Defined: Art That’s Text-Based With Language And Words.

Text-based art is defined as artists and viewers interacting in visual language. Such Art With Words can be aesthetically pleasing all on its own, or add meaning, or both. Text in art can make art accessible; more understandable; and allow more diverse interpretations, interactions, and relationships — as language in art can inspire not only emotions but also views and thoughts. In word art, artists have more ways to express — and viewers have even more ways to experience — because with text-based art, an artist can not only inspire subjective feelings; they can also inspire objective discussions and dialogues amongst viewers of the art — maybe even if across boundaries of cultures and language. Text-based art can be the primary feature of the work — or have a small artistic role.

Beyond Standard Academic Definitions and “Interactions.”

I think text-based art is super cool and when I read that definition I fall asleep. I suppose it’s academically accurate (I drafted it after reading about 20 definitions from all kinds of sources) but it sucks the air right out of everything that is incredible about text-based art. Maybe this is because the standard definitions in error omit that (a) text-based art has spectacular histories (plural) across dozens of cultures for more than 2,000 to 4,000 years. There’s other things the standard definitions omit too. We’ll get to them. But now, let’s get right to the images — are there principled objective ways to decide what is in a definition of text-based art — and what is not?

Can We Just Define It As “Art With Words”?

This is actually a pretty interesting distinction — maybe some text-based art is really all about the text, while some is really about the underlying art with the text serving a more secondary or tertiary role. So, as an initial matter, I think these two things — “text art” and such, on the one hand, and “art with words,” on the other hand, are going to be different from a definitional standpoint. But stay tuned and let’s see. Maybe it has something to do with ideas like “interactions between text and art” or “relationships between words and images” — I just don’t know yet, that will be part of this as we see how various parts of the standard academic definitions and histories hold up to objective analysis of (a) thousands of years of history across every continent and (b) where text-based art has suddenly seemed to be going, generally speaking, in the past 20 years since 2000 came along.

* * *

Text Art Relationships Explained and Described: Five Images

* * *

No, this is not a end-all definition that’s exhaustive or complete or even definitive. This is just the fun start — five images to test the above academic definition as an initial matter. I don’t presume to get to define something as historically and culturally rich — and as incredibly varied — as text-based art. Certainly not in a sound bite. But let’s start here to start to get our hands around it —

THIS IS TEXT-BASED ART — EXAMPLE ONE — Believe it or not, this is a form of text-based art. Normally thought of as one of the oldest known purely figurative paintings by, this is a depiction of an unknown bovine animal discovered in the Lubang Jeriji Saléh cave and dated to be more than 40,000 (perhaps as old as 52,000) years old. Stay tuned for why this fits within a broad definition of text based art (but not, as a distinction, art with words). Already that distinction makes me curious. You?

* * *

* * *

THIS IS TEXT-BASED ART — EXAMPLE TWO — This is Oracle Bone Script (Chinese: 甲骨文; pinyin: jiǎgǔwén) — an ancient form of Chinese characters that were engraved on oracle bones—animal bones or turtle plastrons used in pyromantic divination. Oracle bone script was used in the late 2nd millennium BC, and is the earliest known form of Chinese writing. I’m including it here not only as an example of text-based art, but as an example of the use of, broadly speaking, symbols, letters, and, here, characters in art — and as art. I’m also including it here because text-based art, of course, does not have to be in the language of English. And because this establishes that text art existed long before the commonly accepted (and objectively incorrect view) that art with words and language didn’t start until some Europeans tried it 100 years ago and then some guys in New York City tried it again in the 1950s and 1960s. More on this later. For now, I hope this piece takes your breath away. Whenever I see it, I get goosebumps.

* * *

* * *

THIS IS TEXT-BASED ART EXAMPLE THREE — For strictly initial definitional purposes we are jumping ahead several THOUSAND years to what may seem exactly like text-based art to you. And it is. And it is so much more. This is a foundational, seminal, groundbreaking, incredibly powerful blend of art and image and word and protest — and here again I have goosebumps just looking at it and thinking about it. Barbara Kruger is the artist and her work, not just this one, defines entire types and kinds and categories of what art with words can do and mean. Barbara Kruger (as both an artist and in relation to this particular piece) will be the sole focus of a latter post. For now three big picture points: One, notice the text is a declarative statement directed AT you. Stay tuned for what that ultimately means in the world of text art. Two, notice the text is not idiom or inside joke that requires mastery of the language of English — this art is (a) serious and (b) serious about one of the most universal issues in the world and (c) starts to transcend any one language or culture. This is heading towards universal understanding. Stay tuned on that. Three, notice this is not the work of any of the referenced white males from New York City in the 1950s — This is by an artist named Barbara Kruger. Thereby not only shattering assumptions of what text-based art do, and how it can be, but also who can do it. I will try to adequately articulate later just how many great things are in and behind this work.

* * *

* * *

THIS IS TEXT-BASED ART EXAMPLE FOUR — OK, so conceptually here we start to get towards a tough one — Is this text-based art? On the one hand, it’s only a billboard, right? It’s not in a high-end gallery nor in a museum. Plus, it’s just writing with no aesthetic image behind it, right? Plus, it’s just saying a meaningless word over and over, right? . . . On the other hand, this is a famous text-based artwork by the highly-regarded text-based artist and conceptualist Mel Bochner, part of a well-known series of word paintings he executed between 2008 and 2012 — all using repetitions of the world “blah.” So, within the definition of text-based art, many seem to agree that even use of mere words, with no aesthetic image and with no clear semantic meaning, still counts as (very expensive) text art worthy of a museum, even if here it is on a billboard for a project.

* * *

* * *

THIS IS TEXT-BASED ART EXAMPLE FIVE — OK, so conceptually here’s the REALLY tough one — Is THIS text-based art? If not, why not? On the one hand, most of us (even worldwide) know this to be the name of a corporation, and this to be its corporate logo for advertising. So this can’t be text-based art because it’s “branding” — right? . . . On the other hand, on what principled and objective grounds can this example be distinguished from the billboard example above? Neither uses an aesthetic image; they both use plain backgrounds. The both use capitalization with intention (all lower case here, all caps above). They both use a word that does not necessarily have semantic meaning (depending on your view). So, going back to our initial working definition of text-based art — is there a reasoned basis upon which to exclude this circa 2014 version of the Facebook logo from the definition of text-based art. If so, what is? Can we articulate it simply such that a future-artist-child would understand, say, consistent with the Feynman Technique of Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman (and yes this foreshadows a hallmark of all great text-based art writing! — the occasional reference to things not first seeming to be about text-based art at all, but they are. But I digress, so stay tuned).

* * *

* * *

Ahead — More Definitions, Explanations, Questions, Answers

• Is “art with words” different than “text art”?

• Who makes it, who can make it, and why would you make it anyway?

• Is it really text-based language art if you don’t speak the language you’re looking at?

• How can art be art if it can only be understood by a people / culture speaking one language?

• Does text-based art have to be recognizable letters and words? Does it even have to be legible?

• Is text-based art narrowing and exclusive? — Or is it a path to universality of meaning?

• As you can see, it may be that text art and even art with words is really about linguistics and commonality.

• You guessed it, if you’re curious, stay tuned . . . .

  [About the author: Adam Daley Wilson is a gallery-represented text-based artist. He has traditional academic degrees — a J.D. from Stanford Law School in California and a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Both include work in comparative studies; the B.A. includes world history.]

  [first draft August 2022, revisions October 2022, pending final version]