about

While not primarily focused upon aesthetic renderings of malevolence, the representation of evil is relevant – such representations being found, in an ethnographic sense, across all human cultures. The interrelation of fact, fiction, myth and narrative is a fertile nexus of study and this anthropological and historic review of representations of evil forms part of our ongoing scholarship. Contemporary cultural forms such as radio drama, podcasts, public oration and political speech, sound design, various musickings / playlisting etc clearly develop and transform such historic practices (e.g. monsters, demons, evil spirits, the gothic, the sublime, the uncanny) and a diachronic comparison of the auditory means of rendering fear, threat, unease and anxiety (and so on), continues to provide insight and vocabulary for thought and action

Our more central focus is however (given the aforementioned critical view upon the contemporary aestheticised fascination with evil) a stark and unwavering analysis of real evil as manifest in the world and its devestating impact upon the victims of actual malevolent actions – as perpetuated by individuals, groups, organisations and institutions. The primary consequence of this focus is a productive unsettling of normative notions of reality, ethics and praxis. The concept of evil in itself, and the problems that exist around it, involves questions about the intelligibility of our world and our individual and collective place in it. The current historical moment appears to many to be confused, irrational, unreasonable, perhaps unknowable. The intention is that by leaning into the extreme limits of intelligibility so we may better comprehend our current predicament and to subsequently bring about change for the better.

An appropriate ethical position, academic transparency, a duty to “do no harm” and guaranteed anonymity for participants and sources when required, are vital considerations in handling and discussing materials that can be at times unequivocally distressing, upsetting and unsettling. The development of appropriate language, resilience, conceptual and practical frameworks and reassurances to the community form an important part of the work. This enquiry has been embarked upon with some trepidation with the hope of finding allies able to provide critical feedback and constructive criticism. Everyone is welcomed to participate and this is a safe space for all religions, genders, races, ages, classes and political persuasions. We are keen to hear all voices at all times. Please forgive any inaccuracies, errors and mistakes. Learning together forms part of the change and we are able to accept our human fallibility, committed though we are to accuracy and rigour.

To conclude, might it be posited that while one might reflect upon the consequences, intentional or otherwise, of one’s own choices, it is relatively uncommon that one might consider one’s own actions as intentionally malevolent – though private, internal admission might be less unusual. The literature indicates that the perpetrator of harm seldom considers themselves to be “doing evil”. It is from the victims’ perspective that malevolence and its lasting effects are most keenly experienced. Might then, each of us, to some degree, and from some Other perspective, be considered malevolent either in intent, or in effect?

It’s important to note that Malevolent Audio Systems will likely involve collaboration between communities and experts from a variety of interdisciplinary fields including audio technology, ethics, psychology, law, philosophy, theology, anthropology, history, computer science and new media theory. If you wish to contribute, please get in touch with an expression of interest.

Considering the term Malevolent Audio Systems as a hypothetical or speculative concept, let us further outline some possible inter-related areas of enquiry and intervention: