muzak (in english)

8/14/2019 Muzak (in English)

1/6

Muzak

For anyone living in the West today, "background art" and music are virtually

unavoidable. Public and business space are often saturated with visual and aural

stimulation, yet the content of this stimulation - dilute and inoffensive by design - isbypassed by both art historical and musicological analysis. Yet to conclude that the

subject is pure sociology would be to overlook some important implications for those

interested and involved with the development of new creative languages. In thepostmodern environment, context and subtext are all, and the manufacturers of

Background product have long recognised this and used it to their own ends.

It is important to understand that "Muzak" is not simply another term for background

music, but the name of an American corporation, and the indicator of something more

sophisticated at work. I will consider these two then, as separate phenomena, and also

introduce a third variant, Anti-Noise, which while not strictly music, also comes underthe umbrella of sound designed to be heard but not listened to.

Muzak is scientifically engineered sound -functionalmusic rather than entertainment. Itaffects those who hear it but does not require a conscious listening effort. The Muzak

corporation call themselves "specialists in the physiological and psychological effects

and applications of music", and they draw on the historical use of frequency, as well asthe research work of founder Dan O'Neill, to create a "programmed environment for

applications in offices, factories, banks and shops". The key to Muzak's effectiveness is

"Stimulus Progression"; a system which provides people with a psychological "lift" - asubconscious sense of forward movement achieved through programming sound in

fifteen minute blocks. Within each of these segments, tunes are ordered from least to

most stimulating. The stimulus value of each segment is determined by factors such as

tempo, rhythm, instrumentation and orchestra size. The final, brightest tune is alwaysfollowed by fifteen minutes of silence, so that most employees for instance will only hear

Muzak for half the time that they are working. This not only relates to attention curves,

but also prevents the sound becoming the kind of imposition which could be distracting.According to the Muzak corporation's literature, music alone cannot achieve the same

results as their product

"because music is art, but Muzak is science. And when you employ the science of Muzak:

in an office, workers tend to get more done, more efficiently, and feel happier. In an

industrial plant, people feel better and, with less fatigue and tension, their jobs seem lessmonotonous. In a store, people seem to shop in a more relaxed and leisurely manner. In

a bank, customers are generally more calm, tellers and other personnel are more

efficient. In general, people feel better about where they are; whether it's during work orleisure time. Muzak is all this and more. That's why we say Muzak is much more than

music."

Obviously, the concept ofattention in listeningis important in both true Muzak and

simple background music. Muzak is dependent on a low level of attention - more of anunconcentrated openness than anything intellectual. Background music varies in its

demands, but the attention desired is usually signalled by nothing more or less than


2/6

volume. If people in a restaurant did not talk over quiet background music, it would not

be doing its job. Very loud background music is more often than not used simply to

disguise an environment otherwise without incident or "atmosphere". In all caseshowever, people must not be "held" by Muzak or background music. They must not be

prevented from doing other things at the same time. Pioneering studies on attention to

speech have shown that when two speech messages are presented simultaneously it ispossible to verbally report one of them, but that almost nothing is known about the

characteristics of the other message. Thus, for instance, the non-shadowed message may

change language or repeat the same phrase over and over without the subject being awareof it. These studies have been used to support the notion that our perceptual system

incorporates a single, limited capacity attentional 'channel' through which only a small

part of our sensory experience can pass at any one time. This mechanism operates like a

'filter' which admits only material which is defined by some distinguishing feature, suchas pitch, at any one time. All other material is lost before it can reach those higher

mechanisms which recognise and classify input. This might seem to suggest that Muzak

and background music would either intrude completely or not be heard at all in any

meaningful sense of the word, but more recent studies have challenged the "filter theory"in various ways. One alternative way of explaining attentional phenomena is that

processes may take place simultaneouslyprovided that they do not use the same kinds of

cognitive mechanisms.

Anti-noise claims no connection with music at all, but is used in the same 'environmental'

way as Muzak and background music. The basic principle behind anti-noise has beenknown for a long time. Sound is simply waves of changing air pressure, with peaks and

troughs. If you can create the precise opposite of a particular sound, one that dips where

the intrusive noise peaks, and fire it at the noise with a loudspeaker, the result is virtualsilence. The waves cancel each other out like two sets of ripples meeting each other in a

pond. A device based on this principle was patented in the Thirties by a German, Paul

Lueg, who claimed that he could turn noise into silence instantaneously, but commercialapplications only became feasible with the introduction of computer technology. If the

anti-noise doesn't match the intrusive noise exactly, the result is more noise, so any

changes in sound have to be analysed and used to "tune" the anti-noise wavelength. Nowmicroprocessors can monitor such changes and respond within milliseconds by adjusting

the mirror-image version accordingly.

Various prototype systems have been developed. Noise Cancellation Technologies, a US-based company, have created a "Silent Seat"; an executive's chair equipped with anti-

noise speakers to create a quiet zone for its occupant. It won't be long before washing

machines, fridges and other domestic appliances come with noise cancellers, as they are

starting to do in Japan. Once we as consumers are given the option of buying quietproducts however, we may find that they actually make us more sensitive to noise by

forcing us to think about it. The brain's natural response to a constant, low-level noiselike that produced by a fridge is to block it out after a certain period of time. Once we

start thinking about noise however, it won't go away.

To understand the wider implications of Muzak, background music and anti-noise, it isnecessary to return for a moment to their root - 'pure' music - and attempt a definition.


3/6

According to the philosopher Susanne Langer's theory of music, the principal artistic

function of music is to symbolise feelings; emotion, moods and other mental states

through the organisation of sound. What music provides the listener with are not feelings- his or her own or the composer's - but insight into feelings. A given work of music is

seen as apresentational symbol("presentational" because it lacks the true vocabulary and

syntax which would make it a language). However, if it is symbolic it must have astructure analogous to the structure of the phenomenon it symbolises. A work of music

can do this with emotion by imitating the temporal structure of the real experience - it's

patterns of tension and release, excitation, sudden change, and so on. According toLanger, music is actually better equipped to articulate feeling than language, with it's

discursive nature, could ever be. "Because the forms of human feeling are much more

congruent with musical forms than with the forms of language", she writes, "music can

reveal the nature of feelings with a detail and truth that language cannot approach". Sheadds though, one qualification - that although music is a presentational symbol of feeling,

it is also an unconsummatedsymbol. It represents only the morphology - the common

forms of change - of emotion, and not it's complete nature.

Throughout such theory runs the idea of attention, discussed earlier. Like the falling tree

in it's deserted forest, even the most considered music equals silence if no-one islistening. Is Muzak then really "more than music"? In one sense of course it is not,

because causing people to stop and ponder the nature of emotion would be seen as a

positive failure by it's manufacturers and users. Yet in another sense it is, because it

absorbs and uses the idea of the unconsummated symbol - the impression of change - to adifferent end.

Muzak and background music are both caricatures. They represent music as hyper-

reality; more real than the original music itself. Just as zoos are tamed, edited worlds -

purporting to give visitors the experience of the wild - so Muzak and background music

are both music without any of it's problems, challenges or demands. How are evenmusicians persuaded to accept this constant empty spoonfeeding? The principle is the

same as that of the marine amphitheatre at the zoo. Trained whales are here billed as

"killer whales", and probably they are very dangerous when they're hungry. Once we areconvinced that they are dangerous, it is very satisfying - soothing even - to see them so

obedient to orders. In the same way we are aware of the power of music, but are

reassured by witnessing its (apparent) subjugation.

Still, we should not forget that Muzak has the potential to manipulate when used properly

within it's own environment. Unlike adulterated music, it can become a control

mechanism. There is no doubt that the body's metabolism functions primarily via a

combination of electrical frequency, pulse rates, biochemical rhythms. Research findingson the physiological and psychological effects of Muzak have consistently shown that it

increases the work rate of that metabolism; increasing or reducing muscular energy,fatigue and attention. For all their hyperbole about relaxation, Muzak could be accused of

simply freeing corporate directors from real responsibility for their employees'

conditions. Dependency is always dangerous, and it is engendered through the creation of

a falsely benign object. Music has often been called a drug - but it is not addictive and it'sproperties are relatively transparent. Muzak and background music however, do addict in


4/6

the sense that they suppress the overall potency of the metabolism they affect. In Muzak

this is proven. In background music - which is less controlled - such a result might be less

predictable, but equally wide-ranging in the questions it raises about the status of musicin society, particularly in connection with Art orthe Arts as a whole.

In our culture there exist numerous divisions and subdivisions within the Arts. Musiccould serve as a microcosmic model for this - with fragments corresponding to every

level of critical perception from "trash" to "highbrow". Of course such boundaries, being

entirely artificial, are crossed regularly. Avant-garde music can become pope just as craftcan become fine art. But where do Muzak and background music fit in? Muzak remains

outside categorisation because of its function and its structure. The Muzak corporation

deliberately use established musics - pop, jazz and classical - because they want to

produce the impression of familiarity. Familiarity is equated with friendliness and anythreat is removed. So is any 'artistic' value. Background music can be any type of music,

although familiarity is often put to work here too. There is even the possibility of a

recording "crossing over and becoming 'visibly' popular through background play - but aswith Muzak the volume and surroundings inevitably suggest that it is there to be heard

but not listened to. Does this show a lack of respect for music? If Mozart is played in a

supermarket has the composer been abused? Or is music a product like any other, to bebought and used freely, circumstances notwithstanding?

Similar questions rise in the consideration of background art. This is now as all-pervasive

as its aural equivalent, but also needs to be understood as separate from that which gavebirth to it and feeds it - in this case,painting. Background art is picture-based (ie usually

painting, print or printed reproduction, only occasionally sculpture and never ephemeral

or time-based work) and functions within an interior to promote a certain view ofwhoever owns it. Background art is to be found in the same locations as Muzak and

background music, and like the former has a corporate body dedicated to its commission

and manufacture. Art for Offices, a British company, promote themselves as "thecomplete art service" - providing "focal points" for "all categories of business, small or

large, with financial options to suit the building and the budget". The concept of

convenience and value are two selling points which distinguish background art from whatI propose to call "gallery art". Background art is tailoredart; made to fit and blend, and

sometimes to approach virtual invisibility in the same way that skillful film editing is

"invisible" - we notice only its effects. Gallery art demands that we make space forit. It is

housed in the buildings from which it takes its name and is generally treated withreverence. Often though, this reverence is not an intention of the artist and arises from

context, presentation and tradition rather than genuine appreciation of qualities within the

work. Background art is the ultimate recognition of this effect. When looking at a

painting supplied by Art for Offices in a work space, the viewer's appreciation oftechnique and subject-matter, and whether these combine to make an "effective" picture,

are secondary to the semiotics of the fact of it being there at all; by what the ownership ofart says about the company in question. As in the case of Muzak, the potency of human

perception is suppressed. Background art encourages a brief glance but nothing more; not

to question the priority it is assigned. This is reflected in the situation of artworks within -

to stay with our theme - the office. To give them too great a prominence might suggestextravagance. Ideally they are present, noticeable, but not obtrusive or even striking.


5/6

They are a projection of confidence to be displayed on the boardroom wall like a profits

chart. "A company that believes in image needs art", reads Art for Offices' promotional

brochure, "like any other product in the office, art is a true reflection of your corporateidentity. Art also acts as a perfect counterbalance to the impersonal identity of

technology."

In his "Rhetoric of the Image", Roland Barthes writes:

"the more technology develops the diffusion of information, and notably of images, themore it provides the means of masking the constructed meaning under the appearance of

the given meaning".

So it is that an apparently straightforward image on an office wall is subjugated by the

impression it is placed to convey to competitors and the community. "Old Masters"signify wealth, success, reliability, tradition; "abstracts" signify dynamism, forward

thinking, modernity.

We are here reminded of Marshall McLuhan's famous thesis that the "medium is the

message". The identification of the medium with the message, the means with the contentof communication, the instrument with the intention means that everything we have tosay is a product of the way we express it. Sensations and ideas, feelings and thoughts,

messages and commands are considered, accepted or rejected; media of expression, on

the other hand, are absorbed without conscious thought. So it is that maritime oil

canvasses by William James (fl 1754-1771) can hang in the boardroom of ExcoInternational.

A friend of mine who is a practicing artist told me recently that his paintings were sellingmuch faster since his dealer advised him to double all his prices. Obviously, this was a

gamble, but it paid off because his work had acquired new status by virtue of its

increased cost. Thus the "money factor is introduced. The customers of Art for Officesare not art collectors, although they may accumulate a large number of original works.

They are not buying art as investment, with a view to selling it later at a profit. But still,

expense can be a draw. This is particularly true of the art of the boardroom, of thedirector's office. Conceptual art can never be background art because it requires a certain

amount of intellectual effort on the part of the viewer and aesthetics are considered

insignificant. However, some Minimalist art, often considered extremely academic, is

acceptable because of it's "tasteful", decorative quality. Taste is a central concern inbackground art, and thereby another way of distinguishing it from gallery art. Almost two

hundred years ago, Wordsworth discussed Taste in the preface to hisLyrical Ballads. He

was against those "who will converse with us gravely about a taste for poetry, as theyexpress it, as if it were a thing as indifferent as a taste for ropedancing, or Frontiniac, or

Sherry." He attacked the idea of taste as "a metaphor", taken from apassive sense of the

human body, and transferred to things which are in their essence notpassive - tointellectual acts and operations. That is, the abstraction of a human faculty into a

generalised polite attribute. Where Taste becomes a consideration in the creative process,

or even the selection process, then (unless the consideration is as subject matter, ie

painting about taste) the result is not painting but simulation. It has power, but that poweris not under the control of the artist any more than the power of a building remains under

the control of its architect.


6/6

But how much power does even the "gallery" artist enjoy? The decision as to whether a

work of art is to be understood as a self-sufficient form or as the vehicle for an appeal, a

thesis or a message does not necessarily depend upon the attitude of its author. In "TheSociology of Art", Arnold Hauser argues that "even the most politically, economically or

morally prejudiced representation of reality can be enjoyed as pure art, as a purely formal

structure, if it is aesthetically relevant at all". This gives us some hope that afterbackground art has been deconstructed as such, we might be able to reapproach it with

something like an "innocent" eye.

How then do background music and background art work together? They conspire to

make us feel "at home wherever we are, to win our trust effortlessly. But an environment

so smoothly constructed is bound to invite scratches. A current debate within

Postmodernist art is concerned with the discourse between opposition and complicity;how to use the strategies of power structures in order to criticise them, without slipping

from pastiche into reality and actually becoming part of that which is supposedly under

attack. The phenomenon of the "background is at the heart of such discussion because itprovides a view of "traditional arts put through the looking-glass of technologically

literate Capitalism. Muzak in particular also brings to the forefront once again the idea of

manipulation. A moralquestion then; it it ever justifiable to use manipulation towardsone movement against manipulation by another? Can anti-Muzak exist just as anti-noise

can? What about painting? Can installation artists find ways of embedding playful ideas

within the mind of the viewer as noiselessly as Art for Offices can impressions of

seriousness? A characteristic of Postmodernism is its adoption and adaption of pastgenres, its "creative plagiarism". In seeing only the foreground of our culture, we risk

missing the chance to explore the full potential of this and future strategies.

By Mike.

muzak (in english)

Documents