Models of knowledge | Intellect Skip to content
1981
1-2: The Art of Making: Methods for Research
  • ISSN: 2044-3714
  • E-ISSN: 2044-3722

Abstract

Art practice has an unusual history inside the university sector. Often originating from specialized academies, as disciplines they usually began life through a focus on practical work. This gave rise to small institutions that have been subsumed into larger ones, becoming colleges or schools within universities rather than continuing their independent lives. The advantages of this are clear: structural, financial and cultural opportunities that come with the status of university subjects. What this article argues is that there has been a considerable price to pay in being so accommodated. Creative practice subjects in a qualifications framework, and to some extent in exercises like the Research Excellence Framework, have been required to adopt intellectual enquiry processes in order to burnish their claims to knowledge. Mostly, these come from the humanities. This article examines the impact of this on creative practice, on acceptance of the research elements of it and on distinguishing the difference between arts-based enquiry and humanities models of interpretation and analysis. That these are increasingly incompatible requires rethinking of the relationship between arts and humanities that is so taken for granted.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/scene_00053_1
2024-03-07
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Foucault, M. (1986), The History of Sexuality, Volume 3: The Care of the Self, New York: Pantheon Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Groys, B. (2018), In the Flow, London: Verso.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Kim, J. (2022), ‘Inter-Asian dance as method, artistic research as method: Nam Hwayeon’s work on Choi Seung-hee’, Inter-Asia Cultural Studies, 23:4, pp. 52639.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962), The Phenomenology of Perception, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Pardo-Guerra, J. P. (2022), The Quantified Scholar, New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Quality Assurance Agency (2020), Characteristics Statement: Doctoral Degree, Gloucester: QAA, https://www.qaa.ac.uk/docs/qaa/quality-code/doctoral-degree-characteristics-statement-2020.pdf?sfvrsn=a3c5ca81_14. Accessed 15 January 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Shusterman, R. (1988), ‘Interpretation, intention, and truth, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 46:3, pp. 399412.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sporton, G. (2017), ‘The body and the intellectual’, Scene, 5:2, pp. 11526.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/scene_00053_1
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error