In some of my work, emphasis is on haptic perception, especially the sense of touch as well as the other senses. The mind and body perceive and translate perceptions through the hands and chosen tool (pencil, paintbrush, pen). The marks are analogous to felt experience: seen, heard, touched, etc.).
Haptic drawn in ink to the sound of crickets.
See also this description of haptic by Stephen Vincent, divination drawings by John F. Simon, Jr., and the works of Sara Schneckloth, Tony Orrico, and Sun K. Kwak for somewhat similar, gestural and empathic approaches.
My book. Click HERE to read it online, or download for a donation–whatever you can afford. Go to the sidebar in my website www.local-nomad.com and click on the Donation button. Write a review and post it somewhere and/or give me some feedback. Thanks!
Click HERE for an article about my work by Eileen Tabios.
Click HERE for my literary/arts journal, Local Nomad.
I borrowed this quote by Laura U. Marks from Atelier LaRose:
From “Haptic Visuality” by Laura U. Marks:
“… I hope you get a sense of the political stakes between these two kinds of visuality, haptic and optical, and the two kinds of space they intend, smooth space and striated space.
“Optical visuality sees objects as distinct, distant, and identifiable, existing in illusionary three-dimensional space. It maintains a clear, crisp relationship between figure and ground. Optical visuality is necessary for distance perception: for surveying a landscape, for making fine distinctions between things at a distance. That’s how the object of vision is constituted in optical visuality. The subject of vision — the beholder — is also conceived as discrete, as having solid borders that demarcate the beholder from the thing beheld. So you can see why optical visuality is needed, for example, for firing a missile. It conceives of the other, the object of vision, as distant and unconnected to the subject of vision. Optical visuality is necessary. But it’s only half of vision.
“Haptic visuality sees the world as though it were touching it: close, unknowable, appearing to exist on the surface of the image. Haptic images disturb the figure-ground relationship. The early twentieth-century Viennese art historian Alois Riegl borrowed the term from psychology, haptein, for a kind of vision that ‘grabs’ the thing it looks at. I think it’s important that Riegl was a historian of textiles, and that he came up with this word when he was poring over his Persian carpets. These carpets with their endless, interleaved patterns don’t allow the eye to rest in one place; they invite the eye to move along them, caressing their surface. Contemplating these patterns does something to dissolve the boundaries between the beholder and the thing beheld.”