I've often in the past decade reflected on the "phantom" aspect of asemic works, which can lead to the "sense of a presence" behind it, something "other"; at its best and most powerful asemic writing and visual poetry can generate experiences that are mysterious or numinous.
But only recently have I reflected on the time-based quality of it, or the rhythmic quality of reading itself. Since youth, I have felt most at home in forms of art that unfold in time, such as music and fiction, so when I began creating visual pieces, I brought this obsession with time (processes, growth, decay, etc.) with me. Writing, books, and also panels (e.g., comics) also unfold in time. This essay helps me further what might distinguish "visual poetry" broadly from other forms of visual art. It has less to do with recognizable words/letters and more with what it invites the mind, and eye, to do.
Great observation. Maybe the trick, as with abstract art over the last 100 years, is cultivating the viewer's eye to get comfortable with experiencing something more than practical rote recognition of the expected.
I liked the phrase, "phantom sense of reading" as that describes the process of looking at asemic writing and abstract art in general. I was thinking about the phrase, "reading between the lines" too as I think many people will do that with our critical thinking abilities to not merely go just with the surface of pretty colors, words, sentences that the talking heads shout at us and mediocre "artists" paint just to put down paint and see where it lands........but to really spend time looking or hunting for meaning as it pertains to our own experiences. I like my imagination as it pretends to see words in asemic writing as that will then spurn me on to look at the piece as a whole entity; perhaps finding a story in it whether or not it was implied. Like anyone experiencing art or poetry and connecting it to themself I don't see a right or wrong demanding answer to a piece even if the author/artist has one intended that they created. It's the eye/brain of the beholder thing.
I’m trying hard to understand this article—so far without much success. Please help me.
Do you mean for the article to offer any practical application for other visual artists? Or do you intend only to share the results of your own experiments?
As I read the examples you provided of asemic writing, I immediately searched for meaning in them.
When I deciphered no meaning, my eyes and mind moved on.
My brain is lazy, as are most brains. I don’t spend energy on deciphering apparent nonsense. I imagine many other viewers react in the same way.
So for me, the asemic writing samples you provided do not cause the visual experience of your pieces to exist in time—unless you measure the full experience in milliseconds.
I’m sure must be missing a key point here.
Please explain how and why this might matter to other visual artists. Or to most viewers.
Thanks for writing David. This series of three articles ( of which this is the second) are explaining my use of asemic writing in response to a Scottish poet (mentioned in the first article) talking about my asemic work related to erasure poetry.
Related to visual art in general an artist might find the statements about seeing as relevant or interesting or maybe not.
But mainly I am just discussing my own work and how I think about it when I am working.
Yes we are all lazy when it comes to looking and seeing. Even me, looking at my own work, often skip through it and have to catch myself, slow down and look more carefully. Patient attention is difficult. But it is the same problem in painting, music or poetry. Focused attention.
I have started to respond this comment 3-4 times and then I get busy while I am thinking about it and keep forgetting to post a response and then it disappears or something. Bottom line, I think consciousness occupies a place behind the senses that makes whole all the senses at once into a singular sense experience. The separate arts are focal points for developing each sense separately. hearing, seeing, thinking. When combined together is that a synesthetic experience?
I've often in the past decade reflected on the "phantom" aspect of asemic works, which can lead to the "sense of a presence" behind it, something "other"; at its best and most powerful asemic writing and visual poetry can generate experiences that are mysterious or numinous.
But only recently have I reflected on the time-based quality of it, or the rhythmic quality of reading itself. Since youth, I have felt most at home in forms of art that unfold in time, such as music and fiction, so when I began creating visual pieces, I brought this obsession with time (processes, growth, decay, etc.) with me. Writing, books, and also panels (e.g., comics) also unfold in time. This essay helps me further what might distinguish "visual poetry" broadly from other forms of visual art. It has less to do with recognizable words/letters and more with what it invites the mind, and eye, to do.
Great observation. Maybe the trick, as with abstract art over the last 100 years, is cultivating the viewer's eye to get comfortable with experiencing something more than practical rote recognition of the expected.
I love the art. They make me think of music and EKGs, but in a good way (for the EKGs).
https://substack.com/@slamshopp/note/c-294274584?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=4e5if
I liked the phrase, "phantom sense of reading" as that describes the process of looking at asemic writing and abstract art in general. I was thinking about the phrase, "reading between the lines" too as I think many people will do that with our critical thinking abilities to not merely go just with the surface of pretty colors, words, sentences that the talking heads shout at us and mediocre "artists" paint just to put down paint and see where it lands........but to really spend time looking or hunting for meaning as it pertains to our own experiences. I like my imagination as it pretends to see words in asemic writing as that will then spurn me on to look at the piece as a whole entity; perhaps finding a story in it whether or not it was implied. Like anyone experiencing art or poetry and connecting it to themself I don't see a right or wrong demanding answer to a piece even if the author/artist has one intended that they created. It's the eye/brain of the beholder thing.
Cecil,
I’m trying hard to understand this article—so far without much success. Please help me.
Do you mean for the article to offer any practical application for other visual artists? Or do you intend only to share the results of your own experiments?
As I read the examples you provided of asemic writing, I immediately searched for meaning in them.
When I deciphered no meaning, my eyes and mind moved on.
My brain is lazy, as are most brains. I don’t spend energy on deciphering apparent nonsense. I imagine many other viewers react in the same way.
So for me, the asemic writing samples you provided do not cause the visual experience of your pieces to exist in time—unless you measure the full experience in milliseconds.
I’m sure must be missing a key point here.
Please explain how and why this might matter to other visual artists. Or to most viewers.
Thanks for writing David. This series of three articles ( of which this is the second) are explaining my use of asemic writing in response to a Scottish poet (mentioned in the first article) talking about my asemic work related to erasure poetry.
Related to visual art in general an artist might find the statements about seeing as relevant or interesting or maybe not.
But mainly I am just discussing my own work and how I think about it when I am working.
Yes we are all lazy when it comes to looking and seeing. Even me, looking at my own work, often skip through it and have to catch myself, slow down and look more carefully. Patient attention is difficult. But it is the same problem in painting, music or poetry. Focused attention.
Thank you.
Saccades and saccadic rhythms--whole new concepts for me, but you explain them so well. Thanks for expanding my mind!
It becomes a synesthetic experience, doesn't it?
I have started to respond this comment 3-4 times and then I get busy while I am thinking about it and keep forgetting to post a response and then it disappears or something. Bottom line, I think consciousness occupies a place behind the senses that makes whole all the senses at once into a singular sense experience. The separate arts are focal points for developing each sense separately. hearing, seeing, thinking. When combined together is that a synesthetic experience?