Introduction
Welcome to the first lesson of our module on Postcolonial Sound Studies. In our last lesson, you developed a sophisticated, three-layered method for analyzing how soundscapes construct cultural environments, combining Schafer's acoustic inventory, Hall's model of representation, and Aubry's concept of sonic pluralism.
Today, we delve into the theoretical heart of that third critical layer. Our learning outcome is to explain how postcolonial theory critiques dominant (Western) frameworks for analyzing film sound. We will explore the foundational ideas of postcolonial thought and see how they challenge the neutrality of the analytical tools and listening practices we often take for granted, including some we've already discussed like Schafer's soundscape theory. This lesson will provide the critical foundation for your own research into the soundscapes of Moroccan cinema.
1. Postcolonial Theory: Orientalism and the Colonial Gaze
Before we can apply a postcolonial critique to sound, we first need to understand its core principles. Postcolonial theory examines the cultural, political, and psychological legacies of colonialism. It questions the systems of thought that were established during colonial rule and which often persist today.
A foundational concept is Edward Said's Orientalism. To introduce this and other key ideas, please watch the following video.
Postcolonialism: WTF? An Intro to Postcolonial Theory
This video from the Tom Nicholas channel, 'Postcolonialism: WTF? An Intro to Postcolonial Theory,' provides a clear and concise overview of the field's foundational concepts, particularly Edward Said's work.
Please watch from 03:11 to 06:59. Focus on the explanation of Said's 'Orientalism'—how the West constructed a concept of 'the East' or 'the Orient' as its 'Other'—and Gayatri Spivak's contribution regarding this process of 'othering'.
As the video explains, Said argued that the "Orient" is not a real place but a European invention—a cultural construct defined in opposition to the West.
This process of "othering" creates a binary:
| The West (The Self) | The Orient (The Other) |
|---|---|
| Rational, Scientific | Irrational, Mystical |
| Active, Masculine | Passive, Feminine |
| Civilized, Normal | Exotic, Aberrant |
| Modern, Dynamic | Timeless, Stagnant |
This isn't a neutral description; it's a "configuration of power." By defining the Other, the West simultaneously defines itself as the norm and legitimizes its colonial dominance.
In cinema, this power dynamic manifests as what postcolonial film theorists call the "colonial gaze."
What is Postcolonial Film? A Short Introduction to Postcolonialism and Cinema
The following video, 'What is Postcolonial Film?' from Armchair Academics, explains how Orientalism is applied in cinema through the concept of the colonial gaze.
Watch the first 2 minutes and 37 seconds. Pay attention to how the 'colonial gaze' operates on three levels: the director's choices, the characters' perspectives, and the audience's identification.
The colonial gaze frames the non-Western world as a backdrop for Western stories, its people as exotic objects, and its cultures as primitive or in need of saving. This gaze is a powerful tool for reinforcing the cultural assumptions of Orientalism. Our next step is to question whether this logic applies only to the visual.
2. From the Colonial Gaze to the Colonial Ear
If cinema has a "colonial gaze," does it also have a "colonial ear"? How have the assumptions of Western-centric thought shaped the study and practice of sound?
The field of sound studies, like many academic disciplines, has its own legacy to confront. Foundational theories and methods, while appearing universal, often emerged from a specifically Western, white, male perspective.
The following reading is an introduction to a special journal issue dedicated to this exact topic. It directly challenges some of the figures and concepts we've treated as foundational.
[PDF] Sound, Colonialism, and Power - MAST
This introduction to a special issue of the MAST journal, titled '"Civilizing" Noise: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Sound, Colonialism, and Power,' directly connects sound studies to postcolonial critique.
Please read pages 3-7 of the PDF (the introduction by Lauren Rosati). Focus on these three points: How sound technologies (like microphones) and practices (like field recording) have been used as tools of colonial extraction or 'aural plunder.' The specific critique leveled against R. Murray Schafer, noting the 'racist timbre' of his early writings and the exclusion of Indigenous sonic cultures from the World Soundscape Project. The overarching questions the issue poses about the 'whiteness of sound studies' and how the field has been shaped by Western ideals.
This reading demonstrates a core function of postcolonial critique: it denaturalizes dominant frameworks.
- Practices like field recording, which may seem like neutral acts of preservation, are reframed as potentially extractive—capturing and decontextualizing the sonic heritage of others. The term "shotgun microphone" suddenly takes on a more violent connotation.
- Acoustic ecology, as pioneered by Schafer, is shown to be a product of a particular cultural viewpoint, one that initially ignored or devalued the sonic worlds of Canada's First Nations. His framework of keynotes, signals, and soundmarks is not an objective truth about sound, but one specific, culturally-situated way of organizing it.
This doesn't mean we must discard Schafer's tools entirely. They remain useful for descriptive analysis. However, a postcolonial lens forces us to recognize their limitations and ideological baggage. We must ask: Whose soundscape is being described? Who is doing the describing? And for what purpose?
3. Hungry Listening: The Ontology of the "Tin Ear"
The critique goes deeper than just problematizing analytical tools. It questions the very act of listening itself. Stó:lō scholar Dylan Robinson introduces the concept of "hungry listening" to describe a settler-colonial mode of auditory engagement that is extractive, consumptive, and seeks to fit all sonic experience into Western categories.
[PDF] HUNGRY LISTENING RESONANT THEORY FOR INDIGENOUS ...
The following excerpts from Dylan Robinson's groundbreaking book 'Hungry Listening' offer a powerful critique of Western listening habits. The text is dense and challenging, but the examples are exceptionally clear.
Please read the following two sections from Chapter 1, 'Hungry Listening': Start on page 37 with the anecdote of Justice McEachern's 'tin ear.' Read to the end of page 47. Focus on the fundamental clash between two ontologies of song: the Western view of song as 'performance' or aesthetic object, versus the Gitxsan understanding of song as law, history, and a living legal document. Briefly read the paragraph on page 51 starting with 'For both, this “listening for” satiates...' Focus on how Robinson defines hungry listening as a drive for certainty, recognition, and the 'satisfactory fit as sound knowledge slides into its appropriate place.'
The anecdote of the "tin ear" is a perfect illustration of a dominant Western framework failing. Justice McEachern's legal framework has no category for song as evidence. He can only hear it as "performance," something to be aesthetically judged. He is deaf to its legal and historical meaning because his listening is conditioned by a different ontology—a different understanding of what song is and what it does.
Robinson argues this is a form of hungry listening. It is a mode of perception that:
- Extracts Content: It "mines" other cultures for sounds, stories, and data.
- Prioritizes Certainty: It seeks to categorize, classify, and understand sound within pre-existing Western frameworks (e.g., formal analysis, aesthetic judgment).
- Consumes the Palatable: It privileges easily digestible narratives (e.g., of trauma and healing) or sounds that conform to Western aesthetic ideals, while ignoring more complex or politically challenging work.
As a sound professional, you can see how this might manifest. A film composer might "mine" a culture for "exotic" instrumentation to signal a location, without engaging with the instrument's role or meaning within that culture. A sound editor might seek "authentic" market sounds but mix them in a way that conforms to Western cinematic conventions of background ambience, stripping them of their specific social function.
Conclusion
This lesson has laid the theoretical groundwork for a postcolonial analysis of sound. We've moved from the general critique of Orientalism and the colonial gaze to a specific critique of how sound studies and listening practices can perpetuate colonial logic.
Key Takeaways:
- Postcolonial theory, through concepts like Said's Orientalism, critiques how Western power constructs the non-West as its "Other" to maintain its own dominance. In film, this is often expressed through the colonial gaze.
- This critique extends to the "ear," challenging the supposed neutrality of Western analytical frameworks for sound. Foundational concepts from figures like R. Murray Schafer are not universal truths but are culturally and historically situated.
- Dylan Robinson's concept of "hungry listening" describes a dominant, settler-colonial mode of listening that is extractive, seeks certainty, and attempts to fit all sonic knowledge into Western ontological categories (e.g., seeing Indigenous law-song as mere "performance").
- A postcolonial approach requires us to "unsettle" our own listening habits and analytical tools, recognizing their inherent biases and limitations.
Preview of the Next Lesson:
Having established this critical foundation, our next lesson will focus on the politics of sonic representation in cinema, focusing on whose sounds are heard and whose are silenced. We will examine how these power dynamics play out in the construction of film soundscapes, looking at examples of both colonial representation and postcolonial resistance.