At the very beginning of Rhetoric, Aristotle uses an odd word to describe the relationship between rhetoric and dialectic. In the original Greek, the word he uses is ἀντιστροφή, — antistrophos or “a turning back,” and the word has been giving philosophers a headache for the last 2400 years. The term’s original context is from Greek drama, where (as I understand it), the chorus would “turn back” the main thrust of the ode, and create something larger and more complex as a result. So if the drama were about heroic bravery, the chorus might warn of the fault of cowardice, and a richness would enter the drama — two counter-balancing voices, an emotional and narrative figure and ground. Antistrophos is a way of saying, “yes, but. . . ” or “yes, and. . . ”
One of the goals of my work is to — under exactly the right circumstances — make sound serve as the antistrophos of the visual image. A balance is struck between what they eye sees and the ear hears, and for a moment the works create a dizzying synesthesia — the ear seeing and the eye hearing. This is possible because eyes and ears are just sensors and if you have some glimmering of the firmware that governs the sensors, you can create art that loads up two or more channels at once, knowing that the brain will integrate these data flows into a single experience that packs a good artistic punch.
When it works, its wonderful. Like I’ve said before, the Greeks forgot more about sound art than we will ever know.