Dissertation.Pdf (5.136Mb)
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ESSAYS ON PORT COMPETITIVENESS DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AGDER ZIAUL HAQUE MUNIM Metaphor as a 58 Communication Strategy within a Pop Music Recording Setting DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF AGDER 195 Elin Synnøve Bråthen 2 Elin Synnøve Bråthen Metaphor as a Communication Strategy within a Pop Music Recording Setting Dissertation for the Degree of Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) at Faculty of Fine Arts. Specialization in Popular Music Performance University of Agder Faculty of Fine Arts 2012 3 Doctoral Dissertations at the University of Agder 58 ISBN: 978-82-7117-722-5 ISSN: 1504-9272 Elin Synnøve Bråthen 2013 Printed by the Printing Office, University of Agder Kristiansand 4 Abstract My area of research is the figurative language used by artists/songwriters, musicians, producers, and sound engineers when working together in the studio to record a pop album. The aim of this dissertation is to explore the metaphors occurring in the participants’ musicspeak both to refer to sound events and to negotiate musical solutions. The project is part of the growing tendency to research popular music without being limited to “music as text” (music as a product solely of sound or score), but rather including the culture that surrounds the music. It also joins another growing tendency to research popular music from a sociological angle, looking at the interplay and interaction of human communication mechanisms in a real and current setting where the researcher is part of the culture under research. This interdisciplinary project deals with follows a sociolinguistic route into music performance, and reads and interprets the way participants use dialogue (i.e. the way participants use and exchange metaphorical linguistic expressions) that is closely knitted to sound events. Figurative language is looked at from an interactive point of view; the way it is used in a socio-cultural context, embedded in a dialogue process, and not as an individual cognitive device for producing and processing “image concepts.” The research data is presented and discussed mainly in terms of “conceptual metaphor theory” and “blending theory.” Because the project focuses on the linguistic dialogical content, this dissertation may prove interesting and relevant to people engaged in communication as a general topic, as well as those who are directly involved in music or music-related activities: music students, musicians, songwriters, producers, members of the music industry in general, and scholars within the field of popular music research. 5 What then is truth? A mobile army of metaphors, metonyms and anthropomorphisms (Nietzsche) Acknowledgements This study is the product of a three-year-long scholarship granted by the University of Agder (2008-2012), Southern Norway. Both the artistic and the academic part of this performance PhD have been conducted at different settings in Oslo. First and foremost I wish to thank my supervisor, Professor Tor Dybo, for useful comments and constructive criticism. Other professors on the doctorate programme at UiA have also offered invaluable feedback: Stan Hawkins, Michael Rauhut, Geir Holmsen, and Bjørn Ole Rasch. A number of guest lecturers at the Department of Music have meant a great deal to this project, both as inspirations and as powerful scholarly voices, especially those of you who took the time and energy to comment on my project while visiting UiA: Philip Tagg, Derek Scott, Peter Wicke, Anne Danielsen, and Alan F. Moore. Likewise, my peers on the doctorate programme have been a tremendous support in the process. Thank you Marita Buanes, Erik Askerøi, Sunniva Hovde, Per Elias Drabløs, Jo Brodtkorb, Daniel Nordgård, and others. Furthermore, my study is the product of communication with a large number of people who have read and commented upon various parts of the project at its various stages. I am grateful to all, but would like to specially thank Olav Starheimsæter and David Lee, Gry Stålsett, Kaisa Ytterhaug, Henry Langseth, and the librarians at UiA: Anne Åse Kallhovd and Are Skisland. Thanks also to photographer Astrid Lunke for taking snapshots while working in the studio conducting the artistic part of the project. My thanks go to PR-company Leo Burnett for sponsoring the recording device used for collecting fieldwork material. I am truly indebted to my informants: my producer, the sound engineers at Musikkloftet and Fersk Lyd in Oslo, and also my session musicians and guest performers on the album. Without you this would have been – in the words of Simon Frith – “an oddly bloodless affair.” Oslo, December 28, 2012. 6 Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………… 5 Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………. 6 Table of Contents……………………………………………………………… 7 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………… 195 Introduction 11 I. Area of Research………………………………………………………... 14 II. The World of Music Recording: Speaking about Sound……………….. 16 III. Delimitation and Claims………………………………………………... 19 IV. The Challenge of Terminology – Some Key Concepts……………….... 20 V. Design of Dissertation………………………………………………….. 24 Chapter 1: Sources, Methodology, Action Research: Elaborations on Issues in Question 25 1.1 Source Literature – The Present Research Field………………………... 25 1.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………..... 30 1.2.1 Data Collection Methods………………………………………... 31 1.2.2 Recording Log…………………………………………………... 32 1.2.3 The Artistic Part of the PhD…………………………………….. 33 1.3 Processing and Structuring Research Data……………………………... 34 1.4 Action Research………………………………………………………… 36 1.4.1 Self-Ethnography: Coping with the Double-Role………………. 38 1.4.2 Peer-Ethnography: Some Ethical Concerns……………………... 40 Chapter 2: The Participants’ Backgrounds, Ethnographic Settings 42 2.1 Signature Features of Popular Music Production………………………. 42 2.2 Background Information on the Participants…………………………… 44 2.2.1 Artist……………………………………………………………. 44 2.2.2 Artist and Musicians’ Educational Background………………... 46 2.2.3 Producer………………………………………………………… 46 2.2.4 Sound Engineers………………………………………………… 47 2.3 Role Clarifications……………………………………………………… 47 2.4 Ethnographic Settings and Structure of Recording……………………… 48 7 2.4.1 Ethnographic Settings…………………………………………… 48 2.4.2 Structure of Recording Sessions………………………………… 51 2.5 Enculturation on a Micro-Level…………………………………………. 53 Chapter 3: Figurative Language, Conceptual Metaphor, and Musicians’ Codes: Definitions and Clarifications 56 3.1 Figurative Language……………………………………………………. 56 3.2 Conceptual Metaphor (CM)…………………………………………….. 57 3.3 Metaphors: Something We Live By?………………………………….... 58 3.3.1 Do Metaphors Govern Our Thinking?…………………………... 59 3.3.2 Cross-Domain Mapping……………………………………….... 60 3.3.3 The Logic of Conceptual Metaphor…………………………….. 60 3.4 Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Blending Theory (BT)……… 61 3.5 Why Are Metaphors Important in a Studio Recording Setting?………... 63 3.6 Metaphors in Musical Settings: The Codes……………………………... 64 3.6.1 Traditional Codes (Western Classical Music Vocabulary)……... 65 3.6.2 Technical Codes………………………………………………… 66 3.6.3 Referential Codes……………………………………………….. 66 3.6.4 Creative Codes (MLE)………………………………………….. 66 Chapter 4: Conceptual Metaphor in Discussing Visions and Ambitions for Vocal Expression and the Album as a Whole 68 4.1 Preparing the Album Recording: Visions and Ambitions……………… 69 4.2 Conceptual Metaphor in Discussions about Vocal Expression………… 69 4.2.1 Singing as Sports, Objects to Manipulate, Chameleons………… 69 4.2.2 The Old Vocal Style versus The New Vocal Style……………… 71 4.2.3 The Quest for Magic in the Mysterious…………………………. 74 4.2.4 Vocal Expression: Yes List and No List………………………... 75 4.3 Singing as Storytelling………………………………………………….. 76 4.4 Discussing Some Artist References…………………………………….. 77 4.5 Making Choices about the Album as a Whole………………………….. 79 Chapter 5: Making Ghost Music: Conceptual Metaphor Theory and Blending Theory in Dialogue Analysis of the Track “I Stood In Your Courtyard” 81 5.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………….. 81 5.2 Making Ghost Pop……………………………………………………… 83 5.3 Sound is a Ghost………………………………………………………... 85 5.3.1 KEYBOARD SOUND IS A GHOST…………………………………. 86 5.3.2 GUITAR SOUND IS A GHOST……………………………………... 87 5.3.3 DRUM SOUND IS A GHOST……………………………………….. 89 8 5.3.4 VOCAL EXPRESSION IS A GHOST………………………………… 92 5.4 Summing up the Ghost Image Framework and MLE-Codes…………… 94 5.5 Staging Sound in “I Stood In Your Courtyard”…………………………. 98 Chapter 6: Framework Images and Personification 101 6.1 Personification as a Communication Strategy………………………….. 101 6.2 Crying Desperately in the Department of Sparse?……………………… 102 6.3 Framework Images and Overall Mood…………………………………. 103 6.3.1 Forest Ogress…………………………………………………… 104 6.3.2 Haiku Song and Monster………………………………………... 104 6.3.3 Veiled in a Star Fog……………………………………………... 105 6.4 Personification of Songs………………………………………………… 107 6.4.1 Track 8: Lady With Black Sheep – Flirting with Jazz…………... 108 6.4.2 Track 4: Lift Your Anchor – The Sensitive Kind………………… 109 6.4.3 Track 2: Poetry – Dancing or Dying…………………………….. 109 6.4.4 Track 3: Ride Into Dawn – Four Ways of Using Personification... 110 6.4.4.1 SONGS ARE BOLD TRAVELLERS…………………………… 111 6.4.4.2 SONGS ARE OPTIMISTIC…………………………………… 111 6.4.4.3 SONGS ARE NEEDY AND SCREAMING……………………... 112 6.4.4.4 BORING SONGS ARE TOOTHLESS………………………….. 112 6.5 Personification of Musical Parameters, Collectively and Individually…. 113 6.5.1 Dynamics of the Band Personified – Taking a Leap over the Cliff’ 113 6.5.2 Song Arrangement Personified – Pretty, Styled, and on a Diet…. 115 6.5.3 Keyboards