Haunting and Political Sound Installation: The Influence of Avery Gordon’s Concepts on my Practice

This article explores the influence of Avery Gordon’s concept of haunting on three politically-oriented sound installations created or co-created by the author. Three important concepts from Gordon’s work are identified and summarised: the animation of what is hidden; engagement with subjugated knowledges; and the call to action characterised as a ‘something to be done’. These concepts are related in turn to three politically-oriented sound installations: What Does Who to What? (2018); About Us – For Us (2021); and Cartographies (2019). An analysis is made of What Does Who to What? (2018), in which sounding material and a performance space assemblage animate the hidden social relations of the installation site. This example supports a broader argument for the utility of sonic artworks as means to explore social relations. Subsequently, there is an examination of the importance of engaging with subjugated knowledges in the context of my ethnographic soundscape installation, About Us – For Us (2021). An overview of a project-specific approach to the artistic treatment of participants’ aural histories precedes a discussion of the ways in which this ethnographic soundscape work is haunted by alternative futures. This example supports a second broad argument on the need to consider the political implications of artistic choices, document and share information on them, and work towards an ethical framework for the use of testimonial subjugated knowledges in sonic arts. Finally, Cartographies (2019) is analysed in terms of a ‘something to be done’, and the attendant notions of practical utopian consciousness and historical alternatives. This work documents the actions of three community organisations in West Everton as they resist financial austerity measures in the UK. These actions provide an example of value system construction around seemingly extrinsic goals, such as education and beauty. A third broad argument is made for the utility of Gordon’s treatment of the future in light of these examples. A comparison is made between the notion of attainable historical alternatives and the cultural impasse associated with a popular conception of sonic hauntology, in which alternative futures can no longer be conceived. It is suggested that sonic artists of all kinds are well-placed to contribute to the construction of alternative value systems and create conceptions of the future capable of haunting the established order, of haunting back.