top of page

​​​This page was created to collect wayward thoughts, ideas cast aside and perhaps some other odds and ends.   â€‹â€‹

​Fragments is a living archive of partial things: essays, notes, voices, images, whispers. Some are polished, others raw. Some were never meant to be finished.

 

Debris from the making in a culture always in motion.

 

You may find:

  • Essays on sound and silence

  • Comments rescued from conversation

  • Audio experiments and instructional guides

  • Visual echoes and mnemonic scraps

 

Wander freely. Nothing here demands resolution.

Framing the Cube: A Perceptual Framework for Creative Inquiry

 

This collection of essays operates under the influence of a conceptual framework—a model not just for thinking, but for perceiving. Imagine a cube suspended in space. You stand at its center, equidistant from all faces, held between six planes that represent dynamic polarities. This is not a static diagram; it is a cognitive architecture. Each axis corresponds to a fundamental dimension of human expression: Language, Technology, and Art. Together, they describe a territory in which the creator, thinker, and observer perpetually navigate.

The X-axis, Language, stretches between Mind and Body—between the cerebral and the visceral. This is the axis of perception and articulation. Here we move between abstraction and sensation, between latent meaning and manifest experience. Language, in this sense, is not just words, but the bridge between knowing and feeling.

The Y-axis, Technology, spans from Culture to Nature. It describes the movement between precision and emergence, between the codified and the symbolic. Culture is technique, intention, and craft. Nature is expression, intuition, and the sacred. Technology on this axis becomes a continuum from engineering to revelation.

The Z-axis, Art, travels from the Real to the Abstract. This is the axis of imagination and manifestation. Realism affirms the familiar, the material, the seen. Abstractness defies it—it resists easy classification, insisting on the conceivable, the alien, and the not-yet-known.

Together, these three axes form a perceptual cube—one that invites reflection on position, orientation, and relation. This framework reminds us that every act of creation is also an act of navigation: through competing tensions, intuitive affinities, and multidimensional contexts. Importantly, it also underscores the recursive nature of the creative process. Meaning and inquiry are not linear paths but looping trajectories that intersect, tangle, and re-emerge elsewhere, transformed.

If we imagine ourselves always at the center of this cube, we also admit our proximity to all its extremes. We are never fixed. We drift, shift, and re-situate with each question we ask, each piece we make, each meaning we pursue. In this way, the cube is not a map but a mirror—revealing the structure of our perceptual conditions and the forces that shape our artistic life.

Let this cube be a conceptual companion to the essays that follow. It does not demand to be solved, only rotated. Each axis is a tension. Each corner, a possibility.

The Aesthetics of Boredom: Ordinary Lives and the Power of Unremarkable Sound

 

A girl in a green sweater, a cat curled in her lap, a rhythmic loop of snow falling outside her window—this image, so familiar to millions, evokes a sense of calm solitude. It’s an idealized moment of stillness, where time seems to stretch, unhurried, and everything remains quietly in place. This is the world of lofi girl, an animated figure whose company is never forced upon us, but simply offered. The soft pulse of her music—a constant hum beneath her thoughts—becomes a backdrop to our own. In these moments, there’s no demand to perform, no need to impress, only an invitation to exist alongside the simple passage of time. And this, perhaps, is the essence of boredom.

 

We are living through a musical moment defined, curiously, by its passivity. Lofi hip hop loops drift by like wallpaper. Ambient music hums beneath our thoughts. Mumble rap slurs, stumbles, and sometimes whispers its way through two minutes of sound. To some, this is a cultural flattening—a wave of background noise for a distracted society. But perhaps it is something else: an aesthetic rooted not in spectacle, but in presence. Not in performance, but in companionship.

This is the aesthetic of boredom. And it may hold more than we think.

 

Music as Background: A Feature, Not a Flaw

Genres like lofi hip hop and ambient don’t demand attention—they allow for it. They offer sound as condition, not climax. They are music for the in-between moments: studying, cleaning, thinking, trying to sleep. These are not songs in the traditional sense. They are sonic infrastructure. Emotional wallpaper. Quiet architecture for daily life. And that’s exactly why we trust them. These genres don’t ask anything of us. They are not loud with meaning. They simply exist, and in doing so, they make room for us to exist, too.

 

The Allure of Dumbness

My brother, a brilliant educator and devoted music archivist, once spoke fondly of the 'dumbness' he found in certain 70s dance tracks. There was something appealing in their simplicity—their directness, their refusal to be clever. These songs didn’t pretend to be high art, yet beneath their simple exteriors lived detailed, attentive production. Small variations from section to section. Careful arrangement. Subtle moves that gave the music depth.What looked like dumbness was often restraint. An effort to stay grounded, to remain human in the midst of groove.

 

The Folk Archive of Boredom

Before the folk revival of the mid-20th century, American folk music was not political in the grand sense. It was personal. People sang about trains, work, loss, home. The songs were often plain, the melodies repetitive, the lyrics anecdotal. They weren’t manifestos. They were diaries. This was music made by and for ordinary people. Not to make a point, but to mark a life. These songs were not ambitious. They were truthful. And there is great dignity in that.

 

From Diaries to Declarations

The folk music of the 1960s brought with it urgency and direction. The songs became louder—literally and metaphorically. They became tools for protest, anthems of resistance. Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Odetta—these voices didn’t just sing. They proclaimed.
Out of this came punk: raw, loud, untrained. Still ordinary people, still simple forms, but with political fury. The energy of the folk diary became the rage of the street pamphlet. Simplicity was retained, but now it hit harder.

​

Lofi and the Return to the Unremarkable

Lofi hip hop marks a return to musical plainness—not as protest, but as privacy. It’s diary music again. A sonic mumble. It is not trying to impress or persuade. It wants only to accompany. There is a deep kind of honesty in this.
The loop, the vinyl crackle, the sleepy jazz chords—all suggest a life being lived quietly. Not performed, not promoted. Just lived. And that, too, is powerful.

 

The Power of Passive Sound

There is a paradox in music that sounds boring: it often becomes beloved. Because it doesn’t tell us how to feel, it gives us space to feel. Because it isn’t eventful, it becomes familiar. These songs are like rooms we return to. They don’t change us, but they hold us while we change.

In this way, boredom becomes a kind of presence. A sonic space where nothing happens, and so everything can.

 

In Praise of the Unremarkable

Not every song needs to be a revelation. Not every work of art must dazzle. Sometimes, the most lasting music is the most ordinary—because it tells the truth about how ordinary our lives really are. Boredom, in this context, is not failure. It is fidelity. A promise to remain, to accompany, to hum quietly while we work, rest, or feel nothing in particular.

In an age obsessed with stimulation, there is something radical in the loop that repeats, the lyric that trails off, the beat that simply continues. In these sounds, we find not distraction, but recognition. Not spectacle, but solidarity.

The Artist Does Not Know: Creation in the Age of Algorithmic Performance

 

In the past, we imagined artists as people who followed the spark of inspiration. They chased intuitive glimpses into unknown territory, fumbling through process and doubt in hopes of arriving at something meaningful. The act of creation was understood as risky, opaque, and occasionally revelatory. But that understanding is increasingly out of step with how creative work functions today.

We now live in a world where artistic careers are not cultivated but engineered—less like gardens and more like factories. In the creator economy, visibility is the highest currency, and content is the means of production. It’s not enough to make something good. You must make something that performs. And not for an audience in the traditional sense—but for the algorithm.

This shift has altered more than just our tools. It has transformed our intentions.

 

Content vs. Creation

 

Look closely, and much of today’s content resembles classical production-oriented creative work. It’s technically polished, well-designed, full of sound and color and clarity. Explainer videos echo PBS-style infotainment. Social media tutorials are modeled after broadcast segments. Podcasts ape the cadence of NPR. But these are simulacra. What’s missing is the motivating question: What compelled this to be made in the first place?

Instead of ideas seeking form, we have formats seeking content. This is the central logic of the creator economy: content not as expression, but as compliance—with platforms, algorithms, and expected modes of delivery.

 

The Algorithm as Gatekeeper

 

Where artists once deferred to record labels, literary magazines, or gallery curators, they now defer to the algorithm. But the algorithm is not a curator. It is not discerning, nor reflective. It offers no feedback, no memory. It is a black box optimized for engagement. You do not pitch your work to the algorithm. You model your work on what the algorithm has already chosen.

What results is not the death of creativity, but its automation. Today’s creators are not driven by impulse, inspiration, or uncertainty. They are tacticians. They manufacture outcomes. They reverse-engineer prior success.

 

The Performative Creator

 

Within this system, even the act of creativity is staged. We do not simply make things—we perform being a person who makes things. The performance of work, of process, of engagement, becomes as important as the product itself. The creative impulse is no longer interior. It is scripted. Stylized. Rehearsed.

This mirrors something a former teacher once said about students who transcribe John Coltrane solos with mechanical precision: “They sound just like jazz musicians.” The form is intact, but the force behind it is absent. The gesture remains, but the gamble is gone.

​

See something you like?

Join a growing community of listeners, thinkers, and creatives! Sign up for Frequency and Form: an exploration of the intersections of music, culture, and creativity.

Thanks for submitting!

©2025 Joe Harrison Music

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
bottom of page