Reading Blog

In David Dunn's article "Nature, Sound Art and the Sacred," he talks about the relationship of natural sounds and sounds that are designed, in addition to that he also talks about the similarities and differences. The article begins with the author saying that some forms of communication are impossible, but exquisite can also be something positive, something comfortable.

For me the experimental art pieces that Dunn describes in "Part Two: My Work" is the most interesting part of the article. He states about the artificiality of human separation, by showing that what we experience as distinct phenomena are actually far from discrete. Moreover, I don't agree with some of Dunn's views like when he describes his art pieces in "Environmental Performance Works & Hybrid Soundscape Compositions' ' category. It seems like he is almost being sarcastic. I don't know...

Something I also don't agree with is his views about the human sense of hearing. The whole paragraph that he talks about seems unreasonable. His intention to link this to his views seems total nonsense to me.

Dunn believes that all life around us operates on their own frequency of vibrations and thus each being lives in its own separate universe. Although we associate sounds differently than birds or animals, he also has intentions to create an environmental language as opposed to environmental music. With that I conclude that that music is different from sounds and that the only environment sound is not harmonic enough if compared to music, so it can't be considered music to my ears.