Asemic logos : Curves ahead!

route11

route22

route33

route44

weather patterns

Signs are born at the crossroads of accidents, where we happen to be located. Thus, one accident is paired with another, and produces a mysterious narrative made up of more crossroads, ready to be opened.

weather

boat+meteor

orbit

watermark

flight

zodiac

[asemic] landscape

landscape

             

Asemic writing is not the simple absence of language, or the opposite of language, or the simple presence of a language that cannot be deciphered.

Whatever is asemic is a dynamic moment where things get divided into 1) the becoming-language of the-language-I-know, 2) the becoming-language of the asemic item into the-language-I-don't-know, and 3) the becoming-non-language of everything else. In this scenario, the process of becoming-non-language may even be seen as the parasitic threat that can transform anything into an asemic item.

Thus, in any analysis of an asemic piece, we just need to look at a three-fold interaction: the 1) foregrounding of the asemic item in the perceptual field, the 2) surrounding linguistic or paralinguistic cues, caption or context, and the 3) supporting non-linguistic or material "environment" of the whole interaction (e.g., ink, monitor, paper, brain, or even earth and sky, all in the process of becoming-non-language: that is, whatever we bracket off from the process of interpretation or translation or even divination). This tactic can be useful in both the consumption and production of [asemic] items.

s.moke.s

We are always between form and formlessness, not knowing which subsumes which. Sometimes, we come close to something that we feel is speaking to us, a cloud taking shape, something indescribably familiar, like the asemic smoke in this piece, temptingly moving towards a hidden language, like that of fate.

smokin'

accidental signs

20x20

The illegible is part of the slate where meaning and its negative form the whole spectrum of what we read and cannot read.

re glass

Everything is reflection, like a pond. Before vision, there is reflection. All signs are born through a looking glass, where they share space with their direct opposites, matter and anti-matter, testimony to the forces that shape the signs we see, or do not see.

notes for asemic items

3 major tendencies

1. asemic as COMPOSED - drawn, scribbled, scrawled, typed, outlined, drafted, painted, etc. there is an AUTHORIAL aspect here that i am uneasy about. materials and techniques would also come into play, and the choice to keep things on a material medium or to digitize them as well. this can also include SHORTHAND, or any scriptural item that represents, not meaning, idea, or object, but another language or another sign or symbol. this can be interesting, since the shorthand functions as a form of substitute for another substitute.

2. asemic as FOUND - interesting because it means a semblance of writing is everywhere, and reminds us of the mythic belief in a cosmos, in natural design, in patterns, in a forest of symbols, etc. anything can be (mis)taken for a mysterious language or pattern, as in DIVINATION. from this, i can take pictures of weather beaten walls, copy out hand or skin patterns, trace surfaces on paper, etc. the process is: take a copy of, upload and digitize, modify as necessary. from here on, the logic of reproduction, quotation, dislocation, reterritorialization, reproduction would have added more unknown effects.

3. asemic as what HAPPENS - what may be interesting, far from this dichotomy, is the way anything asemic is processed, and the MATERIAL aspect overtakes both formal and semantic aspects. an example is twisting a newspaper, or crumpling in such a way that the paper distortion renders the prints illegible. see TOPOLOGY and ANAMORPHOSIS. two extreme ideas are at work in this case: transformation and conservation. signs and images are not READ, but are not obliterated. they remain, but become illegible because the material medium that supports them is EMPHASIZED. by undergoing a physical EVENT, the formal and semantic aspects give way, but are not erased. This physical TENSION overwrites semic intention, but remains discernible, that is, as asemic items. digital files are now easily manipulable through editing software, and can be considered as sources of physical tension.

all in all, the key element is the sustenance of the brain's known predilection to hunt for patterns, illusory or not. it is in this intersection between LANGUAGE and NON-LANGUAGE (in their bilateral relation) that we can see the whole dynamics of symbolic energies.

cross/words

cross/word

In the language of action (2009)

1. 

In the language of action loading. 

In the action of language loading. 

Pause for the analysis of action in the language of action. 

Pause for the analysis of language in the action of language. 

Action ongoing, language encoding. 

Language ongoing, action encoding. 

The action of language encoding ongoing. 

The language of action ongoing encoding. 

Pause for the analysis of action in the encoding. 

Pause for the analysis of language in the ongoing. 

The encoding of ongoing language of action in action. 

The ongoing encoding of the action of language in action. 

Analysis encoded in action. 

Analysis encoded in language. 

Pause for the ongoing encoding of the encoded analysis of the language of action. 

Pause for the ongoing encoding of the encoded analysis of the action of language.

2. 

Ongoing action of language on the language of action ongoing encoding. 

Ongoing action of language on the action of language encoding ongoing. 

The encoding of the ongoing language of encoding of the language of action in the analysis of the ongoing action of language. 

The language of the analysis of the encoded language of action in the ongoing action of encoding of the action of language in the action of language encoded. 

The language of ongoing encoding in the analysis ongoing encoding in the action of the language of action. 

The action in the language of the encoded language of encoding ongoing analysis in the language of encoded action. 

Pause for the action of language, pause for the language of action. Pause for the encoded action of ongoing encoding. 

Pause for the ongoing language of encoding action. 

The action of language in the language of action encoded. 

The language of action in the action of language ongoing.

3. 

The encoded language of action in the ongoing encoding of action ongoing encoding. 

The encoded action of language in the encoding language of action encoded ongoing. 

Pause for the analysis of the ongoing action of encoded action in the language of action. 

Pause for the analysis of the ongoing language of ongoing language in the action of language. 

The action of encoded action ongoing in the language of action encoded in the action of language. 

The language of encoded language ongoing in the action of the language encoded in the action of language. 

The language of the encoded language of the ongoing action of language encoded in the analysis of the language of action ongoing in the encoding of the action of language on the ongoing. 

The ongoing action of the encoded language of action in the ongoing language of action encoded in the action of the ongoing action of encoding the language of action ongoing encoding in the language of action.

4. 

Pause for the action of encoding the analysis of the ongoing encoding of the analysis of the encoded language of action ongoing in the action of language ongoing encoding in the action of ongoing language of encoding. 

Pause for the language of the encoded analysis of the ongoing encoding of the action of the encoding of the analysis of the action of the ongoing encoding of action in the analysis of ongoing action of encoding. 

In the action of encoding the language of action encoded in the action of the ongoing encoding of the language of action in the ongoing language of the analysis of language ongoing in the action of language encoded in the encoding action of language ongoing analysis in the action of the language of action. 

In the action of the encoded language of the ongoing encoded action of the language of ongoing language ongoing the encoding of the analysis of the ongoing analysis of the encoding of the action of the language of action encoded in the language of the ongoing encoding of the language of the ongoing action encoded in the action of ongoing language encoding the action of language in the language of action. 

In the action of the language encoding the action of ongoing action of language encoded in the language of language encoded in the ongoing action of action encoding in the language of language ongoing in the encoded action of the language of action.

5. 

Pause for the analysis of action. 

Pause for the analysis of language. 

Pause for the analysis of encoded action. 

Pause for the analysis of the ongoing encoding. 

Pause for the analysis of the encoded action of language. 

Pause for the analysis of the action of encoding. 

Pause for the analysis of ongoing action. 

Pause for the analysis of the encoded analysis of language. 

Pause for the analysis of the encoded analysis of the ongoing action of language. 

Pause for the analysis of the encoded action of the analysis of the language of action ongoing in action. Pause for the analysis of the action of language on the analysis of the action of the ongoing encoding of the action of language on the language of action. 

Pause for the analysis of the language of the language of action encoded in the action of language on the analysis of encoding. 

Pause of the ongoing analysis in the language of action loading…

Notes for a letter, 2

the creation of texts require
a system of writing, with a defined set of signs
a material medium or base (paper, ink, disks, etc.)
a tool or implement (printing machines, pen, typewriter, keyboard, etc)

the creation of meaningful texts require, apart from the items above,
a community of readers who share, to different extents, systems of writing AND
systems of reading.

texts have different levels of elaboration:
the basic string is a simple performance, using the basic encoding procedures of the system. let's call this level I elaboration.
Level II elaboration compounds the first by hyper-coding, that is creating secondary codes that accommodate poly-semantic reading.

Level I can be described by a metalanguage, as linguistics or semiology.
Level II can be described by a metalanguage, as rhetorics or criticism or hermeneutics.
Level III arises as meta-coding, as level II elaborations read through as codes.

what do we call the elaboration of reading level I? Grammatical competence?
what do we call the elaboration of reading level II? Literacy?
what do we call the elaboration of reading level III? as Meta-literacy?
what do we call the meeting of this complex with other systems of signs? Multi-media, Poly-semiotic art, Post-literacy, Hypertext, Intermedia?
what do we call the foregrounding of these levels and the procedures that they use? SCRIPTURAL FANTASY.

several approaches can be done in relation: parodic summaries, materialist immanence, minimalist scripts, proto-lexemic bindings, paragraphic exercises, etc. it can be technical, mechanical, intuitive, complex, reductionist, calculating, simplistic, caricaturist, etc. as exercises, some may fall, some may survive.

what is in the agenda? it is difficult to be argumentative without any DECLARATIVE slipping in. the language of intents and results is difficult in theory and practice. but we can always dramatize this fantasy, with all the implied VERTIGO of the exercise in METAPHORICAL ASSERTIONS (in various ways).

briefly: SUMMARY of scriptural fantasies or logics; REDUCTION to an immanent material & "literal" base; DISRUPTION of allegoric energies; and, REPETITION as core dynamic. plus, a little humor isn't so bad.

Notes for a letter

the LETTER is an argumentative base, not necessarily any specific letter, but the notion of letterness, i.e., SCRIPT. its ALLEGORIC richness as a term is an afterthought that accompanies the MATERIAL base. at one point its foregrounding would also be called upon. at any rate, whatever it is, the letter is simply a scriptural FANTASY at work, summoned by the scriptural act. we do not say it exists or not; merely, that it is part of what goes on in that act.

the TITLE cannot be a full DECLARATIVE. the TITLE does not present an OBJECT formed, but an iconic exercise in RECONNAISSANCE, that is, a pseudo-declarative. (and what is the real status of a pseudo-declarative if it can even be made?)

the allegoric echo is the hermeneutic wing of the SYMBOLIZING ENERGIES of scripts. this aspect is what we consider as a sort of epiphenomenon, but of what, we cannot say definitely. the relationship of CAUSE and EFFECT, what is primary or secondary, is always in flux.

in this case, the phrase "the letter as base" of this exercise is definitely a METAPHORICAL ASSERTION, already assuming the arrival of a positive form demanding immediate interpretation or reconnaissance: THIS as THAT, recognition as/and repetition.

(thus, the TITLE is of the same status. as a metaphorical assertion, it awaits its second term indefinitely. we can then add that a pseudo-declarative, too, is a metaphorical assertion, without a second term, which in this case would be the BODY of the TEXT under it. or, this second part is in a slippery slope. a metaphorical assertion simply mentions the notion of something, without committing itself to the real status of that something: indefiniteness.)

we can always dive further down, into asemic writing exercises, into the dawn of morphemes, but this would only drag the question into a different level. it would still require that we assume what is BEFORE and AFTER a reconnaissance.

the arrival of WORD, OBJECT, LINE, POINT: always in suspension, since they are what is essentially a question of.

the LINKAGES in SPACE or TIME are also a part of the question. as the attempt becomes more complicated, their roles would also be in the foreground. IMAGE and OBJECT are the same thing as far as this exercise is concerned.

the visual aspect is a frivolous but necessary part of this exercise. DESIGN and SYMMETRY are conserved, not because there is BELIEF in their virtues, but that scriptural logics value them as eventual outcome, even though ENTROPY and NEGENTROPY are relativistic concepts. In the end, both Chance and Order are very difficult to reproduce.

as SUMMARIES (caricature) of scriptural logics: the current pieces attempt a simplistic (parodic) material immanence to undercut hermeneutical forces that sustain these SCRIPTURAL FANTASIES. further complications could employ other procedures to broaden this exercise in the next stages.