Departmental Bulletin Paper ティム・インゴルドの反サウンドスケープ論 ー音と光、サンドスケープとランドスケープ ー
Rethinking Ingold’s ‘Against Soundscape’: Six Problems with Ingold’s Four Objections to the Concept of Soundscape

和泉, 浩  ,  IZUMI, Hiroshi

Description
The purpose of this paper is to consider Tim Ingold’s four objections to the concept of The purpose of this paper is to consider Tim Ingold’s four objections to the concept of soundscape, in order to reconsider the concept of soundscape in relation to the concepts of light, sound, landscape, related to sound studies, study of visual culture and auditory culture. Ingold thinks ‘the concept of sound scape would be better abandoned’ based on the four reasons.   This paper points out six problems with Ingold’s objections. (1) Ingold defines sound as ‘I can hear’ depending on Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology and he also situates sound as ‘medium’, but he does not explain the relationship between Merleau-Ponty’s ‘il y a’ and James Gibson’s ‘medium’. ‘il y a’ and ‘medium’ are different. (2) Phenomenological existential conditions are fundamental in a sense, but cultural, social and historical contexts or conditions of sound, light and ontology should be considered. (3) Sound and light have different aspects. (4) His strong nostalgia for nature and past causes narrowing experiences of sound and soundscape. (5) Although he criticizes the confusion of ‘scape’ with ‘scope’, he confuses them in his argument. (6) One can explain nothing in the pure fluxes of medium, distinctions must be made to say something.oundscape, in order to reconsider the concept of soundscape in relation to the concepts of light, sound, landscape, related to sound studies, study of visual culture and auditory culture. Ingold thinks ‘the concept of sound scape would be better abandoned’ based on the four reasons.   This paper points out six problems with Ingold’s objections. (1) Ingold defines sound as ‘I can hear’ depending on Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology and he also situates sound as ‘medium’, but he does not explain the relationship between Merleau-Ponty’s ‘il y a’ and James Gibson’s ‘medium’. ‘il y a’ and ‘medium’ are different. (2) Phenomenological existential conditions are fundamental in a sense, but cultural, social and historical contexts or conditions of sound, light and ontology should be considered. (3) Sound and light have different aspects. (4) His strong nostalgia for nature and past causes narrowing experiences of sound and soundscape. (5) Although he criticizes the confusion of ‘scape’ with ‘scope’, he confuses them in his argument. (6) One can explain nothing in the pure fluxes of medium, distinctions must be made to say something.
Full-Text

https://air.repo.nii.ac.jp/?action=repository_action_common_download&item_id=3124&item_no=1&attribute_id=48&file_no=1

Number of accesses :  

Other information