Silence can be a thunderous sound.
A crash of energy forms a resonance that punctures through yet has already begun to evaporate into the background shuffle, like a ghost into the darkness.
The resonance may continue for a few seconds, perhaps longer, but it is always followed by an equal counter energy of silence.
We can experience a sound like this when a plate falls from its shelf, the harsh crash disturbs the clarity of silence. The experience noise as a continuum (much like how we receive music or sound over a duration) we experience what is believed to be the opposite of silence.
Silence is calm, noise is manic.
Of course however, silence never really exists, but other than our
If this is so, noise is the influx of an energy (or alternatively an influx of sound), happening in a concentrated moment in time.
With this in mind, often you’ll find listening deeply to what you may consider an annoying sound (or noise), like that of a washing machine for example. After a while you can begin to notice the depth within the montage of sounds that make up this singular sound.
If energy is resonance, resonance is vibration, vibration is sound. Silence is sound leaving… Where does noise start and when does it finish?
Noise is disturbance, the undesired. Yet in the presents of noise, the receiver is addressed, like that of a shock of energy (perhaps resulting in provocation, anger, distaste). What happens then in contrast, if one is engaged in curiosity? Is it still noise? Or has the listening capacity of the receiver meant that noise is no longer a noise?
My flow of writing is not academic, there are scales and capacities to all of what i’m saying depending on the listener. But i ask, what then has the role of noise become to someone who finds themselves interested on a deeper level to a sound, or configuration of sounds, that once may have been ‘noise’ (in it rawest sense)?
Perhaps its role is neither important, rather the idea should be further concerned with a celebration in the broadening or enlarged acceptance of the surrounding atmosphere of sounds, that comes when one applies a deeper level of engagement (listening)?
If this is so, might noise be a true expression of human nature?
In more extreme examples, with this knowledge in mind and played with love and intent, noise can be a wild expression of energy unlike any other art form. Much like the music of Yoko Ono and the late John Lennon.
In an act of degradation conventional musical instrumentation (guitar, voice) is muddied, dirtied and in favour of the grit rather than the smooth.
It may be loud, so can it be quite, like that of Rie Nakajima, setting many small actions in motion creating subtle yet densely layered collections of sounds; where sound and sculpture actively merge.
Sound is but the closest expression of human energy as the physical world may offer. A profound statement should be met with an equally profound acceptance and engagement of a large of spectrum of sounds, meaning discrimination in regard to clarity and precision can be subverted to allow for a closer engagement with the world around us. The dirty and the poor quality are in equal to that of the high definition as there is no hierarchy in human expression (it is everything but it is also nothing).
(image from the studio, developing a sound performance based around the formal arrangement of the dinner table)