glitched asemic writing 7.17 x 9.98 cm.
“climbing high mountains / tryin to get home” — repeated four times, in Blind Willie McTell’s voice, as my first thought when looking at this glitchasemic (later in the same song McTell sings “I am bearin’ the names of many, tryin to get home”).
i have to force myself to think of Bill Beamer’s “dritings”
and of Marco’s “drawritings”.
both of these configurations seem foced in the extreme,
radically constructed, so much so that i would prefer something
that didn’t even attempt a seamless hybrid,
i know exactly where i am here, and it is in the midst of a swarming
excess of meanings, as far from the experience of something “having
no semantic content” as i could possibly be.
the late re-definition of the term “asemic” to mean “having no specific
semantic content” doesn’t solve this problem, it merely redefines the
prefix “a-” as synonymous with “poly-“. that simply doesn’t work.
McTell’s voice in my mind makes me think of Ginsberg/Trungpa’s axiom
“first thought, best thought”. “was it even my thought?” is what i am thinking now?
i don’t think so.
it wasn’t even my second mind, to offer a nod to Howlin Wolf, it was
a spontaneous association while looking at Marco’s tiered glitchasemic.
the image is beautiful, stratified and slowly receding, blips and
scratches of the once-written, now a scree and a talus of broken
I am bearin’ the names of many, tryin to get home.
it has been suggested by some that the asemic is a return to or a glimpse of the pre-written, but i don’t experience it that way and i find it disingenuous to attempt to persuade myself that the asemic is the pre-written whether i experience it that way or not.
i experience it, always, as a failed attempt at achieving the post-written. it is not driven by nostalgia or regret, it is driven by anxiety and aspiration. it is a writing against itself, not a writing prior to itself. as such, it exists precisely as a variety of writing, and the mind responds to it by reading, i.e., by giving off meanings like a fire gives off smoke.
i have been working with and against the idea of asemic writing for 20 years now, using the term asemic writing for all of those years. in January of 1998 i said in an email to Tim Gaze that ”the asemic text would seem to be an ideal, an impossibility, but possibly worth pursuing for just that reason.” that’s what makes the idea of asemic writing interesting. it is a specific failure of writing, and will always be so, and we have known that all along, from the outset of our activities. asemic writing is the embrace of a potentially beautiful failure in writing. it will not ever be what it says it is. that’s the only reason to ever want it.
— Jim Leftwich