For each issue, an exciting scholar, artist and/or musician poses a question to the Sonic Scope community. We then invite researchers to respond in whatever way they like.
Andrew Knight-Hill and Emma Margetson Call and Response - Issue Six -
“Any disconnection between the ways we think about doing, and the ways in which we actually do, limits our abilities to imagine, understand practice, and embrace the full creative possibilities available to us” (Knight-Hill & Margetson 2024: 216). Creativity is complex, messy, rich, convoluted and diverse. But rather than seeing this complexity as a negative, we should recognise this as the core affordance and strength of its power. Sometimes conversations about sound and music practice can tend towards the technical or prescriptive as we seek to apply structured forms of analytical analysis to objectively analyse them in grossly simplified ways. But this oversimplification obscures the full potential subjective and the intangible. In our research on ‘Art of Sound: Creativity in Film Sound and Electroacoustic Music’ we identified a network of emergent Principles, Approaches and Techniques (Knight-Hill & Margetson 2024: 28-29) shared by world leading Film Sound Designers and Electroacoustic Composers echoed across and between their practices. We set these out in a map of possible points of creative choice which tells the stories of how these practitioners respond to, negotiate and work with sound. How can this map encourage and enable new opportunities for reflection on, and inspiration to drive, creative practice? What else may be missing?
For each issue, an exciting scholar, artist and/or musician poses a question to the Sonic Scope community.
We then invite researchers to respond in whatever way they like.
Read this issue's question by Andrew Knight-Hill and Emma Margetson at the link above.