Johann said that this piece was not a performance but more him creating a listening room, this almost removes him from the picture and places an emphasis on the space he is in, as it is not titled a performance this removes the idea of a “performer” for the listener and conjures ideas that it is more of a naturally occurring sound despite the piece being made up of conversation, oral history, field recording and music composition. The idea of it not being a performance is only apparent in the title as in the text that was handed out it talks about the performer and then labels it a performance. I disagree with him calling his performance a “listening room” as in the video of the performance you can see him at the front of the room surrounded by his equipment with a crowd surrounding him watching, I think that this is exactly what a performance is. His work was also very personal and closely related to to himself as the performer as it used audio recordings of his father whistling, I think this personal connection also disbars it from being a “Listening room”. Where a listening room would differ for me is the lack of a performer, perhaps a layout of speakers or a sound sculpture playing the sound to a room of people. On the contrary, calling it a listening room would impact the way a listener approached the piece, perhaps making them more attentive and careful to the sounds around them.
I really enjoy the letter Johann wrote on the text that was given to the listener. Having it set out as a letter makes the performance more intimate as it establishes an almost personal connection between the performer and listener through direct contact. The letter describes how Johann is feeling everything at once, the repetition of and makes it feel like all of these things he is doing have piled up, it is neither happy nor sad but very overwhelming. Having a date at the bottom cements the work’s place in time which is important for keeping track of memory and career.