Amanda Giardina Noise Pollution Sources

Bijsterveld, Karin. Mechanical Sound: Technology, Culture, and  

        Public Problems of Noise in the Twentieth Century. MIT Press,   

         2008.

Chepesiuk, Ron. “Decibel Hell: The Effects of Living in a Noisy World.” Environmental Health 

        Perspectives, vol. 113, no. 1, Jan. 2005, doi:10.1289/ehp.113-a34.

Schafer, R. Murray. The soundscape: our sonic environment and the tuning of the world.                  

         Rochester, Vt.: Destiny Books ;, 19931994. Print.

Sound and Identity

Identifying With 

Yvon Bonefant (2010) Queer Listening To Queer Vocal Timbres, Performance Research, 15:3, 74-80, DOI: 10.1080/13528165.2010.527210

Hovey, Jaime. "Gender Dysphoria." Encyclopedia of Sex and Gender, edited by Fedwa Malti-Douglas, vol. 2, Macmillan Reference USA, 2007, pp. 613-614. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX2896200259/GVRL?u=tulane&sid=GVRL&xid=58197c41. Accessed 14 Nov. 2018.​

Duff, Patricia A. "Language Socialization, Participation and Identity: Ethnographic Approaches." Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 2nd ed., vol. 3: Discourse and Education, Springer, 2008, pp. 107-119. Gale Virtual Reference Library, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX3045500106/GVRL?u=tulane&sid=GVRL&xid=3ccf8cc0. Accessed 13 Nov. 2018.

Identifying Against

Glasberg, Elena. “Our Amy Ray Earworms.” Junebug versus Hurricane, 22 July 2011, junebugvshurricane.wordpress.com/2010/03/11/our-amy-ray-earworms/.

Claire Hudson

Sound and Stereotypes: the Formation of African American Music

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1478-0542.2007.00437.x

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3042309?origin=crossref&sid=primo&seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2784725?seq=3#metadata_info_tab_contents

https://www.jstor.org/stable/779265?origin=crossref&sid=primo&seq=16#metadata_info_tab_contents

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0095798415627917

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1540-5931.2011.00898.x

https://search.proquest.com/docview/1311832789/fulltextPDF/3B81BBD0BE5A4DFCPQ/1?accountid=14437

Sound's Place in Memory Recall

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776393/

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/neural-processing/201709/the-sound-memory

http://www.sensorystudies.org/sensorial-investigations/movement-memory-the-senses-in-soundscape-studies/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3757288/

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09541440903378250

Taylor Reher Noise Pollution Articles

https://www.jstor.org/stable/41143800

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3435734

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23525200

Sound in Sports

Boudwin, Julie. “LSU's Tiger Stadium Named Most Intimidating Stadium in the Country” NOLA.com, NOLA.com, 30 July 2014. www.nola.com/lsu/index.ssf/2014/07/lsus_tiger_stadium_named_most.html.

Arguably the biggest venues in all of sports happens with college football at Tiger Stadium in Louisiana. In 1988, over 100,00 fans gathered to watch LSU score a game winning touchdown. Boudwin from The Times Picayune says, “The crowd reaction to that play registered an earthquake on the seismograph in the Louisiana Geological Survey on LSU's campus… The Tigers have lost just one home game since 2010.” Boudwin claims that the sound volume from sporting events such as home games at Tiger Stadium contribute to the final outcome of games and allow the home teams to have advantages with fans. The sonic environment at sporting events can strike fear and anxiousness into opposing teams causing them to not play well.

-Collin

Sound and Perception

http://mcdermottlab.mit.edu/papers/McDermott_2011_Auditory_Preference_chapter.pdf

https://peerj.com/articles/851/

Akil Brown Tumblr Post 3

In Sterne’s essay, he argues that sound recordings are fragile because they may not represent the actuality of the sound. Newman argues that sound can be used to inflict harm if used improperly. Sterne says, “Embalming could also provide almost indefinite preservation through altering the state of the body”. When he discusses the embalming of corpses, he uses this as a metaphor for recording sound. Embalming corpses alters the original state of the body such as recording sound alters the original state of the sound. Newman says, “And according to a report by the Economist in 2004, those deterrent tones cause immediate headaches and pain”. Sound in this instance is weaponized. It is used abnormally and with malicious intent, to gain control over a group of people rather than to entertain them.

Both Sterne and Newman identify how sound can be tainted in different ways. Their connection lies within the idea that people can experience sound differently than others. When sound is recorded and then listened to over again, it will be interpreted in different ways. The experience of sound as a weapon is one that is negative and painful, even traumatizing. I agree with Sterne's argument in the sense that depending on the time and location in which a particular sound is heard or listened to, my perception of it can vary. For example if I listen to a break-up song while I’m single it will have less of an emotional effect on me as opposed to me listening to the song after I just got out of a relationship. Newman’s argument makes me think about how certain sounds can be associated with negative events and invoke negative emotions. I believe her argument is valid and reminds me of when bombs and explosions occur during riots, the noise is used to inflict fear upon others.

Tumblr Post 4 Akil Brown

In discussions of sound, one reoccurring issue has been the use of sound as a defense mechanism.  On the one hand, Lily Newman argues that certain sonic weapons are dangerous and inflict harm upon citizens in her article, “This Is the Sound Cannon Used Against Protesters in Ferguson”. On the other hand, Tim Jonez opposes that argument with the idea that sound can be effectively used as a defense mechanism against certain enemies with his article “Britney Spears' music used by British navy to scare off Somali pirates”. Furthermore, Justine Sharrock argued that sound can be used to take advantage of others in “The Torture Playlist”. Others like Jonathan Sterne discuss how sound recordings compare to dead bodies in the sense that they are ultimately both altered from their original in the end. He says, “The desirability of preserving a corpse’s outward appearance overcame concerns about altering the internal composition of the body”(Sterne). The discussion of bodies was a metaphor for sound recordings.

In my view, Sharrock was somewhat vague and ambiguous in her argument and missed the main point because she didn’t explain how the songs were effective. I wanted to know more about why those songs had the impact that they did on prisoners that were detained. More specifically, I want to know how these songs in particular evoked the responses that they did. For example, All Eyez On Me by Tupac is a classic rap song that is extremely popular and notable. Although Sharrock is giving evidence that she received, I want to explore the effects of these particular songs. Therefore, what I would like to add to this conversation is that certain songs bring out certain emotions but there is always intention when an artist writes a song. This intention differs by artist.

Tumblr Post #4

In discussions of sound’s influence on the body, one reoccurring issue has been the usage of music in the form of a weapon. On the one hand, Lily Hay Newman argues in her article “This is the Sound Cannon Used Against Protestors in Ferguson” how sound can be used against the ear, causing pain that deflects unwanted violence. On the other hand, Tim Jonze contributes to this point in his article “Britney Spears’ music used by British navy to scare off Somali pirates” by also stating that sound, specifically music, has the power to  lure enemies away; in his article, he uses the Somali pirates and their hate towards western pop culture as an example of this music evolvement. Others, like Justine Sharrock, even discuss how music can be used as a torture method, with specific songs being highlighted for their usage in past situations as a way to, “induce sleep deprivation, “prolong capture shock”, disorient detainees during interrogations…also drown out screams,” (Sharrock). My own view is that even though sound may seem harmless, it is very effective in tapping into the human body in a way that makes it highly efficient in an attack or defense setting.

The general argument made by Lily Hay Newman in her work, “This Is the Sound Cannon Used Against Protesters in Ferguson”, is that while the regular combat tactics are more common in stopping riots, noise-based weaponry takes a ‘from the distance’ approach by radiating sound that, “achieves maximum sound projection and penetration beyond 2,000 meters,” (Newman). More specifically, X argues that this capability that sound has yet to be fully explored, making it dangerous and highly unpredictable in long terms effects. She writes, “LRADs are capable of going beyond a person’s 130-decibel threshold for hearing loss,” (Newman). In this passage, Newman is suggesting that while they are a less violent method of attack, sound weaponry still has consequences that can have a huge negative impact if used improperly. In conclusion, Newman’s belief is that sound can be a step forward to more effective and efficient weapons, but there is still more that needs to be done to understand this method safely.

In my view, Newman may have overlooked society’s goal for sound weaponry and how everyone may react to this method differently due to ethics, conditions, and geographical differences. More specifically, I believe that it may be hard to find a balance between the intensity of the sound required to work effectively and the level at which it may turn dangerous. For example, if the main concern is lowering the sound level to prevent long term damages, but this proves to not have as much of an effect on protestors, there will be a conflict on whether the damage is worth the efficiency. Although Newman thoroughly explores how LRADs are playing their part in the weaponry system effectively, I want to explore that once sound is taken to a certain level of violence, the ethical question on whether its effects on the human body are worth it or not must be evaluated. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is that if sound is to take a step into the world of violence and defense, a world where ethics may be overlooked, people need to be willing to understand the good and the bad about it, because it might seem less dangerous, but sound can have mental and physical impacts on individuals that can lead to serious consequences.

Michael Stern post 4

In discussions of how sound can affect people, one compelling issue has been the use of sound as a defense tactic. On the one hand, Tim Jonze playfully discusses the use of Britney Spear’s music as a deterrent against Somali pirates. Jonze sarcastically inquires that “Perhaps nothing else – not guns, not harpoons – is quite as intimidating as the sound of Ms. Spears singing Ooh baby baby!” (Jonze 1). On the other hand, Lily Newman makes clear that weaponized sound should be taken very seriously and there are certain methods and machines that produce sounds that can cause serious and permanent damage to the receiving party. Newman even informs us that “One woman sued the city of Pittsburgh for permanent damage caused by an LRAD (a noise based weapon)” (Newman 1). Others such as Amy Flemming even believe that sound can affect a person’s taste. My own view is that sound is a very serious thing and should not be taken lightly. Sound can perform many functions such as a weapon, communication, and even altering the taste of some foods.

The general point made by Tim Jonze in his work, ”Britney Spears' Music Used by British Navy to Scare off Somali Pirates”, is that sound, in this case, Britney Spears can perform other functions than simply just entertainment and communication, and pokes fun at the ridiculousness of the whole situation. More specifically, Naval officer Rachel Owens explains the reason why Britney Spears’s music, in particular, is so effective against these Somali pirates. she states, “Her songs were chosen by the security team because they thought the pirates would hate them most. These guys can't stand western culture or music, making Britney's hits perfect. As soon as the pirates get a blast of Britney, they move on as quickly as they can.” In this passage, Owens is suggesting that the western nature of Britney’s music is what is so off-putting to these pirates, not necessarily her music specifically. In conclusion, Jonze’s belief is that sound can be used for things outside of what society normally expects.

  In my view, Jonze may have overlooked the gravity of using sound as a deterrent against people because it can be used as a serious weapon that has lasting consequences. More specifically, I believe that sound can be used to seriously hurt people and should not be considered a joke when weaponized. For example, LRAD machines can cause permanent damage to people’s hearing. Although Jonze might be confused that sound could be so seriously used as a weapon, I want to explore that weaponized sound is a serious matter. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is that weaponized sound is relatively unresearched and we should make sure we fully understand the consequences of using sound in these various ways.

Dylan Norris Post

In the discussion of sounds effect on the mental health, It is important to discuss the missuses of music. Furthermore, how some militaries are using music as a way of breaking down the mental health of their prisoners. Justine Sharrock contributes in the discussion with,  "The Torture Playlist". Sharrock's general claim is that the U.S militaries have been using music as a means to torture. Justine discuss how, "American military prisons and on bases to induce sleep deprivation, “prolong capture shock,” disorient detainees during interrogations—and also drown out screams."(Sharrock) Showing the readers the reasoning for using music as a means of torture.

I feel however, that Sharrock failed to highlight the toll that this types of torture takes on the prisoners. More specifically exploring the effect that music and in this case the effect that the particular songs have on the prisoners after their are released. How would they continue to view music and sound? Would it be perceived differently that before? 

Tumblr Post #4

In discussions of the effects of sound on the human body, one compelling issue has been the use of music as a weapon. On the one hand, Tim Jonze in his article “Britney Spears’ music used by British navy to scare off Somali pirates” discusses how the western pop culture icon’s music not only has the power to make you want to get up and dance, but to also cause Somali pirates to get as far away as possible. On the other hand, Justine Sharrock in her article “The Torture Playlist” adds that music can be used as a method for torture to “induce sleep deprivation, ‘prolong capture shock,’” and “disorient detainees during interrogations” (Sharrock). Others like Lily Hay Newman even discuss how sound is further used as a physical weapon with the use of a Long Range Acoustic Device, or LRAD, to project loud noises onto people which can cause “immediate headaches and pain” (Newman). My own view is that sound is a powerful tool that can affect the human body in various forms, which allows sound to be an effective, yet relatively safe, weapon. 

The general discussion contributed by Tim Jonze in his work, Britney Spears’ music used by British navy to scare off Somali pirates,” is that music can be used as a peaceful weapon to deter enemies. More specifically, Jonze contributes that hearing the sound of Britney Spears’ songs, which are highly representative of Western culture, is powerful enough to cause those who despise the West to turn away. He writes, “perhaps nothing else - not guns, not harpoons - is quite as intimidating as the sound of Ms Spears singing ‘Ooh baby baby!’” (Jonze). In this passage, Jonze is suggesting that music can be as effective of a weapon as guns and harpoons. In conclusion, Tim Jonze’s belief is that as absurd as it may seem, music such as Britney Spears’ can invoke emotions of fear in enemies as fierce as Somali pirates.

In my view, Jonze may have overlooked how differently sounds can effect humans, depending on their past experiences, culture, beliefs, etc. More specifically, I believe that while playing Britney Spears’ music may deter those who have such strong feelings against Western culture, this sort of reaction to this music may only be an extreme case due to the Somali pirates’ extreme perversions to the West. For example, I strongly dislike country music, however, if the driver of a car I am riding in plays country music, I am not going to just jump out of that moving car. Although Jonze uses a powerful example of the Somali pirates, I want to explore that extreme reactions are only warranted from extreme feelings toward that sound based on prior experience with that sound. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is that, yes, music can be effectual in evoking powerful emotions in human beings, but it only pulls from emotions that already exist in the person and it will not create emotions of anger, distress, sadness, happiness, etc.

Resonant Bodies (Post #4)

In discussions of sound's effect on the body, one compelling issue has been weaponizing of sound. In the one view, Tim Joze argues the begin or even comical impacts of an audio deterrent. In the other view, Lily Hay Newman counters this view by describing some sonic weapons used to deliver pain and the problematic precedent it sets. Other such as Johnathan Stern and Amy Flemming discuss the negative effects sound can have on our senses and culture.  In my own view, we should not be passive to the use of new sound innovation used against others but be aware of their implications, lest it is used against us.

In the article "This is the Sound Cannon Used Against Protestors in Ferguson" Lily Hay Newman builds the argument that powerful acoustic weapons used against people have dangerous implications. More specifically, Newman discusses the negative effects this weapon can have on others hearing. She writes "... deterrent tones cause immediate headaches and pain," and "there's no telling what the consequences of encountering an LRAD may be." (Newman) Overall, the passage argues against the use of sound as a weapon, as it has powerful physical effects on the body. In my view, Newman may have wanted to know more about sound technology and any sound's effect on the body because it would better explain the implications of sound technology being used against humans. More specifically, I believe that sound and further sound technology has always had societal effects on humans. For example, the exclusion of minorities to early music technology and the misogynic implications of women voiced AI. Although Newman might be confused that I am equating societal effects to physical, I want to explore the implications behind using sound technology against minorities. Therefore, to this ongoing conversation, I would add that humans experience not just in the physical sense but through their personal societal lense.

-Claire Hudson

Taylor Reher Tumblr 4

The general point made by Justine Sharrock in her article, The Torture Playlist, is that music can be used to do awful things to people and can be an instrument of wrong. More specifically, she writes that music can be used to even torture detainees. She writes, “Music has been used in American military prisons and on bases to induce sleep deprivation, “prolong capture shock,” disorient detainees during interrogations—and also drown out screams” (Sharrock). Later in this passage, Sharrock then lists quite a few songs that were said to have been used in the torture. Sharrock’s main point is that music can be used to harm others if it is used in a setting as cruel as torture.

In my view, Sharrock might have overlooked the positive sides to music. While I do agree music can be used for bad, there are many therapies involving music helping people live better lives. While Sharrock might argue that the positive effects are overhyped, I think it’s important to look at music and sound’s positive benefits. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is an examination of the positive effects of music in sound therapy.

The general discussion contributed by Tim Jonze’s in his work, Britney Spears’ music used by British navy to scare off Somali pirates, is that music has the ability to become more than just a radio bop. More specifically, Jonze contributes that Britney Spears’ music has the ability to turn away pirates. He writes, “[the pirates] can’t stand western culture or music, making Britney’s hits perfect. As soon as the pirates get a blast of Britney, they move on as quickly as they can” (Jonze). In this passage, Jonze is suggesting that even songs as simple Britney Spears’ “Oops I Did It Again,” have the capability to make an impact on our world. Even if Britney’s songs are being used in a negative way -- to scare off pirates -- it is saying a lot about the power of music. In conclusion, Jonze’s belief is that music such as songs by Britney Spears can be used in a multitude of ways, even as a distraction for pirates.

In my view, Jonze may have different intentions from the meaning I pulled from the article. More specifically, Jonze never really mentions what I took away as the theme. I determined the thesis by thinking deeper about the very basic information given in the article. I may have overlooked the straightforward informative tone Jonze might have planned for. Although Jonze might object that the message he intended was very different than the one I found, I want to explore my idea of what I assumed was the intended purpose. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is that I agree with the message I saw within the article. I, too, believe that music is more than a cd or track. It has the ability to change moods, invoke emotions and, as seen in the article, scare pirates.

Megan Spector

Tumblr prompt #4

Wed., Oct. 10: No class--Fall Break!

Due by Friday 10/12  at midnight:

Read + summarize: Justine Sharrock. “The Torture Playlist.”

Read + summarize: Tim Jonze. “Brittany Spears’ Music Used By British Navy to Scare Off Somali Pirates.”

Tumblr post #4: Please characterize the conversation so far [use quotes and interweaving to illustrate the conversation as you see it]. 

Prompt: Please begin with my formulaic structure (below) from a popular textbook called, __They Say, I Say__, which asks students to first know what researchers are saying and then try to enter the conversation. Begin using the formulaic structure, but then go back and make it more your own adding interesting and daring sentences and going into more depth. I have included TWO templates for characterizing the entire conversation so far and ONE for how you might enter into a dialogue with 1 scholar. For this prompt, please first enter the larger conversation in the first part, then in the second part dialogue with 1 thinker. This is a 2-part prompt. 

First introduce the ongoing conversation in Sound Studies as you see it loosely using this template:

Introducing an Ongoing conversation in Sonic Rhetoric/Sound Studies:

Template #1: In discussions of __________, one controversial/reoccurring/compelling issue has been ____________. On the one hand, ______________ argues/discusses/avers __________________. On the other hand, ______________ adds/opens/opposes/counters/contributes/makes clear _____________. Others like x, y, and z even believe/discuss/hope for ______________. My own view is ______________.

Template #2: When it comes to the topic of ________, most of us will readily agree/accept/concede that __________. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of _____________. While some are convinced that _____________, others believe that _____________.

Here's the two-paragraph template for dialogue with one author:

The general argument/point/addition/discussion made or contributed by author X in her/his/their work, _______________, is that _______________. More specifically, X argues/discusses/contributes/add that _______________. She/he/they write, “ _______________.” In this passage, X is suggesting that _______________. In conclusion, X’s belief is that _______________.

In my view, X may have overlooked/forgotten/missed/want to know more about a and b (possibly c) because _______________. More specifically, I believe that _______________. For example, ___________. Although X might object/be confused/ that __________, I want to explore that _______________. Therefore, what I would like to add to this ongoing conversation is _______________.

 summary#5 due to Canvas