De-trivialising Music Torture as Torture-lite Natasha Lin Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Music by Research November 2012 Melbourne Conservatorium of Music The University of Melbourne Supervisor: Dr. Melanie Plesch Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………………...i Declaration…………………………………………………………………………….ii Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………..……….iii Chapter 1: Introduction……………….…………..…….………………………..……1 Chapter 2: Current understandings on music torture ……………………………...….4 Chapter 3: Torture by music……………………….……………………………..……9 Chapter 4: Torture-lite…….…….………………………………………………...….15 Chapter 5: Music torture: Is it really torture-lite?…………..………………….…….23 Chapter 6: “It’s O.K. – it’s only torture-lite!”………..……………………….……...31 Chapter 7: Facing the music……...….….……………………………………………36 Bibliography……….…………………………............................................................39 Abstract Music torture is an important interdisciplinary issue in need of great research, particularly in the wake of the events of 11 September 2001. It is an issue that ties into the broader context of torture, a topic of heated debate in the US-led “War on Terror”. Arising from this debate is the concept of “torture-lite”, a term that has emerged within political, social and academic discourse. Although using music as torture is not a new phenomenon, its importance as a research topic is heightened within the current political and social climate sensitive to the ethics of torture. Such sensitivities have resulted in certain interrogation methods, one of which is music torture, being loosely categorised as torture-lite. However, this categorisation is fraught with misconceived ideas on the relationship between sound and body, and mitigates the destructive potential of music torture. Thus, I am arguing that music torture is not torture-lite, as the term “torture-lite” trivialises the severity of music torture and favours the continuation of its use. i Declaration This is to certify that i. the thesis comprises only my original work towards the Masters ii. due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used, iii. the thesis is 10, 763 words in length, exclusive of bibliography. Signed by _________________________________ Natasha Lin ii Acknowledgements The process of researching this topic has not been an easy one, and it is with the help of many that this paper can be completed. My sincere gratitude extends to the various staff in The University of Melbourne. I thank Professor Catherine Falk for referring me to my supervisor, Dr. Melanie Plesch, whose academic guidance, support and encouragement has seen the completion of this thesis. I also thank Mr. Ian Godfrey and Mr. Benjamin Martin for the various interesting conversations regarding this topic, and Ms. Lena Vigilante for directing me to the various university library tools available in aiding my research process. I thank the staff members at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology: Mr. Peter Chambers, for having been a fantastic teacher who is a great inspiration in my pursuit for more knowledge on issues of social injustices, and for introducing me to Dr. Robin Cameron, whose advice and suggestions on readings on current US torture regimes has immensely guided the direction of my topic. I also extend my gratitude to my family and friends for their support and encouragement on a research topic that resulted in many sleepless nights. A sincere thank you to a particular friend who gave up valuable time and shared his editorial expertise to help me throughout this research and writing process. iii Chapter 1 Introduction Music, as a human phenomenon, has permeated throughout our history, our societies and traditions. Although to analyse and understand the definition, and the function of music within our societies and cultures is a scope that is beyond this thesis, what is clear, and what has been stipulated through sociological research,1 is that the importance of music is extensive. It promotes and maintains health and wellbeing, it functions as a form of social cohesion and as an expression of autonomy, and it has symbolic importance in times of celebration, crisis and war. Overall, music has the “seductive power to caress the skin, to immerse, to sooth, beckon, and heal, to modulate brain waves and massage the release of certain hormones within the body.” 2 However, less is known about the effect of music used for negative and violent purposes, or how the potential of music can be harnessed for the purposes of creating distress, fear and terror. One such use of music for violent means is its use as a method of interrogation. Known as music torture, it is the bombardment of loud, repetitive music into the detention cell where the detainee is kept. This “treatment” usually lasts for hours, and sometimes up to days and weeks, as part of the overall interrogation repertoire to sleep-deprive and sensory-overload the detainee for further interrogation. The concern of this method of interrogation lies within the broader context in the debate on the use of torture, a discussion that has become especially prominent after the destruction of the World Trade Centre in New York City on September 11, 2001 (9/11). Particularly after the worldwide leaks of photographs evidencing the treatment of detainees in Abu Ghraib since 2004, there have been many international protests against the United States’ (US) uses of torture, especially considering the United Nations (UN) prohibition of torture since 1984. As a result, it is now known that the US has adopted various interrogation techniques to circumvent the technical definition of torture, and has further devised various memoranda on torture that stipulate the procedures of interrogation, so that such methods cannot be legally defined as torture. Public discourses now term these specific types of interrogation 1 Further details on the positive influence music has on well-being can be found in Robert E. Krout, “Music listening to facilitate relaxation and promote wellness: Integrated aspects of our neurophysiological responses to music,” The Arts in Psychotherapy 34 (2007); and Philip Ball, The Music Instinct: How Music Works and Why We Can’t Do Without It (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011). 2 Steve Goodman, Sonic Warfare: Sound, Affect, and the Ecology of Fear (Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010), 10. 1 procedures as “torture-lite”: methods that are considered “lighter” in punishment and, therefore, a sub-category of torture. It is now popularly accepted that music torture is considered as a torture-lite method of interrogation, one that is, consequently, more “acceptable” within the debate on the ethical nature of torture, and within the terror- stricken context of safeguarding national security. To conveniently categorise music torture as torture-lite is an assumptive generalisation of what music is, an assumption that ignores the potential of sound and its effects on a physiological and psychological level. In other words, the impact of sound on the human body cannot be undermined. This can be best understood through the destructive impact of excessive sound on the auditory complex. Short, explosive sounds that exceed 140dB can sever the connection between the Organ of Corti structure with the basilar membrane of the ear, causing immediate, permanent hearing loss.3 Similarly, exposure to noise at “relatively high intensity levels (e.g. 85dB or higher) over an extended period of time” causes a pathological metabolic change in the cilia hair cells of the ear, which “will lead to the impairment of internal amplification of the travelling waves of the cochlea”.4 Ultimately, continuous exposure to excessive, intense sound can cause “diminished intellectual capacity, accelerated respiration and heartbeat, hypertension, slowed digestion, neurosis, [and] altered diction”.5 However, it is the impact of excessive sound on the human psyche wherein lies the destructive potential of music as a method of torture. It is the dimension of sound, and music being part of the larger landscape of sound, which brings “into the field of power the dimension of unsound, of frequencies just outside the periphery of human audibility, infrasound and ultrasound, as well as the nonstandard use of popular music, not as a source of pleasure, but for irritation, manipulation, pain, and torture.”6 The symbolic use of sound as a form of territorial delineation has been implemented in the deterrence of loitering in public spaces by certain countries. One can also imagine how such symbolism can be translated from the use of music as a form of religious and political insult to a detainee in a 3 Eileen Daniel, “Noise and Hearing Loss: A Review” Journal of School Health 77, 5 (2007), 226. 4 Fei Zhao et. al., “Music exposure and hearing disorders: An overview” International Journal of Audiology, 49 (2010): 55. 5 Jacques Attali, Noise: the Political Economy of Music, translated by Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1985), 27. This is also the basis of noise control in countries including the United Kingdom (UK), Canada, the US and Australia. 6 Goodman, Sonic Warfare: Sound, Affect, and the ecology of fear, 17. 2 military prison. Thus, to conveniently categorise music torture as torture-lite is a generalisation that assumes what music is, an assumption that ignores the intimate relationship between sound and the body. As Jacques Attali states, sound, “beyond a certain limit, becomes an immaterial