table of contents

05/30/2012

Gabriella Safran on Listening

Gabriella Safran received her BA with honors in Soviet and East European Studies from Yale University and her PhD in Slavic Languages and Literatures from Princeton University in 1998.  Safran has written on Russian, Polish, Yiddish, and French literatures and cultures.  Her most recent book, Wandering Soul:  The Dybbuk's Creator, S. An-sky (Harvard, 2010), is […]

download transcript [vtt]
00:00:00.000
[ Music ]
00:00:06.000
>> This is KZSU Stanford.
00:00:08.800
Welcome to entitled opinions.
00:00:11.900
My name is Robert Harrison, and we're coming to you
00:00:15.620
from the Stanford campus.
00:00:17.180
[ Music ]
00:00:29.500
>> Generalizations are always problematic, but when it comes
00:00:36.000
to Western culture, there is one generalization
00:00:39.100
that will not get you into any trouble at all.
00:00:41.500
Western culture is thoroughly phyloscopic.
00:00:45.100
Phyloscopic is a fancy way of saying
00:00:48.380
that we privilege vision over any of our other senses.
00:00:51.500
Scope from the Greek scope pain to watch.
00:00:54.700
I'm amazed at the enormous efforts we have put
00:00:57.900
into enhancing our video technologies,
00:01:00.100
while we let our audio technologies degenerate all together.
00:01:03.900
Our computers and television give us the most extraordinary
00:01:08.040
high-definition images, yet those same devices come
00:01:12.320
with the most god-awful sound systems.
00:01:14.580
We don't mind listening to Edge of 17
00:01:18.240
on a radically compressed YouTube audio file,
00:01:21.120
as long as we can see every curl and Stevie Nicks hair.
00:01:26.120
The audio technology is out there, we just don't avail ourselves
00:01:29.460
of it very much.
00:01:30.500
Not anywhere near the extent that we avail ourselves
00:01:34.060
of video technologies.
00:01:35.540
It seems that on our scale of sensory values,
00:01:39.340
listening comes in well-blows seeing, and probably comes
00:01:43.260
in below taste, too, since most of us would spend our money
00:01:47.180
on a good restaurant meal rather than on good speakers
00:01:50.780
for our cars.
00:01:51.820
But I can tell you this much, there's all the difference
00:01:54.860
in the world between a good sound system and a bad one.
00:01:57.980
Whether you're listening to me pronouncing these words,
00:02:01.160
as you are now, or listening to the bass, drums,
00:02:04.400
and guitar flourishes coming up.
00:02:06.160
[ Music ]
00:02:35.160
[ Music ]
00:02:46.160
Looks so good, it looks so cool, you're planning to live
00:02:48.500
into the...
00:02:49.040
Why is it that we live in a visual culture rather
00:02:51.500
than an audio-visual culture?
00:02:53.540
The answer to that question takes us way back, all the way
00:02:57.920
back to the ancient Greeks whose philosophers determine
00:03:01.480
so much of our subsequent Western values and thought.
00:03:04.860
Plato, for example, did not have much use for hearing.
00:03:08.160
He conceived of knowledge as a kind of intellectual vision.
00:03:12.160
The knowing mind does not hear the truth, it sees it
00:03:16.400
by contemplating the ideal form of things.
00:03:19.760
Plato's word for the ideal form is edos,
00:03:24.080
which means the visible aspect.
00:03:26.080
And our word idea comes from the Greek Idaya, literally,
00:03:31.480
the look of a thing, from Edane to C.
00:03:34.940
Ultimate knowledge was conceived of by Plato
00:03:38.860
and Aristotle as theoretical knowledge, again,
00:03:41.820
from the Greek word, theodane to look at.
00:03:45.260
This typically Greek and above all platonic privileging
00:03:50.300
of sight as the highest mode of knowledge stands
00:03:53.780
in contrast to the Hebrew tradition where knowledge
00:03:57.020
or access to God comes about primarily through hearing God's
00:04:01.100
call and commandments rather than from viewing him in his form.
00:04:05.820
That's why when Philo Judeus of Alexandria set out
00:04:10.540
to plateanize Jewish philosophy in the first few decades
00:04:14.060
after the death of Jesus, one of the first things he did was
00:04:18.380
to insist on what he called the conversion of ears into eyes.
00:04:22.740
Commenting on the phrase in Exodus, which says,
00:04:27.340
"And all the people saw the voice of God."
00:04:30.400
Philo remarks, I quote him,
00:04:32.600
"The human voice is to be heard, but God's voice is in truth
00:04:37.400
to be seen."
00:04:38.320
Why?
00:04:39.220
Because that, which God speaks, is not words, but works,
00:04:43.780
which the eye discriminates better than the year.
00:04:46.780
This same Philo claim that when Jacob takes on the name Israel
00:04:54.380
as described in the Hebrew Bible, Jacob transitions from hearing
00:04:59.220
to seeing, quote, "Jacob is the name for learning and progressing.
00:05:04.060
That is, for the powers that depend on hearing.
00:05:07.140
But Israel is the name for perfection, for it means seeing God."
00:05:13.440
False etymology, by the way.
00:05:16.940
Philo, however, goes on to say, I quote,
00:05:19.980
This is an example of the kind of allegorical interpretation
00:05:34.420
of Hebrew scriptures that eventually led to a fusion of
00:05:37.860
plateanism and Christianity in the West, a fusion that once again
00:05:42.220
privileged spiritual vision is the most exalted mode of knowing
00:05:45.980
and relating to the divine.
00:05:48.340
But what about hearing?
00:05:50.780
What about listening?
00:05:52.700
What about this other fundamental sensory mode that attunes
00:05:57.540
us to the world that mediates our relationship to nature, to God,
00:06:01.940
or to one another?
00:06:03.100
I mean the auditory.
00:06:05.220
How do things stand when it comes to hearing and listening?
00:06:08.900
That's the question we're devoting our show to today.
00:06:12.100
And the person who joins me in the studio is currently writing a
00:06:15.860
book on the history of listening.
00:06:17.620
And she has many thoughts to share with us, not only about the Greek
00:06:21.980
and Hebrew traditions, but also about the role of that
00:06:25.260
listening is played in traditional folk culture, especially
00:06:28.900
Russian culture, as well as in the modern and contemporary
00:06:32.180
errors in general.
00:06:33.220
Gabriela Safran is the professor in the Department of Slavix
00:06:38.220
here at Stanford and is currently the chair of Stanford's
00:06:40.860
division of literature, cultures and languages.
00:06:43.740
We will be posting her distinguished academic profile on the
00:06:46.420
website of entitled opinions.
00:06:47.860
But I for one am eager to hear her talk about listening.
00:06:50.700
So let me welcome her to the program without further ado.
00:06:53.660
Gabriela, welcome to entitled opinions.
00:06:56.140
Thanks.
00:06:56.460
Thank you for joining us today.
00:06:57.940
Thank you, Robert.
00:06:59.300
So we agreed that we would try to cover four important aspects
00:07:06.780
of the history of listening in our show today.
00:07:08.740
The first one being the visual versus auditory as a way of knowing
00:07:13.500
the second has to do with the modes of listening and pre-modern
00:07:16.380
cultures in the third.
00:07:17.700
We'll talk about listening experiences in the modern era.
00:07:20.700
And if time permits, we'll move on to listening in the present.
00:07:25.300
So I already made some comments about the visual versus the
00:07:29.020
auditory in my opening remarks, but I'm sure there's a lot more
00:07:32.300
that you'd like to add to that topic.
00:07:33.980
Yeah, I'm very, very intrigued by the kind of dichotomy that
00:07:40.260
you've set up between Judaism and Christianity, between the Hebrew
00:07:45.940
Bible, the Greek Bible, and kind of linking the older Jewish
00:07:53.740
tradition to hearing and listening and the newer Christian one
00:07:58.500
to the visual, and indeed to our Western ideas as they've
00:08:04.820
developed.
00:08:05.500
I think there's, you know, there's so much truth to what you're
00:08:09.420
saying, the fundamental prayer in Judaism, the is the Shama, which is
00:08:17.580
the kind of prayer that affirms monotheism that says, listen,
00:08:23.500
listen Israel, there's just one God, right?
00:08:27.220
Listen or people sometimes translated here, here, oh, Israel.
00:08:31.020
And certainly from from inside Judaism and from inside the Hebrew
00:08:36.420
Bible, there's a kind of anxiety about the visual and a kind of
00:08:41.460
preference to preference of listening, over seeing.
00:08:46.500
And a sense that that the visual is dangerous.
00:08:51.100
The visual is a route maybe to away from monotheism, a route
00:08:58.740
to starting to believe in more than one God.
00:09:02.300
And if you look from inside the Jewish tradition, you see a kind
00:09:06.180
of suspicion of Christianity and specifically of its use of the
00:09:10.740
visual, you know, Christianity uses the visual certainly.
00:09:14.540
The Al-Sizam Eastern Orthodoxy images are used and that religion
00:09:19.340
kind of grows strong from it.
00:09:21.220
And you sort of look from inside Judaism and you think, you see
00:09:25.220
Jewish thinkers thinking, this is this is dangerous.
00:09:28.340
This is sort of leads you toward away from monotheism.
00:09:32.820
But but I think if we look more closely, what we see in both of
00:09:37.300
these religious traditions is a kind of concern about what
00:09:42.700
effective hearing or listening is versus ineffective hearing
00:09:47.460
or listening.
00:09:48.300
Remember Psalm 135, if you quote the King James version of the
00:09:56.500
Bible, the idols of the heathen are silver and gold, the work
00:10:01.700
of men's hands, they have mouths, but they speak not eyes have
00:10:06.660
they, but they see not.
00:10:08.020
They have ears, but they hear not.
00:10:10.980
Neither is there any breath in their mouths.
00:10:13.700
They that make them are like unto them.
00:10:16.500
So is everyone that trust in them.
00:10:19.300
Right.
00:10:20.220
So so the Psalmist here in number 135 is saying those heathen,
00:10:26.620
right?
00:10:27.100
Those people from before, from before the Israelites, those
00:10:30.220
people are there's some incorrect hearing going on around them.
00:10:35.900
And seeing and seeing.
00:10:37.460
Yeah.
00:10:37.660
All of the senses are not working for them.
00:10:40.260
But but if you kind of focus on hearing, they have, they have
00:10:43.940
ears, but they hear not.
00:10:45.180
They seem like they're hearing.
00:10:47.020
Maybe they're hearing, but they're not listening.
00:10:49.260
Why can I see, but they're not hearing?
00:10:51.420
Why do you think there's a specific paranoia about the visual
00:10:56.100
and monotheism?
00:10:58.420
And from inside Judaism.
00:10:59.580
I think that it has to do with this anxiety about the idol
00:11:05.900
worshippers, that the people that this
00:11:07.900
relates are constructing themselves against, they they
00:11:11.420
like to, as we see in Psalm 135, they like to portray
00:11:16.300
other religions as religions of false
00:11:21.860
constructions of God, religions that that create these, you
00:11:26.660
know statues and that worship them and the and what false is
00:11:31.500
especially this sense that those, those other religions
00:11:36.700
believe that there's a kind of listening happening, happening
00:11:41.940
by those statues that's not real.
00:11:44.020
And I think that the Israelites construct, they imagine their
00:11:47.660
deity as one who can hear.
00:11:49.940
So they can hear each other Israelites hear each other.
00:11:54.220
They say they're Shama and then they think their God can hear
00:11:58.500
them.
00:11:58.980
And because that's so powerful, that's so powerfully expressed
00:12:02.780
in the Hebrew Bible, we really associated with with the
00:12:07.460
Israelites, but what I find fascinating is that if we move on
00:12:11.260
to to the Greek Bible to the Christian Bible, you see that
00:12:16.100
this same, the same concern about good hearing, correct
00:12:22.860
hearing, hearing that's really effective, that that's something
00:12:26.580
that the that the writers of the Gospels share as well.
00:12:31.660
You know, in Matthew 13, he's talking about, he's citing
00:12:37.380
Jesus and Jesus is explaining why he speaks in parables.
00:12:41.780
And and Jesus says, therefore, speak eye to them in parables
00:12:45.780
because they seeing see not and hearing they hear not neither
00:12:50.500
do they understand.
00:12:52.220
So there's this sense in in the Gospels as well that we need
00:12:57.140
to distinguish good hearing from bad hearing.
00:13:00.380
Oh, for sure.
00:13:01.300
I mean, the Gospels are are very Jewish in their in their
00:13:05.980
sources.
00:13:07.020
The juxtaposition that I was playing with this more about
00:13:12.220
Greek and especially platonic philosophy, which privileges
00:13:17.620
vision and the way the Christian church fathers took over a lot
00:13:23.420
of these platonic elements and and fused with Christianity
00:13:26.340
giving a certain sort of primacy to vision in their in their
00:13:32.860
theology, specifically speaking.
00:13:35.900
Now, if we go back to the role that hearing plays in the in the
00:13:41.780
Hebrew scriptures, the idea that God speaks, I think that
00:13:46.260
Philo really distorts the facts about the facts, distorts might
00:13:52.340
understanding of the role that Yahweh's voice plays there in
00:14:00.460
the old passages there where it's above all the voice of
00:14:07.780
commandment.
00:14:08.500
And it's a voice that calls on his people.
00:14:13.860
So there is something in it, which is not just as he says the
00:14:18.540
works that God through his works becomes visible and you
00:14:21.580
hear him through through seeing.
00:14:23.140
And I the one question I'd like to ask you is whether you
00:14:26.540
believe that there's something about the way in which history
00:14:31.500
has such an important role to play in the Judeo Christian
00:14:35.300
notion of a more rectilinear time as opposed to the Greek
00:14:41.500
notion of cyclical time.
00:14:42.980
In so far as hearing our sense of hearing is something that is
00:14:49.020
profoundly embedded in the temporal.
00:14:52.260
You have to wait until I finish my sentence before you can
00:14:55.660
understand what it is I'm trying to say.
00:14:58.020
Unlike vision where you can look at a totality of elements,
00:15:03.420
almost in one sort of syncretic moment, which is why the Greeks
00:15:08.940
took vision as the kind of most divine sense because you can see
00:15:13.100
the hold in one instant whereas with hearing you hear
00:15:16.660
things in time.
00:15:17.860
And therefore there's a temporal aspect to the, you know,
00:15:22.780
just on the very physiological level that is not the case
00:15:26.220
with vision and that therefore it's maybe not by accident
00:15:29.100
that Judaism and then with Christianity gives us a kind of
00:15:34.060
linear narrative kind of temporal notion of something unfolding,
00:15:40.580
God unfolding his providential design through history rather
00:15:44.700
than in a transcendent, a temporal space.
00:15:47.340
That's very fascinating.
00:15:50.140
I'm not, I'm trying to think about how to respond.
00:15:56.740
I think if you, you know, what I, what I've studied is sort
00:16:02.140
of late 19th century, early 20th century, Russian Empire.
00:16:08.180
And I'm especially interested in the interactions between Jews
00:16:11.940
and Christians in that space.
00:16:13.620
And you know, Russian, Russian, Christian culture,
00:16:16.420
Eastern Orthodox culture is heavily influenced by Greek models,
00:16:21.180
of course.
00:16:21.780
I think what you, what you tend to see there is a sense
00:16:30.260
of a sense of Jewish time as being very present-oriented.
00:16:37.460
So Jews, in fact, Judaism is interested in the end of time.
00:16:45.740
It's, it drives toward.
00:16:48.300
Messianic.
00:16:49.100
Yeah, it's Messianic.
00:16:50.300
It, it imagines that you're, you're moving toward some end.
00:16:54.900
And that things that happen in the present have to make sense
00:16:59.820
in relation to the end.
00:17:01.260
And in that way, of course, it's very similar to, to Christian culture.
00:17:05.740
But when you look kind of on the ground at this, this situation
00:17:10.380
I'm familiar with, which is Christians observing Jews
00:17:13.780
and Jews observing Christians, what you see as Christians thinking
00:17:17.500
about Jews that they, they live very much in the present
00:17:20.260
and that they're very, very noisy, that they're, they're somehow,
00:17:26.180
loud and that they're, their worship is loud, that they, you have these fascinating descriptions.
00:17:34.500
One, for instance, by Dstayevsky who was in prison in Siberia in the 1850s.
00:17:42.700
And in his prison, there was a Jewish prisoner.
00:17:47.580
And he writes about this Jewish prisoner, he's siphoned each in his memoirs.
00:17:53.980
They're called the memoirs, I called Notes from the House of the Dead.
00:17:56.860
And Dstayevsky describes how every Friday night this, this Jewish prisoner,
00:18:03.940
he's siphoned each was, was allowed to perform his religious rituals.
00:18:09.740
And so he would like candles and he would say prayers.
00:18:13.940
And Dstayevsky describes this as sort of very oral, very performative,
00:18:22.700
very, very present, very physical in a way that does not really, um,
00:18:29.500
that doesn't parallel ways in which Dstayevsky describes Eastern Orthodox ritual.
00:18:36.180
That's pretty, that's spirituality.
00:18:37.180
And spirituality.
00:18:38.260
Yeah.
00:18:38.900
Yeah.
00:18:39.100
So you have a sense, I think that that, that orality, um, that somehow,
00:18:44.300
Jewishness is perceived as oral, um, for Dstayevsky,
00:18:50.220
the Dstayevsky perceives Jewishness as oral and, and perceives Christianity as perhaps
00:18:55.900
more visual, he's very interested in, um, depictions of Jesus, uh,
00:19:02.100
the, especially of course, um, the crucified Jesus, the, the dying Jesus,
00:19:07.260
the dead Jesus, that's those images are very fascinating for him.
00:19:10.540
So I think what we have is a, um, sort of literary tradition that sort of
00:19:16.380
heightens and re, re-inscribes this idea of, um, Judaism being about sound and listening
00:19:24.020
and Christianity being about looking and seeing.
00:19:27.140
Right.
00:19:27.420
And, uh, you know, let's, we'll move on now to our part two, but if you have a religion
00:19:34.260
that believes in the, the doctrine of the incarnation, namely of, of God becoming
00:19:40.740
human, that's already the, um, let's say the theological foundation for this
00:19:47.540
phyloscopia that I was referring to.
00:19:50.660
And so far as God now has become visible here in our midst, in our presence
00:19:54.340
at, in human form.
00:19:55.900
And therefore the incarnation of according to a lot of Christian theologians is
00:20:01.380
really the basis for why there is this massive iconographic tradition of,
00:20:07.140
the representation of, uh, you know, the divine invisible forms.
00:20:11.220
Okay.
00:20:11.660
That's very, that's very much, uh, the case for Russian Orthodox theology,
00:20:15.820
sort of Russian Orthodox, um, icon, the theology of icons is really based on the
00:20:20.820
idea that just as, um, the divine can come down to earth and take on human form
00:20:27.820
with the incarnation.
00:20:29.820
So the image of the divine can take on material form in the icon and any,
00:20:36.460
any Orthodox church that you go into, um, will be full of icons.
00:20:40.780
And they won't just be pictures, you know, in the mind of the believer.
00:20:44.380
They're, they're pictures, but they're also windows or their doors.
00:20:47.900
They're, they're ways of accessing the divine and you do it through sight,
00:20:52.020
not, not through hearing, but through sight.
00:20:54.500
Right.
00:20:54.860
In fact, I did a show a few years ago with our colleague, Bisa
00:20:59.060
Pincheva in art history on the icon and, and, uh, the Virgin Mary and, and the way
00:21:03.420
that these icons are actually animate with a certain presence, uh, visual,
00:21:08.460
but that she claims that there's the other senses are brought into it because
00:21:12.420
you have, um, you know, the incense and you have music and so forth.
00:21:15.780
But anyway, your, uh, this whole phenomenon of listening, obviously,
00:21:20.580
it, it goes far beyond the traditions that we're talking about because we're
00:21:24.780
talking about one of the fundamental, um, uh, uh, senses by which we perceive, uh,
00:21:31.540
all sorts of things from nature to, uh, each other.
00:21:35.180
And we, that we can only do a very tiny select history of it here with you
00:21:40.260
today. Now, your specialization, as you said, is Russian culture, 1819,
00:21:45.820
early 20th century. What can you say about, uh, the cultural history of
00:21:51.620
listening, uh, jumping into your, uh, the field that you're most comfortable
00:21:56.140
with here? Um, well, I'm, I'm very, I'm very fascinated by the idea that
00:22:01.500
there's, uh, there's shifts in how we listen that listening is something that you
00:22:06.500
can historicize, that you can really, that it's meaningful to say people listen
00:22:13.020
differently in 1500 versus 1800 versus today. Um, you know, I think we're,
00:22:19.020
we literary scholars tend to think that you write in genres and forms,
00:22:25.980
right? And, and we tend to certainly linguistic and virologists agree that you
00:22:29.980
speak in genres and forms, you know, our utterances have a kind of shape. And, um,
00:22:36.460
and they take on meaning within a kind of form or a shape. And, and I think it
00:22:41.180
makes sense also for us to think about genres of listening and how they can
00:22:46.380
change over time, how your act of listening today, right now to this radio
00:22:52.700
show is different from other acts of listening that you might be performing,
00:22:58.180
you know, listening to your family, listening to listening in a court, listening to
00:23:03.460
someone accuse you. That's a different kind of listening. And, um, and, and
00:23:07.420
listening is, is something it can be active. You're doing it. You're not, it's
00:23:11.660
not just something, you know, sound being imposed upon you. You're listening.
00:23:15.380
And so what I'm very, uh, what I'm writing about is the idea that, um, there's a
00:23:20.940
real, there's an important shift in genres of listening, modes of listening in, um,
00:23:27.140
in the Russian Empire. Um, at some point around 1860s, 1870s, um, that, you know,
00:23:34.900
before the 1860s, in the Russian Empire, you have, um, such surfoning
00:23:41.180
society, you have 80% of the population are slaves, um, very, very archaic
00:23:47.820
legal system. And, and there's a certain kind of listening that happened in that
00:23:53.620
context. And then you have this shift where suddenly surface of freed in the 1860s,
00:23:59.540
a new legal system comes in new professions, new kinds of ways of living. And
00:24:04.540
people start to listen differently. And I, I think we should pay attention to
00:24:08.100
that and think about how maybe we can reread some great works of Russian
00:24:12.820
literature, recognizing that they're occurring at the moment of this shift in
00:24:17.420
listening. So what would you say were the dominant genres of listening prior to
00:24:23.340
these changes you're describing? Well, I think the way people listen in a slave
00:24:28.460
owning society is, um, is very specific. And there's, there's actually great, um,
00:24:33.860
historians of the US, um, the US South in the, um, pre civil war era who
00:24:41.340
talk about how there was a kind of, uh, valorization of a certain kind of
00:24:47.220
silence. So slave owners would like their slaves to be not too loud. They want
00:24:54.740
to, they want to experience the, the plantation is quiet. Or they, they can also
00:25:00.460
appreciate a certain kind of, um, controlled sound singing, contained sort of
00:25:08.020
singing. And, um, and I think what you, um, what you see in the Russian context is
00:25:15.260
very similar to what you see in the US context in terms of pre, pre 1860s, pre
00:25:21.420
emancipation that, um, that you have listening that's, uh, very class, class
00:25:28.780
based, right? The, the people in charge, the landowners, the surf owners speak
00:25:33.100
and the surf's listening. And what's interesting about Russian, as opposed to
00:25:36.580
English, is that these roles are reflected in the language itself. So in Russian,
00:25:42.940
the verb for, uh, for to listen slushets and the verb for to obey is slushets.
00:25:49.940
It's the reflective form of that same verb. And, um, and there's an adjective
00:25:55.420
plus slushly, which means obedient. So if you're obedient, then you're a listener.
00:26:01.900
Right. That, um, that's all fascinating. I was thinking about the origin of the
00:26:07.700
blues. We did a two-part show on the blues and then the call and response origins in the fields,
00:26:14.700
uh, you know, through, um, song and sound and anyway, but that's a, that's a
00:26:19.420
different issue. So, and I would imagine that storytelling was a, uh, genre of
00:26:26.980
listening among the surf's that was, it must be hard for us to imagine in, um, in
00:26:33.860
our own era because of all the changes that have taken place in the society as, as large
00:26:41.420
and, and that, um, when, when, what have to use a lot of imagination to, to, to, um, reconstruct
00:26:47.940
what the, the listening to an oral recitation of a story would have been there. Yeah,
00:26:54.940
and it's, it's a very, um, it's, it's an interesting question. Of course, there's all this
00:27:01.660
great work by father Walter Ong on, um, orality and literacy where, where he asks, you know,
00:27:09.100
how do you, if you're not literate or if you're not very literate and if you grow up in an,
00:27:16.580
an oral society and you, you listen, you listen to stories, you listen to songs, does
00:27:23.180
that make you think differently? Can we ever recapture the experience of listening as, for
00:27:30.180
someone who's primary mode of taking in information, taking in words is listening. You know,
00:27:39.180
we, for whom our primary mode of taking in words is, is looking and, and, and reading, maybe
00:27:45.220
we can't ever, we can't ever get at how it felt to just listen. And what about the, um, the
00:27:51.900
orthodox mass? Was that highly, um, participatory and where there, there was a lot of listening involved
00:28:01.100
and responding? He know there's a choir, you listen to the choir and sermons, you know, sermons
00:28:09.140
are not so traditional in Russian orthodoxy. I mean, today, yes, but in the period I study sermons
00:28:16.820
were rare, they were once or twice a year. Um, and I don't think there's such a sense that it was part
00:28:25.900
of the duty of an orthodox priest to sort of say his own words. I think the priest really
00:28:31.260
said the words that were, that were part of the liturgy. So, so that's, um, that I think
00:28:37.940
is a kind of listening that it's, um, that we, we tend to not, uh, think about enough.
00:28:44.620
What does it mean to listen to something that you listen to every year or to listen to something
00:28:49.620
that you listen to over and over? I think we, especially here in academia, we privilege
00:28:55.940
the, um, taking in of information that's new. And we're very interested in, um, what happens
00:29:04.020
when you read something for the first time. Of course, we're teaching students who are reading
00:29:07.860
things for the first time or we talk to them or we hope we're saying to them things they're
00:29:11.780
hearing for the first time. So we get, I think, a little bit too, too focused on, on that, that
00:29:19.380
kind of information going in, the sensory experience, the listening or hearing, listening
00:29:24.900
or seeing experience of information going in. But I think there's a lot of important listening
00:29:30.140
experiences that have to do with hearing it again, hearing it, richually experiencing pleasure
00:29:37.020
from hearing something over and over again, being part of a maybe cyclical, um, sort of calendar
00:29:46.060
in which you know you're going to hear a certain liturgy because it's Easter and, and
00:29:52.340
you, you feel sort of satisfied that it was Easter because you heard that liturgy. And
00:29:57.140
then of course, if you're an orthodox believer, you go around and you say to everybody,
00:30:02.940
Christ is risen, he is truly risen, you're speaking and listening to each other and that,
00:30:08.660
um, that affirms for you something about who you are and what you believe.
00:30:12.620
Yeah. The modern day equivalent of that would be like the people who go to rock concerts
00:30:17.100
to go in here, the song that they've listened to a thousand times, we perform their
00:30:21.220
life, you know, in a ritualistic kind of mass of the rock concert.
00:30:26.500
Gabriela, when we move to the modern period and there are all sorts of huge inventions
00:30:34.420
and changes that can't but affect that transformation in the genres of listening. And I hate
00:30:41.260
to brutally kind of yank us into a completely different context. But could you say a few
00:30:47.020
things about this sort of the concussions that take place in the modern era when it comes
00:30:54.980
to listening? Yeah. I mean, it's interesting because we, because the visual, you know,
00:31:00.660
our experience of the, the word as a visual thing has always been mediated, right? You
00:31:06.380
don't have the written word until you have the technology of writing and that, that
00:31:10.340
seems very natural to us. But what's interesting about technologies of sound is that
00:31:15.500
they get introduced all of a sudden, you know, there isn't, and then there is, um, especially
00:31:20.860
with, um, so something I'm very fascinated by is the gramophone, which, you know,
00:31:25.860
1890s, there's gramophones. People are traveling around. They're traveling to little Russian
00:31:32.780
villages far away from, from anything and they're bringing a gramophone. And, and that's
00:31:40.100
suddenly, imagine how that must have just blown people's minds to, to realize that the
00:31:47.540
word, the spoken word, which had always been so tied to that moment of hearing it, suddenly
00:31:55.860
it can be untied from that moment and heard again later. I'm convinced that it's a momentous
00:32:05.340
cultural revolution when you can hear the dead speak in their own voices for the first
00:32:12.620
time through recording technologies and not have the actual presence of the person, you know,
00:32:19.620
it behind the voice. And, you know, I believe that the poet traditionally has served as
00:32:27.180
the voice for the dead, whether the epic poet, like, um, through a disheous who goes and talks
00:32:34.300
to the dead in Homer or whether it's Orpheus who descends into the underworld of the lyric
00:32:39.820
voice, this kind of traditional role that the poet has played now, all of a sudden with
00:32:44.420
recording technologies, we can hear Martin Luther King still today in his voice or we can
00:32:49.620
also see through images the same thing. So it must have had a, you know, huge impact as
00:32:57.100
you're suggesting. Here, you know, you let me this article that I read through it's by
00:33:03.240
Hillel Schwartz on the indefensible ear history and there there's a passage where if I
00:33:10.120
can just read it, maybe we can talk about some of the things that he introduced it, the
00:33:15.320
centrality of hearing itself was being reassessed at the turn of the 20th century. We
00:33:22.000
are told by cultural critics and historians that modernity has been marked by a supreme victory
00:33:26.800
of the visual over the oral in the hierarchy of the senses, but to people between 1870
00:33:31.760
and the First World War, the most amazing new elements in modern society were keenly oral in
00:33:37.040
their impact and influence. The player piano, the gramophone, the telephone, the radio,
00:33:43.280
the subway train, the elevated train and during the Great War, the loudspeaker and high
00:33:48.560
powered extremely loud artillery and then he goes on, she goes on more, more sort of examples
00:33:56.000
and there you mentioned the gramophone, but it's true also that the gramophone is part of a larger
00:34:02.160
nexus of a soundscape that is very different than what it was just a few decades earlier.
00:34:09.040
Yeah, yeah, I think that's absolutely true and that's, you know, that's what I find fascinating,
00:34:17.280
is what I've been researching is when you suddenly have the introduction of all these
00:34:22.960
technologies, the change, your experience of listening that allow you to hear things you couldn't have
00:34:27.760
heard before and that make those things that you might have already been hearing much, much louder,
00:34:34.560
or that just produce new, there's just new experiences that are allowed in like trains, you know,
00:34:41.200
in a way that you just didn't have before, I think what you see in Russian literature and I'm sure
00:34:47.520
it's not only in Russian literature from after the 1870s is people writing about wanting to avoid
00:34:58.400
that excess sound, people writing very kind of persuasively and kind of compellingly about
00:35:05.840
about wanting to turn off the voice of the other, wanting to escape, wanting to get out of that
00:35:13.600
new loud sphere and kind of fantasizing about about pushing it away, shutting it down and at the same
00:35:21.280
time I think what you see in these, in these fictions and I'm thinking about stories I've found
00:35:26.400
by Tolstoy and to stay up ski and check off at the same time I think there's an awareness that
00:35:32.320
you can't escape it. So say something about those authors if you don't mind about where listening
00:35:37.840
comes into those fictions you're referring to. Well, so I found this short story by Chekhov called
00:35:48.480
Drama that's from the 1880s where it's about a writer who's just sitting sitting at home in his
00:35:59.360
studio in his home and a woman comes to him and says you need to listen to my play that I
00:36:07.600
wrote you need to listen to it right now and he kind of weakly protests but she comes in and she
00:36:13.760
starts speaking she reads it to him and he kind of goes crazy as he listens to her and then he
00:36:18.960
throws a paperweight at her and he kills her and then he's put on trial and he's exonerated
00:36:24.720
and what's interesting to me is that and I think I'm the first one to realize this but so
00:36:33.440
a couple years after that Tolstoy who loves Chekhov he loves Chekhov's well he loves some of Chekhov's
00:36:40.400
stories but he loves this story for sure and he he actually loves reading it out loud and he loves
00:36:45.520
having other people read it out loud to him it's a short story it's five pages you can all go home
00:36:50.080
and find it and read it out loud so Tolstoy loves this this story and just two years after Chekhov
00:36:56.160
writes this story Tolstoy writes his own story which is a very famous story called The Croixer Sonata
00:37:02.320
and the Croixer Sonata is about it's set on a train it's about a man a conversation on a train in
00:37:12.800
which one man says to his fellow passenger you may have heard of me I'm very famous I killed my wife
00:37:19.280
this is how it happened hi my wife met this she's a piano player and she met a violinist and
00:37:26.480
she started to perform with his violinist and she and when they performed the Croixer Sonata
00:37:32.480
I felt very jealous and one day they performed the Croixer Sonata and he says and I feel okay and I go out
00:37:39.200
of town and then I hear that she's seen this violinist again and I become incredibly jealous and I
00:37:47.280
go take the train back to Moscow and I go into where my wife is playing piano and I kill her
00:37:55.440
and then he's he's also exonerated and and what I find fascinating is that these two stories which
00:38:05.840
which are so close in time I mean they're about sort of familiar topics of 19th century literature
00:38:14.800
romance violence you know things we all know about but at the same time they're about listening
00:38:21.920
and they're about how listening can drive you crazy listening can be too much and what's what's interesting
00:38:30.800
to me is that they're on the one hand they're about kind of familiar listening experiences listening
00:38:37.280
to a play listening to music but they also both of these stories talk about listening in court
00:38:48.720
because in both of these stories the the main character the murderer is ultimately put on trial and that
00:38:55.040
knew that that kind of listening listening in a court having trials by jury in which
00:39:01.760
you know people get to speak in their own defense and they have lawyers and
00:39:06.480
and then there's a jury that listens and it it issues a verdict that was a completely new thing
00:39:13.760
in the Russian Empire that was something that only came into place in the 1870s so at the time of
00:39:19.200
Chekhov and Tolstoy's stories this was an institution that was only in place for you know a decade
00:39:26.480
and it was it was very new and it was very weird the idea that you could people maybe people who
00:39:34.240
were who were peasants who were very poor could be on a jury where they would listen to somebody
00:39:40.400
who might be an aristocrat tell his story and then they the jurors could decide that the person was
00:39:47.040
guilty that was a completely new sort of listening experience that Russians were kind of dumped into
00:39:54.320
in the 1870s and that I think was tremendously uncomfortable as sort of symbolic of a kind of
00:40:00.480
modernity that was full of these very difficult listening experiences and that people wanted to
00:40:06.640
maybe escape yeah I wonder about the phenomenon of hearing voices inside your head when you were describing
00:40:17.520
the husband who murders his wife and and this I don't know what the history of listening
00:40:23.200
says about this I I'm trying to think of any kind of classical stories about
00:40:31.040
protagonists hearing voices inside their head and going crazy and then doing something and I can't
00:40:36.160
think of any I'm wondering if it has something to do with the the excess of noise you were referring
00:40:41.040
to earlier where in we live in an era where things are so loud or the volume just amped up so much
00:40:47.520
that this is a psychological symptom of some modernity where you start hearing voices inside
00:40:54.320
your head and I could be completely wrong about that but it is interesting the way when you're
00:41:02.800
talking about the actual situation of a jury in a court trial that you hear the verdict or you listen
00:41:10.800
first thing you listen to the evidence and then you end then you hear the verdict but this is also
00:41:14.640
the fundamental example of what the voice of conscience has always been for a certain certainly
00:41:24.320
in the among the Puritans where they heard an internal voice which they had to associate with a
00:41:32.240
voice of God we said this is wrong this is or this is right and that voice of conscience is one that
00:41:39.920
has something about the tribunal about it because it is passing judgment but it's silent but the
00:41:46.880
sanctity of the voice of conscience is something you know that was a huge hugely important for
00:41:54.240
the Protestant Reformation for sure so it's it's really quite interesting when you start putting
00:42:01.840
these things together and so a history of listening has to be totally fascinating you can't go wrong with it
00:42:08.480
no well of course that's my feeling right and so you have you've written that Russia's most
00:42:15.840
prompt I'm quoting you your Russia's most prominent writers are motivated to experiment with
00:42:19.680
depictions of listening as unexpectedly difficult requiring filtering through psychological barriers
00:42:25.920
and background noise and that sentence of yours there is something I got me thinking also about hearing
00:42:32.880
voices and the background noise and the psychological barriers so what is this difficulty that you
00:42:39.840
find represented in the text you work with the difficulty of listening properly yeah I mean in this
00:42:47.600
this very famous Tolstoy story the court's there's anada there's there's a lot of references to
00:42:53.760
how difficult it is to hear the story on the train right so this main protagonist the murderer is on
00:43:00.240
this train speaking to our our frame our frame narratee right the guy who's hearing the story and
00:43:07.440
and he keeps referring to how the train made all these sounds rumbling over the tracks and then
00:43:13.680
there's these other passengers in the compartment who who don't turn out to want to hear the story of
00:43:17.920
the murderer but they they make noise going out of the compartment and then the murderer himself
00:43:24.080
makes noises that that are inadvertent he makes these kind of clearing his throat noises I've always
00:43:33.280
wondered if if he has Tourette's or if there's some kind of of a physiological thing that Tolstoy
00:43:43.920
is gesturing toward when he talks about how it's it's hard to you have to sort of filter out what
00:43:49.760
what the the real story is from the sounds that the that the murderer is making that the story
00:43:57.440
teller is making it and when the story teller when the murderer talks about his wife playing piano
00:44:03.680
he uses that same term for sounds that Zwookia that the that the near AT uses when he's talking about
00:44:13.120
how it's hard to understand the murderer so you get this this sense of of a world that's full of noise
00:44:21.520
but in which it's very hard to figure out what it is you're supposed to what meaning you're
00:44:28.560
supposed to derive from all these sounds well it makes sense to me because we I think you and I are
00:44:36.480
both musicians it and you know what it's like when you want to listen to a some music but most in most
00:44:45.280
cases that music very few people sit there and actually listen to it very attentively it's always
00:44:50.960
in the background as part of the noise and sometimes you know the people who are really committed to
00:44:56.080
music get get exasperated at the way in which for a lot of people music is something that plays
00:45:02.320
in the background and it commingles promiscuously with the tinkling of glasses and conversation and
00:45:10.000
other kind of noise and things like that is just that is something certainly that an author
00:45:15.600
would also have the same anxiety about I imagine because when you write a when you write a novel
00:45:24.800
you are expecting maximum attention and concentration from the reader because I believe reading
00:45:32.560
is a form of listening more than it is a visual a visual sense and you have to hear the voice in the
00:45:40.320
prose or the poetry whatever it is and that requires blotting out a lot of the background noise
00:45:46.640
and I guess the modern era the lament is that it's just louder and louder noisier and noisier
00:45:56.480
and our friend Hillel Schwartz my quoted earlier says well every era believes that
00:46:03.760
it's the loudest and most raucous and vulgar and so forth but so it's almost generational every
00:46:10.960
generation thinks that their children are louder and more raucous and then they were
00:46:16.080
who knows if it's objectively the case but we do live in extremely loud environment there's no
00:46:23.920
doubt about that and listening as a form of concentrated attention it's something I think that
00:46:31.120
you have to find sanctuaries for and literature might be one of the places where you do that
00:46:37.360
yeah yeah I mean I think we you know we yearn for a kind of authentic and singular experience
00:46:48.080
and we yearn we fantasize that we're going to get it through listening we fantasize that we'll get it
00:46:54.800
through the voice you know I think we I've noticed that we tend to easily be skeptical about how
00:47:04.560
things look maybe that's because we're a phyllis copic society and we're obsessed by how things
00:47:10.720
look but but we we quickly dismiss you know someone's looks where it's easy for us to believe
00:47:18.320
that someone looks a certain way because of surgery or makeup or you know it can be fake looks can
00:47:23.920
be fake I think we believe that but I think we we are much more naive listeners than we are
00:47:31.760
lookers right we we we believe that the voice is real we believe that a voice that shakes is one that
00:47:42.080
that sort of conveys real emotion to us we we believe that there's some kind of
00:47:51.520
that we can hear the truth in a way that we might not be able to to see the truth and and I think
00:47:59.360
that that that sort of very earnest belief on our on our part is sort of the flip side of the fact
00:48:07.840
that we think the world is too loud you know everybody is preventing us from hearing that that one
00:48:14.960
real that one real message you know that one true thing it's of course you know how beautiful
00:48:22.240
that you instructed me to turn off my cell phone before we began this recording session because
00:48:28.400
otherwise that that unwanted extra background noise would have come in and and prevented this you know
00:48:36.080
sort of authentic conversation from happening I think we're constantly figuring out how to how to cope
00:48:43.280
in a world of too much noise we're we're constantly buying noise canceling earphones and you know
00:48:49.440
we're paying higher rent so that we can live in a quiet neighborhood quiet neighborhood to us means
00:48:56.160
in a elite neighborhood silence is a commodity for us that's that's available at a at a price
00:49:05.120
we want we want less sound but we also want exactly the right sound and it makes me think that we
00:49:13.280
we have something in common with the the writers of the Hebrew and Greek Bibles right they
00:49:20.320
they also want that definitive listening experience right they wanted to to hear the voice of god they
00:49:26.560
wanted to affirm a kind of a monotheism right a kind of single truth and they felt that that
00:49:32.800
affirmation could happen orally whereas maybe the visual would distract you and and you would
00:49:38.960
start to you know follow other gods too many other gods I think we want to you know if you think
00:49:45.040
about that that statement from from Matthew you know I speak in parables because they hearing they
00:49:50.800
hear not you know we we want to believe that we're the people who hearing we would hear right we
00:49:56.160
would we would hear the the truth we're kind of we're able to have authentic listening experiences
00:50:04.560
because we are authentic listeners ourselves and I think we reject all kinds of other listening
00:50:11.760
experiences as inadequate maybe because we feel we fear that we're inadequate or we reject other listening
00:50:18.560
experiences in as inauthentic maybe because we fear that we're inauthentic but but you know I
00:50:25.680
I suspect that that you can never be fully satisfied with your listening experience you can never
00:50:32.720
have that kind of fully adequate fully authentic experience of listening why do you say this is a
00:50:38.800
challenge to you well I I don't know if you buy that you mean that's some kind of permanent
00:50:45.920
transcendent communion with the divine but there are plenty of it kind of every day occasions where
00:50:54.560
you have listened to a great album or you have heard a great talk or or you've listened to a great
00:51:03.600
episode of entitled opinions and you you know you just say wow that's what that has kind of gathered
00:51:12.240
my concentration in such a way that I have heard or you know what the ros says that you awaken
00:51:18.880
to the hearing of things that you had that you're not hearing usually and when it comes to the voice
00:51:26.000
I I agree that there's a kind of nostalgia for an authentic voice in people and it's quite astonishing
00:51:32.480
about how first thing that can be manipulated appearances are deceiving in visual appearances are
00:51:39.920
deceiving but also the voice you know actors show us every every time they go on stage that
00:51:44.800
emotions can be fain through the voice and so forth and it's amazing to me how often we will
00:51:51.920
detect false notes in what someone else is saying and is that a product of their voice or is it
00:51:59.280
something in the intonation is it something where through our hearing we are actually connected what is
00:52:07.280
this access to authenticity that we have or that is presupposed by the fact that we can detect a note
00:52:14.640
of inauthenticity and what we hear it happens all every day you know yeah yeah I mean maybe the way
00:52:22.320
maybe the way to answer this or the way that you're answering this challenging that this
00:52:27.520
challenge that I'm putting forward which is that you know we can't have authentic listening experiences is
00:52:32.560
you're saying we can have them but not in a permanent way we have them in time so it gets it gets back to
00:52:39.120
this this point you were raising at the beginning which is that listening is temporally extended
00:52:46.640
right listening happens in time as opposed to looking which happens almost out of time and and it can
00:52:55.120
you know the the artifact the visual artifact goes on existing forever and the sound artifact doesn't
00:53:02.480
even when it's been recorded when you listen to something that's been recorded you have to go
00:53:08.640
through that same temporal expanse that the recording took when it was first made right that the
00:53:18.400
the speaking first required so so we have to we we can believe that there's a kind of authentic listening
00:53:26.560
if we're willing to to live in time well exactly I agree with that it completely and so far as
00:53:34.000
the listening experience takes place in time a guston saniguston has this um whole analogy and
00:53:42.640
is confessions about the way in which time is like a sentence or it's like a paragraph that you have
00:53:49.520
and in Latin especially because you have to usually wait till the end of the sentence in order
00:53:53.440
to find out with the subject and the good so you really meaning is so interwoven in the temporal
00:53:58.880
process of the unfolding of something in time that he said I get to the end of the sentence and
00:54:03.760
then I have to get to the end of the paragraph and I get and in time we never get to the ultimate end
00:54:09.600
so there is something as you were suggesting about listening that does not arrive at some kind of
00:54:17.200
absolute uh resolution of stability because it has to keep being reenacted in time and that's
00:54:25.440
why a guston says it's only when you finally get to the end of time god the second coming all that
00:54:32.640
that's why I think there is this messianic linear sort of sense of the end time because otherwise
00:54:41.920
we're going to have to repeat what we just said and undergo the listening experience in time
00:54:48.000
over and over again because as you said it doesn't last whereas Plato chose a vision because the
00:54:54.560
vision is you can have a paint the difference from having painting and a piece of music is that
00:54:58.640
the painting can be there comes a temporal you see it it has the illusion of a certain kind of permanence
00:55:05.920
in its form whereas a speech a piece of music and so forth it's deeply embedded in time and so
00:55:16.560
I wonder if some of our some of our impatience with all the sound that fills our lives is a kind of
00:55:24.400
impatience with the temporal that we we somehow imagine that if you could um if you could just block
00:55:34.320
out all that sound you would have um some kind of you would have your time back you wouldn't have
00:55:43.760
to experience you wouldn't have to go through all the time in which you listen to these sounds that
00:55:48.320
you that you find irritating you know other people's conversations on their cell phones well I like
00:55:53.040
the way you put it there that you would have your time back as opposed to the way you first phrased it
00:55:58.720
which is that we it there's some kind of um resistance to the temporal in the objection to noise
00:56:08.560
I think the objective my objection in noise and I'm hugely misophonic I really am phobic about
00:56:15.600
excess of noise is that I cannot hear time taking place and in fact I think the reason that we drown out
00:56:26.400
the silence so much in our world is because a lot of people don't want to hear time taking place
00:56:33.040
in the moment that is taking place forget it you know to distract yourself from the fact that we
00:56:39.600
are caught up in time so I think there that an excess of noise in the world is I'd say a symptom of
00:56:46.800
yeah the fact that we're anxious about time rather than um uh to commit it to it mm-hmm okay
00:56:57.280
so Gabrielle one last question uh how far into the present will you take your own book on
00:57:08.880
this history of listening you know I'm I'm thinking I'm kind of playing with different ways of
00:57:15.840
of constructing this book it it might be that I um that I have this book move from examining the
00:57:27.840
kind of irritating voice of the other in 1870s and 80s Russian literature through
00:57:36.720
through looking at literature and performances that really make the irritating voice of the other
00:57:42.960
comic and I might end up then with um looking up looking at vaudeville and looking at the US and looking
00:57:53.040
at maybe stand-up comedy in the US and the way that uh plays with our irritation at the voice of
00:58:00.640
the other and our irritation at listening to other people and at the same time are kind of our
00:58:05.280
compulsion you know the way that we can be fascinated by voices that simultaneously irritate us we
00:58:12.800
we can listen very carefully and and in a really compelled way to voices that we that we
00:58:19.600
simultaneously sort of make our flesh creep and I think there's a lot of radio that does this you know
00:58:24.960
very very beautifully um so so we could go it could go up to the present that's great or it could
00:58:32.160
just stop in the Russian Empire and we'll see what happens well I'm I'm for the latter alternative I mean
00:58:38.960
take it up to the present latter or former I don't remember now so uh best of luck with that
00:58:44.240
project we've been speaking with Gabriela Safran from the Department of Slavics here at Stanford
00:58:49.040
I'm Robert Harrison for entitled opinions thank you again uh Gabriela for coming on we're going to
00:58:53.920
leave our listeners with a song uh by pj harby called the wind or listen to the wind blow how about
00:59:00.480
that listen into the wind blow take care thanks again thank you
00:59:11.280
Katherine like time places
00:59:20.480
I am I am a house a place making noises like whales places like the whales and she built a chapel
00:59:36.080
with her image an image on the wall at least wishing rest and rest and a place where she could
00:59:50.240
wash
00:59:52.240
listen to the wind blowing
01:00:01.600
and listen to the wind
01:00:05.520
listen to the wind
01:00:16.000
she's
01:00:18.000
she was
01:00:20.000
she was
01:00:22.000
she was
01:00:24.000
she
01:00:26.000
was
01:00:26.000
she
01:00:28.000
nothing
01:00:30.000
she
01:00:34.000
was
01:00:36.000
lady
01:00:38.000
with
01:00:40.000
her
01:00:42.000
oh
01:00:44.000
the city
01:00:46.000
my
01:00:50.000
my
01:00:52.000
oh
01:00:56.000
the
01:00:58.000
the
01:01:02.000
the
01:01:06.000
the
01:01:10.000
the
01:01:14.000
the
01:01:18.000
the
01:01:22.000
the
01:01:24.000
I see her
01:01:40.000
the
01:01:42.000
the
01:01:44.000
the
01:01:46.000
the
01:01:48.000
the
01:01:52.000
the
01:01:56.000
the
01:02:02.000
the
01:02:04.000
the
01:02:08.000
the
01:02:10.000
(upbeat music)
01:02:12.600
(upbeat music)
01:02:15.180
(upbeat music)
01:02:17.760
(upbeat music)
01:02:20.340
(upbeat music)
01:02:22.920
(upbeat music)
01:02:27.920
(upbeat music)
01:02:32.920
(upbeat music)
01:02:36.920
♪♪♪
01:02:57.500
♪♪♪
01:02:59.500
♪♪♪
01:03:01.500
♪♪♪
01:03:03.500
♪♪♪
01:03:05.500
♪♪♪