In our artistic collaboration we explore the materialities of the intertwining of the practices of writing and drawing. The medium of drawing and the text assume an almost dualistic world construction where the reading and the seeing merge into one act that must be done repeatedly. The text,which is simultaneously a short story and a syncopated rhythm, gets into a relation with the multiplicative composition of the algorithmic drawing.
Each pair of materiality: text/drawing & action: reading/seeing forms a MICMAC – a word that means muddle, intrigue or disorder. In the MICMACs there are two parts: the passage – the textual – and the awake – the image, which interact through a repeated reading/seeing transaction, and form a link that can work in a symbiotic way. This symbiotic relationship within the MICMAC, as in the biological analogue, can assume one of the following biological types, mutualism, commensalism, amensalism, parasitism, competition orpredation.
The MICMAC transaction can be, in one extreme, mutual when both the passage and the awake reinforce each other; or, in the other extreme, competitive or predatory, when one of the parts dominates the otherandconsumes it.
In our work we address aspects of these speculative biological analogies, the pleasure of reading and seeing, the relation between storytelling rhythms and visual rhythms by practicing them as a material amalgam of text and vision.
The MICMAC is a transdisciplinary practice and an instrument for epistemological exploration in the search for epistemic objects. In a sense they constitute objects that are “gradually configured from the juxtaposition, displacement, and layering of these traces.”. They are “future generating machines, configurations of experimental apparatus, techniques, layers of tacit knowledge, and inscription devices for creating semi-stable environments— little pockets of controlled chaos— just sufficient to engender unprecedented, surprising events” (Rheinberger, 2010).
The MICMAC register in a first gap between the two media: text/drawing; and in a second gap between two actions: reading/seeingBridging this gaps in a textual-non-textual back and forth goes beyond embracing both mental and body capacities of the subject. The differential qualities of the media open new avenues of interpretation, making both text and drawing probes into the properties of one-another.
In the presentation we propose to discuss the above and to perform a MICMAC with the collaboration of the participants as one voice.
R E F E R E N C E S
Bakhtin, M. (1991). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Davis, L. (2019). Essays One. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Davis, L. (2021). Essays Two. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Jameson, F. (2024). Mimesis, Expression, Construction: Fredric Jameson's Seminar on Aesthetic Theory. (O. Esanu, Ed.) London: Watkins Media Limited.
Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg (2010). An Epistemology of the Concrete: Twentieth-Century Histories of Life (Experimental futures : technological lives, scientific arts, anthropological voices). DukeUniversityPress.
A B O U T T H E A U T H O R S
Alexandra Abranches: MPhil and PhD in Philosophy. Philosophy Professor at the University of Minho. Researcher at CEHUM, University of Minho. Translator. Writer of short stories.
Pedro Alegria: Degree & MSc in Engineering and Robotics (FEUP) & MSc in Environmental Eng. (UA), Degree & PhD Fine Arts (FBAUP). Researcher at I2ADS; Drawing teacher @ FBAUP: live figure model. Works in algorithmic drawing.
Throughout our artistic and artistic-research collaboration, we explore strategies to reflect on the experience of writing and drawing.
Gestalt psychology often focuses on sensory phenomena, particularly in visual arts, which provide ample opportunities to test our Gestalt-forming abilities. However, much less attention has been given to Gestalt formation in linguistic media such as poetry, literature, or drama. The Gestalt potential of texts is vast, especially when we consider elements of form and rhetorical devices like alliteration, repetition, and metaphor (Bakhtin, 1991). These features structure language in ways that guide our perception of coherence and unity, echoing the principles of Gestalt in visual arts.
In linguistic media, alliteration and repetition create rhythmic patterns similar to visual symmetry, while metaphor allows readers to form holistic images by linking disparate ideas. When reading a text, we assemble fragments of meaning, tone, and structure into a cohesive whole, much like how we organize visual elements into recognizable patterns. This active process shows that Gestalt principles can shape our understanding of both images and language.
In our work, we experiment with micro-narratives paired with visual objects (Davis, Essays One, 2019) (Davis, Essays Two, 2021) to illustrate how each medium enhances the other. Text can illuminate visual objects, providing context and shaping interpretation, while visuals can add depth to text, grounding abstract concepts. A visual object might seem fragmented in isolation but gains coherence when accompanied by narrative. Conversely, a text’s impact is heightened by a visual that anchors or contrasts with it.
This interaction taps into our brain’s innate drive for unity, revealing how text and image can mutually reinforce our Gestalt-forming abilities. The “hostile surfaces” of text and image create a tension that compels us to find connections, enriching our engagement with both (Jameson, 2024). Each medium acts as a Gestalt anchor, drawing out layers of meaning that would be inaccessible if each stood alone.
Three MICMACs for you to see: