Inspired by its use in literary theory, film criticism and the discourse of game design, Salomé Voegelin adapts and develops "possible world theory" in relation to sound. David K Lewis' Possible World is juxtaposed with Maurice Merleau-Ponty's life-world, to produce a meeting of the semantic and the phenomenological at the place of listening.
The central tenet of Sonic Possible Worlds is that at present traditional musical compositions and contemporary sonic outputs are approached and investigated through separate and distinct critical languages and histories. As a consequence, no continuous and comparative study of the field is possible.
In Sonic Possible Worlds , Voegelin proposes a new analytical framework that can access and investigate works across genres and times, enabling a comparative engagement where composers such as Henry Purcell and Nadia Boulanger encounter sound art works by Shilpa Gupta and Christina Kubisch and where the soundscape compositions of Chris Watson and Francisco López resound in the visual worlds of Louise Bourgeois.
I like what Voegelin has to say in this book; a lot. Her analysis of the cultural and philosophical aspects of contemporary sound works is very strong and I appreciate almost any discussion of new music that goes beyond music theory and other technical issues.
But I no longer have much tolerance for the awkward academic prose style that Voegelin uses in most of the book. Others have written far more clearly about abstract phenomenological matters and how they pertain to contemporary arts. If the writing in this book were less tortured, I would have given it five stars.
Academics need to learn how to express themselves 'to the point'. They should not be able to write paragraphs like this: "Sound is the thing thinging, a contingent materiality that is not captured as noun but runs as verb. It is the predicate that does what the world is and yet what the world is, as presumed actuality, is established in its description as nouns, as objects and as subjects, whose sound remains an attribute." C'mon. What is really the point of that?