Introduction

“What I’m trying out at this stage of my life is new formats, or new settings maybe, or formats and settings that have been tried before but then been forgotten or put aside because established formats have such a powerful hold on our thinking.” (Toop p.582)

This article is an interview with David Toop made in 2014.

Summary

Toop finds “sound art” problematic. 1. The economy of the art world. (issues of value – e.g. Banksy, Monet, exclusive, elitist, class, privilege, crime, capitalism, status of artists, precarity, austerity) – provide examples and case studies to back up your argument. 2. The creation of an object (even if a text, concept, or installation) – “sound work was always about a process”

Reflection and Discussion

There are a few contradictions in Toop’s discourse – one the one hand he talks about process and an artistic process should be a natural instinct rather than a job, by characterising art as “work” he sets up barriers, and is then complicit in the capitalist appropriation of “art”. One the other hand, making art takes practice, and is hard work. Art is a practice, a skill, “techne”.

Conclusion / Future Work

Questions

“Sound art” first used in 1983? Where? by Whom?

Who is David Toop?

Is all expensive art money laundering? Tax havens?

“the economy of clout”

References (Harvard System)

Author Surname, initial . (year) Title. Publisher. City.

Small, C. (1998) Musicking : The meanings of performing and listening. Wesleyan University Press. Middletown, CT

Lamar, K. (2015 ) To Pimp a Butterfly. Top Dawg / Interscope. B0023464-01

Glossary

orthodox –

problematic / problematicise

etymology

hybrid – “like a car/t/plant/synth/person/genre” / half and half

genre / aesthetics / identity / ethos / hyper-individuality / branding