A speculation on a development from Imagism to Asemic Writing.
The credo for Imagism is the primacy of the image.
Does this primacy illicit a kind of cliché-breaking in the image-narrative pattern, which then renders the conventional logic asemic or nearly so?
See also: Trope, Tropes and Archetypes and Clichés
For example, take this lyric in "The Rose": Some say love, it is a razor / That leaves your soul to bleed. This lyric breaks the trope ~ cliché by substituting soul for heart, which, in turn, risks making itself asemic, i.e., without meaning or more to the point, dysfunctional in its normal form as communication.
Indeed, the expected noun (image)-verb (action), your heart to bleed, makes more sense than the given noun-verb, your soul to bleed, a phrase which defies the usual sense of what a soul does.
But notice too how the rupture of the image-narrative flow in "The Rose" is not altogether unlike the rupture forced by the verb-lacking juxtaposition of images in "In a Station of the Metro"?
Continuity as a Logical Imperative
