Brief Encounters with Sounds up Close

by Babos Anna

Distance from the sub­ject is an essen­ti­al aes­the­ti­cal, ethi­cal and prac­ti­cal ques­ti­on in film­ma­king. Get­ting to know some­thing neces­si­ta­tes time, a pro­cess of coming nea­rer. It is not about the neces­si­ty of having an estab­li­shing shot or the rejec­tion of in medi­as res sto­rytel­ling, but more about the rela­ti­on of film­ma­king with rea­li­ty. Approa­ching a per­son, object or sub­ject can lead to this rea­li­ty, whe­ther gai­ning per­mis­si­on to draw clo­ser or fin­ding the pro­xi­mi­ty to cap­tu­re the essence of the sub­ject of film­ing. This pro­cess is neces­sa­ry for any kind of cine­ma­tic depic­tion, and igno­ring to reflect on the appro­xi­ma­ti­on can lead to the mis­di­rec­tion of atten­ti­on and takes the risk of pro­vo­king a strong emo­tio­nal impact wit­hout having an idea about the context.

Begin­ning a film with an image of an instant clo­se-up, for ins­tance, crea­tes an atmo­sphe­re of con­fu­si­on within the audi­ence: whe­re are we and what are we loo­king at? Ope­ning imme­dia­te­ly with a clo­se-up of a per­son may feel like an uncal­led for intru­si­on: why do we enter so intru­si­ve­ly into a stranger’s per­so­nal space, body and face?

Distance is not only per­cei­ved through the image but also through sound – even when lis­tening to mono sound, we feel when the recor­der is clo­se to or distant from the source. Audi­tive pro­xi­mi­ty has always been a tool for film­ma­kers to play with, not only for illus­t­ra­ting clo­se-up images, but also in the case of point-of view-shots, when the per­son is tal­king but loo­king far away, or having a nar­ra­tor who intro­du­ces the distant images from a clo­ser posi­ti­on. While films are con­stant­ly explo­ring the ways sound and image can cohe­re or dif­fer, recent­ly the­re has been a ten­den­cy of favou­ring clo­se-up sounds in cinema. 

Like sud­den clo­se-up images, clo­se-up sounds also crea­te a con­fu­sing fee­ling of intru­si­on; a stran­ger whis­pe­ring right into our ears will feel impo­li­te and dis­re­spectful. Even if it’s quite rare to hear some­thing so clo­se in real life, the­re are some films that favour clo­se sounds over a more rea­li­stic use of it. Their images are accom­pa­nied by inten­se hum­ming, whis­pe­ring, or other kinds of voices or noi­ses heard from up clo­se. This way, they not only skip the pro­cess of appro­xi­ma­ti­on, but also pro­vo­ke and satis­fy the viewer’s con­stant impa­ti­ence and urgent need of being at the heart of the action. 

Through dif­fe­rent ide­as of silence, this ques­ti­on of abun­dance and satis­fac­tion can be easi­ly descri­bed. Silence has pri­ma­ri­ly been used as a tool to express and streng­then the emo­tio­nal sta­te of the cha­rac­ters, offe­ring a sub­jec­ti­ve sound expe­ri­ence. This idea of sty­li­zed silence, when the moment of silence means the lack of sounds and music or is fil­led with one sound held on for a long time, is repla­ced by the idea of let­ting dif­fe­rent sounds of ever­y­day life pre­vail, which other­wi­se would remain unno­ti­ced. Whe­re­as the dis­ap­pearance of silence might sug­gest a more rea­li­stic approach, a step towards objec­ti­ve sound, the way of por­tray­ing silence often means to make use of the infi­ni­te pos­si­bi­li­ty of fil­ling it with sounds. 

This acou­stic abun­dance doesn’t neces­s­a­ri­ly mean a step towards rea­lism, for ins­tance the case of Alfon­so Cuarón’s Roma. Using Dol­by Atmos, a sur­round sound tech­no­lo­gy which, by adding extra height chan­nels, achie­ves a per­cep­ti­on of sounds as three-dimen­sio­nal objects in a 360-degree bubble, Roma starts with a clo­se-up image and sound of swa­shing water. From the first sce­ne on, this film works with slight­ly resound­ing steps, inten­se breaths, drip­ping water, bar­king dogs and the con­stant voice of the radio. The sound­scape is far from being natu­ral, we per­cei­ve an exces­si­ve and phy­si­cal­ly com­pli­ca­ted audi­tive atmo­sphe­re. “Atmos was that extra step into com­ple­te immersi­on and that was the goal, to make this film as com­ple­te­ly immersi­ve as pos­si­ble” says Craig Henig­han, the re-recor­ding mixer of the film. 

Under­stan­ding of the director’s stance towards sound beco­mes even clea­rer from his pre­vious film, Gra­vi­ty. App­re­cia­ting and making use of the idea of silence doesn’t neces­si­ta­te actu­al silence for Cuarón. San­dra Bul­lock, working in space as an astro­naut, ans­wers Geor­ge Clooney’s ques­ti­on refer­ring to what she likes in space, she says “Silence” while we hear inten­se, ele­vat­ing music. This sce­ne rai­ses a ques­ti­on though: the music can neither refer to her sub­jec­ti­ve expe­ri­ence, nor can it be chai­ned to the camera’s hea­ring- and view­point. The only idea behind the sound design seems to be the per­fec­tion of the audience’s cine­ma­tic expe­ri­ence, not the ela­bo­ra­ti­on of the cine­ma­tic expres­si­on. The con­cept is to fill each second with the most pos­si­ble sound to a degree whe­re it gives the expec­ted amount of plea­su­re. Each noi­se of the atmo­sphe­re is desi­gned pri­ma­ri­ly to bind our sen­ses, and it seems to be only a side-effect that they descri­be the envi­ron­ment, fee­lings or objects. 

Howe­ver, this idea of offe­ring an immersi­ve expe­ri­ence is not only pre­sent in major film pro­duc­tions, but also in inde­pen­dent films. This is even more pro­ble­ma­tic, as this phe­no­me­non can­not be sepa­ra­ted from new media or their con­tem­po­ra­ry cul­tu­ral prac­ti­ces, defi­ned by the desi­re for imme­dia­te access, dubio­us inte­rest in pseu­do-inno­va­ti­ve sub­ject mat­ter and audio-visu­al plea­su­re. An exam­p­le of a direct inter­play bet­ween cine­ma and other audio-visu­al works could be the impact ASMR vide­os had on a cer­tain type of film with a part­ly docu­men­ta­ri­an, but most­ly avant­gar­de approach.

Auto­no­mous Sen­so­ry Meri­di­an Respon­se is a pseu­do-sci­en­ti­fic term describ­ing a ‘ting­ling’ phy­sio­lo­gi­cal respon­se given to sound vide­os pri­ma­ri­ly in the online space, com­bi­ning audi­to­ry, visu­al and tac­ti­le trig­gers. When get­ting real­ly clo­se to the micro­pho­ne, the voice or any other kind of sound gets lower and more sono­rous, aiming at a more immersi­ve audi­tive expe­ri­ence. Accen­tua­ting the mun­da­ne noi­ses of ever­y­day life, such as hair brushing, tur­ning the pages of a book or stro­king and crink­ling dif­fe­rent mate­ri­als, the­se vide­os sup­po­sedly offer a rela­xing, medi­ta­ti­ve expe­ri­ence, which, from out­side of the ASMR com­mu­ni­ty, is often refer­red to as ‘whisper porn’. The­re is not an exact sci­en­ti­fic expl­ana­ti­on to this fee­ling, but ple­nty of peo­p­le have descri­bed it as a plea­sant sen­sa­ti­on moving down from the scalp through the neck to the upper spi­ne. In the twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry spe­cial sti­mu­la­ti­ons are indis­pensable even for relaxing.

Some film­ma­kers open­ly use and reflect upon the trig­gers of ASMR cul­tu­re, such as Peter Strick­land, an artist com­mit­ted to dis­co­ve­ring dif­fe­rent audi­tive expe­ri­en­ces in his latest short, Cold Meri­di­an. A woman is pre­pa­ring for a per­for­mance, washing her hair or sket­ching the cho­reo­gra­phy. Mas­sa­ging wet hair, a pen­cil scrat­ching paper, the per­for­mers sort­ing docu­ments; the­se are ide­al and typi­cal sce­nes for an ASMR video, which is, bes­i­des the audi­ence, wat­ched by ano­ther woman. The pre­pa­ra­ti­ons are inter­rupt­ed by the images of the actu­al per­for­mance, the woman and a man wrest­ling naked. The online inti­ma­cy bet­ween the fema­le view­er and the per­for­mer is jux­ta­po­sed by the vio­lence of the naked dance. This dis­so­nan­ce is not exten­ded to the sound despi­te its empha­sis. The whis­pe­ring voice addres­sing the view­er and all the other trig­ge­ring noi­ses don’t get con­tras­ted, ASMR domi­na­tes the inti­ma­cy and the naked dance at the same time. Even if Cold Meri­di­an reads as a reflec­tion on this online trend, it makes use of its trig­gers; in an unde­fi­ned space bet­ween being cri­ti­cal and pro­mo­tio­nal the film remains hypocritical. 

Aiming at a simi­lar­ly night­ma­rish effect with the use of clo­se sounds, the uncan­ny images of Hong Kong in Simon Liu’s Signal 8 are con­tras­ted by various noi­ses. The film dis­co­vers the place and mea­ning of natu­ral ele­ments in the ali­en­ated city, but ins­tead of crea­ting a balan­ce, it shows the upset­ting pre­sence of the­se ele­ments. Water whoo­shing from a bro­ken gut­ter recalls a water­fall, the images of wel­ding slag evo­ke fire­works. All the­se asso­cia­ti­ons and fal­se illu­si­ons rein­force the atmo­sphe­re of cha­os, rush and anony­mi­ty of the city. To this end, clo­se sounds such as hum­ming and murm­u­ring voices, muf­fled music cues and some mecha­ni­cal noi­ses are used over and over again. The­se noi­ses didac­ti­cal­ly push the obvious noti­on of a soul­less metro­po­lis, con­ver­ting the ghost­ly atmo­sphe­re into a fan­cy music video.

An unex­pec­ted way of using this stran­ge effect is tied to a cer­tain kind of docu­men­ta­ri­an approach. Jes­si­ca Sarah Rin­land has been using extre­me clo­se-up sounds and images in most of her films, inclu­ding one of her latest works, Tho­se That, at a Distance, Resem­ble Ano­ther, which explo­res the natu­re of pre­ser­va­ti­on and repro­duc­tion through the making of an ivo­ry tusk’s repli­ca and other cera­mics. Plas­ter, slip cas­ting and other cera­mic tech­ni­ques are shown focu­sing on their tac­ti­le qua­li­ty in acou­sti­cal­ly and visual­ly plea­sing shots. This high-qua­li­ty ASMR film offers a one-hour-long medi­ta­ti­on on the cera­micists and pre­ser­va­tio­nists’ work, an immersi­ve expe­ri­ence in various pha­ses of work. The visu­al clo­se-ups of hands play a cru­cial part in crea­ting an inti­ma­te atmo­sphe­re; the­re is some­thing utter­ly sug­ges­ti­ve in the airy but also meti­cu­lous move­ments of the hand. It overs­ha­dows the fact that a work is being done, the dance of the hand resem­bles more of a per­for­mance than actu­al labour, rai­sing the issue of exo­ti­ciza­ti­on and almost ero­tiza­ti­on of the other­wi­se exhaus­ting and mono­to­no­us ever­y­day work.

When wat­ching this film, I kept thin­king about my pro­cess when making mosaics. The pro­ce­du­re of work and crea­ti­on beg­ins with careful sand-drizz­ling, then smoot­hing the sand gent­ly in the frame, cut­ting the glass mosaics to fit the who­le shape and then pres­sing down every sin­gle litt­le pie­ce into the wet sand. Yet, it also means work, one gets tired or bored, pin­ches a fin­ger ins­tead of the small glas­ses with the clamp, cuts ones­elf seve­ral times with splin­te­red pie­ces of glass and even­tual­ly one’s back starts hur­ting becau­se of the hours, days and weeks spent ben­ding over the frame. The depic­tion of the pha­ses that are not mere plea­su­re are pain­ful­ly miss­ing from this film; this way, wat­ching others working beco­mes unneces­s­a­ri­ly com­fort­ing and spectacular.

Clo­se-up sounds are domi­nant in other films of this docu­men­ta­ry approach and idea to pre­sent places and mate­ri­als. An exam­p­le for that kind of explo­ra­ti­on is Vil­la Empain direc­ted by Katha­ri­na Kast­ner. A fusi­on bet­ween Bau­haus and Art Deco, the house was con­cei­ved by Lou­is Empain. Mes­me­ri­zed by this idea, Kast­ner wan­ders around the house and com­bi­nes her foo­ta­ge with old pho­to­graphs of Nor­man­dy, whe­re Empain used to spend his holi­days with his fami­ly. Images and an exces­si­ve use of sounds illus­tra­te asso­cia­ti­ons of time and art, giving a sen­su­al, decep­tively vivid sen­se to the still parts of the buil­ding. The maxi­mi­zed die­ge­tic sounds and the arti­fi­ci­al sound­track hin­ders the film to con­vey a sen­se of the villa’s spaces and quiet­ness. The only cha­rac­ter of the film is a woman, Tamar Kas­pa­ri­an, who makes nuan­ced imprints of lea­ves and some details of the villa’s flo­or. Not only the idea of repro­du­cing but the mate­ri­al is also simi­lar to Rinland’s film, the tac­ti­li­ty of Vil­la Empain is per­fec­ted by the 16mm film. 

Con­nec­ting dai­ly rou­ti­ne, work and remem­brance in The Pla­s­tic House Alli­son Chhorn ima­gi­nes the pas­sing of her par­ents and shows the pro­cess of grief in a steamy green­house. The direc­tor per­forms the work she usual­ly does to help her par­ents; work with drip­ping wet and wind-blown mus­lins, dra­pes and net­tings. While the­se films that are often descri­bed as mini­ma­list deal with work, the rich­ness and small-grai­ned natu­re of the audio add up to a rather immo­de­ra­te who­le. The unu­sual­ly and unrea­li­sti­cal­ly sharp sounds are exhi­bi­ted in a way that would be impos­si­ble to per­cei­ve during actu­al work, thus the expe­ri­ence invo­kes a stu­dio rather than a place that func­tions out­side of the film’s world. 

Howe­ver, the idea of clo­se sound and the diver­se pos­si­bi­li­ties of its com­bi­na­ti­on with images has been approa­ched in many meaningful ways. One of the most striking con­tem­po­ra­ry examp­les of that is Die­ser Film ist ein Geschenk, a docu­men­ta­ry about the life and art of Dani­el Spoer­ri. Anja Salomonowitz’s film gives an insight into his work of rede­fi­ning ever­y­day objects, detaching them from their own con­text and put­ting them tog­e­ther in a pie­ce of art. Salo­mo­no­witz reflects this method of artis­tic recy­cling by doing the same with the sound of the­se objects, crea­ting a sym­pho­ny of their ratt­ling and clin­king noi­ses. This uni­que audi­tive atmo­sphe­re also reso­na­tes with the artist’s phy­si­cal tre­mor which almost pre­vents him of making art. Ano­ther exam­p­le could be Heinz Emig­holz, who com­bi­nes the hol­low sounds of the emp­ty rooms of a muse­um under con­s­truc­tion and the dyna­mic noi­ses of the work in the com­plex sound­scape of Years of Con­s­truc­tion.

Despi­te the abo­ve examp­les of clo­se-up sounds, the phe­no­me­non is dis­con­cer­ting. It signi­fies an over­sti­mu­la­ted sta­te of mind that reli­es on osten­ta­tious­ness becau­se it finds too litt­le in mode­ra­ti­on. In other cases, the trust in the attrac­ti­ve power of an online trend marks an uncon­scious sur­ren­der to mar­ke­ta­bi­li­ty. Strip­ping manu­al labor of its envi­ron­ment and dura­ti­on in order to inten­si­fy and acce­le­ra­te the expe­ri­ence, or the adop­ti­on of a high­ly con­su­me­rist tech­ni­que to increase audi­tive plea­su­re marks the way how fan­ciful, high-brow cine­ma satis­fies com­mer­cia­lism and takes advan­ta­ge of its pro­ducts. The over­whel­ming extre­mi­ties of sound aggres­si­ve­ly swing the atten­ti­on into one pos­si­ble direc­tion of inter­pre­ta­ti­on. This way, art­ma­king beco­mes aim­less and meanin­g­less, prio­ri­tiz­ing the satis­fac­tion of the audi­ence wit­hout con­fron­ta­ti­on, decla­ra­ti­on or intellec­tu­al challenge.