Hi everybody,


> I believe I understand you both here...let me try to explain and
generalize:
>
        ....I don't know that either of you understand me at the moment!

> --
>
> Mark's advice and suggestions come from a pragmatic perspective: how
> to design and complete a successful research project and come up with
> results that fulfill xyz criteria.
>
> Allan's comments come from the point of view that the issues
> presented are interesting and it would be nice to know more about
> them...a very valid stance for research, as well - in my opinion.
>
> --
>
I don't know how many or you read my original mail as colleagues here
have told me they received a mess of ASCII. The comment that Allan was
responding to was the fact that I said that some research projects have
questions so broad as to be useless. it was a long mail and I don't know
how many pushed through to the end but I suggested that research
questions ought to originate from (hopefully burning) questions that
arise from practice. Apologies if it seems grumpy...I'm in the middle of
moving house!

Now the problem here is that many seem to think that theory is some kind
of commentary or explanation of stuff that rather than something capable
of having its own coherence and rigor; which in turn can disrupt the
assumptions we make when making or designing. A Ph.D. is a doctorate in
philosophy, it's about how we think about a problem. When we ask the
research question it should be open because we don't know the answers,
indeed it shouldn't necessarily assume that there are 'answers' . But
what we should be able to do is work through the way we're thinking
about a problem, leaving things open and being honest and rigorous.
Clutching at a series of discontinuous explanations in order to produce
an explanation is not research, being open and rigorous is.

In light of all of this is where questions that are burning issues
allows one to radicalize one's thinking and address a problem. When folk
come up with research questions such as the impact of digital technology
on sculpture these are so broad that the student can be drawn off in a
load of directions without really addressing an issue. If a student is
bright enough to do a Ph.D. they ought to be able to address the issue
that excites them and that needs addressing. This can then carry them
through years of research. The work I did on my Ph.D. (or ore to the
point couldn't fit into it) became the basis of a proposal that got me a
three year fellowship with the AHRB. There is no contradiction between
rigor and aspiration... the task is to make sure that one does not
compromise the other!

all the best,

Mark

The information in this email is confidential and is intended solely for
the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised.

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on
it, except for the purpose of delivery to the addressee, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. Kindly notify the sender and delete the message and
any attachment from your computer.