Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Transcripts from demagnetized tapes - Vol. 1

2021, LN

Asemic writing and visual poetry are inherently connected, and the relationship is symbiotic. Thus it is not at all surprising that typewriter-generated concrete poetry (ironically considered by some to be obsolete) is re-emerging in new forms and with considerable vitality in the asemic writing movement. Federico Federici is one of the master practitioners of this interesting sub-genre. (He is also contributing to my long-held theory of Neo-Concretism.) That contemporary asemic writers and artists should benefit from the triumphs of the “Golden Age” of concrete poetry is, after all, an indication of healthy cultural evolution: a balance of tradition and the iconoclastic. Working in the context of concrete poetry, Federico Federici uses type-overs (as well as some calligraphy) to generate asemic symbols and structures. I believe this is one of the most promising possibilities for the use of concrete poetry in the asemic realm: The generation of symbols and structures. Federici also interjects words – mostly nouns – to allow for some degree of “reading” and association. A nature theme emerges: “TREE,” “weed,” “wood,” “leaf,” “deer,” “stone,” etc. The work can be read, but not strictly in a conventional sense. For instance, traditional syntax is lacking yet the sign-system is intact for individual words. Poetically, the work presents a severely fractured pastoral lyric that is neither highly Romanticized nor parodied. The typewritten structure suggests linearity; however, I believe the piece requires a “depth-of-field” reading. (Both asemics and vispo require new kinds of reading.) One is directed to look into and through the dense layering (not across). Federici’s asemic-concrete composition implies, I believe, that a “text” is a dense field of accumulated meanings. Meanings can be distorted, obscured or disrupted by others. Emotional response competes with rationality. Linear (conventional) reading is misreading and misleading. True understanding of the text involves seeing into its depth and layers of possibility. The play of these layers of meaning, in turn, creates new meanings. Federici’s work, indeed, uses a randomness principle. The precise geometry of concrete poetry obscures the randomness and creates a deconstructive tension in the work. The asemic text demands a new kind of “reading” and finding meaning. Federico Federici’s work helps open new possibilities. - De Villo Sloan

FEDERICO FEDERICI TRANSCRIPTS FROM DEMAGNETIZED TAPES LN libri della neve Transcripts from demagnetized tapes All rights reserved © Federico Federici 2021 ISBN 9798688757347 http://federicofederici.net http://leserpent.wordpress.com libri della neve PRINTED ON EARTH ASEMIC-CONCRETE TEXT HYBRIDS Asemic writing and visual poetry are inherently connected, and the relationship is symbiotic. Thus it is not at all surprising that typewriter-generated concrete poetry (ironically considered by some to be obsolete) is re-emerging in new forms and with considerable vitality in the asemic writing movement. Federico Federici is one of the master practitioners of this interesting sub-genre. (He is also contributing to my long-held theory of Neo-Concretism.) That contemporary asemic writers and artists should benefit from the triumphs of the “Golden Age” of concrete poetry is, after all, an indication of healthy cultural evolution: a balance of tradition and the iconoclastic. Working in the context of concrete poetry, Federico Federici uses type-overs (as well as some calligraphy) to generate asemic symbols and structures. I believe this is one of the most promising possibilities for the use of concrete poetry in the asemic realm: The generation of symbols and structures. Federici also interjects words – mostly nouns – to allow for some degree of “reading” and association. A nature theme emerges: “TREE,” “weed,” “wood,” “leaf,” “deer,” “stone,” etc. The work can be read, but not strictly in a conventional sense. For instance, traditional syntax is lacking yet the sign-system is intact for individual words. Poetically, the work presents a severely fractured pastoral lyric that is neither highly Romanticized nor parodied. The typewritten structure suggests linearity; however, I believe the piece requires a “depth-of-field” reading. (Both asemics and vispo require new kinds of reading.) One is directed to look into and through the dense layering (not across). Federici’s asemic-concrete composition implies, I believe, that a “text” is a dense field of accumulated meanings. Meanings can be distorted, obscured or disrupted by others. Emotional response competes with rationality. Linear (conventional) reading is misreading and misleading. True understanding of the text involves seeing into its depth and layers of possibility. The play of these layers of meaning, in turn, creates new meanings. Federici’s work, indeed, uses a randomness principle. The precise geometry of concrete poetry obscures the randomness and creates a deconstructive tension in the work. The asemic text demands a new kind of “reading” and finding meaning. Federico Federici’s work helps open new possibilities. De Villo Sloan 11 kein genaues wort datum 12 lapses and latencies 14 AKT 98-56 22 woods etc. 26 26 in herzens mitte 32 œil n.1 35 to begin a poem with 37 gewicht-gedicht 44 hier suchst du das wort im wort 45 feuer 62 why most words are hidden 63 notes about a found texturee 66 die welt, das licht liegen im kampf 67 first line of dark 68 lapses 69 interfering landscapes 70 ensamheten 75 denken mit zeichner 84 lautgedicht n.1 86 lautgedicht n.3 DING AN SICH This work invites the reader/onlooker to depict the whole body as a diffused neuro-semiotic net, wherein synapses, cells and other attractors intertwine. Ears, eyes and skin (Ohr/Ohr, Augen, écran) restlessly collect stimuli from an ultimately unknowable, maybe subliminal substrate (Ding an sich) to be later on mapped into language. In the same way as artificial fuzzy systems or neural networks essentially consist of adjustable mathematical models, the original states of biological machines are keen on being informed. Since the speed of learning can hardly keep up with the fluidity of perception, world may become a resonation of word, and word that of wood(s) and so forth. Reality exhibits a certain bias for meaning and conceptualizing beyond likely errors. The thick barrage of signs at the verbivisual surface of the page is a caveat against anchoring signification, as if an excess of information had definitively come into play. The intrinsic instability of textual matter begins at the ground-state of words. The mechanism of adding or dropping letters reminds that of the charging/uncharging of particles by contact and proves that meaning always exerts a certain pressure. In addition to that, doping a writing by means of another writing introduces new allowed meaningfulness states within the sense gap, quite close to the full semantic band of the dopant text. To put it another way, text donor impurities create states near the signifier band, while text acceptor impurities create states near the signified band. The gap between these meaningfulness states and the nearest accessible meaningful band is rather small and may be referred to as asemic gap. Federico Federici 88 ding an sich 92 Tiresias’ gate 97 canto CXVII 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 text surface scanning, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 concrete disassembled poem n.1, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 concrete disassembled poem n.2, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 concrete disassembled poem n.3, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 kein genaues wort datum, ink pen, charcoal, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 lapses and latencies, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 wet poem, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 AKT 98-56, watercolor, glue, dust, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 transkript 27a, watercolor, glue, fire, ink brush, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 145×207 mm, 2018 requiem fragment, watercolor, fire, glue, dust, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 schneestreifen, watercolor, fire, glue, concrete, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 147×205 mm, 2019 sampling of a requiem, ink, glue, chalk, fire, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 190×260 mm, 2017 conversation through an optical fiber, watercolor, collage, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 midsummer dusk map, ink pen, rubber stamps, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 80×135 mm, 2018 landscape with lacking data, charcoal, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 297×210 mm, 2018 woods etc. (homage to Alice Oswald), Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 parable brut, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 sound landscape on an early spring day, ink pen, blue pencil, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 noise of a crumbling poem, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 in herzens mitte, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 winter ‘45, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on cardboard, 160×205 mm, 2019 until next winter, watercolor, inkpen, Olivetti Studio 46 on cardboard, approx. 145×145 mm, 2019 ich bin dein vater, charcoal, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 nach S. Freud, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 110×135 mm, 2017 ich, sandpaper, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 œil n.1, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 œil n.2, ink brush, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 wie es sich ausschweigt, pencil, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 to begin a poem with, ink pen, sandpaper, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 rhymes for a prepared poem, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 gewicht-gedicht, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 ordgranser, glue, sandpaper, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 vorm wort, ink pen, glue, sandpaper, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 histing the reader’s attention, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 the kinetics of text, charcoal, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 reading between the lines, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 alles schwebt im wort, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 hier suchst du das wort im wort, ink pen, toner, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 120×115 mm, 2019 feuer, fire, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 ett ord, fire, glue, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 170×55 mm, 2018 mir, ink brush, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 about the horizon, ink pen, fire, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 297×210 mm, 2017 nero, ink pen, ink, glue, transparent paper, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, approx. 110×115 mm, 2018 missed poem, ink pen, ink, watercolor, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 drowned poem, ink bush, ink pen, watercolor, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 obscured by alphabets n.1, ink bush, toner on paper, 297×210 mm, 2017 obscured by alphabets n.2, ink pen, toner on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 alphabet variations, ink, ink pen, rubber stamps, 210×297 mm, 2018 alphabetical fluctuations, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46, 210×297 mm, 2017 how to dismantle the alphabet to be found, ink pen, ink brush, sanguine, rubber stamps, 210×297 mm, 2018 synapse und symbol, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 in this rose’s other death, charcoal, ink pen, rubber stamps, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 waste poem, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2017 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 how does a conversation begin?, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 why most words are hidden, ink pen, pencil, sandpaper, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2018 notes about a found texture, ink pen, ink, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 erdgedächtnis, ink pen, charcoal, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 except statements, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 die welt, das licht liegen im kampf, charcoal, ink pen, toner, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 first line of dark, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 lapses, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 interfering landscapes, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 ensamheten, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 something axiomatic, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2018 black language manifold, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 das gleichgewicht der welt, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 how to work around a paradigm, ink, ink pen, glue, wood chips, rubber stamps on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 denken mit zeichner, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 notes while listening to the alphabet, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 notizen auf dem weg durch die stadt, ink, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 lines for a prepared poem, ink brush, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×148 mm, 2019 this text: blank, pencil, ink brush, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 210×297 mm, 2019 im mund der welt, oil, ink, pencil, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 wort der psyche, charcoal, ink, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on black cardboard, 130×140 mm, 2019 poem of nature, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 wind workbook, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 lutgedicht n.1, pencil, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 lutgedicht n.2, ink pen, ink brush, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 lutgedicht n.3, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 war es form?, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 ding an sich, charcoal, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 next to the next person’s breathing, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 the room at the centre of, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 Tiresias’ gate, ink pen, crayon, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 vor einem wort, ink, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on canvas, approx. 130×185 mm, 2020 whole, charcoal, pencil, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on Olivetti paper, 130×185 mm, 2020 continuum, ink, ink pen, pencil, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper and transparent paper, 148×210 mm, 2018 es gilt auch für tiere, ink brush, ink pen, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on cardboard, approx. 120×225 mm, 2018 canto CXVII, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 short essay about concrete poetry, ink pen, sandpaper, glue, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2020 nicht ohne grund, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 es gehet aufs ende zu, ink pen, Olivetti Studio 46 on paper, 148×210 mm, 2019 ~ Excerpts have appeared in: (electronic) «3:AM Magazine», «Abstract Magazine», «A-Minor», «AOM», «Asemic Front», «Asemics Magazine», «Brave New Word», «Diagram», «Ex-Ex-Lit», «Freshwater Review», «Gasher», «Internet Void», «The Journal», «Koan – The Paragon Press», «Letters Journal», «Memoir Magazine», «The New Post-Literate», «NiedernGasse», «nokturno.fi», «The Operating System», «Otoliths», «Raw Art Review», «Riggwelter», «Roanoke Review», «The Scriblerus», «Stadtsprachen Magazin», «Utsanga», «Watershed Review», «Zetaesse», «Zoomoozophone»; (print) «Art in America», «Digressioni», «Europoe», «Jelly Bucket», «Havik», «Maintenant – Journal of contemporary dada writing and art», «Meat for tea», «Metonym Journal», «New Plains Review», «Obra/Artifact», «Ós Pressan», «Perspektive», «Sand», «Sheepshead Review», «The Shanghai Literary Review», «Stoneboat», «Stonecoast Review», «Tiny Spoon», «ToCall», «Tule Review», «Tuli & Savu», «Unknown Quantities», «Welter».