Post-humanism and music production: An essay.

The following post consists of my essay for my second year of Creative Sound and Music at the University of Wales, Newport. The subject is post-humanism and the impact it has on music production and experience.

“The claim that the apparent separation between the human and the environment is invalid in the post-human era”. With reference to examples, what impact does this have on a contemporary approach to understanding both the production and the experience of a piece of music?

 This essay will look into the background of post-human theory; what is post-humanism, what effect does it have for us as a species and what effect does it have for us as musicians? My initial research presented me with the idea that post-humanism can only really be achieved through developing technology and the idea of “becoming post-human” is only viable once we, the human species, have a more informed idea of “reality”. It seems to be a common post-humanist view that human beings are separate from the environment and that we are all individual beings. In Robert Pepperell’s “The Posthuman Condition”, he argues that the human being is essentially “fuzzy”, giving the term as a way to describe that there is no definable start to a human being, and that we are each connected to our surroundings. Pepperell (1995, pp. 20) cites the idea of constant fluid, chemical and energy exchange as a way to show that we are intricately connected to our environment; we are not separate from it:

“Our bodies consist in a complex matrix of senses that perpetually respond to the stimuli and demands of the environment. Even when asleep we are still partially sensitive to light, heat, movement and sound. And as our waking body responds to fluctuations in the world, so to some extent it affects the world reciprocally with its excretions and actions. Since a human cannot be separated from its supportive environment for any length of time without coming to harm (for example, by being put under water, or into space), it seems the human is a ‘fuzzy edged’ entity that is profoundly dependent into its surroundings, much as the brain is dependent on the body. We only have to consider the perpetual exchange of liquids, chemicals and energies in the form of urine, faeces, menstrual fluid, hair, air, sperm, food, water, skin, sound, light, and heat to recognise how deeply integrated into our environment we are. Because of this perpetual exchange between the living human organism and its surroundings, there can be no fixed state of a living human”

This theory is incredibly interesting to research, as it has a profound effect on our everyday activities. If we were to realise that we are essentially “one with the universe”, what does that mean for us as a species, and what effect does it have upon our art (and music) production? It is entirely possible that there is a deep connection between the human body and its surroundings, and there are theories stating that we think with our entire bodies and not just with our minds (Robson, 2011):

“If the simple feeling of the heart beating in our chest is somehow connected to our subconscious reactions to a person, how might the body’s myriad other processes be shaping our thinking? That is exactly what researchers studying “embodied cognition” would like to know. Running against Descartes’ philosophy, this school of thought maintains that many, if not all aspects of our mental lives are inextricably linked to the experiences of our flesh and blood”

Pepperell’s following comment on consciousness, and the subsequent connection between mind and body, can be reinforced through the knowledge that a human has more senses than only sight, sound, taste, touch and hearing (howstuffworks.com); instead, a human body has between 9 and 20 different senses. These include the senses of balance, acceleration, pain, limb position, thirst, hunger and relative temperature, among others. This connection through a human’s nervous system, consisting of their brain, spinal cord, peripheral and autonomic nerves, travelling via electrochemical signals, is enough evidence to argue for a connection between mind and body. Citing such connections as the essential cause of consciousness, Pepperell (2000, pp. 2) states:

“Imagine a kettle used to boil water. It consists of a vessel to contain the water, a heating element, electrical energy, a certain atmospheric pressure, gravity and the water itself. If you put all these things together in the right way you can, within a few minutes, produce the effect known as ‘boiling’. But, where is ‘boiling’? It cannot be specified, isolated or confined to any part of that system. Boiling is a property that emerges from a specific set of conditions. The same is true of consciousness. Given the right combination of genes, tissues, nutrients, chemicals and environmental conditions, the property we know as ‘consciousness’ emerges. We cannot precisely define what this quality is, where it occurs or how it might look in isolation from those conditions — it is a consequence of all those conditions. As with the kettle, if you remove any of the constituents the emergent quality evaporates”

Pepperell is saying that consciousness is not only limited to the mind, but is instead a product of our entire body. This is reinforced by the study by New Scientist, which argues against Descartes’ statement “I think therefore I am”, instead offering, “I act, therefore I think” (Ananthaswamy, 2010). But how are these post-humanist connections between our minds and bodies, and the human species and the environment, reflected in music production and experience? Is there such a concept as post-human art? First, we must look at the idea of human creativity in relation to production, and if the concept of creativity is a purely human characteristic. Pepperell (1995, pp. 101) writes:

“In posthuman terms the subject of art is interesting not only because it is traditionally seen as a defining human product, but it also represents an area of activity in which the processes of invention, creation and aesthetic production are highly concentrated and visible”

Pepperell’s use of “traditionally” alerts us to the idea that due to advances in technology, a recurring idea in post-humanist theory, art production may no longer be a defining characteristic of being human. In the foreword of “The Posthuman Condition”, Pepperell (1995, pp. IV) states:

“[Post-human] refers to the general convergence of biology and technology to the point where they are increasingly becoming indistinguishable”

This raises questions for both post-human art and human/machine collaboration. The latter can be seen in Pepperell’s own audio/visual exhibition “Generator”, which resulted in the production of an audio/visual piece of art through human and machine collaboration. Such a piece could be considered post-humanist, as neither contributor had full control over the result, yet operated under specific creative constraints. Comparable to Turner’s ‘Deluge’ (Turner, 1843), of which Pepperell (1995, pp. 106) writes, “The discontinuities of the [painting] produce an aesthetically stimulating experience”, “Generator” is intended to interrupt the flow of art production, while being produced within creative limitations. The term “creative limitations” refers to constraints placed on an artist wishing to create an original piece of art. Using music production as an example, we can see that there are constraints such as genre, tempo, melody, harmony and time signature, among many others. Pepperell (1995, pp. 115) states:

“A composer, then, is put in the position of having, on one hand, a series of almost infinite musical possibilities whilst, on the other, a set of constraints that determine the success, or otherwise, of the composition”

These constraints are essential to art production, as, without them, there would be no structure to a piece, resulting in a “formless yet repetitive cacophony” (Pepperell, 1995, pp. 118). A creative person needs to understand the rules of their medium and be able to produce a piece that operates under these creative rules, yet ensuring the piece is somewhat new and exciting. This application of creative constraints can be seen through modern music, resulting in the evolution of many different genres, and new sounds being constantly developed. As technology and therefore society progresses, as do the rules in which creative processes operate. In “The Posthuman Manifesto” (Pepperell, 2005), Pepperell writes;

“Posthuman art uses technology to promote discontinuity. Healthy societies tolerate the promotion of discontinuity since they understand that humans need exposure to it, in spite of themselves. Unhealthy societies discourage the promotion of discontinuity”.

Considering this, we can assume that, for art to be considered “post-human”, it must be produced under at least two conditions. Firstly, there must be a convergence, or collaboration, of biology and technology, or human and machine. Secondly, the product must somehow “interrupt the flow” of art production. That is, to be considered “good” through post-humanist standards, the product must contain “an element of disorder (discontinuity)” (Pepperell, 2005). This concept of discontinuity can be seen in Pepperell’s “Generator” exhibition and reinforces the idea of “Generator” as an example of post-humanist art.

Using these standards, we can now examine popular music in terms of post-humanism. For example, the genre dubstep is a relatively new sound to explore in terms of developing technologies. Originating in South London almost a decade ago as dub remixes of garage music, dubstep began to be promoted at the London club Plastic People’s “FWD>>” night, along with similar garage music. The term “dubstep” was attached the genre in 2002 and the genre achieved moderate success through 2003, gaining the support of Radio 1 DJs John Peel and Mary Anne Hobbs. Commenting on the genre, Mary Anne Hobbs stated (O’Connell, 2006):

“After you’ve been as passionately involved with alternative electronic music for as long as I have, to come across something so utterly original… well, it really changed my life. Dubstep is a sound that will literally stop you in your tracks, it’s so powerful and elemental”

However, dubstep could not have been produced before the advancement of technology. Many producers rely on music sequencers to create essential elements of the music, such as bass lines, sampled sounds, drum patterns and bass wobbles. Wobbles are especially interesting to study in terms of advances in technology as, before the development of electronic synthesisers, achieving such a sound would be almost impossible. A bass wobble is when a bass note is manipulated by using a low frequency oscillator to manipulate the volume, filter cut-off or distortion on a track and can be heard especially in club-friendly dubstep songs. This reliance on Digital Audio Workstations by music producers again raises the question of human and machine collaboration, as using a music sequencer could be seen as collaboration, but with a more controlling human input. Pepperell (1995, pp. 122) writes of creating his music composition software ‘Playtime’:

“This was in contrast to the more predictable ‘master-slave’ relationship we traditionally expect of technology, especially complex control devices like music sequencers”

With the interaction of humans and music sequencing software, dubstep could be labelled as post-human art, as it is created through human and machine collaboration, despite the human having almost all control in the relationship. But what does this convergence of biology and technology mean for those that listen to dubstep? Are these individuals “new kinds” of humans, based on the music they listen to, as it is hugely influenced by production software? Although the production of dubstep could be labelled as post-humanist, the experience of such a piece does not carry the same connotations; listening to dubstep, with its human and machine collaboration, is no more post-human than listening to any other produced song. That is to say, despite the convergence of biology and technology in the production of the song, there is no such convergence in the experience of it; the collaboration between human and machine in the production, does not apply to the audience of the product. As previously mentioned, dubstep was built upon and developed from UK Garage music, but had to operate within the constraints provided by music composition. However, with the invention of this new genre, dubstep has since produced its own set of creative limitations.

If an artist wishes to produce a dubstep piece, they must operate under the use of bass lines, syncopated rhythms, 138-142bpm, “wobble bass” and “bass drops” to name a few. Again, “wobble bass” is distinctive to dubstep, as previously mentioned, yet “bass drops” are interesting to study due to their inclusion in other genres of music. Inherited from drum and bass music, and also found in metal-core music, a “bass drop” or “drop” usually follows after a section of music which builds to a short silence. The actual drop may consist of a louder, lower bass line and added percussion, giving the song a more intense feel. When asked about producing “drops”, dubstep and electro-house producer Skrillex wrote the following (MusicRadar, 2011):

“The easiest trick I use is basically to make sure that whatever sample you’re using, it’s hitting at 200Hz. Look through a spectrum analyser and you’ll see a little ‘dunk’, and it should sound like that”.

This use of a spectrum analyser in popular music can again be seen as a reliance on technology to produce art. However, this technology has allowed the creator to produce a piece of music that works within the genre’s creative limitations. Therefore, music composition as a whole has its own creative limitations, but there are further limitations for music production, if a musician wishes to create a song belonging to an already established genre. Elements of post-humanism can be observed in both music production and experience, yet they are not necessarily obvious. With Pepperell’s “Generator”, which essentially became a collaboration between human and machine, certain aspects are reflected in production of modern music, especially forms of electronic dance music. It could be argued that music sequencing programs such as Ableton Live 8, which contains automatic beat-matching software which supports the user during music production, are post-humanist as, despite the relationship being master-slave, both the individual and the software are working together to create a piece of art.

Ableton Live can be seen as emblematic of post-human technology, as using such a program can be seen as a convergence of human and machine which results in a creative output. As previously mentioned, Pepperell’s (1995, pg 101) quote that art is “an area of activity in which the processes of invention, creation and aesthetic production are highly concentrated and visible” reflects the connection between human and machine, as the creation of music using Ableton Live is hugely interfaced by the software itself. Due to this, the producers of Ableton Live consider the program to be more than music software; (Ableton.com, 2011):

Ableton Live is about making music; for composition, song writing, recording, production, remixing and live performance. Live’s nonlinear, intuitive flow, alongside powerful real-time editing and flexible performance options, make it a unique studio tool and a favorite with live performers. If you’d rather be “making music” than just “using music software,” Ableton Live is for you.

The distinction between “making music” and “using music software” makes it obvious that the creators of the program set out to produce software that goes further than allowing the user to produce music; the software also contributes to the production of the piece, along with the individual using the program. Boasting “drag-and-drop simplicity in a familiar pad-style interface” and working “seamlessly with controller hardware” among many, many other functions, the interface of Ableton Live is easy for an individual to navigate and begin making music with. However, does the inclusion of such a program in music production change humans as musicians? Does using such a program turn an individual into a “post-humanist musician” and is music produced through such methods becoming more popular? There has certainly been a rise in electronic music, ever since the 1970’s, with artists using electronic instruments in their compositions. This has led to more advanced electronic instruments being created and developed which, in turn, led to advanced music production software. This means music composition now bears very little resemblance to traditional music performance production. Jim Morrison, in 1969, said the following to Rolling Stone (Rollingstone.com, 2009/Zeult, 2007).

“I guess that one day the new generation’s music will be a synthesis of those two elements and some third thing. Maybe it will rely heavily on electronics—tapes? I can kind of envision one person surrounded by a lot of machines—tapes and electronic setups—singing or speaking and using machines.”

The rise of technology in music can be seen through both modern music and the explosion of new genres, artists, sounds and sequencing programs. It is now possible to create music using only a laptop computer, without the need to buy or rent musical instruments or musicians. This democratisation of music production, combined with the availability of content on the internet, results in a society with millions of songs and artists readily available to listen to, while also constantly producing new music. This revolution in music production can be attributed to advancing technology, which is essential to a post-human society. It could then be said that music made using Ableton Live and, therefore, any other Digital Audio Workstation, is essentially post-human, due to the collaboration between humans and machines, both using interfaced technology for music production. Programs such as Ableton Live and other Digital Audio Workstations could be seen as emblematic of a post-human society, as the technology involved will always rely on human/machine collaboration to produce a piece; Ableton Live cannot produce a piece of music by itself. Similarly, the online flash-based synthesizer ToneMatrix (Michelle, 2009) relies on human/machine (or algorithm) collaboration to produce a piece of music. Consisting of 256 individual cells, each with its own allocated audio clip, ToneMatrix relays audio back whenever a user selects a certain cell, based on a pre-programmed algorithm. However, the application still needs human input to produce music, as it cannot select cells by itself. Again, this could be seen as a convergence between human and machine and embodies the essence of post-humanism. Experiencing a piece created with such an application could be included with the idea of human/machine collaboration, as the synthesizer is intended for individual use, and the line between producing and experiencing is suddenly blurred. Ending his blog post on the synthesizer with “Audio is the next big thing in Flash” (Michelle, 2009), Andre Michelle refers to a flash player; software for viewing animations and films a web browser. Noting audio as “the next big thing”, it may be entirely possible that computer programs in the future focus more on audio and music production through human and machine collaboration, promoting both the concept of post-humanism and post-humanist art.

In conclusion, it would seem that there are already elements of post-humanism in modern electronic music production, as many Digital Audio Workstations can automatically analyse and edit a piece of music with little human interaction, turning the production of a piece into human/machine collaboration. As post-humanism is based on advancing technology, and the convergence of biology and technology, this may mean that the future of music production is set to become even more collaborative, as production software advances. Combining this with Pepperell’s comments about discontinuity in post-humanist art, which is essential to a healthy post-human society, it becomes obvious that there are already pieces of music which could be labelled post-humanist. As already stated, dubstep can be considered post-humanist; it is created through human/machine collaboration, it interrupts the flow of music production and it operates under the creative constraints presented by music production as a whole, as well as creating its own creative limitations for the genre. This both impacts society and the concept of music production itself, as new methods of music production have an effect on the audience of such a piece and the already established methods of production. As noted with Pepperell’s theory, such discontinuities in art production healthily contribute to a post-humanist society, and promote the concept of post-humanism.

Sources

Books

Chadabe, J. 2004. Organised Sound: Electronic Music and Life.

Emmerson, S. 2007. Living Electronic Music. Aldershot: Ashgate

Gilbert-Rolfe, J. 1999. Beauty and the Contemporary Sublime. New York: Allworth Press.

Pepperell, R. 1995. The Posthuman Condition: Consciousness beyond the brain. Bristol: Intellect Books.

Pepperell, R. 2000. The Posthuman Conception Of Consciousness: A 10 Point Guide. Intellect Books.

Magazines

Ananthaswamy, A. 2010: “Mind over matter? How your body does your thinking”, New Scientist. 24 March 2010.

Robson, D. 2011. “Your clever body: Thinking from head to toe”, New Scientist. 15 October 2011.

Electronic and Online Sources

Websites

Ableton.com, 2011. “Ableton Live 8” [Online]. Available at: http://www.ableton.com/live-8 [Accessed 18-11-11]

Ananthaswamy, A. 2010: “Mind over matter? How your body does your thinking”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20527535.100-mind-over-matter-how-your-body-does-your-thinking.html. [Accessed 11-11-11].

De Wilde, G. 2006. “Put a bit of dub in your step”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3655896/Put-a-bit-of-dub-in-your-step.html. [Accessed 12-11-11]

Fairhall, S. L., & Ishai, A., 2007. “Neural correlates of object indeterminacy in art compositions, Consciousness and Cognition”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.robertpepperell.com/papers/Fairhall&Ishai_ConCog07.pdf [Accessed 18-11-11]

Howstuffworks.com, “How many senses does a human being have?” [Online]. Available at: http://tlc.howstuffworks.com/family/question242.htm. [Accessed 05-01-12]

MakeTunes.com, 2009. “The Tone Matrix – an online synth with 16 step sequencer”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.maketunes.com/blog/matt/the-tone-matrix-an-online-synth-with-16-step-sequencer. [Accessed 05-01-12].

Michelle, A. 2009. “The amazing ride of Tone Matrix”. [Online]. Available at: http://blog.andre-michelle.com/2009/the-amazing-ride-of-tonematrix/. [Accessed 05-01-12].

MusicRadar, 2011. “Interview; Skrillex on Ableton Live, plug-ins, production and more”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.musicradar.com/news/tech/interview-skrillex-on-ableton-live-plug-ins-production-and-more-510973/2 [Accessed 18-11-11]

O’Connell, S. 2006. “Dubstep”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.timeout.com/london/music/features/2083/3.html. [Accessed 12-11-11].

Pepperell, R. 1998. “The Posthuman Conception of Consciousness: A 10 point guide”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.robertpepperell.com/papers/The%20Posthuman%20Conception.pdf. [Accessed 11-11-11].

Pepperell, R. 1995. “The Posthuman Condition: Consciousness beyond the brain”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.robertpepperell.com/papers/Posthuman%20Condition.pdf. [Accessed 11-11-11].

Pepperell, R. 2005. “The Posthuman Manifesto: VII. Statements on art and creativity.” [Online]. Available at: http://intertheory.org/pepperell.htm. [Accessed 08-01-12].

Robson, D. 2011. “Your clever body: Thinking from head to toe” [Online]. Available at: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21228341.500-your-clever-body-thinking-from-head-to-toe.html. [Accessed 11-11-11].

Rollingstone.com. 2009. “Flashback: Jim Morrison predicts the future of music in 1969”. [Online]. Available at: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/blogs/staff-blog/flashback-jim-morrison-predicts-the-future-of-music-in-1969-20090501. [Accessed 05-01-12].

Image, Video and Application.

Michelle, A. 2009. ToneMatrix. [Online Application] Available at : http://lab.andre-michelle.com/tonematrix. [Accessed 05-01-12].

Turner, J. M. W. 1843. “Shade and Darkness – the Evening of the Deluge”. [Photograph of Oil on Canvas] Available at: http://www.victorianweb.org/painting/turner/paintings/evening.jpg [Accessed 09-01-12]

Zeult, 2007.The Doors – Interview (French subtiles) part 2. [Online video]. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8wblCPj2Meg. [Accessed 05-01-12] (Quote taken from 4.35 onwards).