Support
Critics have dismissed this as “pretentious asemic writing” or a gimmick. But linguists like Dr. Mira Tannen of MIT have noted that Falcon’s script shares structural features with early proto-cuneiform—a system born not from speech, but from accounting. Falcon is not trying to transcribe speech; he is trying to bypass the auditory cortex entirely. He is building a language for the eye and the hand, bypassing the treachery of the tongue.
His subsequent withdrawal from verbal speech was not a retreat into autism or depression, but an act of decolonization—a rebellion against the grammatical structures that predetermine thought.
Falcon’s visual art—large canvases filled with these geometric scripts, often painted over with translucent layers of wax and ash—challenges the fundamental premise of Western art. Art, since the Romantics, has been about expression . Falcon’s work is about implication .
His life’s work is an unfinished sentence written in a language only he fully reads. But perhaps that is the point. The most interesting essays are not those that answer a question, but those that reframe it. Falcon reframes the question of language from “How do we speak?” to
OTT Payment Services India
