User:Angeliki/Grad-thesis-essays

Titles

• Voluminous bodies
• The volume of female voices
• Knowing and inhabiting with your voice

Introduction

  The thesis is a series of 5 essays which relate to the voice and its mediation. They address the voice as a feminist tool for communicating and an object of inhabiting space and presence. The texts deal particularly with the voice as a medium for collective practices (see The roots of collective voice). Historically, some voices and modes of addressing have been marginalized and shut out of the public domain (see the monstrosity of female voice); the collective voice represents the marginalized voice and the female voice is part of it. The former affords the amplification and multiplication either with the aid of technology or embodied practices (see Multiplication vis a vis amplification) that refuses the dominant ways of establishing presence; in the patriarchal democracy there is a fear of ugly forms of address which are connected to the female body _ blood, birth, death, mourning &c_ and other dark aspects and passions. These are forms of vocalization which are excluded public discourse which centers on “self-control” and “reason”. Such things are creating noise and disorder and "have to be kept" silent according to the patriarchal norms. But alternative mediums and forms of communication have been developed against that (see transmitting ugly things). There are technologies for self-control and filtration. The men are taught to disport themselves in particular ways and they are taught to teach the women to be silent. In the current era we see how technologies serve to filter forms of collective voices; again this aims to reduce “noise” (see Let’s talk about unspeakable things).

2. The Monstrosity of the Female Voice

With the excuse of the annoying noise that creates disorder, some modes of address [especially the female voice, maybe also collective one? so not need for the essay "Roots..."] have been marginalized and shut out of the public domain or have been normalized/filtered/controlled according to the principles of society.

What modes: the annoying noise

In Ancient Greece there was a mystification around the high-pitched voice that was connected with the evil. The human nature, as defined by the patriarchy, differs from the other animals' nature on the ability on articulating the sound and creating the ‘logos’ (speech). Through 'logos' humans can develop dialogue and democratic processes of communication and decision making. All the other forms of expression are wild and not rational, including sign language [example?] and the 'hysterical' exposures of women [more detail on describing why the noise is annoying]. Aristotle and his contemporaries believed that the vocal sound is based on the physiognomy, the genitals, of a person and that is why men speak in a low pitch. The high-pitched utterance of women, called 'ololyga', which was a ritual practice dedicated to important events of the life, like the birth of a child or the death of a person, was considered as a 'pollution' to the civic space. They were annoying sounds. If they were expressed in public they would create chaos and craziness. In mythology, when Odysseus awakens in the island of Phaiakia, he is "surrounded by the shrieking of women (...) and goes one to wonder what sort of savages or super-natural beings can be making such a racket". These women were Nausica and her girlfriends that are described by Homer as "wild girls who roam the mountains in attendance upon Artemis" (Carson, 1996, pg. 125). Similarly Alkaios, an archaic poet that had been expelled, was left outside of the city, where public assemblies were taken place, and was disgust by the presence of women’s voices talking 'nonsense'. In the ancient world women were excluded in the margin, the dark and formless space were speech and thus politics were absent. This disorderly loud female noise was related to a non civilized wild space, a political incorrect sound. Today women in public life worry if their voice is too light or high to deserve respect. Thus radio producers and politicians, like Margaret Thatcher, are trained to learn how to speak in public, deepen their voice and being taken seriously as a male speaker would do. A very recent example of how men were annoyed by women's voices is the abhorrence that Ernest Hemingway had for the voice of Gerdrude Stein [his words]. He would judge her for her big physical size and her monstrous voice that could not be tolerated.[Carson talks about his feelings for being in the margin, feelings of alienation]. Carson (1996, pg. 120) observes that the female voice in public is related to madness, witchery, bestiality, disorder, death and chaos. An thus has to stay hidden from sight ["The Oxymoron..." individual vs collective democracy].

HOW FEMALE VOICE SOUNDS LIKE: high-pitched, loud shouting, having too much smile in it, decapitated hen, heartchilling groan, garg, horrendous, howling dogs, being tortured in hell, deadly, incredible babbling, fearsome hullabaloo, she shrieks obscenities, haunting garrulity, monstrous, prodigious noise level, otherwordly echo, making such a racket, a loud roaring noise, disorderly and uncontrolled outflow of sound, shrieking, wailing, sobbing, shrill lament, loud laughter, screams of pain or of pleasure, eruptions of raw emotion, groan, barbarous excesses, female outpourings, bad sound, craziness, non-rational, weeping, emotional display, oral disorder, disturbing, abnormal, "hysteria", "Not public property", exposing her inside facts, private data, permits direct continuity between inside and outside, female ejaculation, "saying ugly things", objectionable, pollution, remarkable [from Carson's text]

Mechanisms of marginalization

The mechanisms of marginalization of these specific modes of addressing are based on control and filtering. One example is the repetitive action of self-control that comes from the ancient tactic of controlling the emotional exposure of one's self. Carson (1996, pg. 126) says that patriarchal thinking on emotional and ethical matters is related to ‘sophrosyne’, self- control of the body. A man is feminized when he leaves his emotions come out of his mouth and so he has to control himself and his body. "Females blurt out a direct translation of what should be formulated indirectly" (Carson, 1996, pg. 129). It was believed that the masculine deep voice, by default, indicates self- control. So the doctors of archaic periods would suggest exercises of oration to men to cure the damage of the daily use of loud and high-pitched voice. This means that they would practice public speech so to learn how to filter their insides when they come outside. In addition to that the low-pitched voice would be the right one to use in public assemblies so to be taken seriously.
The female version of this term was perceived more as a way for men to silence women when they get loud or scream of pain or pleasure. Because they weren't able to control themselves by nature. Silencing of women, the female ‘sophrosyne’, had been an object of legislative arrangements in the ancient world. Women didn’t have the license to express their ‘noise’ in specific places and events and there was a also a restriction over the duration, the content and the choreography of their rituals in funerals so that they wouldn’t create chaos and craziness. So, women’s public utterance restricted in cultural institutions expressing nothing more than a self- fulfilled prophecy. But there was a form of curing the women and city from this. These unpleasant tendencies of them had to stay hidden from the men’s view because were annoying, non-human and disorderly. But in Dionysian festivals the task of one selected woman would be to discharge the unspeakable things on behalf of the city, that was called ‘aischrologia’ leading to ‘katharsis’, which means the 'clearance' of the soul. She was free to express all these weid noises but only then and for the shake of the society. ‘Aischrologia’ (pg.132-133) seems similar to the therapeutic practice of hypnosis by Freud, who was aspiring this ancient idea, on hysterical women. Their emotions, the unspeakable things, were polluting their inside and ‘talking cure’ or otherwise ‘katharsis’ would help them. Freud would cure that by channeling these negative emotions through politically appropriated containers, through 'speech'. The silencing of women has to do also with the interruption of their voice when they express an argument in a dialogue and men are participating in it (Interview Cristina?).

Shut out of the public: Separation of public and private space

Ancient Greek thinkers had set the gender binary and their separation in the space. According to Kevin Fox Gotham (Ελιάνα Καναβέλη, 2012), territorial restrictions, identities and meanings are negotiable, as they are defined through social interaction and controversy. Thus the space is the material of the human action and the outcome of the social interactions. The philosophical western thought, based on the ancient social structures, supports the division between private and public domain. In the public space everybody should be civilized and resolve conflicts through dialogue but the inside of private spaces is ruled by a domestic power where violence is permitted. This separation has reached to a point were men are the main operators of politics in the public space. But the division is also between politicians and citizens, natives and immigrants.The representations of gender and space are not immutable but they consolidate dominant realities because of their repetition. The outside space has been historically connected to the male gendered subjects. Public spaces has been turned in gender constructions that privatize men and female subjects are expressing their needs and desires through them. The latter are related to house-wifi-zation and the private sphere of the house.
The dominant notion that men are the main operators of public sphere together with the idea that women are vulnerable and weak lead to the normalization of fear of women in the outside space. Their presence in inappropriate and dangerous spaces is their responsibility. The idea that women are excluded from the public space because of the male violence doesn't mean that men are excluding women. There are complicated power relations that create that exclusion. Freedom of speech relates to the political participation and in theory everyone can have it but in practice unwritten rules and power relations define what is going to be said and from whom. The factor of fear intervenes in that. These rules construct the public sphere and restrict female subjects in expressing harmless speeches. The voices and speeches of women in public are directed to “non-listening ears” and they remain silent.

Conclusion

The association of the female voice with bestiality and disorder justifies the tactic of patriarchal culture to ‘put a door’ on the female mouth since the ancient times. Different mechanisms have been developed to exclude specific forms of addressing from the public that are based on complicated power relations.

3. Multiplication Vis a Vis Amplification

The mediation of all these marginalized modes of address (see "Monstrosity..." {I can put extracts of my essays as annotations}) is happening in conditions that escape the traditional ways of the main public platform, which is male and expert dominated. Practices have been developed in response to that. All of them have in common the localization, the small scale, the refuse of prohibition and specialization, the participation and presence of people and temporariness. In this essay I will present examples of such practices.

The mediation of voice through multiplication

The urban space hosts several political activities like squatting, demonstrations, politics of culture and identity that are visible on the street and non dependent on massive media technologies. Such an example is the Speaker's Corner, "the home of free speech, where anyone can get on their soapbox and make their voice heard" (Coomes, 2015). Anyone becomes a speaker in a public street or square and can be heard by passengers by. This was a very crucial element in the Occupy Movement ¹; part of the occupy events would be public speeches often by philosophers, writers, academics, resistant figures(?) on the spot of the occupied space. The audience would may be very big and thus an amplifier was needed for the voice of the speaker to be heard to everyone. However, in the case of the Occupy Wall Street, amplified sound devices, like microphone and megaphone, were only allowed outside in the public spaces when a special permission from the municipality was given ¹. But "when the technologies above them are removed somehow, the foundational elements remain embedded and embodied in our cyborg bodies and brains" (Pages, 2011). The participants of #occupy became the 'human microphone', as they call it. This means that all together would repeat the words of the speaker for the benefit of those located in the rear. "Even given that many of the participants of #occupy are in full possession of smartphones, verbal address to the crowd from a singular source is still important" (Pages, 2011). This is an interesting fact of the public outside physical space of today. Even though many new technologies of networking, amplification and communication emerge, the public space seems to exist in a more 'primitive' and embodied expression for the ones that lack platforms of representation. Saskia Sassen (2012, p.) observes that in the cities today a big mix of people coexist. The ones who lack power can make themselves present through face to face communication. According to her this condition reveals another type of politics and political actors, based on hybrid contexts of acting and outside of the formal system. Kanaveli (2012) says that something that is visible and can be heard is reality and can create and give power. Site specificity is also very characteristic here.
From my point of view, the Occupy Movement revealed a lot about the relation of the media technology with the presence and resistance, emerged as an amplified process, in public. What I find interesting is that those people because of their multilayered relation to technology, like social media, are able to spread the words and make them viral in Internet. As it can be seen from the Youtube videos of the #occupy the crowd is using a lot of different media technologies, like their smartphones, to record or stream the words of the public speakers in Livestream platforms. This process was also a way to archive and make public bottom-up initiatives in public spaces in diverse networks. At the same time there is a temporariness in this action as platforms in internet are constantly changing or disappearing. So, the events and speeches are appearing in fragments of videos, transcriptions, conversations in forums. It is more like the users, protesters are leaving as many traces online as possible, as fragments of resistance. The multilayered communication of the events is like an urgent and fast multiplication of them in different forms and spaces [more]. The use of all these media doesn't require any special skill and the presence of an expert is not required. So mainstream media journalists are not needed for the news to spread to a wider public. This also means that the message is not edited or altered by a big company. "With cellphones, iPads and video cameras affixed to laptops, Occupy participants showed that almost anyone could broadcast live news online. In addition, they could help build an audience for their video by inviting people to talk about what they were seeing" (Preston, 2011)

Multiplication could be seen as a way of parallel and multiple presences in diverse private and public places. Internet, Skype, Youtube, voice messages “[r]adio and television have brought major political figures as public speakers to a larger public than was ever possible before modern electronic developments” (Ong, pg. 135). There are two ways of multiplication in the above examples. The one is through a unified collective voice and the other one through spreading the words as a spider net. The 'human microphone' resembles the first examples of collective voices in public, which is the 'ololyga', the female collective utterance (see 'Monstrosity'). Even though may not be a direct expression of resistance, it was an alternative temporary and informal [not specialized] mode of address that was suppressed and used only for specific occasions that were acceptable by the society at that time (see 'Monstrosity'). The second case reminds me of the very ancient practice of gossiping [example of gossip-based algorithms/ Gossip protocol/ peer-to-peer communication]. It has a negative connotation especially when connected with women [text of Federici]. However sometimes this is more an attempt to claim and exchange knowledge when there is no platform for them that practice it. The Internet and social media have the same baton effect and even though this is misused by mainstream political voices, it also serves the voiceless [examples and images].

The mediation of voice through amplification

In some occasions the amplification of the voice, as a mode of prohibition and presence, becomes possible both literally and metaphorically [definition of amplification]. This means that somebody can amplify their voice with the use of microphone so to strengthen the signal on the spot, and at the same time to make themselves loud and present so to be heard over the dominant ones. Suffragettes' speech-making workshops was a way to provide women with tools “with which to take their concerns out into the public domain” (Rose Gibbs, 2016) or in other words to amplify their voices in public. Speech was a civilized way to respond to violence happening inside homes. Feminists focused on the voice because there is a uniqueness in it, that embodies the speaker when entering a dialogue. It is an approach that rejects the abstract and bodiless universal identity of one's person, that has been developed by the western thought. By such identity I mean that one person is represented as a universal entity that shares the same characteristics and problems with all the people. So this person can be represented by somebody else, like a politician or another member of the family (see Transmitting...through men's speech), in a conversation concerning her/his body. But according to the feminist perspective, each one is unique and carries personal and situated problems and principles, so they are the only one that can represent themselves. Arendt () observes that the speech becomes possible with the existence of a group of people. Even more, the voice through speech- that can take the form of songs passing from one to the other or the collective voice of protesting- links one another and at the same time keeps the individuality of the speaker. In contrast to mainstream political spheres the feminists, like anarchists, were looking for horizontal ways of communication were no voice was dominating over others (Gibbs). Listening and wait everyone to speak, even the most shy ones, is a basic element of this kind of practices.

In the examples of radio art and pirate radio activism the temporariness and site-specificity of these actions- of prohibition, sharing of knowledge and communicating through voice- were tangled with the materiality and specificity of the medium. In an interview I had with Reni Hofmüller it was a hit and run action...the radio station was a fragile hardware [text of Dunbar]
Since 1920 the radio was criticized as a wasteland of commercials and state propaganda. It was Bertolt Brecht that perceived it as transceiver to experiment with and questioning its use and Walter Benjamin [more on Benjamin text] who noticed that it will be a failure as long as the separation between practitioners and public dominates it. From early on, tight regulations restricted the electromagnetic public sphere so that artists didn’t engage deeply with its elements and it was constantly seen as “an unrealized and undertheorized social and aesthetic space” (Kanouse, pg. 87). Only pirate radio practiotioners, with their low-tech practice and self-broadcasting, could interrogate the public, critical and political aspects of radio, as Brecht and Benjamin would imagine. Kanouse sees the use of prohibited technologies and the confrontation with these restrictions as a political act. An act that can propose an “anti-authoritarian radical democracy” (Kanouse, pg. 89) through the formation of small groups that learn to broadcast and produce alternate media cultures. An unlicensed broadcast can challenge what public art wants to: the creation of a public sphere willing to interrogate the “democratical” public space which is part of. (More on "The oxymoron...")
She brings the example of a project, called Talking Homes by John Brumit, that was realized under the residency of Neighborhood Public Radio (little NPR) arts collective of Detroit. The inhabitants broadcast personal stories through transmitters located in their houses and other buildings, revealing the struggle and the daily routine of these people living in degraded neighborhoods. The interviewers were trained by the artist to use their transmitters. It seemed that the exposition of the private sphere, reflected in the localization of the media and the gossiping produced, to the public re-framed clearer the struggle for the neighborhood than the big radio programs. The engagement of the public, which was not the privileged audience of art spaces, was deep even if the broadcast may have been illegal. The people felt safe and trusted the unfamiliar technology to them only because it was a certified technology (by FCC [define]) and didn’t bother for the more technical context about radios and frequencies. The project aspired the spirit of NPR that was characterized by the smallness, site-specificity and listener’s participation. Even though these small transmitters have not many listeners because of their small range, NRC sees that as a way to link people and thus negates the separation of practitioner and public mentioned before. The little NPR, in contrast to National Public Radio (big NPR), embraces amateurism on the base of “polymorphous” [ref to Kanouse]. In other words it embraces the instability, diversity, discomforts and the contradictions that produces.
The second project that she talks about is The Public Broadcast Cart made by Ricardo Miranda Zuñiga, that is a portable home-made radio broadcasting the voice of the one driving the cart in several places. The voice of the participant becomes public on site through speakers and extends to radio frequencies and the Internet. The legality of the radio cart doesn’t concern the present public and the unusual object attracts even more their attention. Based on the open source and pirate radio spirit, this offering of access to the technology refuses the specialization and the prohibition of the airwaves. The parallel expanses of the voice and the uncensored speech in three different public spaces occupies at the same time the physical, on-line and electromagnetic realm. The DIY electronic media empowers the individual and collective voice.

cars together playing the same frequency. Similar to multiplication https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=28&v=GC8MIa98f-E, https://www.a-n.co.uk/events/temporary-local-broadcast/, http://www.tadeosendon.com/temporary-local-broadcast/

https://www.thisamericanlife.org/667/wartime-radio

[other examples: max neuhaus people broadcasting different frequencies that compose a piece. other radio art examples from re-inveting radio]

Conclusion

The collective or individual concern of the ones that lack power is spread through different ways of mediation of their voice that overpass the mainstream and dominant modes. In my essay I separated the examples of amplification and multiplication but in conclusion these two terms are easily mixed together. These examples have all the condition I mentioned in the introduction in common. But they also have in common the spirit of oral cultures that are based on presence and vocal expression though they exist in a contemporary western context that differs from them. As Ong (2002, pg.13) says, “[a]t the same time, with telephone, radio, television and various kinds of sound tape, electronic technology has brought us into the age of 'secondary orality'”

Notes

<a name="myfootnote1">1</a>: It is an international movement since 2011 for social and economic justice and new forms of democracy with meetings in public spaces

<a name="myfootnote2">2</a>: "In NYC, a sound permit is required in order to use these devices in public, and the police may, or may not grant the permit" (NewYorkRawVideos, 2011, note)

4. Transmitting Ugly Things

The marginalized modes of address share concerns that seem uninteresting or bad for the Western formal and civilized society, that supports a democracy rooting in the Ancient Greek politics. Because of their ugliness, they are suppressed and accused as ugly forms, then filtered and censored before they been expressed in public. They share unfiltered, unedited messages that overpass the rational sphere of speech. From my perspective the medium used by these modes reflects their character. They are based on instant and urgent communication, liveness, "hit and run" approach (from Multiplication...). Today streaming media is used constantly by protesters or citizens for broadcasting news by themselves that are not censored by the government. Streaming media is characterized by the distribution of unfiltered data, the sense of liveness and the continuity (direct distribution) of the message. In this essay I will explain how the use of streaming media and the concept of streaming in general can be related to these 'ugly' forms of mediation. How these kind of media transmits 'ugly' things, according to the rational society, that marginalized people need to communicate for establishing their own voice and find space for their own desires. I think that the acceptance of continuity and direct mediation can facilitate more democratic processes.

What ugly things and the medium

Marginalized people are mediating things that are unacceptable by the society, unspeakable, political incorrect, emotionally overwhelmed, disorderly. They are too personal, too emotional, too embodied. Carson in her text explains how the direct mode of address of women's voices is annoying for the patriarchal society since Ancient Greece. A woman would expose her inside facts that are supposed to be private data. Examples of these facts would be emotions that reveal pleasure or pain either from sexual encounters from before or the birth of a child. "By projections and leakages of all kinds- somatic, vocal, emotional, sexual- females expose or expend what should be kept in" (Carson, 1996, pg. 129) and this reveals the fear of society for death, blood, darkness, the female body. This direct continuity and linkage between the inside and outside was a threat for the human nature and society as it was not filtrated through the rational toll of human, the 'speech'. It has been established that our inner desires and needs have to be expressed indirectly through speech and in the case of women through their men’s speech. It is very common that women stay inside home when their men come out to the streets to protest or talk about their family concerns (Kanaveli, 2012, pg. )example.

As I described in "Monstrosity..." one ugly form of address was an utterance, a high-pitched cry, called ‘ololyga’ and it was a ritual practice of women. This is a practice that is still valid in countries like Greece or Middle East. In their rituals women were also talking offensive bad things as described in "Monstrosity..." under the context of 'aischrologia'. A more recent one is 'hysteria', introduced by Freud, that expresses the psychic events within the woman's body directly to the outside of the body.pg. 134 kaminada "untoward event" Female is associated with the bad things of the collective memory. Gossiping is a form of address that reveals secrets that should have stayed hidden. It is an alternative way of communication hidden in the private domains that has been created in response to the exclusion of speech in public. Gossip "provides subordinated classes with a mode of communication beyond an official public culture from which they are excluded" (The Gossip, 2017, p.61). But even in the Ancient Greece this form was annoying. Alkaios describes how talkativeness annoyed him ('Monstrosity...') and Plutarch tells a story about how a secret is spread fast by women creating chaos and ruins, and how men are keeping themselves from revealing it (Carson, 1996, pg. 130).

Other ugly things are the private and hidden events of family violence. For feminists in the early 20th century the speech in public, in a group of other women sharing the same problem, was a way to externalize the personal violence and suppression of women without using violence in response. Protesters talk collectively about the bad financial structure of the states either by demonstrating or occupying public spaces. All these examples are not following the rationalist approach of the context they are part of. They express passion, vulnerabilities and unfulfilled desires. The idea that democracy is a civilized way of taking decisions that doesn't accept any form of over-emotion or overflow of expression, is nothing more than an illusion. An illusion that threatens the existence of democracy by creating exclusion and disregarding the importance of passions and desires in politics. As Mouffe (2013) says, "[i]f there is anything that endangers democracy nowadays, it is precisely the rationalist approach, because it is blind to the nature of the political and denies the central role that passions play in the field of politics." Thus democratic processes should take into consideration any irrational fantasies and desires that the public express. The suppression of them may lead to suppressed pain, fanaticism and fascism.

Streaming media in relation to female continuity

In the ancient medical and anatomical theory women had two mouths, the upper and the lower, connected through a neck. The lips of both of them guarded the “hollow cavity” (Carson, 1996, pg. 131) and they had to remain closed. Having two mouths that speak simultaneously is confusing and embarrassing and this creates ‘kakophony’. Females were expressing something directly when it should have been told indirectly. This direct continuity between the inside and the outside is repelling for the male nature that aspires the self-control which interrupts this continuity and dissociates the inside from the outside (Crason, 1996, pg. 131). They 'transmit' unfiltered information. At this point I would like to draw parallel lines with the streaming media that has been used as a tool of direct and urgent communication for protesters like in the case of the Occupy Movement. Similarly with the continuity I described before streaming protocols/processes are delivering unedited live messages that sometimes don't agree with the mainstream current public opinion. In Occupy Wall Street for example streaming media was a way for the protesters to be heard in public fast and broadcast their own news online ("Multiplication..."). Thus not any expert or official media platform could filter their speech and alter the message before they spread it online. This unaltered and direct speech of (radio/streaming) broadcasting (Ernst, 2016, pg. 104) have similarities with the non controlled direct expression of the female bodies in public (like hysteria and aischrologia, ololyga).

For an agonistic streaming

This uninterrupted continuity shows us that what is important is not the last message but what is happening right now at present and what practices of democracy are emerging. It is like the 'agonistic' model of democracy of Chantal Mouffe in which there is not an external power that filters it example of personal licences and creative commons and no time for thinking about future utopias and realities but what is happening now. It gives space to the conflicts to happen naturally.

Streaming media reflects a sense of liveness and presence. There is no time to reflect or edit the message Clara and pauline oliveros mediation, workshop at tender. The audience receives the message directly from the proprietor and can see clearly who is broadcasting, what is the source, how it looks like.

Conclusion

The ugly forms of address are pushed away because they reveal the hidden dark side of a 'democratic' society. The allowance of them can become crucial for the democracy we want to be part of. As "the prime task of democratic politics is not to eliminate passions or to relegate them to the private sphere in order to establish a rational consensus in the public sphere. Rather, it is to 'tame' those passions by mobilizing them towards democratic designs" (Mouffe, 2013). Focus more on the media that allow/facilitate this process to happen can open possibilities and alternatives of democratic processes.

Index

Absent Voice

Agonism Agonism (from Greek ἀγών agon, "struggle") is a political theory that emphasizes the potentially positive aspects of certain (but not all) forms of political conflict. It accepts a permanent place for such conflict, but seeks to show how people might accept and channel this positively. For this reason, agonists are especially concerned with debates about democracy. The tradition is also referred to as agonistic pluralism.

Amplification to increase the strength or amount of. Especially : to make louder. A figure of speech that adds importance to increase its rhetorical effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amplification Democracy

Female Voice high-pitched, loud shouting, having too much smile in it, decapitated hen, heartchilling groan, garg, horrendous, howling dogs, being tortured in hell, deadly, ...........craziness, non-rational, weeping, emotional display, oral disorder, disturbing, abnormal, "hysteria", "Not public property", exposing her inside facts, private data, permits direct continuity between inside and outside, female ejaculation, "saying ugly things", objectionable, pollution, remarkable (from Carson)

Individual empowerment

Invididual/Collective

Mediated Voice

Orality is thought and verbal expression in societies where the technologies of literacy and writing are unfamiliar to most of the population

Past/Present Voice

Public Space is the space that hosts collective decision making activities, democratic processes and freedom of speech. Though many contemporary public spaces are controlled spaces that exclude many modes of address. Big corporations and states are defining the public space and it is more a space of consuming and public access instead of a free space for expression. This space refers to either physical or digital (Sassen...). There is a big separation between private and public spaces that has been established since the ancient philosophy.

Public Speech is the ability to talk in public about individual or collective concerns

Speech is the rational human way of expressing personal stories, opinions. It is what differs human from animals according to the patriarchal principles on human nature (Carson...)

Streaming Media

Streaming refers to the process of delivering, it is a steady current of a fluid, a technique for transferring data so that it can be processed as a steady and continuous stream.

Transmitting is the act of passing, communicating, sending, to spread from one to another

Voice is the vocal sound that comes from the inside of the body and articulates speech

Bibliography

• Dunbar-Hester, C. (2014) ‘The tools of gender production’, in Bijker, W. E., Carlson, W. B., and Pinch, T. (eds) Low Power to the People: Pirates, Protest, and Politics in FM Radio Activism. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, pp. 53–68.
• Benjamin, W. (2008) The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. 01 edition. Translated by J. A. Underwood. London: Penguin.
• ‘Φύλο, φόβος και δημόσιος λόγος - Βαβυλωνία | Πολιτικό Περιοδικό’ (2012) Βαβυλωνία, 25 February. Available at: https://www.babylonia.gr/2012/02/25/filo-fovos-ke-dimosios-logos/ (Accessed: 26 November 2018).
• Kogawa, T. (2008) ‘Radio in the Chiasme’, in Elisabeth Zimmermann et al. (eds) Re-Inventing Radio. Aspects of radio as art. Frankfurt am Main: Revolver, pp. 407–409.
• Carson, A. (1996) ‘The Gender of Sound’, in Glass, Irony and God. First Edition edition. New York: New Directions, pp. 119–142.
• Rose Gibbs (2016) Speech Matters: Violence and the Feminist Voice, Institute of Contemporary Arts. Available at: https://archive.ica.art/bulletin/speech-matters-violence-and-feminist-voice (Accessed: 3 December 2018).
• Federici, S. B. (2014) Caliban and the witch. 2., rev. ed. New York, NY: Autonomedia.
• Lilja, M. (2017) ‘Dangerous bodies, matter and emotions: public assemblies and embodied resistance’, Journal of Political Power, 10(3), pp. 342–352. doi: 10.1080/2158379X.2017.1382176.
• Panopoulos, P. (no date) ‘Μέσα: Φωνές των απόντων, αντινομίες της αναμετάδοσης(Inside/ Media: Voices of the Absent, Antinomies of Transmission) (Φωνές/ Fonés, 2016)’.
• Ernst, W. (2016) ‘Experiencing Time as Sound’, in Chronopoetics. London ; New York: Rli, pp. 99–121 (102-111).
• Berry, D. (2011) ‘Real-Time Streams’, in The Philosophy of Software: Code and Mediation in the Digital Age. 2011 edition. Basingstoke New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 142–171.
• Tetsuo, K. (no date) ‘Minima Memoranda: a note on streaming media’. Available at: http://anarchy.translocal.jp/non-japanese/minima_memoranda.html (Accessed: 12 October 2018).
• Ong, W. J. (2002) Orality and Literacy. 2 edition. London: Routledge.
• Chantal Mouffe (2013) ‘Politics and passions: the stakes of democracy (2002)’, in Martin, J. (ed.) Chantal Mouffe: Hegemony, Radical Democracy, and the Political. 1 edition. London ; New York: Routledge, p. chapter11.
• Preston, J. (2011) ‘Occupy Movement Shows Potential of Live Online Video’, The New York Times, 11 December. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/12/business/media/occupy-movement-shows-potential-of-live-online-video.html (Accessed: 6 December 2018).

Revisions

23-1-2019