Narco-sonic Affect - Becoming Intense

Inigo Wilkins 17/12/04


Narco-sonic Affect
Becoming Intense

The history of music cannot be sundered from the practice of the ingestion of narcotics. From the primitive use of drugs in shamanic rituals to the conspicuous abstemption found in classical culture, from the covert references to marijuana in jazz, to the psychedelic effects of LSD on rock and roll, and the cybernetic conjunction of techno and ecstasy. This essay will analyse the affective conditions for the emergence of these assemblages and situate them in relation to a post-structuralist understanding.
The present ‘war on drugs’ parallels the ‘war on terrorism’ with its conservative paranoia, its irrational faith in the immutability of identity, its anticorporeal puritanism and its chronic fear of infection, and above all the impossibility of its eventual success. Anti-drug legislation as we know it today began in the U.S. with the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914, which was largely a reaction to the growing use of marijuana by black jazz musicians, and the increasing popularity of the genre (considered dangerous non-music by the establishment) (1). It therefor has its roots in racial suppression, a fact that can be substantiated by the quotidien use by whites of hemp and opium in all aspects of life prior to this. The condemnation of intoxification by the State and its institutions (particularly the church) stretches back further than this however, and points to a fundamental opposition of the State apparatus to the perception altering capacities of certain chemicals.
This puritanical trope can be traced to the beginnings of civilization (by this I mean the constitution of the State, and the civilian) in the crystallisation of Athens under the logos of Apollo, and through the suppression of Dyonisis. Dyonisis, the god of chaos, later championed by Nietzsche, was the most important deity in the greek pantheon prior to the arborification of culture that constituted literate society. Athenians favoured Apollo, the god of order and reason, where Dyonisis was associated with the (grape)vine and all things excessive and debaucherous. Graves has shown that rather than getting barbarously drunk Dyonisian worship predominantly consisted in the careful consumption of (fly agaric or ‘magic’)mushrooms, and that the vine depicted was actually poison ivy (2) .
Socrates understood the potency of music, and based much of his philosophy on the goodness of harmony. Plato in turn considered music the barometer of a societies’ condition, and thus rejected any music that was not accompanied by lyrics (logos) which moreover should be uplifting, towards the supposed masculine principles of strength and valour, rather than emotive and feminine (3). Aristotle was more openly fascist, he was critical of Socrates’ liberal addition of the Phrygian mode to the Dorian, and beleived that this made the music too emotional and orgiastic, stating unequivocally,

‘Any musical innovation is full of danger to the whole state, and ought to be prohibited. . . when modes of music change, the fundamental laws of the state always change with them.’ (4)

The Athenian legacy, which was subsumed into Christianity through the Romans, and thereby transformed into a disciplinary injuncton, was a fundamental anticorporeality, a supression of rhythm, and above all repitition, in favour of melody and of course harmony. The Platonic Idea is a hierarchalisation of the original over the copy, false bodily perception is subjugated to true, unchanging, ideal forms. Foucault has said that drugs have nothing to do with truth and falsity, but are about unfolding and emerging (5). The Apollonian order brought about the gradual stifling of folk music, and the smooth space it occupied, and its replacement with the stratisfied space of the stave. Itinerant musicians who drew sonic diagramms became sedentary labourers who traced representations (6) (7). Dancing gave way to contemplation, and music was captured into the concert hall.
The view that change in music signals or even causes social transformation is one shared by Attali, who maintains that the function of music is to ward off the essential violence of ultimate equivalence, through presenting a simulacrum of ritual sacrifice (8). Music stands for order in the face of death and chaos. However, according to Attalli, new musical forms are always repudiated and considered noise (or entropy) by the established order (even Bheethoven), yet their composition is related to the emerging form of social organisation in the manner of a premonition (9).
. Music, as pure information, has two sides then, one being the reaffirmation of order, or reterritorialization as refrain, and the other being its dissolution, its escape from the code, its deterritorialization (10). Both new musical forms and states of intoxification have, since Athens, been considered causes of a breakdown in order and the warping of reason. Drugs are associated with revolutionary desire and creativity in the arts, with counterculture movements and individuals such as Baudelaire, Marcuse, and Benjamin; Rimbaud and the romantics; Burroughs and the beat generation; rastafarianism and the rebel music of reggae; punk, dub and rave.
To understand the emergence of these musical genres and their complex relationship with narcotics we must study Spinoza’s philosophy of affect, Dos Santos’ conception of rhythmanalysis, Bergson’s notion of the virtual, and Deleuze and Guattari’s radical reassemblage of their ideas.
Spinoza, who was contemporary with Descartes and his reaffirmation of Platonic dualism, expounded a monistic theory of existence. He maintained that all bodies are differentiated but adhered to some ‘common notions’ (11), and could be defined in terms of their relative motion or rest, and speed or slowness. Where Descartes began with the subject and was concerned with the adequate cause of an effect, Spinoza started from movement and mapped bodies according to their longitude (relations of speed and slowness) and latitude (capacity to affect other bodies) (12).
Dos Santos similarly placed movement at the centre of his thought, proposing that all things are rhythmic. He founded a new science devoted to the study of these oscillations and included in his personal explorations a rhythmanalysis of matter, biology and psychology. In Bachelard’s explanation of Dos Santos he uses the kinetic theory of solids, showing that the most stable structures are those in rhythmic discord. and that we consist of, and live in, ‘an anarchy of vibrations’ (13). Vibrationary energy is the elementary force of existence, and matter can only exist by the vibrations that cause that materials specific duration (14). Since the essence of time is vibration, all substance is involved in a process of transformation or becoming (15). It is interesting to note here that the hindu religion of India beleive the universe came into existence through a certain frequency of vibration or sound.
It is in these respects that Deleuze and Guattari have said ‘All drugs fundamentally concern speeds, and modifications of speed.’ (16) It is important here not to confuse speed, which is an intensive quality (molecular and indeterminate), with movement from point to point in extensive space, which is measured, striated and molar. There are three general aspects of drugs, ‘[1] the imperceptible is perceived; [2] perception is molecularised; [3] desire directly invests the perception and the perceived.’ (17) This does not mean that we see something that is not there, on the contrary, it is movement and becoming which are otherwise imperceptible - ‘relations of speed and slowness, pure affects, are below and above the threshold of perception.’ (18) Drugs enable ‘molecular microperceptions’ (19), they mark the point where ‘desire and perception meld’ (20). It is not just drugs which cause a tendency to be conscious of becoming, though, it is all artistic endeavour, and especially music, which inspires this molecularisation of desire (21). Deleuze and Guattari ellucidate a series of becomings with becoming-woman at the near end, then becoming-child, becoming-animal, and becoming-molecular, even becoming-imperceptible at the far end. (22)
It should be pointed out here that Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophy is anti-unitary in essence. No body can be examined in isolation, or as a thing in itself, but must be considered both part of, and also composed of, an assemblage of heterogeneous elements. This is what they mean when they propose, against a vitalist or essentialist conception of humanity, an abstract machinism. ‘This is not animism, any more than it is mechanism; rather, it is a universal machinism: a plane of consistency occupied by an immense abstract machine comprising an infinite number of assemblages.’ (23) We must also mention their assertion that subject, object, and meaning have no unity, they are always already a crowd, a multiplicity. They are opposed to the hierarchal, binary logic of arborescence, which always sublimates effect to cause and couches everything in terms of disjunctive either/or propositions. Instead they declare that multiplicities are rhizomatic, that is: non-hierarchal, connective and cartographic rather than representative. (24)
Let us return then to primitive territorial societies and examine this correlation between drugs and music in becoming. Music is ‘often a gateway to unusual or ecstatic states’ (25), and the shamans function is to be ‘technicians of ecstasy’ (26). The use of toxins amongst shamans is primarily as an aid to inducing trance states which enable the practitioner to crawl out of the narrow space of consciousness (27) and enter the unconscious. This entails a becoming-animal specific to each shaman - ‘In every hallucinatory journey, shamans would transmute into animal form.’ (28) ‘The unconscious no longer designates the hidden principle of the transcendent plane of organization, but the process of the immanent plane of consistency as it appears on itself in the course of its construction’ (29). Hallucinations do not describe something imaginary, they are the process of perception in its raw state, they consist of phosphenes, the apprehension of which are entoptic - ‘that is, they are not the result of mere visual, retinal observation, but are generated mainly in the neuronal system which includes the retinal ganglion network together with the cortical and subcortical range.’ (30)
The inducing of trance states is very much to do with rhythm, since the brain resonates at certain frequencies depending on its state. There are four categories of brain-wave activity; beta, at 14 cycles per second or hertz, is experienced during waking consciousness; alpha, 8-13 hertz, light dreaming/ meditation; theta, 4-7 hertz, sleep and advancced meditation; delta, 0.5-3 hertz, deep sleep/meditation. It is no surprise to find that most shamanic music uses repetitive drumming at a rate of exactly four and a half beats per second, the frequency that corresponds to theta and high states of meditation
It is not just the drum and the brain which emit frequencies, though, as the actual ingested substance has a rhythm too. This helps to account for the common experiences of those under the influence of one drug or another, so that ‘there exists an element of rhythm of pulsation in the imagery of Banisteriopsis intoxication, that seems more likely to be organically based than determined only by a visual and culturally moulded memory.’ (31) Certain chemical substances can then be considered rhythmic assemblages, Dos Santos calls such a group a ‘body of photons’ (32).
Thus psychoactive drugs and different forms of music together form a rhythmic assemblage, such that a musical genre, and those bodies which participate in its form can be longitudinally and latitudinally mapped. Jazz forms a rhizome with marijuana and alcohol - the Western preoccupation with melody can be correlated with liquor, which in jazz is fused with a more African tendency to priveledge rhythm, and herb. ‘Drunkenness as a triumphant irruption of the plant in us’ (33). Psychedelic rock forms a gang together with LSD, the speed at which they vibrate is altogether different from jazz - this is not to be confused with tempo, which is an aspect of extension, it is rather an intensive quality. We can call these different groups ‘speed tribes’.
The way that a certain genre of music reaches a critical threshold after which it transforms into another has been described by Brian Eno as ‘scenius’ (34). This relates to the fact that it is not one individual that invents the new musical form, but it emerges from a complex set of relationships to an already existing group of rhythms. We should examine here Bergson’s conception of the virtual as a field of potential that is real but not actual (35). The virtual is a realm of indeterminacy that can be actualised through chance. The new musical form is virtually present in the longitudinal and latitudinal relations of the old one. Thus the move from reggae to dub (which means double, or replicate) was an accidental discovery, which occurred due to bad singing that had to be stripped away from the instrumental track. This naked drum and bass template, or dubplate, could be manipulated to produce ‘odd perspectives and depth illusions, sound effects, unexpected noises and echoes that repeat to infinity’ (36) using the recording studio equipment which was formerly used to keep the sound clean and organised.
The concept of ‘scenius’ reprioritises the average participant in a rhythmic assemblage. A single person striking out in a new direction is of little importance unless it has an affect on the environment, unless it is copied by others, and spreads across bodies, constituting a new speed tribe. It is in this sense that Deleuze and Guattari stress that becoming is a multiplicity, a rhizome, or a pack (37). Music is a becoming-molecule (38) that is not subordinated to the form of molecule since becoming is not imitation, resemblance, or identification; neither is it progress or regress in series. It is not evolution by filiative descent but involution by horizontal transference, an alliance that is contagious - a communicative symbiosis (39).
To comprehend this notion of contagion by alliance it is necessary to study Deleuze and Guattari’s investigation of strange attractors. Their prime example of which is the wasp orchid, and its alliance with the wasp. Neither the wasp nor the orchid can be ontogenetically defined in terms of mimicry or resemblance, they are rather in a simbiotic relationship that produces an aparallel evolution. They connect with each other by mutually independent deterritorializations and reterritorializations. (40). Another alliance they cite is that between Captain Ahab and Moby Dick, this is an example not of pack contagion but of an alliance that is struck with an ‘exceptional individual’ (A41). This individual they also call the Anomaly, it is ‘a position or set of positions in relation to a multiplicity’ (42) and constitutes the ‘cutting edge of deterritorialization’ (43). It is therefor not an individual after all, nor a species, and designates a borderline, it is ‘linear yet multiple “teeming, seething, swelling, foaming, spreading like an infectious disease, this nameless horror.”’ (44)
The involution of drugs has taken millenia. Plants developed a whole array of defence mechanisms, the most lethal of which were chemical. Some of these chemicals were reaquisitioned, reterritorialized and assimilated by other animals and by predators themselves as means of self-defence, for example the tiger moth which ingests toxic alkaloids. Animals of all kind actively use these chemicals and others for the purposes of enjoyment. Llamas eat cocaine, deer eat fly agaric mushrooms, cats love catnip, humans drink coffee - all strange attractors (45). Bateson was inceptive in understanding drugs as a complex chemical economy ‘a meshwork of reactions and syntheses connecting humans and animals with the most innocent molecular processes of plants.’ (46)
Probably the most famous drug addict of the twentieth century, Burroughs was a pioneer in the application of virology to thought, fiction and matter. His mischeivous suggestion that drugs, or junk, is a virus was an idea that quickly spread through middle class america - aggravating a paranoia that was already infectiously out of control. Burroughs ideas were greatly influenced by the scientific theories of Korzybski, who defined bodies as protoplasmic, having no real boundaries, but participating in a colloidal behaviour that is common to all matter (47). This is very similar to the philosophy of affect as we have understood it, so that according to Korzybski philosophy can cause illness, especially those which support the Platonic notion of identity.
This can be correlated with Burroughs earlier writing, and his first viral body, which is an undifferentiated gelatinous mass, displaying the quality of a radically diminished discrete materiality (obliterating the categories of location and identity, replacing them with flow and function) and absolute deterritorialization (48). The second body, the schlupping body, was inspired by his experiences with drugs and sex, and is the extreme edge of need for the other, and the will to assimilate, or reterritorialise. Inorganic junk replicates hunger for itself, usurping the body it has invaded, litterally replacing the body particle by particle (49).
It is the fusion of the first body with dianetics, the brainchild of Hubbard, founder of scientology, that produces the mutant viral body of his later writing (50). Dianetics takes the concept of the engram, which is a multi-sensory recording of experience at a cellular level on the body, from Semon, and pathogenizes it so that it is traumatic experiences which are recorded, and further that the recording surface itself is irritable. Everything is fundamentally infected, or diseased. Therapy consists, much like Freudian pschoanalysis, of playback of the traumatic recording (51). The mutant body becomes highly differentiated, technologically determinant, microbial, and transmissable not merely through ingestion but also through communication (52). Language is a virus he calls ‘The Other Half’ which lives parasitically in your nervous system - the word becomes an organism that is damaging the body. (53)
These later works were produced using the cut-up method he pioneered with Gysin. By rearranging the fragments of text he beleived he could ‘scramble the order’ of the virus (54). It was his experiments with audio and film tape using the same method that yielded the concept of playback. This is a simultaneous deterritorialisation, of the environment recorded, and reterritorialisation, of the playback environment. Like Joyce’s promiscuous words, Burroughs’ cut-up method created a space of indeterminacy where meaning could flood in, chaos opens the door to the virtual. ‘Burroughs machine, systematic and repetitive, simultaneously disconnecting and reconnecting - it disconnects the concept of reality that has been imposed on us and then plugs normally dissociated zones into the same sector’ (55)
The essential nature of the virus is replication, repitition, and recombination, a factor which can just as well be applied to language as it can to music. A certain threshold passed somewhere, the speeding up of hip-hop break-beats that caused the emergence of hardcore, for example (56), can spread around the world in much the same way as the common cold (which, noone tires of repeating, we have still not found a cure for). Attali divides the history of music into four eras, sacrifice, representation, repitition and composition. In repitition, which Attali asserts he is contemporaneous with, ‘accessibility replaces the festival. . .The sacrificial relation becomes individualized, and people buy the individualized use of order, the personalized simulacrum of sacrifice.’ (57). He further contends that ‘music today is in many respects the monotonous herald of death’ (58).
As such he concurrs with the Freudian Oedipalization that places lack at the centre of desire. Freud too, in his cocaine rhizome (59), disovered a fundamental connection between death and repitition. At first he thought that repression caused repitition, through the mechanisms of sublimation and condensation, such as a repressed trauma that is repeated in dreams in different disguises (60). In ‘Beyond the Pleasure Principle’ he reverses and qualifies that ‘the death instinct seves as the positive originary principle for repitition’ (61). Disguise then becomes an aspect of the death instinct - ‘repetition is in its essence symbolic; symbols or simulacra are the letter of repetition itself. Difference is included in repitition by way of disguise and by way of the order of the symbol.’ (62) According to Freud ‘I do not repress because I repeat. I repeat because I repress, I forget because I repeat,’ (63).
For Deleuze on the contrary repitition ‘is the emission of singularities’ (64), this is the key to understanding Nietzsche’s eternal return and the fundamental anti-dialectical nature of Deleuze’s thought. ‘If eternal return is a circle, then Difference is at the centre and the Same is only on the periphery’. (65) Number one is the original, that is Plato’s Idea, being that is identical to itself already corresponds to a problem or question (66). Number two is the same, which never corresponds to the equal or identical, but is a gathering by way of difference’ (67). Number three is the eternal return ‘it takes time out of ‘joint’ and, being itself the third repitition, renders the repetition of the other two impossible.’ (68).
Modern music is undeniably all about repitition, a fact which causes Stockhausen, and Schoenburg, unimaginable boredom. Karlheinz entreats ‘the technocrats’ to end their use of repitition, psychology, drugs, environmental music, and stop prostituting the highest form of intelligence that is music (69). Stockhausen is a fascist serialist, stuck in the structuralist grid of negativity, who by priveledging the novel and the non-identical only reinforces the lack Freud posed at the centre of desire, the bar that Saussure placed between signifier and signified. He misses the point of repetition, which creates difference and is not opposed to it, and he thereby misses the point of life.
Deleuze distinguishes between cadence, which relates to representation (the mask and the envelope), and rhythm, which corresponds to repitition. Rhythm is a variable curve, not a cycle, and is primary. (70) It is difference that is rhythmic, not repitition ‘which nevertheless produces it: productive repitition has nothing to do with reproductive meter.’ (71) Techno, jungle and garage overturn the Western hierarchy of rhythm over melody. Jungle in particular uses a heavy bass which deterritorializes the drums allowing polyrhythmic beats that function like an abstract machine (72). Polyrhythmic drumming has of course a long history in Africa, and forms a rhizome both with the various stimulants used in ritual festivities and with the social form of the primitive territorial machine. This can be seen in the practice of apart playing that is at the heart of the polyrhythmic practice. Apart playing is when several drummers create a complex dynamic space of difference in the overlaying of their repetitive beats on each others. It is a game whose aim is to avoid the crystallisation of the rhythm into unison, as such it is analogous to the primitive territorial machine which actively wards off the solidification of the State through anticipation (73)
The quintessential new musical instrument of our times is the turntable and the computer. The DJ and the laptop musician are anti-originary, anti-hierarchal, networked, recombinant, and characterised by the loop. The simbiotic relationship between music and drugs has never been so apparent. It is not without a note of caution that Deleuze and Guattari ascribe becoming both to music and drugs. They warn that perception and the imperceptible pursue each other without coupling, turning the line of flight into a coil, which swirls into a black hole - an empty, cancerous body, a line of death. (74) The becoming that is music is also dangerous since, although music is joy it has a taste for death, and is potentially fascist.

‘Music has a thirst for destruction, every kind of destruction, extinction, breakage, dislocation,’ (75)

‘Now make the machines talk’ (76)


References

(1)Shapiro, H. ‘Waiting for the Man - The Story of Drugs and Popular Music’. p.xi. Helter Skelter Publishing. 2003.
(2)Graves, R. ‘The White Goddess - A Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth’. p.347. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 1966.
(3)Plato. ‘Republic’. p.67. Dover Publications. 2000.
(4)Aristotle, The Politics, trans. T.A.Sinclair, rev. T.J.Saunders. Book 8, section 5, page 466. Pengin, London. 1981.
(5)Foucault, M. ‘Theatricum Philosophicum’. p38.
(6)Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. p.49. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
(7)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.8. Athlone Press 2003.
(8)Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. p.26. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
(9)Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. p.65. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
(10)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.327. Athlone Press 2003.
(11)Deleuze, G. ‘Spinoza, Practical Philosophy’. p.55. City Lights Books. 1988.
(12)Deleuze, G. ‘Spinoza, Practical Philosophy’. p.75. City Lights Books. 1988.
(13)Bachelard, G. ‘Dialectic of Duration’. p.137. Clinamen Press. 2000.
(14)Bachelard, G. ‘Dialectic of Duration’. p.138. Clinamen Press. 2000.
(15)Bachelard, G. ‘Dialectic of Duration’. p.142. Clinamen Press. 2000.
(16)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.282. Athlone Press 2003.
(17)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.282. Athlone Press 2003.
(18)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.281. Athlone Press 2003.
(19)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.285. Athlone Press 2003.
(20)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.283. Athlone Press 2003.
(21)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.272. Athlone Press 2003.
(22)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.248. Athlone Press 2003.
(23)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.256. Athlone Press 2003.
(24)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.8. Athlone Press 2003.
(25)Toop, D. ‘Ocean of Sound’. p.221. Serpent’s Tail. 1995.
(26)Toop, D. ‘Ocean of Sound’. p.221. Serpent’s Tail. 1995.
(27)Gray, J. ‘Straw Dogs’. p.94. Granta Books. 2003
(28)Toop, D. ‘Ocean of Sound’. p.221. Serpent’s Tail. 1995.
(29)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.284. Athlone Press 2003.
(30)Reichel-Dolmatoff, G. ‘Rainforest Shamans’. p.136. Themis Books. 1997.
(31)Reichel-Dolmatoff, G. ‘Rainforest Shamans’. p.258. Themis Books. 1997.
(32)Bachelard, G. ‘Dialectic of Duration’. p.143. Clinamen Press. 2000.
(33)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.11. Athlone Press 2003.
(34)Eno, B. ‘A Year with Swollen Appendages’. p72. Faber and Faber. 1996.
(35)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.208. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(36)Toop, D. ‘Ocean of Sound’. p.118. Serpent’s Tail. 1995.
(37)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.238-9. Athlone Press 2003.
(38)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.248. Athlone Press 2003.
(39)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.237-8. Athlone Press 2003.
(40)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.10. Athlone Press 2003.
(41)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.243. Athlone Press 2003.
(42)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.244. Athlone Press 2003.
(43)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.244. Athlone Press 2003.
(44)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.245. Athlone Press 2003.
(45)Plant, S. ‘Writing on Drugs’. p.201. Faber and Faber. 2001.
(46)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.294-5. The MIT Press. 2001
(47)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.294-5. The MIT Press. 2001
(48)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.301. The MIT Press. 2001
(49)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.312. The MIT Press. 2001
(50)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.313. The MIT Press. 2001
(51)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.295. The MIT Press. 2001
(52)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.317. The MIT Press. 2001
(53)Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. p.317. The MIT Press. 2001
(54)Burroughs, W. ‘Nova Express’. p.43. Grove Press. 1992.
(55)Plant, S. ‘Writing on Drugs’. p.145. Faber and Faber. 2001.
(56)Reynolds, S. ‘Energy Flash’. p.88. Picador. 1998
(57)Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. p.100. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
(58)Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. p.125. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
(59)Plant, S. ‘Writing on Drugs’. p.72-3. Faber and Faber. 2001
(60)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.14. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(61)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.16. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(62)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.17. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(63)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.18. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(64)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.201. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(65)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.55. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(66)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.64. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(67)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.65-66. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(68)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.296. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(69)Cox, C. & Warner, D. ‘Audio Culture - Readings in Modern Music’. p.382. Continuum. 2004,
(70)Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. p.21. Columbia University Press. 1994.
(71)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.314. Athlone Press 2003.
(72)Davis, E. ‘Roots and Wires’. at http://www.techgnosis.com/cyberconf.html
(73)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.435. Athlone Press 2003.
(74)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.285. Athlone Press 2003.
(75)Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. p.299. Athlone Press 2003.
(76)Cox, C. & Warner, D. ‘Audio Culture - Readings in Modern Music’. p.338 . Continuum. 2004,



Bibliography

Aristotle, The Politics, trans. T.A.Sinclair, rev. T.J.Saunders. Pengin, London. 1981.
Attali, J. ‘Noise - The Political Economy of Music’. University of Minnesota Press. 2003.
Bachelard, G. ‘Dialectic of Duration’. Clinamen Press. 2000.
Bergson, H. ‘Matter and Memory’. Zone Books. 1991
Bull, M. & Black, L. ‘The Auditory Culture Reader’. Berg. 2003.
Burroughs, W. ‘Nova Express’. Grove Press. 1992.
Davis, E. ‘Roots and Wires’. at http://www.techgnosis.com/cyberconf.html
Deleuze, G. ‘Spinoza, Practical Philosophy’. City Lights Books. 1988.
Deleuze, G. ‘Foucault’. The Athlone Press.1999
Deleuze, G & Guattari, F.. ‘A Thousand Plateaus’. Athlone Press 2003.
Deleuze, G. ‘The Logic of Sense’. Continuum. 2004.
Deleuze, G. ‘Difference and Repetition’. Columbia University Press. 1994.
Deleuze, G & Guattari, F. ‘AntiOedipus. Capitalism and Schizophrenia’. Athlone Press
Eno, B. ‘A Year with Swollen Appendages’. Faber and Faber. 1996.
Cox, C. & Warner, D. ‘Audio Culture - Readings in Modern Music.’. Continuum. 2004,
Graves, R. ‘The White Goddess - A Historical Grammar of Poetic Myth’. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. 1966.
Grosz, E. ‘Volatile Bodies - Towards a Corporeal Feminism (theories of representation and difference). Indiana University Press. 1994.
Kahn, D. ‘Noise, Water, Meat - A History of Sound in the Arts’. The MIT Press. 2001
Hayles, K. ‘How we Became Posthuman - Virtual Bodies in Cybernetics, Literature and Informatics’. University of Chicago Press. 1999.
Foucault, M. ‘The Order of Things - An Archaeology of the Human Sciences’. Routledge. 1992.
Foucault, M. ‘Madness and Civilisation - A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason’. Routledge. 1995.
Foucault, M. et al. ‘Dream and Existence’. Humanities Press International, Inc.
Foucault, M. ‘The History of Sexuality, Volume 1’. Penguin Books. 1990.
Freud, S. ‘Civilization and its Discontents’. W.W.Norton & Company. 1989.
Gray, J. ‘Straw Dogs’. Granta Books. 2003.
lya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers, ‘Order Out of Chaos’ [New York: Bantam, 1984],
Lyotard, F. ‘Libidinal Economy’. Continuum. 1993.
Levy, P. ‘Collective Intelligence’. Plenum Trade. 1997.
Plant, S. ‘Writing on Drugs’. Faber and Faber. 2001.
Plato. ‘Republic’. Dover Publications. 2000.
Nyman, M. ‘Experimental Music - Cage and Beyond’. Cambridge University Press. 1999.
McLuhan, M. ‘Understanding Media’. Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1964
McLuhan, M. & Powers, B. ‘The Global Village’. Oxford University Press. 1992.
Massumi, B. ‘A User’s Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia - Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari’. The MIT Press. 1999.
Reichel-Dolmatoff, G. ‘Rainforest Shamans’. Themis Books. 1997.
Reynolds, S. ‘Energy Flash’. Picador. 1998
Shapiro, H. ‘Waiting for the Man - The Story of Drugs and Popular Music’. Helter Skelter Publishing. 2003.
Sokal, A. & Bricmont, J. ‘Intellectual Impostures’. Profile Books. 1997.
Toop, D. ‘Ocean of Sound’. Serpent’s Tail. 1995.