Dear Ken,
I am somewhat perplexed by your comment that "David's post reflects my views", in response to David Durling's helpful forwarding of sections of the recent report of the Research Excellence Framework panel here in the UK. The sections of the report quoted give a clear indication of the well established presence and acceptance of practice based research in Art & Design (Unit 34 in the Research Excellence Framework- Art & Design: history, practice and theory).
On the face of it, this fact would seem not to reflect your views but rather to clearly contradict them as stated in your previous post which I must confess I saw as heralding the predictable onslaught of conservative dogma that usually follows when anyone mentions creative/ practice-led/ 'artistic' research on this list. Such views may be well received in this context as I suspect that most of those list members from the boundaries of design and the expressive arts have long since been driven away or are cowed into hiding by the attacks that resurface whenever this subject returns to the agenda.
I hope you will forgive me for asking a few questions in relation to your post of 4th March:
You say:
"Many “research-creation” projects lack a question. Pablo Picasso once said, “Others seek. I find.” He was a magician and an artist, not a researcher."
Is it the case that the emergence of new knowledge and insight can only begin with a question?
I am not aware that anyone is suggesting that Picasso was a researcher. The idea that great artists are or were ‘magicians’ whose mysterious processes and methods are conjured from thin air is a conveniently tenacious but tired, and misguided one. Nevertheless it is useful in highlighting the residual misunderstandings of ‘artistic research’.
"Most of what people do as “research-creation” has little impact"
I may be missing something but this comment doesn't seem on the face of it to be reflecting the views of the REF panel? Is it not the case that this sweeping, anecdotal generalisation could equally be applied to a great deal of research in general? Or do you have more tangible evidence support such an assertion in relation to "research-creation"? Having been the subject of an ‘impact case study’ myself in the recent Research Excellence Framework, I have looked a little at the concept of ‘impact’.
"What most folks seem to want is to represent that they are doing research by creating something — it doesn’t matter to them that no one uses it or builds on it."
Here we have what appears to be another generalised, unsubstantiated assertion. Do you have anything to back up your assertion as to what ‘most folks’ want? The Research Excellence Framework panel would appear to have arrived at a different conclusion to the issue of what most folks want. (I must confess to feeling slightly insulted by this particular comment!).
And finally-
"Research shows us the “how” of how to do it."
Some research does, yes. But perhaps this is less relevant in artistic research? It aims to deliver knew knowledge and insight in ways that may be less 'scientific' but no less important.
I would be most grateful for any clarification/ explanation of these apparent contradictions or of how the REF panel's findings reflect your views.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Martin
Professor Martin Salisbury
Course Leader, MA Children's Book Illustration
Director, The Centre for Children's Book Studies
Cambridge School of Art
0845 196 2351
[log in to unmask]
http://www.cambridgemashow.com
http://www.anglia.ac.uk/ruskin/en/home/microsites/ccbs.html
--
In the official 2014 government assessment of our research the following 12 areas were found to have world-leading research: Allied Health Professions; Architecture & Built Environment; Art & Design; Business & Management Studies; Communication, Cultural & Media Studies; English Language & Literature; Geography & Environmental Studies; History; Law; Music, Drama & Dance; Psychology; and Social Work & Social Policy.
This e-mail and any attachments are intended for the above named
recipient(s)only and may be privileged. If they have come to you in
error you must take no action based on them, nor must you copy or show
them to anyone please reply to this e-mail to highlight the error and
then immediately delete the e-mail from your system. Any opinions
expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
represent the views or opinions of Anglia Ruskin University.
Although measures have been taken to ensure that this e-mail and attachments are
free from any virus we advise that, in keeping with good computing
practice, the recipient should ensure they are actually virus free.
Please note that this message has been sent over public networks which
may not be a 100% secure communications
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|