Chion Reading

While Chion makes several excellent and very valid points on sound, he doesn't propose any real alternatives or solutions. Really, there are only two ways to make films, with, and without sound, both of which have been done before. Very few films are truly "silent". Brakhage is one of the only filmmakers that comes to mind that used absolutely no sound. The others might be some of the flux films made in the 60s. Even early silent films used had piano players or other musicians at the cinema. They also had dialogue cards and many would have probably used recorded sound if available at time. Yes, sound assists, and occasionally supersedes visuals in film, giving it a certain rhythm, tone, and mood. More often then not, in my opinion, it simply aids the image and works in conjunction with it. As humans, assuming both our visual and auditory senses function, sound aids and helps us understand what we see. Music, while (arguably) constructed, does give us enjoyment and can also work with our visual senses. Filmmakers and editors can chose when to use sound and what type of sound to use. No music, or even no sound is always an option, though silence seems to have its own unique sound and rhythm. I would argue that when you remove sound from an image (as Chion did) it is not that the image has its own rhythm (though it does), but that silence just adds a different type of rhythm and mood to the image. This reading did remind me of a clip I saw recently on youtube which removed the laugh track from a sitcom. While I never found the original to be funny anyways the removal of the laughter gave the scene entirely new meaning and pace and it felt very serious at all. Had you seen it for the first time you might suspect the show was a drama or even soap opera.