Re: [-empyre-] live performance vs. studio/other

["Stasisfield.com" <john@stasisfield.com>]

Hi Tobias,

You've offered far more here than I can comment on at the moment, but I 
wanted to address the following points in relationship to my own work:


tobias wrote:

> 6
> The question I'd like to as is *why* many audio-artists feel the need to
> work with visuals.


and:

> 9
> If sound-art is the goal, should not it simply be presented as such, to
> listen, and to cultivate listening?


Your comments seem to be based on the supposition that I am an audio artist 
only and merely tacking on visuals to my work because I think it will help 
the audience in some way.

I began my artistic career as a painter. I think visually first, sonically 
second (for the most part, although that's begun to change). I feel the 
need to work with visuals because I am a visual artist. I began my sound 
career focusing on sound-only pieces because I wanted to have a focus, to 
spend time honing audio skills so they could at least begin to catch up to 
my intuitive visual sense. I'm not finished learning by any means, but I 
finally feel the time is right for me to begin exploring visual and sonic 
relationships, and make no claims that a performance that includes visuals 
is purely sound art; it's not. I dislike the term "happening", but 
according to the definitions you've proposed, this would be more apt.

I hope I'm not coming off too defensively; I merely want to clear up what 
seems to be some confusion about my work and motivations. I don't doubt 
your expertise--you're obviously more well-versed in the history of the 
medium than I am!



>>

john kannenberg

[ http://www.stasisfield.com/empyre ]

[ http://www.whistlingpariah.com ]

[ http://www.stasisfield.com ]