The Problem with Planes
In my bedroom, I am working with Windows Moviemaker to create a guided meditation video on nature sounds. I went to Newtonbrook Creek earlier today and had recorded a video with the sound of running water. Now here's the problem: the Newtonbrook Creek is located just where a lot of planes are flying toward Pearson Airport. Even when I try to press the recorder close to the running water, I still hear quite a lot of airplane noises. So my dilemma is, do I include the sounds of the airplanes, or do I wait for them to subside to record the running water? Eventually, I decide to record the video anyway, and wait for the right opportunity to simply get an audio sample of the running water and loop it into the video.
Considerations such as these seem mundane, and I am sure many an amateur filmmaker has had to do some kind of "brush up" to a movie to get rid of the kinks or flaws here and there. But one of the problems I am facing relates to the question of authenticity. How are we to treat the exercise of going to a natural area such as the woods or creek and recording "meditative nature" sounds? What is "nature"? Is it a real authentic experience,or is it a constructed experience that is edited for human consumption? Can anyone say that nature is "natural" in the sense of being untouched by human eyes and hands? And how does this relate to contemplative practices?
Not trying to influence the external environment---practicing acceptance and non-discrimination--are thought to be hallmarks of many spiritual practices, including Buddhism. At the same time, however, spiritual practice itself is formalized by rituals and procedures that are designed to help calm the mind and steer it away from distractions. Notions of purity (a "pure" sound) do exist a this level, because the mind needs to be calmed. On the other hand, too much control can lead to a sense of artifice: it goes against what contemplative practices are designed to do, namely to discover what is happening in the present. So I begin to wonder, what would have happened if I had decided to keep the plane sound as a factor in the sound of nature? More importantly, why might I make the distinction between "nature" and "non-natural" sound in the first place?
Considerations such as these seem mundane, and I am sure many an amateur filmmaker has had to do some kind of "brush up" to a movie to get rid of the kinks or flaws here and there. But one of the problems I am facing relates to the question of authenticity. How are we to treat the exercise of going to a natural area such as the woods or creek and recording "meditative nature" sounds? What is "nature"? Is it a real authentic experience,or is it a constructed experience that is edited for human consumption? Can anyone say that nature is "natural" in the sense of being untouched by human eyes and hands? And how does this relate to contemplative practices?
Not trying to influence the external environment---practicing acceptance and non-discrimination--are thought to be hallmarks of many spiritual practices, including Buddhism. At the same time, however, spiritual practice itself is formalized by rituals and procedures that are designed to help calm the mind and steer it away from distractions. Notions of purity (a "pure" sound) do exist a this level, because the mind needs to be calmed. On the other hand, too much control can lead to a sense of artifice: it goes against what contemplative practices are designed to do, namely to discover what is happening in the present. So I begin to wonder, what would have happened if I had decided to keep the plane sound as a factor in the sound of nature? More importantly, why might I make the distinction between "nature" and "non-natural" sound in the first place?
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments