CPE Proposal

So I've been doing a lot of reading and thinking on the sensual nature of language. (Not to be confused with "a lot of close reading and time spent with sensual language", which would be more erotic but probably less relevant to this email). Our discussions in class on the false borders between idea and structure have made me think about the fact that writing/traditional text, despite its abstraction and men's best intentions over the years, is not even close to being "removed" from the realm of the sensual (thanks, physics!). We access and experience texts and the ideas therein like we access and experience every other thing in our reality: through our senses. Not only that, but the act of sensing is by definition an act of individual creation. Writing, therefore, like Bernhardt would say, is more an act of 'leading' than 'showing', or, as McCloud would say, more an act of 'talking with' than 'talking to'. As both readers and writers, we tend to forget this, and I have a hunch that it leads to, at best, fumbling stabs by writers to hone what "good communication" is through trial and error and, at worst, some serious miscommunications, missed opportunities, and mistakes of intent. I want to know the extent to which writing is both inclusive of and dependent on the reader, and I want that to give me, as a writer, specific strategies and tools for making all my texts more engaging, effective, and accurate. (Though I suspect my current definitions of those words may melt in my hands as I go forward)

(And I'm suspecting texts in any form, but for sanity's sake let's keep our first focus here on alphabetic text)

To find out more about this and to shape my inquiry, I'm going to do as much reading as I possibly can between now and December. The texts I'm planning on starting out with are David Abram's 'The Spell of the Sensuous', our very own, good ol' McCloud (I have his other book, 'Making Comics', too), and Maurice Perleau-Monty's 'Consciousness and the Acquisition of Language'. I also have Perleau-Monty's Phenomenology of Perception on order and am most excited about that one, as so many texts I'm geeking out over are referencing it. 

What I'm most worried about is nailing down some kind of specific strategies to answer (I know you said don't use that word) to my question. Amassing theory is all well and good, but I want to distill that into tangible practices, and for that I think I would need some scientific data or math or something. Yikes. Worst case scenario at this point is that I'll just have to read even more to give my own hypotheses and conjectures enough weight that I can convince myself they're valid. I feel conversation with the pros (we have Zach Bean and Rick Bass at our disposal) will be about as "scienced" as we'll be able to get this shit. If anyone has any other suggestions for research, I'm certainly all ears.

As for what form this piece will take, right now I'm thinking that a multimodal essay (photos, charts, curious text screenshots and examples, etc) is where I'm going to start, but who knows — things might get trippy. I'm going to be talking a lot about experience and the senses, so a physical essay with physical non-essay components can't be ruled out.

All told, I'm excited to see where that part will go, but for now, I'm going to to try to amass some readings and see where she goes.