Vehicles of Intentional and Arbitrary Experience: Silence as an "Aurally Artistic Blank Canvas"

By Kaitlyn Sisco

“Sound studies”, as a field and area of interpretation, implies the production of and engagement with sonic noises and aural experiences. However, where does silence (or lack of aural interaction) fit into this domain of knowledge? What exactly is silence? Can it even be objectively defined? What are its effects on the human mind and the human experience? Although silence requires limitless idiosyncratic, contextual, and individualized definitions, I argue that silence, as a labelled but pit-less entity, is (what I term) an aurally artistic blank canvas. This aurally artistic blank canvas, though intangible, can be molded and altered through different intentions, personal objectives, societal traditions, and lack thereof-- meaning that the individualized listener is the master (and theoretical artist) of their own “silent” experiences. 

INTENTIONAL SILENCE

Silence, as an endless chasm of possibilities, can be altered to fit personal, or societal, needs and desires. However, there are specific instances of silence in which sound productions are halted intentionally. Some of these contexts include, but are not limited to, different societal traditions (like a “moment of silence”), noise cancellation endeavors (for personal preferences or to limit distraction), and for spiritual or religious betterment practices (like a “Vow of Silence”).

Typically, silence is considered a taboo in modern, urban society. Individuals, in their daily routines, use the public sphere as an extension of the private one and foster conversations and personalized sound production accordingly. However, there are occasions in which silence is a form of collective solidarity or respect, and the value of that silence is weighed more heavily on the population than other instances. One of those cases, the “moment of silence”, is used to manufacture a collaborative silence effort. This effort is meant to produce a period of intentional thought on a specific matter. This matter could be a tragedy (such as a violent crime or death), or it could be the contemplation of a specific action (such as a religious offering). Either way, these instances of silence are not equal to others. Instead, they are contrived periods of intention meant to avoid speaking inadequate words.

For example, Kobe Bryant’s recent passing led thousands of individuals in Madison Square Garden to offer a moment of, not words, but silence to remember the life of the basketball legend. Why was silence used as a mechanism of mourning instead of endless speeches from those who knew him personally? It is likely that silence is used in these cases due to the aurally artistic blank canvas term I mentioned previously. Instead of speaking subjective words of remembrance, individuals (in a moment of silence) can create their own personal experience of mourning and thought. 

Different from moments of silence, noise cancellation practices are typically an individualized endeavor (away from the collective experience). Individuals may feel overwhelmed with their external soundscapes and may opt to create a more manageable, personal one. Resultantly, normal headphones (as well as ones meant specifically for noise cancellation) are vehicles of intentional soundscape alteration. With these tools, an individual can create their own definition of silence (such as a particular song which produces contemplation or relaxation away from external noise). 

Works such as, “The Audio-Visual iPod,” in Hearing Cultures: Essays on Sound, Listening, and Modernity by Michael Bull details this exact experience. Discussing iPod users’ habit of “aestheticizing” their everyday, urban spaces with individualized soundscapes (or sonic-utopias), Bull makes a comment on personal control, aural-artistic expression, and noise cancellation. Instead of listening to their external soundscapes, the iPod users in Bull’s work use their headphones as freeways to internal, sonic freedom. Do these individuals use this freedom to hear their own definitions of silence? Or, do they use the headphones to avoid the uncomfortable silence around them (in an intentional manner)? No matter the response, Bull’s piece examines how individuals interact with the silence (or lack thereof) in their environments. However, the “illusion” produced by these headphones breaks the threshold of intentional silence-seeking practices in that individuals do not need to be in a silent space initially to experience it. Instead, silent experiences can be produced portably, intentionally, and technologically. Bull even states the following: “Silence protects the urban subject from ‘the harsh realities of the world’. It is this silence which promotes both isolation and the flowering of self; the richness of interiority contrasted with the blandness of the outside world,” (page 200).

Another practice of intentional silence can be found in the area of personal, spiritual, or religious betterment. Usually, a “vow of silence” (or a fasting of the vocal cords) is used as a tool for self-evaluation, religious contemplation, and external understanding. Individuals will go days, even years, without speaking in both private and public contexts for this individual improvement. Why is this effective? According to multiple vlog-style videos, participants feel a new sense of self, freedom, and clarity in their life. Though there may have been periods of awkward, uncomfortable, and ineffective silence, the vow commonly produces a hyper-aware individual with an altered identity molded by the silence they experienced. Resultantly, individuals can not only alter their own silent experiences, but silences can alter individuals as artists as well. Further, are both the silences and the listener “blank canvases”?

Similarly, there are mini-periods of the “vow of silence” that can usually be described as meditative techniques. Meditation, whether in guided or free form, is a short period of personal silence and reflection. Although it is not typically experienced for an extended period of time, its results are similar to those aforementioned. “Songs” such as, “Two Minutes of Silence,” by John Lennon and Yoko Ono play upon this narrative of individual reflection in order to produce a new counterpublic of silent contemplation in society. Similarly, author Deborah Kapchan explores concepts of meditation, listening techniques, and religious contemplation in her work, “Listening Acts, Secular and Sacred: Sound Knowledge Among Sufi Muslims in Secular France” in Islam and Popular Culture. In her work, Kapchan states that collective listening techniques are powerful methods of understanding (even if the sounds or silences produced are not understood completely). Resultantly, intentional and collective silence (or listening) is argued to be “main vehicles” for sacred, or religious, conscious thought (page 31). 

UNINTENTIONAL AND ARBITRARY SILENCE

While many instances of silence are intentional, there are arbitrary occasions of silence in which individuals have no immediate control over their sonic environments. One instance of this unintentional silence is experienced in deaf communities. My younger brother, deaf in his left ear and over 70% deaf in his right ear, led me to question this sector of individuals. How do their experiences of silence differentiate from others? Sounding Out! Blogpost, “my mother’s voice, my father’s eye, and my other body: the sound of deaf photographs,” by user c.1. cardinale details a commonly misconstrued notion about the deaf community; “Deafness announced itself. Deafness was not mute.” By this, the author likely means that silence to one is not necessarily silence to another. Consequently, my blank canvas theory (where “silence” is subjective) is supported once again.

 Another Sounding Out! Blogpost, “The Plasticity of Listening: Deafness and Sound Studies,” by user sceraso explores a developing theory known as “multimodal listening”. This theory, defined by an alternate understanding/method of listening through vibrations, describes how sound through the ears may not be considered sound to those in the deaf community. Resultantly, it can be concluded that silence and other forms of sound are not necessarily heard. Instead, they can be unintentionally felt or seen. Do vibrations interfere with one’s definition of silence, especially in the deaf community? I believe the answer to be “yes” due to silence being experienced in the same “multimodal” manner mentioned previously. 

Differentiated from deafness, changing environments of sound can be considered unintentional silences as well. For example, an individual from a highly populated, urban area is likely to consider the sounds of rural terrain (such as wind blowing and leaves rustling) to be “silence” in his or her own personal definition of the term. This silent experience is not intentional. Instead, it is produced from an individual perspective and broken whenever the threshold of awareness changes. Author R. Murray Schafer’s work, “The Soundscape: Our Sonic Environment and the Tuning of the World,” examines the differences between hi-fi and lo-fi sounds in his section The Rural Soundscape (page 43). In a lo-fi soundscape of the urban environment, small sounds (like that of nature) are blanketed by immediate surrounding sounds. Resultantly, the hi-fi soundscape (without many obscured noises) is more attuned to rural landscapes without large populations. Unconsciously, the aforementioned and theoretical individual from the urban area believes that the hi-fi sounds he or she is experiencing are “silence” when compared to his or her original soundscape. Why is silence to one, noise to another? Simply, there is a difference in experience and definition. 

A realtor’s promotional video below quickly details his personal perception of what he considers to be a “silent countryside”. However, birds chirping (or hi-fi sounds) can be heard with intentional listening techniques. Consequently, is this realtor’s claim based on his own definition of silence? It is likely that he, from his own experiences, does not consider naturalistic sounds to be sounds at all-- proving the argument that definitions of silence are pit-less chasms of possibility.

Whether “silence”  is defined by an intentional or unintentional context, all silences are not created equal. Instead, they are tailored to the individual mind, objective, and experience. Further, silence does not even need to be heard through aural stimulation. Instead, it can be seen and felt by particular communities. Resultantly, silence’s objective definition is left inconclusive, and silence as an aurally artistic blank canvas remains conceptually and arbitrarily intertwined in the fabric of society.