Guest blogger and speed tweeter Lucy Bannister on Haroon Mirza in conversation with Nicola Stephenson of The Culture Company

It seems that the use of sound in art is a hot topic at the moment. And this was at the forefront of my mind as I listened (and tweeted) at the conversation between Northern Art Prize short listed artist Haroon Mirza and Nicola Stephenson on Tuesday night.

In December Susan Philipsz won the Turner Prize 2010 for her work ‘Lowlands’, a sound work that was initially presented at Glasgow International Festival of Visual Art in an emotionally tender yet grand scale installation beneath three bridges that span the River Clyde.

She describes herself as a visual artist that uses sound as a sculptural material. However there has been a lot of criticism that the work is not art because it uses sound, and therefore must be categorised as music.

Susan’s work is about emotional intensity, sense of space, the experience of listening, and the resonance of memories that are held both within the built environment and ourselves.

The work does not sit within the history of musical composition but within the understanding that art can affect us on a level that transcends the everyday. There is no reason why that transcendence has to be a purely visual experience.

Haroon Mirza also uses sound within his sculptural installations but he prefers not to be labelled as either a sound or a visual artist, instead he likes to sit between genres.

For Haroon what is important is creating that moment when noises become sound; that moment when your perception shifts and your auditory focus moves from just hearing to actively listening.

Haroon’s installations are constructed using analogue technology; they are peppered with old TVs, record players, wooden speakers, lamps.

There are two reasons for using these out-moded items: they are easy to get hold of and you can take them apart, unlike contemporary software driven technology.

For him it isn’t a ‘green’ issue but one of resourcefulness, form and aesthetics.

But what really drew me back to the debate that has circulated around Susan Philipsz’s work is the question of how we listen. In contemporary society looking is prioritised over listening.

Both Susan and Haroon’s work help to bring about the act of listening within our cultural experience. We might not be able to shut our ears but we are very adept at not opening them.

Is this the same in all cultures? One question that preoccupies Haroon and that has occupied my thoughts since Tuesday, is whether religious dogma that bans music actually results in a more musical soundscape within those cultures.

In this environment, where there is no composed music, sound can fill that void becoming music to the listener. Sound becomes music becomes sound becomes noise and so on ad infinitum.

And herein we return to the start of the debate. Perhaps we could all listen more to the noises that surround us. So that they can become music to our ears.