Research- 'Art, Research, Philosophy' Clive Cazeux
Research-
'Art, Research, Philosophy'
By Clive Cazeux
2017
Artistic research forms of many names, due to the likely of anxieties and uncertainties surrounding its definition. Artistic research seems to be the term that is sticking due to its relations with scientific research. Research in art differs from artistic research due to the fact we get taught and it has long been to my belief that a number of practices, studies and actions act as research. This is separate and regardless of their theorisation and academia. however, on balance we do then have to process them in a classically academic way.
'...one area upon which there is general agreement is the origin of artistic research: the growth of audit culture in university research, and the marketisation of higher education.' p1
Artistic research emerged with issues:
1) ''It is wholly the product institutional, managerial forces, a subject brought into being to raise the profile and income of the departments.'p2
The monetary presence, after movements such as the avant-garde and Dada, almost mock much of what has gone before. Reading this while also paying for a formal art education is difficult as I consider the lectures that we have received, while also countering this with the massive shortcomings of the university in terms of ethical alignment and student support. There is lack of confidence in the students in lower years who do not get their money worth from degree level education. The lectures, contextuals and tutorials can be as rich as they like, however, that does not stop the overarching commentary of neoliberal power and desire for research level students and rising tuition fees. However, to counter argue once more, there is the possibility that the knowledge can outgrow the conditions that gave rise to it.
2) 'A second worry is that, although it is discussed as a form of knowledge, the artwork itself is never acknowledged as the site of knowledge, but has to be supported or defined by textual commentary.' p2
The above notion could be reminiscent of Linguistic imperialism, Guattari's concept initially. Suggesting that the work of art on its own is never enough, to constitute research.
3) A third anxiety is the question of what exactly artistic research is or might become. The concept pushes together some of the most strongly opposing terms from the history of ideas, creating a complex of forces that shows no sign of resolution or definition.' p3
How can something that is subjective become something objective like knowledge, if knowledge is objective. Art's essence is of the visual and sensory as well as emotive, can this be translated into writing without losing or distorting the essence? This concept of the book is presuming that research is only of valuable is quantified by the same institutions which commodified it.
'There is a danger that artworks become classified as outputs or outcomes, assessed in accordance with criteria that measure contribution to knowledge, rather than being appreciated in terms of responses drawn from the history of art and aesthetics.'p3
My own practice currently is at this interface, I am struggling with the ways in which my work is ever quantified into an output. I try to stop this with the referral to 'outputs' as projects suggesting that there is no expiration date. However, this organisational way of working, means that the space for pure aesthetic consideration, interaction and development is inevitably limited.
Artistic research as '...a new and exciting episode in the history of the tension between aesthetics and epistemology.' p3
'A worry that is often raised in relation to artistic research is that the art itself is not very good. The requirement to produce a body of artwork in relation to a programme of research has somehow resulted in the creation of works which, in having to respond to cognitive or epistemic demands, are judged to be lesser works of art.' p7
Although I was unable to read the entire book due to time constraints this text has been incredibly influential while writing my dissertation. Further to this, within my practice, this text has allowed me to consider the ways in which my work overlaps into academia. Due to my placement and work with the Tyndall centre I have also been extensively considering the ways in which art has a responsibility/should not have a responsibility. Further to this, and another aspect which is discussed and considered in the book is the fact that rat which has expectations is usually of lower quality. This is the pivotal point of reflection for me as I believe that creativity can steer the responsibility instead of the other way round.
'Art, Research, Philosophy'
By Clive Cazeux
2017
Introduction
Artistic research forms of many names, due to the likely of anxieties and uncertainties surrounding its definition. Artistic research seems to be the term that is sticking due to its relations with scientific research. Research in art differs from artistic research due to the fact we get taught and it has long been to my belief that a number of practices, studies and actions act as research. This is separate and regardless of their theorisation and academia. however, on balance we do then have to process them in a classically academic way.
'...one area upon which there is general agreement is the origin of artistic research: the growth of audit culture in university research, and the marketisation of higher education.' p1
Artistic research emerged with issues:
1) ''It is wholly the product institutional, managerial forces, a subject brought into being to raise the profile and income of the departments.'p2
The monetary presence, after movements such as the avant-garde and Dada, almost mock much of what has gone before. Reading this while also paying for a formal art education is difficult as I consider the lectures that we have received, while also countering this with the massive shortcomings of the university in terms of ethical alignment and student support. There is lack of confidence in the students in lower years who do not get their money worth from degree level education. The lectures, contextuals and tutorials can be as rich as they like, however, that does not stop the overarching commentary of neoliberal power and desire for research level students and rising tuition fees. However, to counter argue once more, there is the possibility that the knowledge can outgrow the conditions that gave rise to it.
2) 'A second worry is that, although it is discussed as a form of knowledge, the artwork itself is never acknowledged as the site of knowledge, but has to be supported or defined by textual commentary.' p2
The above notion could be reminiscent of Linguistic imperialism, Guattari's concept initially. Suggesting that the work of art on its own is never enough, to constitute research.
3) A third anxiety is the question of what exactly artistic research is or might become. The concept pushes together some of the most strongly opposing terms from the history of ideas, creating a complex of forces that shows no sign of resolution or definition.' p3
How can something that is subjective become something objective like knowledge, if knowledge is objective. Art's essence is of the visual and sensory as well as emotive, can this be translated into writing without losing or distorting the essence? This concept of the book is presuming that research is only of valuable is quantified by the same institutions which commodified it.
'There is a danger that artworks become classified as outputs or outcomes, assessed in accordance with criteria that measure contribution to knowledge, rather than being appreciated in terms of responses drawn from the history of art and aesthetics.'p3
My own practice currently is at this interface, I am struggling with the ways in which my work is ever quantified into an output. I try to stop this with the referral to 'outputs' as projects suggesting that there is no expiration date. However, this organisational way of working, means that the space for pure aesthetic consideration, interaction and development is inevitably limited.
Artistic research as '...a new and exciting episode in the history of the tension between aesthetics and epistemology.' p3
'A worry that is often raised in relation to artistic research is that the art itself is not very good. The requirement to produce a body of artwork in relation to a programme of research has somehow resulted in the creation of works which, in having to respond to cognitive or epistemic demands, are judged to be lesser works of art.' p7
Although I was unable to read the entire book due to time constraints this text has been incredibly influential while writing my dissertation. Further to this, within my practice, this text has allowed me to consider the ways in which my work overlaps into academia. Due to my placement and work with the Tyndall centre I have also been extensively considering the ways in which art has a responsibility/should not have a responsibility. Further to this, and another aspect which is discussed and considered in the book is the fact that rat which has expectations is usually of lower quality. This is the pivotal point of reflection for me as I believe that creativity can steer the responsibility instead of the other way round.
Comments
Post a Comment