With or without much science or knowledge,
people try to solve problems they run into during their daily lives. As a
by-product, they create Technology: tools and techniques that help keep solving
the problems efficiently without having to re-invent the solution multiple
number of time... -Eduardo
Escardo-Raffo
(Contd from Sound…Music...Cinema...)
So, initially at the instance of the pioneers
like Edison, the film was buttressed by sound created in the pit, as there was
no known expedient for putting the same in the horse’s mouth. The sounds would
vary with each performance and the public had to stretch their convictions, and
pretend that the illusion was real. In general, all authorities are in
agreement as to the purpose of Cinema: creating a credible and sustained
illusion. Cinema pioneers doggedly went after problems that beset the fledgling
craft. Columbus stumbled into a new continent and in the process created
avenues that enriched human existence immeasurably. Likewise, cinema pioneers
created a whole new Culture, a major component being the technology of Sound in
Cinema, which is now one of the most critical disciplines associated with
cinema, next in importance perhaps, to Editing. Before we see how sound was wedded to vision,
a covert and hitherto unsuspected association between the two needs to be
highlighted.
The process of evolution of the talkie and how
sound and vision interact, is quite instructive. McGurk and MacDonald (1976:US)
experimented exhaustively with the phenomenon, producing their paper “Hearing
Lips and Seeing Voices” wherein the McGurk Effect-how the sum of vision and
sound differed from merely the sum (vision+sound) - was unveiled.
McGURK EFFECT
The burden of the song is this: “vision is the
primary sense for humans but sound is multimodal, involving information
from more than a single sensory modality, more particularly from audition
and vision… when it comes to recognize speech or sound, the brain cannot
differentiate whether it is seeing or hearing the incoming information”
(Wikipedia). By throwing sound into the arena, the players changed the very
complexion of the cine-experience.
As a small illustration, take the example of synchronous
sound: one that emanates from the screen visuals, and asynchronous sound, which
is disembodied. Asynchronous sounds impart
an unexpected dimension to the visuals. For instance a couple fights on-screen
and in the background we hear the siren of an ambulance. This could imply that
the fight might result in a medical condition, or could go on to enhance
realism of the scene by underscoring an urban setting. All this, without being
saddled with a separate visual, achieving the desired outcome in an economical
and a more subtle manner. Similarly the Akashwani signature tune has conventionally
become a surrogate for day-break- the audio obviates the need to show the Sunrise,
people brushing teeth, birds scurrying to get the worm for their chicks- and
remember, initially there was no colour to embellish the morn… Likewise a
tell-tale musical track could be used in the background to indicate the feelings
fleeting through the mind of the on-screen character or sought to be engendered
in the minds of the audience. Battleship Potemkin was a silent movie, but released
with an original background score in Germany. The score supposedly had a
‘crushing effect’ in Germany, so much so that in many places the German
military command passed the film but banned the musical score. Goebbels
reputedly said about the movie ‘it is a marvelous film without equal in
cinema…anyone who has no firm political conviction could become a Bolshevik
after seeing the movie..’
Another interesting instance of the secular
interaction between vision and sound is
quoted by Ashish Rajyadhyaksha from Keshavrao Bhole’s book Majhe Sangeet:
Rachana ani Digdarshan. Bhole composed music for V.Shantaram’s initial
talkies like Amritmanthan and Andhalyanchi Shala. Keshavrao Bhole
wrote:
During rehearsals I timed every sequence with a stop-watch and composed
my phrases to given durations. And then to demonstrate the effect to the
director, as much as to actors and musicians, we would play to the action in
the rehearsal. But we had a remarkable and unforeseen result. The actors
started choreographing their performance to the music, finding a rhythm that
they matched with their movements, speaking their lines to the curves of the
music….the pace of the performance was bound to the music…..I got new
ideas about the music itself. We could exercise greater control on sound volume
than ever before…The pitch and qualities of the spoken voice helped us to
choose our instruments as well, so that there was no interference in frequency.
It helped us choose our octaves…
Putting sound into cinema was easier
said than done. The noises of whirring cameras, lurching trolleys and overhead
cranes could not be overcome and the best that could be done was nocturnal
shooting. But so what- during dance-shoots the costumes would create their own
noises. Microphones would be stationary,
restricting movements of characters. Voice delivery, for instance pitch of
singing, would be affected by vigorous movement of characters. Retakes had to
be done constantly, adding to costs. Songs posed their own challenge. The
rhythm had to be synchronous with the action in case of real-time recording-
imagine what would happen to an Ayega Anewala in such conditions…and indeed
song would prove to be the thin edge of the wedge which was destined to prise open
the can of Dubbing…
No comments:
Post a Comment