Practice as Research
The
Centre for Moving Image Research has a series of academic initiatives
described elsewhere on this website, but we also wish to generate
practice as research in the area of experimental moving images.
There is still some confusion about what is practice as research and how practice interfaces with research. Some artists cannot or will not conceptualise their practice to become research believing that to do so will inhibit or stem the flow of their creativity. Some researchers believe that practice as such cannot become a site of research. But at CMIR we understand the process and the methodologies required to make the transition from artist to researcher whilst retaining the essential elements and freedom that creativity requires to blossom into the best research. That claim is based upon actually doing some highly effective and influential work in the field.
We advocate a simple process:
Originate Core Research Question, hypothesise answer, pose question within the creation of an artefact, exhibit this and related works, evaluate audience response, critically reflect on the process until now, present results at conference.
Two words in the above suggest scientific method: 'hypothesise' and 'evaluate' - But we are not advocating science as an answer to the problems or opportunities afforded by art or design. The use of the word 'hypothesis' can also encompass rumination and intuition. The use of the word 'evaluate' can also engage processes such as contemplation, consideration and reflection - none of which are reserved for science alone. For further reflection on these ideas see the latest post in the blog: On Practice as Research.
So effectively, the process we're suggesting is that of a Pratice as Research Portfolio of behaviours which is linear in activation. You can then either proceed with another protfolio - or equally scaffold your behaviour to evoke subsequent reseacrh questions - or use the original Portfolio as a point to radiate your enquiries outwards from (or move inwards using the Portfolio as an encompassing inquiry with orbits of other portfolios circling in towards a centrality that can be revealed over the PhD). Whilst being robust in concretising an artistic process for the needs of academia - this is as flexible as you and your Supervisor allow this to be.
There is still some confusion about what is practice as research and how practice interfaces with research. Some artists cannot or will not conceptualise their practice to become research believing that to do so will inhibit or stem the flow of their creativity. Some researchers believe that practice as such cannot become a site of research. But at CMIR we understand the process and the methodologies required to make the transition from artist to researcher whilst retaining the essential elements and freedom that creativity requires to blossom into the best research. That claim is based upon actually doing some highly effective and influential work in the field.
We advocate a simple process:
Originate Core Research Question, hypothesise answer, pose question within the creation of an artefact, exhibit this and related works, evaluate audience response, critically reflect on the process until now, present results at conference.
Two words in the above suggest scientific method: 'hypothesise' and 'evaluate' - But we are not advocating science as an answer to the problems or opportunities afforded by art or design. The use of the word 'hypothesis' can also encompass rumination and intuition. The use of the word 'evaluate' can also engage processes such as contemplation, consideration and reflection - none of which are reserved for science alone. For further reflection on these ideas see the latest post in the blog: On Practice as Research.
So effectively, the process we're suggesting is that of a Pratice as Research Portfolio of behaviours which is linear in activation. You can then either proceed with another protfolio - or equally scaffold your behaviour to evoke subsequent reseacrh questions - or use the original Portfolio as a point to radiate your enquiries outwards from (or move inwards using the Portfolio as an encompassing inquiry with orbits of other portfolios circling in towards a centrality that can be revealed over the PhD). Whilst being robust in concretising an artistic process for the needs of academia - this is as flexible as you and your Supervisor allow this to be.
|
Case Study
In 2007 Terry Flaxton was awarded the first of two post-doctoral AHRC Fellowships, which were the first practitioner lead research project in High Resolution Imaging worldwide. It was entitled ‘High Definition Imaging: An Investigation in the Actual, the Virtual and the Hyper Real’. and the efficacy of the work resulted in Flaxton's current professorship. As part of a scaffolded investigation derived from the production of artefacts, Flaxton developed a number of research outputs which were created to explore the immersive properties of the higher resolution image and framed by the following research question: ‘In what ways will the advent of high resolution imaging change the work produced and in the convergence of art and visual technologies and consequently, our experience of that work?’ The requirements to win such a prestigious award were extremely stringent and involved developing a 36 month schedule of research. |
An Interesting proposition about Practice as Research Behaviour
|