon that the ipod provides. Most of the time, an ipod is not used to connect people to others in a particular setting. Listening is a singular activity in most cases. There are also cases, though, where ipods can create unity and relationships. New technologies such as the ihome and the itrip allow multiple people to listen to one thing playing on the ipod. Originally meant to be a solo activity, listening to an ipod has expanded into new realms and is able to reach a wider audience in a larger fashion. In this way, ipods can be a part of our lives even more so than they were just as solo listening devices. Ipods are all around us and there is nothing we can do about it.
John Kaestner
Some of the reading I have been doing for my video project talk about what iPod ads do to our sense of subject. I think they speak to this idea of the iPod creating a “bubble” for its user. The old ads, with a silhouette dancing with iPod headphones on forms a sense of subject that is exclusive to the user. The central idea of the ads is that when the headphones go on you can live in your own world, dancing around in a completely bare area.
The other thing that I wanted to comment on that I thought was interesting was a piece from Bull that I remember Professor Pandian quoted in our lecture on Tuesday. Something about how hearing is a very extreme sense that is much more vulnerable to the outside world than other senses. This reminded me of when we were talking about newspapers and referenced the way newspapers apply to the public but talk to individuals. iPods allow people to take mass produced media and apply them specifically to themselves.
Post a Comment