Westerkamp mentions in the article, “Today the term soundscape composition does exist, but none really seems to know what is meant by it, myself included… And my sense is that as soon as we try to define it further…Because each soundscape composition emerges out of its own context in place and time, culturally, politically, socially, environmentally and is presented in a new and often entirely different context.” He does not give a clear definition to what ‘soundscape composition’ might mean, but does go against limiting soundscape composition to a single field.
>Based off of Westerkamp’s words, could you give a definition of “soundscape composition” in your own words? How does your ‘background’ determine the definition of ‘soundscape composition’? In either Westerkamp’s or your own terms of ‘soundscape composition’ limit your experience of accepting ‘soundscape composition’?
When talking about ear and microphones’ role in soundscape composition, “The ear has a capacity to focus, to blend in and out, to pay attention to specific sounds and to switch the attention from one sound to another…” while “The microphone alters listening.” He emphasizes the importance of recording along with the sound but not one itself, saying that “regular listening” could only be beneficial for the composer.
>Why would it be bad to only benefit the composer? What does it mean to take in soundscape? What’s the purpose or relationship of soundscape to the composer?
Westerkamp says, “Whatever we do, our choices are always influenced by our cultural, social and political background and experiences, by age and gender, musical taste, past experiences with various soundscapes, as well as the present life situation.” But for soundscape composition Westerkamp asserts that it is necessary for the composer to experience the actual sound.
>If said that our choices are always influenced by our diverse backgrounds why would it be wrong for a musician to define ‘soundscape composition’ based on their background even if it is not from their actual experience?
Westerkamp mentioned, “If the listener does not know the place, time or situation, resonance between composer and audience is hard to achieve” and that “The listener cannot understand the deeper meanings…with some background knowledge from films, radio, books, newspapers, television, National geographic…” Westerkamp again points out the importance of the actual experience of the sound occurring.
>What does it mean to take in “deeper meaning” of a soundscape composition? Would it matter if the audience takes in different interpretations from the composer? Would it be necessary to share the same interpretations if the relationship between the soundscape composition and the individual matter the most?
I think the purpose of the soundscape is something quite individual to the composer. One may be creating it for instructional or informative purposes, another for pure enjoyment, another to stimulate controversy.
For the last question I think that a deeper meaning that a composer wants to deliver is his or her original thoughts that comes up with the piece but it can evoke a common feeling among people but the premise is to understand or have knowledge of the detailed information about the piece instead of just listening to it. However there is no such thing that the audience would completely feel or get what the composer is trying to deliver, therefore audience must have different interpretations of the piece. I don’t think it is necessary to have the same interpretation and different interpretations, if well communicated, can possibly bring up feelings or ideas that even the composer have never thought of.
4. The idea that the listener should view a soundscape composition the same as the composer, I think, defeats the purpose of the composer sharing it. While it can be frustrating perhaps to the composer if something to them is irritating or gritty, but to the listener it is calming and soft, the composer may feel as if the message they created was not received well. On the contrary, the composer has used the sounds recorded to create another experience beside their own that the listener is able to bring forth. A “deeper meaning” is ambiguous to each and every person, there is never a true resonance between composer and listener, only an understanding from different backgrounds.