Today Ben has informed our group that he went to the park and recorded multiple sounds that were present at the time of the recording.

Now that we’ve gained footage we need to compile it into a one minute soundscape. However, the question of whether or not a narrative is needed has appeared and its confusing my idea of what this studio aims to mean. By attaching a narrative or audio of some sort, on top of the recorded sounds (whether the script be teleological or abstract), I feel like it makes the soundscape inherit a correlationist view.

By having ‘us’ describe elements of the nature, we’re attaching human interpretation to the micro-politics of the natural world. How do we really know if the water from the sprinkler is feeding the grass with nutrients, or if theres a huge monster underneath that is absorbing it all? Surely, it would be better not to attach human voice but instead attempt to edit sounds provided in a way that shows a connection to one another (perhaps through sound editing techniques of fade etc).

Or maybe we just incorporate speech in little pieces throughout the piece, instead of for the duration of the minute? But, I’m wary though by doing that as it might be interpreted as lack of script = a lack of effort.

Me dunno.