Dr
A A Piccini / Senior Lecturer in Screen Media
Deputy PI:
Productive Margins (Tues/Thurs); Co-I:
knowyourbristol.blogs.ilrt.org/ (Mon/Fri)
Rm 3.17
/ Department of Film and Television
/ School of Arts
University of Bristol
/ Cantocks Close
/ Woodland Road
/ Bristol BS8 1UP
T: +44 (0)117 331-5087 (Mon/Weds/Fri) / +44 (0)117 954-6713 (Tues/Thurs)
/ 0775 834-8497
E: [log in to unmask] Consultation & Feedback Hours: Mondays, 5pm-6pm / Wednesdays, 10am-11am
Twitter: @AAPiccini / @ProductiveMgns / @knowyourbristol / @OlympicCityScre
Performance as Research Working Group
International Federation for Theatre Research
Essay Collection Call for Proposals
Performance as Research: Knowledge, Methods, Impact
Editors: Annette Arlander, Bruce Barton, Melanie Dreyer-Lude, and Ben SpatzThe Performance as Research (PaR) Working Group of IFTR invites
proposals for an essay collection that will bring new critical insights to fundamental questions about PaR.
While there
has been considerable discussion of PaR methods and documentation
over the past decade, the status of methodology within PaR, and of PaR
within a broader spectrum of methodologies, remains contested
(see Allegue, Jones, Kershaw & Piccini 2009; Riley & Hunter
2009; Smith & Dean 2009; Barrett & Bolt 2010 [2007];
Freeman 2010; Biggs & Karlsson 2010; Kershaw & Nicholson 2011;
Borgdorff 2012; Nelson 2013). Arguably, less attention has been paid to
the results produced by this kind of research. Debate has been
ongoing for years as to whether artworks and/or ‘art working’ (the
processes that produce artworks) may serve as 1) data for the research;
2) a method of research; or 3) a crucial part of the research
outcomes. By extension, the relationships between PaR and approaches
such as practice-lead research, artistic research, and
qualitative research more broadly remain topics of negotiation. The case
for PaR as a legitimate component of mixed-method research designs is
now familiar. More controversial is the assertion of PaR as a distinct
methodological approach, and for the validity of “the research findings
as presentational forms” in which “the symbolic data works
performatively” and “not only expresses the research, but in that
expression becomes the research itself” (Haseman 2006).
In order
to make meaningful contributions to an academic environment
that increasingly prioritizes interdisciplinary social and political
inquiry, does PaR need to demonstrate not only rigorous application of
methodologies and documentation strategies, but also substantive
results? What form might these results take? Beyond
performative “symbolic data”—
which only increases in artistic value
through ambiguity and openness to interpretation—must PaR generate more
conventionally accessible and less ambiguous results? Must these
results satisfy the criteria more commonly associated with other forms
of research activity, such as
outcomes, impact, utility, circulation, transmissibility, and
transferability? To what degree, and in what ways, should the established criteria of
knowledge production determine
and shape the potential of PaR activity, currently and in the coming
decades? How might PaR practitioners advocate for expanded and refined
engagement with a diverse range of fields of knowledge—somatic,
kinesthetic, and phenomenological, in addition to more traditional
analytical and empirical models—as a means of extending the potential of
PaR validity and relevance?
We welcome proposals addressing PaR
processes and projects drawn from a broad, thoroughly interdisciplinary
spectrum, and from both academic and non-institutional contexts. All
proposals should be grounded in specific creative, artistic, and/or
embodied practices. Further, all proposals should reflect the
authors’ careful and explicit reflection on the key considerations
detailed above: 1)
contextual disciplines or fields of knowledge; 2)
methods and/or methodologies; and 3)
results of the research.
Contributors are also encouraged consider, but not be restricted by, the following questions in framing their submissions:
·
Does PaR produce generalizable or transmissible outcomes of the kind so prized in other fields?
·
Which PaR methods are most likely to produce knowledge or insight
that serves the needs of humanity and the planet in the twenty-first
century?
· What kinds of knowledge or insight does PaR produce that might contribute to the greater social or public good?
·
Are these kinds of goals applicable to the work we do? If not, why
insist that academia is an appropriate location for such work?
· What does PaR suggest about the future structure of academia and the university?
·
In what ways do methodologies and results differ when PaR is
practiced outside the academy? What can be learned through this
comparison?
· What roles do language and distinct
cultural traditions play in the practices of PaR and, in particular, in
the shaping of PaR methodologies and results? How do processes of translation figure in these equations?· What kinds of responsibilities does the doing of PaR entail?We welcome detailed proposals (
400 – 500 words) on a broad range of approaches to these and related questions. Proposals are to be submitted no later than
February 28th, 2015. First drafts will be due no later than
June 30th, 2015, and final versions of the essays will be due no later than
January 1st, 2016.
Send submissions or any questions to
[log in to unmask].