i like this medieval monk's work. but what does it mean that i like it when i can't possibly understand what it means (latin) unless i research it. is it, for me, just text as image? or not so simple as that?
there are religious symbols here that i, and probably most modern readers, am missing. it had a social/religious purpose, for the artist:
"Given that a large part of the population at the time was not only poor, but illiterate, Maurus' visual poems bridged the gap between a priviledged reading community and the common person. Maurus used simple symbols : rings to signify cycles, squares to represent books, and letters for days. By doing so he made religious concepts easily accessible to the masses. "
the images follow the path of the letters--sometimes carefully and sometimes the figures seem merely superimposed onto the text. but either way, there is a kind of convincing oneness there, between the images and words. i think this is why i like his work, because i can at least sense this oneness, without dealing with real meaning of words. i can hear it, though i don't understand it. would the oneness go away if i was able to read the latin clearly? i don't think so, because the text is arranged in a way that seems to place it's overall visual form over legibility. this question of legibility is also complicated (or made irrelevant?) by the fact that this was partly created for illiterate people.
and if i knew (without reading the explanation) what the symbols meant? that's a whole other question that i guess i'm not as interested in but is obviously a really important one for the work.
This website has a lot of beautiful figure poems of his: http://www.almaleh.com/raban-e.htm#
