I am intrigued by the idea of writing an entire book using only emojis. In their current incarnation, it is not possible to render a coherent story. But that’s not to say that at some time in the future it may be possible. Indeed, the emoji might well be on its way to becoming the language of the future.

I scroll through my Phone searching for the “right” kind to use. There is no right kind. Nothing represents what I feel like saying.

Adorno’s theory of mass-culture comes to mind – I know, I’m weird – the culture industry of film, tv, ads, pop art forming a language of images, a hieroglyphic writing.  Could emojis be the next logical step in the symbiotic system of mass production ~ mass consumption? Per Adorno, this is a language of domination creating the psychological needs to perpetuate the consumption of capitalist goods. But this can’t be entirely correct. Something is lost in the economy of transaction. We can’t go from automation to imagination without noticing that behind this language there is a real person. False consciousness cannot circumvent true consciousness without abandoning the instinct of liberation. I imagine the language of our shared world is already both false and neurotic. Automation simply improves upon the process.

There must be another language at work, hidden in this process, one that resists all transcription. It is a language without words, without the imposition of form, a kind of proto-music. We secretly yearn to give voice to that instinct by calling it individual. But it cannot be transcribed into the language of the everyday world. Whenever the two attempt to unite, the former is lost in a cloud of mist. Ambiguity.

I write from that instinct, realizing that the language of the everyday will force me into making definitive choices, imposing its own logic, progression, rhythm and time. As writers, it is useless to try to resist this domination of the written word. We only try to give voice to that instinct.

This might explain the appeal of emojis, a true hieroglyphic writing. At a superficial level, they seem to represent common emotions, or shorthand questions and answers.  How do you feel? 😀😏😒🤔😟😔😫😤😱😨😢  These imply emotional states. But at a deeper level, there is something ambiguous, allowing some part of the exchange to be left unspoken. The icon both captures and resists. That is me, and that is not me.  The language of the everyday does not work like this. It imposes its form compelling us to embrace its identity as our own. The instinct of liberation impels us to escape from the dominance of form, the urge toward the hieroglyph.