Handwriting is another exciting subject of this series. Even if the viewer cannot decode the words in Schovánek’s handwriting, it still describes the mood in which the sentences were expressed. Writing is generally standardised in order to facilitate it as a means of communication. Standardisation of the characters also causes the language that it expresses to become standardised. In turn, standardisation of the language standardises thinking itself, ultimately standardising thought and therefore the world. This is the inherent element of the power of writing.
At first in its history, writing frees itself only gradually from conformity. It’s likely that general literacy was needed for this, which was only implemented around seven generations ago in Europe. Once access to writing is no longer restricted, its use can no longer be monitored. Only then in the history of writing does the urge to develop original, personal spoken expression set in. At that point, we begin to write how we speak.
When writing is involved, Schovánek returns to that arena in which handwriting has to please aesthetically more than anything. The sensuality it expresses is more than just a supplement to the sense of the words. The handwriting also serves as a metaphor for the individuality of the overwriting process. Every image tells its own story, the history of its material, the history of the process that created it, the history of the manipulated media. In no way does this coating of wax represent a process of erasure.
Sigmund Freud also recognised this while reflecting on the ‘Wunderblock’. This child’s toy enables a wax layer beneath a protective film to be written and painted on. A simple device allows the image created to be erased again; however, Freud noticed that fine lines remained scratched on the film. This enabled the father of psychoanalysis to confirm his own theories about memory. To be exact, the theory of how memories are created and what their characteristics are. In short, a model of memory itself.
