The Xenotranscriptional Landscape: Neural Potentiality as Poetic Composition
An Essay
ABOUT THE WRITER
Kenji Siratori is a Japanese avant-garde artist who is currently bombarding the internet with wave upon wave of highly experimental, uncompromising, progressive, intense prose. His is a writing style that not only breaks with tradition, it severs all cords, and can only really be compared to the kind of experimental writing techniques employed by the Surrealists, William Burroughs and Antonin Artaud. You can catalyze with his website here.
You can purchase a PDF file of his book EXCREMENT for any price here.
Henri Michaux’s engagement with visual and gestural language provides an apt analogy for the silent inscription of transcriptomes within motor neurons. In Movements, Michaux’s pseudo-idéogrammes function as a non-verbal, universal system of signification, resisting stable linguistic codification and instead gesturing toward a form of silent writing. Michaux’s ideogram-like drawings operate in a space between linguistic determinacy and asemic expressivity. However, such terminological controversy does not detract from Michaux's poetic charm, and, in the final analysis, we propose the term pseudo-ideogrammatic silence. This notion of a pseudo-idéogrammatique silence echoes within the molecular landscape of transcriptional regulation, where gene expression, much like Michaux’s drawings, resists fixed phonetic interpretation. The absence of an acoustic image in pseudo-ideograms parallels the latent silence within genetic inscriptions—a space where meaning is generated through structured absences and contingent formations. The transcriptional landscape of motor neurons does not simply function as a deterministic blueprint for cellular fate but emerges as an iterative, recursive structure akin to a generative poetic text. In this sense, the TFs Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Myc function not merely as molecular regulators but as the primary lexemes of a transcriptional poetics, each operating within an interplay of activation and repression that is structurally homologous to the syntactic and semiotic transformations found in poetic language. "Writing represents the idea but not necessarily the language" aligns with the way transcription factors inscribe potentiality rather than fixed cellular identity. Much like the pseudo-idéogrammes, which destabilize fixed linguistic representation, the transcriptional network of motor neurons resists a singular, deterministic interpretation. Bertrand Russell’s suggestion that writing may have preceded spoken language further situates the silent operations of transcription within a broader grammatological discourse. The inscription of genetic material, occurring independently of direct phonetic representation, can be conceptualized as an ancient form of asemic writing—a molecular xenopoetics in which structure precedes articulation. In this regard, the transcriptional landscape embodies an "écriture avant la parole," an anterior linguistic system that functions through encoded potentiality rather than realized articulation. Michaux’s attempt to create a universal language through pseudo-idéogrammes suggests a formal resonance with the universalizing tendencies of genetic transcription. The ideographic structure of Michaux’s work, wherein meaning is inferred rather than stated, finds a parallel in the epigenetic modulations that guide transcription without imposing a fixed cellular fate. This "universal language" of genetic inscription operates within an ontological space that evades direct verbalization, much like the pseudo-idéogrammes that detach themselves from conventional linguistic structures. In the same way that Saussure distinguishes the signifier from the acoustic image, the transcriptional mechanisms underlying motor neuron differentiation separate genetic inscription from immediate phenotypic manifestation. The latent potentiality of neural differentiation mirrors the suspended, indeterminate meaning of Michaux’s pseudo-ideograms—both existing within a field of deferred articulation, awaiting interpretative actualization. Xenopoemology frames the transcriptional landscape of motor neurons as a poetic inscription, where the interplay of TFs constitutes a silent but expressive form of biological writing. By drawing upon Michaux’s exploration of pseudo-idéogrammes, we uncover a homologous structure within molecular transcription—a system of inscription that resists phonetic fixity, gesturing instead toward a silent, generative language of cellular differentiation. The dynamic interplay between transcription factors in neural differentiation aligns with the poetic and visual aesthetics of ideogrammatic expression. The transcriptional signatures within motor neurons form what may be described as a palimpsestic layering of meaning, a recursive poiesis rather than a deterministic inscription. This resonates with Michaux’s assertion that "The destiny of Chinese writing was absolute weightlessness," a declaration that, in the xenopoemological sense, can be extended to the weightlessness of molecular inscription. Here, Oct4 and Sox2, in their roles as neural reprogramming factors, function analogously to ideographic strokes—each an independent signifier yet deeply embedded within a network of gestural interrelations. The biological process is, in effect, a calligraphic enactment of pluripotentiality, where the convergence of gene expression mirrors the "polygraphie" of Michaux’s own textual practice. The relationship between visual and textual elements in Michaux’s Ideograms in China offers a compelling parallel to the structural interplay of transcriptional networks. The duality of alphabets and ideograms, as discussed by Foucault, presents a conceptual framework through which the transcriptional interplay in neurogenesis can be interpreted. Just as Michaux disrupts the hierarchical subordination of text to image, so too does xenopoemology reject the reductive paradigm of linear genetic determinism. Instead, it acknowledges the interplay between stochasticity and structured differentiation, much like the ideogrammatic method, wherein the visual abstraction of script both contains and exceeds linguistic meaning. Michaux, in his preface to Chinese Calligraphy: A Four-Dimensional Art, highlights the paradox of calligraphy as both a textual and visual practice. This paradox finds its molecular counterpart in transcriptomic expression, where the written code of genetic material oscillates between functional specificity and poetic emergence. The transcription factors Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Myc, though firmly embedded within the constraints of biochemical necessity, simultaneously articulate an open-ended grammar of neural differentiation. The pluripotent state induced by these factors is not a static inscription but a fluid, iterative movement, an "art of painting and writing" that transforms the cell into a living manuscript of potentiality. A fundamental aspect of xenopoemology is its acknowledgment of non-inscription, the pauses and silences within transcriptional activity. Michaux’s exploration of the "ideogrammatic silence" provides a crucial insight into the inherent indeterminacy of neural differentiation. The absence of explicit genetic transcription at certain loci does not denote void or inertia but rather an active space of potential articulation. This silent interval is reminiscent of the intervals between calligraphic strokes, where the unmarked space holds as much meaning as the inked inscription. The indeterminate nature of neurogenesis thus mirrors Michaux’s own aesthetic resistance to linguistic closure. As he articulates in Ideograms in China, the Chinese script’s visual density serves not to fix meaning but to proliferate interpretive possibilities. In the same way, the stochastic variability in transcriptomic profiles does not signify biological noise but rather an underlying openness—an embrace of neural becoming rather than a foreclosure of fate. As Foucault observes, "The world was twisting in on itself," an insight that underscores how transcriptional landscapes, much like Michaux’s ideograms, do not merely represent but actively engender new realities. In aligning transcriptomic inscription with Michaux’s ideogrammatic poetics, xenopoemology posits a radical departure from anthropocentric epistemologies of the nervous system. It challenges the Cartesian paradigm of mind-body separation by embedding cognition within a textual-material process, one that is neither strictly biological nor purely semiotic but an entanglement of both. Just as Michaux’s textual experiments blurred the boundary between script and image, xenopoemology dissolves the opposition between molecular inscription and poetic articulation. Moreover, in light of posthumanist thought, this approach situates neural transcription within a broader ecology of becoming, one that transcends species boundaries and reconfigures the centrality of human linguistic agency. The molecular poetics of Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Myc thus emerge not as static markers of identity but as generative vectors in a ceaseless process of differentiation and emergence. Just as Michaux dissolved the boundary between the verbal and the visual, xenopoemology dissolves the boundary between the biological and the poetic, reimagining neural transcription as an open-ended, dynamic cartography of possibility. In doing so, it challenges conventional models of neural identity and differentiation, proposing instead a framework that recognizes the fundamental indeterminacy and aesthetic vibrancy of the molecular syntax that underlies the nervous system. Like Michaux’s calligraphic gestures, the transcriptomic inscription of motor neurons is an act of world-making—an articulation of difference that resists closure, embracing instead the ceaseless interplay of inscription and erasure, silence and emergence, potentiality and becoming. The interplay of transcription factors in the differentiation of motor neurons can be understood as a poetic act, where genetic inscriptions function analogously to linguistic structures. Each transcription factor introduces a distinct rhythm and phonemic quality to the unfolding of neural differentiation. Just as in poetic composition, where syntax determines meaning beyond mere lexical content, the molecular orchestration of TFs shapes the emergence of neural identity. Deleuze’s notion of "pliegue" (fold) provides a conceptual entry point into this phenomenon. The folding of chromatin and the epigenetic regulation of gene expression mirror the way in which poetry creates layers of meaning through enjambment, repetition, and variation. The transcriptional machinery, then, does not simply "read" a static genetic code; rather, it composes neural futures through recursive, iterative inscription. Xenopoemology emerges as a method for interpreting the transcriptomic inscription of motor neurons, reframing the transcriptional landscape not merely as a functional map but as a poetic composition. Here, the molecular syntax of transcription factors—Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, Myc—becomes a generative matrix of neural potentiality. This perspective aligns with a broader philosophical discourse on the instability of identity and the fluidity of forms, resonating with Henri Michaux’s reflections on the transformation of humanity and its communicative potential with the nonhuman. The idea that "Man is on the way to becoming something other than what he currently is" suggests a radical reconfiguration of human identity and potentiality. In the realm of xenopoemology, this transformation is inscribed at the level of the genome, where motor neurons do not merely function as sites of neural instruction but as poetic structures encoding a trans-species and posthumanist grammar of becoming. The transcriptional activities within neural tissues suggest a fundamental indiscernibility between human and nonhuman forms, echoing Gilles Deleuze’s notion of "devenir-animal" (becoming-animal) wherein communication extends beyond linguistic formalization into molecular resonance. In this view, motor neuron transcription does not merely determine biological function; it participates in an emergent semiotic system. The molecular inscription of neural plasticity echoes the Deleuzian concept of "communication aberrante"—an exchange between disjunctive series. Just as the wasp and the orchid engage in an asymmetrical yet essential exchange that shapes their evolutionary trajectories, transcription factors within neural cells enact a poetics of differentiation, a mode of inscription that foregrounds process over fixity. The movement of Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Myc within the transcriptional landscape functions as a linguistic structure akin to Michaux’s poetic vision—each molecular interaction represents a destabilization of fixed identities, suggesting the embryo as an open text, a living poem yet to be fully realized. Moreover, Michaux’s assertion that communication with the nonhuman is the key to human potentiality aligns with contemporary microbiological perspectives that view transcriptional processes as sites of interspecies interaction. Animals offer humans a different kind of companionship than human exchanges… the belief persists that it is humans who lack the ability to speak with animals. This linguistic gap, echoed in the molecular exchanges of neural transcription, signifies a potentiality rather than a deficiency. It is not merely the case that man must learn the language of the animal, but that, at a fundamental level, molecular transcription enacts this very process—a becoming-animal inscribed within human neurogenesis. The Deleuzian critique of fixed human essence finds its molecular analog in the stochastic variability of transcriptional outcomes. Individuation is a process shaped by differential potentialities rather than the realization of a preordained form. Transcriptional poetics thus extends beyond the functional to the ontological: the neuron is not simply a biological unit but a site of becoming, a molecular articulation of indiscernibility between the human, the animal, and the machinic. Michaux’s vision of a humanity that has yet to construct itself finds resonance in this molecular perspective. The transcriptional processes of motor neurons operate as zones of indeterminacy, prefiguring a posthumanist biology in which genetic inscriptions function not as rigid determiners of identity but as poetic structures of potentiality. Just as Michaux imagines the future as a space of untapped transformation, xenopoemology situates neural transcription within a framework of poetic genesis—where the act of becoming is encoded within the very syntax of the cell. The trans-species communication implicit in transcriptional activity reflects Deleuze’s notion that "Becoming is not about reaching a form... but finding the zone of proximity." The transcriptional landscape, then, is not a fixed map but an unfolding poem, where molecular rhythms and neural differentiation inscribe the grammar of an emergent, posthuman potentiality. The emergence of xenopoemology as a method for interpreting the transcriptomic inscription of motor neurons challenges traditional biosemiotic models, proposing instead an aesthetic and philosophical engagement with molecular syntax. Here, transcriptional landscapes cease to be purely functional maps and become poetic compositions where transcription factors (TFs) such as Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, and Myc function as generative matrices of neural potentiality. At its core, xenopoemology suggests that gene expression operates not merely as a biochemical necessity but as a form of linguistic and poetic generativity. If TFs sculpt cellular differentiation, they do so through a syntax that encodes not just structure but also rhythm and modulation, akin to a literary composition. The transcriptional landscape, thus, mirrors the Deleuzean conception of literature as an act of "becoming," in which meaning is not imposed but emerges through an unfolding process. Deleuze’s notion of "devenir-animal" (becoming-animal) serves as a critical lens through which we might analyze the inscription of molecular syntax in the nervous system. The gene regulatory network (GRN), much like Michaux’s literary treatment of animality, resists a fixed morphology and instead exemplifies an indeterminate state of flux and emergence. The biological processes underlying neuronal differentiation parallel the ontogenetic fluidity discussed by Simondon, where individuation is an ongoing event rather than a completed state. Michaux’s work, particularly in Ecuador, reflects an anticipation of this conceptual framework, as he envisions a future where communication between species transcends linguistic barriers. His reflections resonate with contemporary understandings of transcriptomic expression, where cellular differentiation does not adhere to fixed categorical boundaries but instead reflects an ongoing negotiation between pre-individual potentials. Michaux’s post-mescaline shift in perspective—his increasing alienation from animal empathy—parallels shifts in neural transcriptional states, where external stimuli reconfigure regulatory networks, altering potentialities of expression. When we consider the role of TFs—Oct4, Sox2, Nanog, Myc—in neural differentiation, we encounter an interplay of stability and flux. These TFs function as a kind of literary dispositif, configuring neural states in a manner reminiscent of how Deleuze and Guattari conceptualize the rhizomatic structure of meaning. The GRN does not encode fixed forms but rather possibilities of differentiation, much as Michaux’s literary corpus traverses multiple ontological states, resisting the closure of static identity. This perspective aligns with Simondon’s critique of hylomorphic models, where he challenges the classical Aristotelian framework that defines form as an imprint on passive matter. Instead, Simondon introduces the notion of "pre-individual reality," a metastable condition where differentiation emerges from an ongoing process of individuation. In a similar vein, the transcriptomic inscription of motor neurons can be viewed not as a definitive mapping but as an open-ended poetic event—an ongoing negotiation between form and its latent virtualities. The intersection of xenopoemology and transcriptomics opens a pathway for rethinking biological inscription beyond deterministic models. By positioning gene expression as an aesthetic event, we foreground a mode of inquiry that treats molecular processes as acts of signification rather than mere biochemical functions. This aligns with Deleuze’s assertion that literature is the passage of life into language—a paradoxical endeavor wherein language seeks to capture that which exists outside its grasp. If we take seriously Michaux’s proposition that the future will entail interspecies communication, then we might extend this notion into the domain of biosemiotics, where transcriptomic inscriptions become modes of communication that transcend the human-animal divide. The act of transcription, then, is not merely the encoding of biological function but an ontological event, a poetic unfolding of potentiality that resists closure.