Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-846f6c7c4f-x6crq Total loading time: 0.33 Render date: 2022-07-06T16:35:17.281Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Towards a Relational Understanding of the Performance Ecosystem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2011

Tom Davis*
Affiliation:
Poole House, Talbot Campus, Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, BH12 5BB

Abstract

This article seeks to form a deeper understanding of the performance ecosystem by drawing parallels with Bourriaud's Relational Aesthetics and Guattari's conception of subjectivity as outlined in Chaosmosis. Through an examination of participation within performance, and a recognition of the mutability of the roles of performer, listener, instrument and environment in the creation of the music event, this article examines the place of subjectivity, the capacity for self-creation, in the formation of a group aesthetic. Such a concept places the creation of meaning not within the individual participant but rather within the relationship between participants in a situation, a relationship that recognises the interaction between individuals, societies and institutions in its production. Such a discussion helps further our understanding of the performance ecosystem as a conceptual tool.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barthes, R. 1977. Image Music Text. London: Fontana Press.Google Scholar
Bishop, C. 2004. Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics. October 110: 5179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bishop, C. 2006. Participation. London: Whitechapel.Google ScholarPubMed
Bourriaud, N. 1998. Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Les presses du réel.Google Scholar
Bourriaud, N. 2001. Public Relations: Bennett Simpson Talks With Nicolas Bourriaud, Artforum (April 2001). Available at http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0268/is_8_39/ai_75830815 (accessed 20 April 2011).Google Scholar
Bowers, John. 2003. Improvising Machines: Ethnographically Informed Design for Improvised Electro-acoustic Music. Available at http://www.ariada.uea.ac.uk/ariadatexts/ariada4 (accessed 27 October 2006).Google Scholar
Fried, M. 1967. Art and Objecthood. In C. Harrison and P. Wood (eds), Art in Theory, 1900–1990: An Anthology of Changing Ideas. Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.Google Scholar
Guattari, F. 1995. Chaosmosis: An Ethico-aesthetic Paradigm, trans. P. Bains and J. Pefanis. Sydney: Power Publications.Google Scholar
Guattari, F. 1996. Subjectivities: For Better and for Worse. In G. Genosko (ed.), The Guattari Reader. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 193203.Google Scholar
Impett, J. 2001. Interaction, Simulation and Invention: A Model for Interactive Music. In E. Bilotta, E.R. Miranda, P. Pantano and P.M. Todd (eds), Proceedings of ALMMA 2001 Workshop on Artificial Models for Musical Applications. Cosenza: Editoriale Bios, 108119.Google Scholar
Maturana, H., Varela, F. 1980. Autopoiesis and Cognition: The Realization of the Living. Netherlands: Reidel Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno, A., Etxeverria, A. 2005. Agency in Natural and Artificial Systems. Artificial Life 11(1–2): 161176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Sullivan, S. 2006. Academy: The Production of Subjectivity. In Irit Rogoff et al. (eds), Academy. Frankfurt: Revolver.Google Scholar
Ranciere, J. 2007. The Emancipated Spectator. Art Forum (March): 270281.Google Scholar
Small, C. 1998. Musicking: The Meanings of Performing and Listening. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press.Google Scholar
Ungvary, T., Kieslinger, M. 1996. Towards a Musician's Cockpit. Proceedings of the International Computer Music Conference. Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Waters, Simon. 2007. Performance Ecosystems: Ecological Approaches to Musical Interaction’. Proceedings of the Electroacoustic Music Studies Network 2007. http://www.ems-network.org/spip.php?article278.Google Scholar
4
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Towards a Relational Understanding of the Performance Ecosystem
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Towards a Relational Understanding of the Performance Ecosystem
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Towards a Relational Understanding of the Performance Ecosystem
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *