background image


February 2, 2005

I have a growing feeling that when discussing theory with visual artists the field of topics generally understood to be part of “theory” is sometimes sereverly limitied as compared to what theoretical fields I have to touch upon in my own work.

Today I saw reports from some students at the academy evaluating the education given last semester and I got the feeling that to some of them “theory” is limited to topics of contemporary art and especially topics relating to conceptual art occationally touching philosophy. I’ve had similar impressions sometimes during some of the fellowship seminars when observing the strong contrasts in how visual artists and musicians understand and talk about “theory” as a discipline.

Being a sound artist I of course also have to relate to current trends of a long musical tradition. Sound art is more and more becoming a field in itself but also a branch of media art in general.

But then it’s everything relating to the craftmanship the technical knowledge skills understanding and development required in order to be able to do anything at all: Computer-based composition digital sound processing synthesis spatialisation programming sound engineering electronics video editing etc. Under what topic is this filed if it is not recognised as proper and vitaly important theory?