MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318019503 · doi:10.1215/00141801-10117336

Hungry Listening: Resonant Theory for Indigenous Sound Studies

2023· article· en· W4318019503 on OpenAlex
Sarah Quick

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnohistory · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousDepictionMusicalSoundscapeActive listeningSingingAestheticsPower (physics)EthnomusicologySociologyHistoryVisual artsArtSound (geography)CommunicationAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stó:lō scholar Dylan Robinson’s Hungry Listening is a treatise on how to approach, engage with, and listen to/with Indigenous ways of knowing. One major premise is simple: musical undertakings that involve Indigenous musics and/or musicians have reified and continue to reify colonizing power structures. Nevertheless, what he offers in response is complex and necessarily impartial, since no one answer exists. The decolonizing work remains in the hands (ears?) of scholars, composers, musicians, music critics, and audiences as they grapple with the varying contexts and functions for past and contemporary Indigenous music-making. More generally, such answers could apply to any rethinking of (Indigenous) art and knowledge production. Robinson’s threading of decolonizing approaches together with his analysis of several different musical settings presents a most provocative springboard.Robinson opens with Canadian composer Murray Schafer’s disparaging depiction of Inuit singing. For those fond of Schafer’s compositions and theoretical ponderings (after all, he did peg soundscape in sound studies), he jarringly, yet effectively, rips open assumptions running through past and recent encounters with Indigenous musics and musicians. Some are blatant, as in Schafer’s depiction; others are couched in good intentions, as in more recent performances in the name of Truth and Reconciliation. His introduction also provides his initial explanation of the hungry listening concept, a phrase creatively adopted from Halq’eméylem to convey the exploitive and selective manner in which Western (art) music is heard and created with formal-aesthetic properties at the forefront. Directly after, he enacts critical Indigenous studies use of refusal and writes to an Indigenous-only readership in a short section.The next two chapters further flesh out hungry listening as an orientation and explore writing about music through performative writing. Robinson’s point that Indigenous musics function in different ways than Western art music is nothing new, yet he also teases out the implications of ignoring such functions in terms of Indigenous sovereignty. Further, in tackling hungry listening as something that ideally should be resisted/refused, he begins to propose pathways for practical and structural change. Between them is an “Event Score,” these appearing throughout in brief interludes of poetic writing engaging places, the senses, and materiality.The bulk of his analyses of musical performances come in the next three chapters. Chapter 3 examines performances bringing early music (Western classical) together with Indigenous music and/or Indigenous musicians, albeit in different ways, while chapter 4 takes on the issue of songs collected by early ethnographers stored in museums. Such songs have been used repeatedly by Western art music composers, often encouraged by the ethnographers that collected them, with little to no regard to their Indigenous functions/meanings/contexts. Providing some egregious examples, Robinson also highlights varying approaches from Indigenous activist-artists in reviving and repatriating such songs and asks composers/music critics/listeners to consider their own responsibility when working with or writing about musics stemming from such collections. Directly after is “Event Score for Responsibility,” a playbook for how a composition inspired by Inuit singing might be enacted more critically and collaboratively. Chapter 5 then grippingly recounts Robinson’s spectator reactions to four specific musical performances, enacting his positionality through performative writing. Here he also tackles affect, whether collective affect is even a possibility, and ultimately asserts “fostering empathy” (232) is not enough to direct structural change.Robinson concludes by revisiting inclusionary and exclusionary approaches modeled after Indigenous multimedia artists for listening, creating, and collaborating. He then offers space to two (non-Indigenous) ethnomusicology scholars to ruminate on decolonial thinking and listening before ultimately offering his own conclusions. Hungry Listening, while sometimes difficult to wade through with its many interdisciplinary references and Halq’eméylem phrases, pushes readers—refusing to placate them.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.261
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.062 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it