Imogen Heap became a widespread name in popular music after the use of her group Frou Frou\u2019s song \u2018Let Go\u2019 in the movie Garden State<\/em> (2004).\u00a0 Following Frou Frou\u2019s album with a self-produced solo album called Speak for Yourself<\/em>, Heap continues to make a name for herself as an electronica artist-producer.\u00a0 She is a musical cyborg as she incorporates \u201ctechnological extensions to [her] sound producing capabilities and kinetic expressions of the human body.\u201d (Gay 1998. p. 84) It is through her cyborg identity that she renegotiates traditional notions of power, gender and sound. I demonstrate these renegotiations through biographical details, analysis of published interviews with Heap, and close readings of her music.\u00a0 At the end of the paper, I will frame Heap\u2019s current status as electronica artist-producer within the reconfigurations of institutional and commercial structures enabled by developments in recording technology.<\/p>\n Heap\u2019s earliest music training was in classical piano and theory, but from a young age she was fascinated with other instruments, including cello, clarinet (Retka), and a \u201chilarious keyboard with boss-nova presets\u201d (Gilbey 2005).\u00a0 Her first significant opportunity to experiment with electronic music technology was at the private boarding school she attended as a young teenager.\u00a0 Heap clashed with her music teacher, who punished her by sending her alone to a small room.\u00a0 Left in the room with an Atari computer, with Mac Classic 2 and Notator, and the large manual, Heap began to experiment and gained an interest in building her own studio (Gilbey 2005). She formalized her training in production at the BRIT school of Performing Arts & Technology in Croyden, Surrey, from 1992 until 1995.<\/p>\n In 1998, Heap released her first solo album I Megaphone<\/em> with Almo Sounds.\u00a0 This album shows little trace of her early interests and skills in electronic technology, excepting a few tracks that resemble Bj\u00f6rk (\u2018Oh Me, Oh My\u2019).\u00a0 Her style is more reminiscent of Kate Bush and Tori Amos (\u2018Candlelight\u2019). But through the initiation from Guy Sigsworth (producer, composer, musician for Bj\u00f6rk and Madonna) to collaborate as Frou Frou, Heap began to interact more intentionally with electronic technology.\u00a0 The result was Details<\/em>, released in 2002. <\/strong><\/p>\n According to the liner notes, Sigsworth and Heap both played guitar, piano, drums, synthesizer, samplers; wrote the music; and arranged and produced the album.\u00a0 This project was a huge stepping-stone on Heap\u2019s path to artistic autonomy, as she began to participate more thoroughly in all aspects of album making.\u00a0 Unfortunately, the album was not initially received with the popularity Heap and Sigsworth had hoped for.\u00a0 They both moved on to other projects.\u00a0 But after Zach Braff included \u2018Let Go\u2019 during the emotional climax of his film Garden State<\/em>, as well as including it as the only background song in the movie teaser, Frou Frou and Imogen Heap were suddenly famous. Subsequently, many songs off the album were used in movies and on television.[1]<\/p>\n Despite the claims in the liner notes, Heap\u2019s cyborg identity on Details<\/em> is not overt.\u00a0 Generally it seems that Heap\u2019s voice is merely placed on top of the electronic sounds and loops with minimal technological manipulation beyond the customary reverb and echo.\u00a0 Frou Frou\u2019s videos maintain the gendered association of technology, namely, that the man plays with technology, while the woman is the pretty voice on top.<\/p>\n For example, the video for \u2018Must Be Dreaming\u2019 \u00a0visually highlights Heap through close-ups of her on a bed and shots of her running down a hallway.\u00a0 Guy Sigsworth does not even make an appearance until half way through the first chorus. When he does appear, he is in the background playing the keyboard, handling the technology; this image is strikingly similar to the promotional photographs of the group.\u00a0 As quickly as he appears, Sigsworth disappears from view.\u00a0 He makes occasional appearances in the choruses, once again behind the keyboard.\u00a0 At one point, Sigsworth sits quietly in the shadows, a single silent being: l\u2019\u00c9minence grise<\/em>. According to this video, Imogen is not a musical cyborg, but rather the pretty voice and face.\u00a0 Sigsworth, on the other hand, is the cyborg with the technological power.<\/p>\n Similarly, the video for \u2018Breathe In\u2019 has a conspicuous lack of Sigsworth appearances, with him making only four brief appearances in the video.\u00a0 He stands and looks at the camera twice at the beginning and twice at the end.\u00a0 Because of the many other characters that are given close-ups, Sigsworth is practically unidentifiable, unless one already knows what he looks like.\u00a0 In the video for their third single, \u2018It\u2019s Good to Be in Love\u2019, Sigsworth is completely absent.\u00a0 One might suggest that this only serves to affirm Heap\u2019s importance as a musician, but I believe that, on the contrary, the videos contradict the type of work she does and wants to be known for. Heap explains,<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not Guy\u2019s fault, but with Frou Frou, everyone assumed the man did all the production and engineering, mixing and programming and that the girl, me, just sang. And I have to say that really irritated me.\u00a0 We did everything together. I\u2019d been programming on Macs since I was twelve and that was more of a love for me than singing ever was\u201d (Purevolume).<\/p>\n The minimal appearance of Sigsworth in the videos does not seem to diminish his power, but rather increase it. It is almost as if he is the puppet master running the show behind the scenes, in the shadows, dictating Heap\u2019s movements. The videos only serve to maintain the misinterpretation of Heap\u2019s role in the group.\u00a0 This misinterpretation surely contributed to her desire to forge a solo project, in every sense, and finally convince the public and critics of her technological skills.<\/p>\n But her work in Frou Frou was not without its benefits. Through Heap\u2019s work with Sigsworth, her sound became more codified and distinct within the broad genre of electronica.\u00a0 For instance, she incorporates sounds from \u201creal\u201d instruments, such as piano, cello, harp and mbira, and layered vocals, and downtempo beats, \u201cwhile electronic noises swoop and swirl with a refreshingly understated gracefulness\u201d (Lerner).<\/p>\n Heap acknowledges Sigsworth influence in several interviews:<\/p>\n My solo work has definitely changed as a result of working with Guy… (Auralgasms 2006)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I loved working with Guy.\u00a0 I\u2019d learnt so much from him…. Now I was bursting with ideas and just wanted to get my hands really dirty! (Purevolume).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The success of Frou Frou, however belated, also afforded Heap the option to work independently of recording labels (Retka). \u00a0She spent a year working in her home studio on Speak for Yourself<\/em>, which was released in 2005; since then her solo work has been used in popular films and on television shows.[2]<\/p>\n Heap embodies a cyborg identity through the blend of her body and voice with technology.\u00a0 Cyborg discourses about Heap are ubiquitous. A 2006 New York Times<\/em>\u2019 review describes the single \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019 as \u201cthe ghostly pi\u00e8ce de r\u00e9sistance,\u201d a song which suggests \u201ca kind of lovesick cyborg alienation, an almost disembodied, distinctly modern malaise\u201d (Sinagra 2006).\u00a0 An online blog for the Denver Post<\/em> states that Heap \u201cmanipulates the sound by using digitizers, computers, and echo machines to create a type of cyborg music: it feels organic even though it\u2019s been computerized\u201d (Rodriguez 2007).\u00a0 Even fans have picked up on the cyborg trope in their personal reviews of Speak for Yourself<\/em>.\u00a0 For example, one fan webpage asserts, \u201cImogen\u2019s voice burns through the cyborg tones of a double-tracked vocoder, creating a strange angelic warmth out of the mechanical modulations\u201d (Christiensen 2005).<\/p>\n The blend between Heap and technology is heard most basically in the technological modifications to her voice, such as double tracking in \u2018The Walk\u2019 and \u2018The Moment I Said It\u2019, heavy reverb in \u2018Just for Now\u2019, a vocoder effect in \u2018Closing In\u2019, distortion in \u2018Daylight Robbery\u2019, and echo in \u2018The Moment I Said It\u2019.<\/p>\n The most shocking song on the album, in terms of style and production, is the third release of the album, \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019.\u00a0 The song was played in \u2018The O.C.<\/em>\u2019 Season Two finale and gained enormous popularity after that.\u00a0 Heap revealed through interviews that a breakdown of technology actually led to the creation of this song.\u00a0 Her new computer was malfunctioning due to a faulty power supply.\u00a0 This halted her work, but she decided not to leave her studio without any work done.\u00a0 So she picked up her harmonizer, plugged it into her keyboard via MIDI and recorded it on her eight-track mini-disc recorder.\u00a0 As she sang into the microphone and played notes on the keyboard, the harmonizer took that vocal input and shifted it to the other pitches depressed on the keyboard.\u00a0 Heap (2005) describes the process:<\/p>\n The only sound you can hear on Hide and Seek is my voice.\u00a0 There\u2019s no keyboard noise.\u00a0 All those harmonies are a result of what notes I play on the keyboard, which then tells the harmonizer which notes to make my voice appear to sing.\u00a0 I can choose the amount of effect (harmonies) to show through.\u00a0 I used about 50\/50.\u00a0 So you can hear unaffected natural voice too.\u00a0 The first thing I sang (luckily set to record) were the words \u201cwhere are we?\u00a0 What the hell is going on?\u201d I carried on playing and singing, reacting to the chord inversions the harmonizer was throwing at me (it was set to four-note polyphony, four notes at a time, but using most or all fingers on the keyboard, the box is forced to choose which notes to use out of a chord) and before my very ears a song had emerged out of nowhere.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This song clearly manifests Heap as cyborg.\u00a0 The sound is only achieved through an integration of the voice with the technology.<\/p>\n Heap\u2019s cyborg identity can also be observed in her live performances. For some electronica musicians, only the recorded album is of consequence.\u00a0 But for Heap, creating a live concert is very important:<\/p>\n It took me a long time before it [Speak for Yourself<\/em>] came out to figure out how I was going to [translate the recorded album into a live show].\u00a0 I don\u2019t want to just press play but at the same time I don\u2019t just want to play the piano.\u00a0 I want the audience who hasn\u2019t heard it to realize that there\u2019s much more to it than just piano but at the same time, I\u2019m not just some little girl who sings to backing tracks (Alderman 2005).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Heap typically has about fourteen \u201cinstruments\u201d on stage with her at any given time (Snider 2006), including a sampler, a Mac laptop, a large mbira, keytar, and a specially made cyborg piano that can hook up to MIDI and trigger sounds (Barcode 2005). In the video of a live to air performance on Indie 103.1, Heap is surrounded by her keyboard, sampler, laptop, and mixing board. Her live version of \u2018Just for Now\u2019, with its series of overlapping loops, demonstrates a seamless blend between her natural voice and body (hand claps, finger snaps) with technological capabilities.\u00a0 This is Heap the cyborg, aural and visual.<\/p>\n As I have previously stated, technology maintains gender associations.\u00a0 But Heap establishes herself as a beautiful, statuesque women capable of working with technology on her own.\u00a0 Heap explained in an interview that when people compliment the record and ask who made it, she relishes in the opportunity to say \u201cMe\u201d (Retka).<\/p>\n In addition to renegotiating sound and gender through her musical output, Heap also renegotiates power in her relationship with technology.\u00a0 In several interviews about Speak for Yourself<\/em>, Heap describes the writing process for the album, explaining that the majority of the songs were not written before heading to the studio.<\/p>\n Before I made the record I had no vision of what I wanted to do and I had no songs before I went in.\u00a0 I spent the last year just coming up with sounds and it became what it became.\u00a0 There was no grand plan. (Auralgasms 2006)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The album came about as an experiment with her voice and skills as an instrumentalist in combination with the seemingly endless options afforded by the technology.<\/p>\n I\u2019m building it as I go along.\u00a0 Like a painting.\u00a0 It just builds and builds, and then there\u2019s no kind of moment where you…; you don\u2019t rub white paint over a painting and go, right, let\u2019s do that final one.\u00a0 You do it as you go along and then you end up with the final product. (Retka)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n As I mentioned earlier in the discussion of \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019, even the breakdown of technology had the power to influence the creation of some of the songs on this album.\u00a0 \u2018The Moment I Said It\u2019 was written when her computer broke down, forcing her to work with non-electronic instruments and technology: in this case, a piano.\u00a0 Furthermore, when her equipment would break down, Heap would listen to other people\u2019s music, often gaining inspiration for her own music and lyrics (Barcode).\u00a0 Technology had influence over the creative process, both in its presence and absence.<\/p>\n As I previously highlighted, the renegotiated power relationship is also apparent in the production details of \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019.\u00a0 Though it was originally Heap the human and the mind that gave the harmonizer the power to choose only four notes, it became a combined effort of the cyborg: Heap\u2019s voice generates the sound that the harmonizer transfers to different pitches; Heap\u2019s hands depress the keys of her choice on the keyboard; and the harmonizer then chooses the final outcome of pitches.<\/p>\n As a parallel to this discussion of Heap\u2019s musical career, I will now discuss her status as artist-producer as an embedment of historical reconfigurations of institutional and commercial structures enabled by developments in recording technology. In the early years, creative interaction with the technology was restricted to institutional studios, due to its cumbersome and costly nature (Chadabe 1997).\u00a0 As tape technology became cheaper, and multi-track technology offered the artist creative options beyond mere transduction, more professional and amateur musicians built home studios.\u00a0 During this time, the producer was growing in importance, with many producers becoming as famous as the artists they worked with.[3] The technology afforded greater innovation, thereby granting the producer an increased creative status.\u00a0 With the development of digital technology, home studios became commercially viable and useable spaces, producing music equal to that produced in professional studios (Th\u00e9berge 1997).\u00a0 Also by the 1990s, personal computers became ubiquitous, principally due to their affordability (Rubey 1999).\u00a0 Now computer users have access to trial downloads and packages such as iLife (which comes with all new Apple computers) that allow amateur composers and producers the opportunity to make their own music. Heap recognizes her dependency on the state of technology for her ability to create this latest album.<\/p>\n Technology has been a big factor.\u00a0 I couldn\u2019t have made my first record or this record ten years ago with the technology that existed.\u00a0 I just feel very liberated.\u00a0 I can make any single sound on the planet; I can just download a sound.\u00a0 I can make any record I want.\u00a0 There\u2019s no limitations now. (Auralgasms 2006)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Technology not only allowed for the creation of Heap\u2019s music, but also for the dissemination of it. Heap\u2019s promotion of Speak for Yourself<\/em> took place largely on the Internet.\u00a0 Her first three singles \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019, \u2018Goodnight and Go\u2019, and \u2018Headlock\u2019 were digital releases on iTunes.\u00a0 As well, MySpace proved invaluable for the dissemination of her music, and the establishment of her fan base.<\/p>\n With increased accessibility and affordability comes the opportunity for women to participate in recording.\u00a0 Women were generally restricted socially and economically from the production side of the recording industry until the home studio and personal computers. Heap believes that what she has done as an artist and as a woman is part of a larger trend facilitated by an increased access to recording and production technology. Heap offers her forecast for the future:<\/p>\n And I think we\u2019ll see a lot of young ladies in the future, because in the past it was quite difficult for a girl to get into a studio, to be a tea girl or anything, to help around the studio.\u00a0 And that won\u2019t be a problem anymore because you can employ yourself to work in your bedroom! (Gilbey 2005)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n The limitation for creatively using music technology will no longer be associated with gender, but rather finances.<\/p>\n Heap grew up with increased accessibility to ever developing technology.\u00a0 Thus, she was able to forge her way in electronica as an artist and producer.\u00a0 By tracing her musical career, one can observe Imogen Heap, the musical cyborg, who was able to renegotiate power, gender and sound.<\/p>\n [1] \u2018Let Go\u2019: The Holiday <\/em>(2006), \u2018So You Think You Can Dance\u2019 (2006), Garden State<\/em> (2004); \u2018It\u2019s Good to Be in Love\u2019: \u2018Birds of Prey\u2019 (2002); \u2018Must Be Dreaming\u2019: \u2018Six Feet Under\u2019 (2003); \u2018Breathe In\u2019: \u2018Life as We Know It\u2019 (2004), \u2018Six Feet Under\u2019 (2002), \u2018Smallville\u2019 (2002).<\/p>\n [2] \u2018Hide and Seek\u2019: \u2018So You Think You Can Dance\u2019 (2008), \u2018CSI Miami\u2019 (2007), \u2018\u2019Smith\u2019 (2006), The Last Kiss<\/em> (2006), \u2018The O.C.\u2019 (2005); \u2018The Moment I Said It\u2019: \u2018Ghost Whisperer\u2019 (2008), \u2018So You Think You Can Dance\u2019 (2007), \u2018Criminal Minds\u2019 (2007), \u2018The Black Donnellys\u2019 (2006); \u2018Speeding Cars\u2019: \u2018Suburban Girl\u2019 (2007), \u2018The O.C.\u2019 (20006); \u2018Just for Now\u2019: The Holiday <\/em>(2007); \u2018Goodnight and Go\u2019: \u2018The O.C.\u2019 (2004); \u2018I Am In Love With You\u2019: \u2018Lipstick Jungle\u2019 (2008).<\/p>\n [3] George Martin, Phil Spector, for example.<\/p>\n Alderman, Melody [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee]. 2005. An Interview with Imogen Heap<\/em>.\u00a0 Retrieved from http:\/\/www.puresongwriters.com\/interview1_imogenheap1.htm<\/a><\/p>\n Auralgasms [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee]. 2006, 18 January. Imogen Heap: An Interview<\/em>.\u00a0 Retrieved from http:\/\/www.auralgasms.com\/Features\/Imogen\/default.aspx<\/a><\/p>\n Barcode [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee]. 2005. Imogen Heap Interview<\/em>.\u00a0 Retrieved from http:\/\/www.barcodezine.com\/Imogen Heap Interview.htm<\/a><\/p>\n Chadabe, Joel. 1997. Electric Sound: The Past and Promise of Electronic Music<\/em>. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.<\/p>\n Christiensen, Jared. 2005, 24 October. Loving: Speak for Yourself, Imogen Heap. Message posted to http:\/\/www.jaredigital.com\/<\/a><\/p>\n Gay, Jr., Leslie C. 1998. Acting Up, Talking Tech: New York Rock Musicians and Their Metaphors of Technology. Ethnomusicology<\/em>,\u00a0 42(1), 81-98.<\/p>\n Gilbey, Sam [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee]. 2005. Pixelsurgeon Interview: Imogen Heap<\/em>. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.pixelsurgeon.com\/interviews\/interview.php?id=200<\/a><\/p>\n Heap, Imogen.\u00a0 2005, 18 June. Leepin\u2019 Lizards. Message posted to http:\/\/www.imogenheap.co.uk<\/a><\/p>\n Lerner, Will.\u00a0 Imogen Heap [Review of I Megaphone<\/em> and Speak for Yourself<\/em>].\u00a0 Rhapsody<\/em>. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.rhapsody.com\/imogenheap\/more.html<\/a><\/p>\n Purevolume [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee]. Imogen Heap \u2013 Frou Frou<\/em>. Retrieved from http:\/\/www.purevolume.com\/imogenheapfroufrou<\/a><\/p>\n Retka, Megan [Interviewer] & Heap, Imogen [Interviewee].\u00a0 Imogen Heap: Interview<\/em>.\u00a0 Retrieved from http:\/\/www.imogenheap.com\/media\/press\/08.05_londonnet_interview.html<\/a><\/p>\n Rodriguez, Cindy. 2007, 11 February. Grammys: My Pick for Best New Artist. Message posted to http:\/\/blogs.denverpost.com\/<\/a><\/p>\nEarly Musical Life<\/h3>\n
Frou Frou<\/h3>\n
The Cyborg Returns<\/h3>\n
In the Artist-Producer Lineage<\/h3>\n
Conclusion<\/h3>\n
Notes<\/h3>\n
Bibliography<\/h3>\n