WEBSTRUCTIONISM by ROBERTO LAVIDEZ

Thursday, March 20, 2014

a different story

by Roberto Lavidez

to remember

one thing

is to let

another

slip from

remembrance

no one could

envision

anything else

making

the putz

understand

the reality

of life

why me

why is this

happening

to me

needs a

rescue effort

to bail oneself

out of his

dilemma

to recognize

his own

impulses

burdened

with the

forgetting

of all those

parts of

ourselves

we want

to forget

echoes

from our

ancestors

fanatically

convinced of

their presence

although they

remain invisible

perhaps it

does not seem

obvious that

something

is amiss

something

that tends

to fade

into the

background

too vague

to constitute

a definite

threat

under

the noses

of an

unsuspecting

world

avoiding

a sensation

of helplessness

dominating

our dream

thoughts

like the tail

wagging still

after its head

has been

cut off

or the vision

of a mermaid

drowning

in a sea

of deep

desire

if nothing

matters

there is

nothing

to save

the story

would

have been

completely

different

No comments:

WEBSTRUCTIONISM: Reinventing the World through Creative Language

by Roberto Lavidez

Webstructionism is a name I have given to a theory that explores the use of random words or string of words extracted from various texts and references as construction material for both poetry and art. It is a practice of sequencing words to form new phrases as narrative for painting. It is also a process of extracting and assembling unrelated words and phrases from different sources to create new poetry. What began as a wayward search for an idea for a painting has turned into a method that challenges one’s intellectual approach to words as much as it enhances creative use of language. It has also led to criticizing acquired language after discovering how words can be accumulated and manipulated to effect a thought outside of one’s storage of ideas.

The creative dimension of language use presupposes that man can generate and transform word combinations and grammatical structures that are not commonly articulated in any form of communication. Sentences and phrases that may have no exact parallels in previous English usage can be created and introduced to extrapolate abstract ideas. This rationalist view, in contrast to the empiricist, argues that not all knowledge is derived from and determined by sense experience. It supports the theory of innate ideas whereby some knowledge can result from the inherent structures of the mind. Though external stimulation is necessary to awaken innate capacities, it does not necessarily mean that ideas and concepts result completely from external impressions.

As an artist who is in the habit of not only rendering what is visible in nature, but also capturing what may be deemed unpaintable, I have recognized the viability of the written word as more than a tool for poetry by extending its use as guide material for an experimental pictorial composition. What began as a playful mixing of words from torn pages of an old English dictionary had evolved into a theory encompassing other linguistic theories that bear semblance to Webstructionism. The randomness of stringing words and sequencing of unrelated phrases offer exponential possibilities for creative projects of all media which may provide support to existing theories.

In elucidating the workings of the mind and its capacity to reinvent language, I have embarked on this experimental approach using art and poetry to underscore the creative mental process of forming phrases derived from random extraction of borrowed words. The expression of a thought comes from processing words or phrases that are made available through random selection. I rely on intuition in combining words that normally wouldn’t be selected in expressing a thought in the real sense. Phrases preclude any reference to clichés or predictable word combinations. Though there are instances when memory dictates the stringing of commonly used words to produce a phrase subsequent arrangement almost always lean back to the original intent of surprise of Webstructionism which diverts away from worn out phrases or any reference to immediate reality.

Now, how does this word structure render itself to visual exploration? There is an otherworldly reality inhabiting the canvas space where the arbitrary selections of words provide the framework - syntax as pictorial composition. Symbolic knowledge supersedes the literal in providing the blueprint for the visual imagery. The words that make up the complex phrase is connected by a single drawn line following the sequence of the group of words’ relative use to expressing a thought. The resulting visual abstraction made up of a continuous swirling line connecting words serves as the compositional guide for painting. Enclosed shapes determined by the line weaving through selected words are then painted according to artist’s preference which is directed by intuition and sometimes influenced if not hampered by his predictability of taste and acquired style. Choosing colors to fill in shapes simulate the process of choosing words to make a phrase. Aesthetics that guide the artist’s use of colors however do not necessarily apply the same writer’s approach of mixing words. The sensory appeal of colors influenced by artistic preference and knowledge of the discipline do not strictly correlate to the ordering or sequencing of words in a phrase. Rules are different for each discipline, literary or aesthetic, and compounded by the introduction of Webstructionism, adherence to what has been laid down thus far as rules of the game will eventually yield a more comprehensive scope or objective. Putting yellow next to mauve does not need analyzing as to whether it is representative of nature or an abstract concept as much as combining words ‘grout’ and ‘devout’. Lines and colors do not evoke as much analytical response as words. We can ‘read’ past the random display of colors on a canvas surface, but with words, which is what Webstructionism is driving at, the random selection of words when pasted or written together on the surface compels the literate viewer –reader to translate what may seem outright non-sensical verbiage to something even poetically profound. ‘Grout’ and ‘devout’ may be analyzed as sounding similar but the relevance does not end there. Though they rarely appear together on any text, both words when placed side by side, sans the conjunction, conjures up a meaningful connection or symbiosis. The pious devotee referring to the ‘devout’ requires faith which metaphorically can be associated with the word ‘grout’. Grout ‘fills the space’ which can represent the ‘filling in’ of doubt by the devout or devotee’s faith.

Webstructionist grammar does not reject sense. It does in fact embrace profundity given the right word or in the webstructionist sense ‘the rite’ of words through random selection. It is also, as mentioned, autonomous in the rationalist sense. Syntax is not solely derived experientially. It does not categorically represent sense reality. Sentence construction is rooted in imagination breeding odd selection of words in favor of the commonly used. Since ideas are stimulated by the words made available through random selection the artist is discovering thoughts that may have no parallel in the real sense but which can expand if not add new horizon to the conducive kind of rationality he has been accustomed to.

To illustrate the process of Webstructionism, the line that connects words to form a phrase creates the fluid like image branching into irregular shapes which are then enhanced by color. Words that are not selected are either painted over or left as they are printed on a page. The words taken to form a phrase command the flow of the line according to how each word appears in the sequence. What results as visual abstraction after the line is drawn following the sequence of words is actually a mapping out of the evolution of the phrase. It is similar to connecting dots to form a figure, only the dots are replaced by words and the line that goes through the phrase does not represent any particular figure other than the image it creates out of stringing words.

The first step involves skimming through the dictionary and picking a particular page. Leafing through the pages and stopping at any random page is all instinctive. What follows as the tearing of pages and the haphazard pasting of torn pieces on the canvas surface still requires no mental exertion. The word selection that transpires next, where some are highlighted and others are either left out or erased in the process, is based on the artist’s familiarity or quick recognition of the words. It might take some browsing and discriminate selecting of words but this is as far as the tweaking of the elements go which is not unlike choosing green over purple in coloring a spot. Though there are marginalized words that do not end up in the forming of a phrase the goal is to be able to arrange the retrieved words in the quickest way possible avoiding redundant words that would otherwise spoil the freshness of the selection. The process is similar to picking flowers for an arrangement without giving much thought as to why some are left out and others end up in a vase.

During the sequencing of words, worn out phrases are avoided to explore possibilities of creating a syntax out of unique word combinations. It is a conscious negation of conventional usage of the English language, freeing every formation or phrasing of words from the subjugation of official grammar. Despite the wide variety of descriptive words available to depict reality, common language is forged in its method of representation. The very limitation of vocabulary available to webstruction on the other hand, propels the imagination to forge a reality embedded in the new phrase.

In Wittgenstein’s philosophy of language, he rejected the assumption that the meaning of the word is the thing it stands for. Wittgenstein argued that meaning is what is given by explanations of meaning, which are rules for the use of words. It is what is understood when one understands what an utterance means based on several criteria of understanding. “Concepts are not correct or incorrect, only more or less useful. Rules for the use of words are not true or false. They are not answerable to reality, nor to antecedently given meanings. Rather they determine the meanings of words, are constitutive of their meanings.”

The intentionality of thought and language of Webstructionism conveys the subjective proposition of a metaphorical world laden with symbols. The object is not perceived or seen in the spatio-temporal world but is imagined from the relations of words. The personal imaging of thought formed by the play of words is manifested through the content of what is written. Though the puzzle of retrieving usable words to create a thought shares a similar thread of arbitrary use of language to represent external reality, Webstructionist thought gravitates towards the unknown like stumbling upon an intriguing object or mysterious code that needs to be examined or deciphered to reveal its meaning. The meaning is in the process of construction and deconstruction of imaginings. It does not pretentiously encapsulate the essence of a higher reality but can open up to alternative realities. The final end has neither finality nor ending. It can only retrace the arbitrary formation of words. Looking at the amorphous image created by the line tracing all the words that make up the phrase reveals the choices made by the artist and the blueprint of how messaging was processed. The inductive deductive roundabout exegesis behind the pictorial and verse compositions is the operative principle of Webstructionist thought and language. It is picture-making which generates potential variants of invented realities.

Roberto Lavidez

Ontario Canada

WEBSTRUCTIONISM by ROBERTO LAVIDEZ

Thursday, March 20, 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive

Search This Blog

About

Thursday, March 20, 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search This Blog

Subscribe To

About