Asemics by Jayne B. Lyons (Lakeville, Minnesota, USA)
In ponderous theoretical discussions I've had over the years, questions about the relationship of the Rosetta Stone to asemic writing have occasionally arisen. In fact, the great Richard Canard - well-known in the Eternal Network - was very interested in this issue at one point, sending me Rosetta Stone images for careful study.
I grappled with the topic (is the Rosetta Stone asemic?) for some time. I finally came to the firm position that the Rosetta Stone - with its mixture of ancient Greek and Egyptian with the bonus of hieroglyphs - is not asemic writing. Probably some clever asemicist out there can make a case for the opposite position; I do not doubt it. As my own understanding coalesced the answer came clear to me, however.
The Rosetta Stone cannot be asemic because it is inscribed with known languages that can be read through a conventional process of signification. BUT the astute observers who have been drawn to the Rosetta Stone are attracted because this artifact's historical narrative shares commonalities with core asemic theory.
At one point in time the Rosetta Stone, at least partially, was unreadable; however, the code was deciphered. The unreadable was made readable through translation through the efforts of Jean-Francois Champollion and other scholars of language.
The true asemic text can never be translated or deciphered into a language that is conventionally readable. (That does not mean asemic writing does not express or convey meaning entirely.) This accounts for my position that codes are not asemic. The process of signification is eradicated in the asemic work, and the Rosetta Stone's great interest is as a multi-lingual chart of signification with the added fascination of hieroglyphs.
The Rosetta Stone also has the Romantic allure of asemics that purposefully evoke the archaic and lost civilizations and languages. The Rosetta Stone made a huge cultural impression in Europe when the Romantic movement was flourishing. Our understanding of asemics today comes in part from Romanticism.
All this is a great deal to hang upon this wonderful piece by Jayne B. Lyons in her first contribution to Asemic Front 2. By now the viewer, I hope, can see what sparked my meditation: Jayne's work is a structure of known symbols and asemics presented in a form similar to the Rosetta Stone. This is an approach that has and continues to produce interesting image-texts.
- DVS
At one point in time the Rosetta Stone, at least partially, was unreadable; however, the code was deciphered. The unreadable was made readable through translation through the efforts of Jean-Francois Champollion and other scholars of language.
The true asemic text can never be translated or deciphered into a language that is conventionally readable. (That does not mean asemic writing does not express or convey meaning entirely.) This accounts for my position that codes are not asemic. The process of signification is eradicated in the asemic work, and the Rosetta Stone's great interest is as a multi-lingual chart of signification with the added fascination of hieroglyphs.
The Rosetta Stone also has the Romantic allure of asemics that purposefully evoke the archaic and lost civilizations and languages. The Rosetta Stone made a huge cultural impression in Europe when the Romantic movement was flourishing. Our understanding of asemics today comes in part from Romanticism.
All this is a great deal to hang upon this wonderful piece by Jayne B. Lyons in her first contribution to Asemic Front 2. By now the viewer, I hope, can see what sparked my meditation: Jayne's work is a structure of known symbols and asemics presented in a form similar to the Rosetta Stone. This is an approach that has and continues to produce interesting image-texts.
- DVS
No comments:
Post a Comment