語言文字是從社會習得的，可以說明人的模仿本能與語用經驗，而這一過程已先蘊含語言文字有交流的本質。漢字作為表意文字，圖像功能與意義連結是特點，而解讀的主要感官是視覺，在複製數量、速度前所未有之當代，視覺的消費作用影響甚鉅。本來，文字是思想藉由書寫耗材，使思想得以實體化、物質化的手工技藝，文字的生產方式最初原屬物質低度消耗的行為，人類藉食物而生存，是人體亦有物性而能有思想，思想與身體物性機能各有運作之功能與歷程，然而思想不必然外顯而實體化、物質化，除工藝治器，至如文字書寫，在作者為備忘或成為物質講究的藝術品，然因其交流之本質，而有價值產生，其流通之效能則與思潮有關。文字之變異除審美形式改變之外，當前由文字衍生的問題可以有哪些思考面向？1.書寫與物質的認識以視覺為優先，由此略述視覺與物質的文物意義；2.書寫形式的改變其意義在於思想先於書寫內容，書寫的變異是思想變異的外顯形式，但此改變也造成眼球進行閱讀時的運動習慣及方式上的改變，隨之則是理解上的差異，若為文本則有語言交流上的爭議，此部分以王文興的文字書寫為例加以說明；3.當前書寫行為的大概趨勢在於，物質消費已擴及視覺以外的其他感官體會，而將感官體會當作意義的獲得所進行的物質消費，使「藝術製造消費者」自以為可以從無止盡的消費性書寫中去掌握主體的精神價值，是值得關注的現象。

That language is socially acquired explains humans’ pragmatic experience of using language and their instinct to imitate others’ utterance. What is implied hereby is the communicative nature of language. As a linguistic sign, the Chinese character is featured by its combination of both signifying and iconic systems. Its interpretation depends primarily on the sensuous organ of “the eye.” In the epoch of mechanical reproduction, the impact of visual consumption is definitely tremendous. So far as the variation of calligraphy writing is concerned, the change in aesthetics only accounts for one of the reasons. This paper addresses the issues arising from a reconsideration of calligraphy writing in its contemporary context. First, both calligraphy writing and the object it refers to in the material world need to be perceived by the eye. Hence, the meaning of visuality and materiality as involved in the character and the object is to be grasped. Second, since the change of the character in its form is always preceded by thinking, the change of calligraphy writing means that of thinking in an explicit manner. Here comes the new way one reads as his/her eyeballs move differently, and then that change also results in his/her understanding the character differently. If the change occurs in a piece of writing, communication problems arise. To illustrate this, writings by Wen-xing Wang will be taken as examples. Third, as the trend of calligraphy writing suggests, material consumption has involved with sensual perceptions other than visuality. Material consumption that resorts to sensual perceptions as the absolute meaning helps validate the concept that “art produces consumers.” Nevertheless, in the endless reproduction of writing for consumption, what always remains problematic is the subjectivity of the consumer, which is the final issue that the author attempts to bring up in the paper.