[-empyre-] Practice in Research & odd methods, rude mechanics

Mon Jan 21 23:05:45 EST 2013

Hi all !

I am bit drown in english so excuse me if I don't take part more often.

Phi Shu, about your fore last paragraph (before the note)
you write 'I was asked to remove it for the final version'.
It is incredible !!! How did they justify their request ?

About the struggle to keep on doing art while being an academic :
I want to testify that the 2 other practice-based phd persons (in 3D  
artworks) that I know and that got a position are not doing so much  
and so good art as before. But they are much 'higher' in the hierarchy  
than I am.
I was surprised to hear them both tell me that I do the right  
thing/choice... ! (developing and protecting the creation practice.)
Can't they resist to the desire of being recognised as 'good' academic ?

... research as justification (for an academic-artist)
I am not sure I write on my creation process to 'justify' it. For me  
it is a deep matter of understanding it. I write because I don't  
understand it through and through (if it is possible). And I try to  
question and understand the creation process altered by programming  
language.
I put more the emphasize on the genesis of ideas, description and  
links between elements than on the interpretation(s) of the piece  
itself. I guess I feel it is not the core topic I have to deal from my  
position. (and probably, according to this meaning desire I have just  
mentioned, it is the easiest to analyse -from my position).

au plaisir !

Anne-Sarah

> I'm guessing that neoliberal economic policies can be blamed for the
> problems we are seeing both in universities and in the arts more generally.
> Where are all these creative practitioners with doctorates going to get
> relevant academic jobs? If they chose to work independently after a PhD,
> where is the arts funding going to come from? How long can this
> neoliberal "creative industries"
> economic exercise continue before people wake up to the fact that there
> simply are not enough jobs, there is simply no way every "educated"
> creative practitioner can make a "career" out of doing art/music/whatever.
> So what's the point? Why bother doing a PhD at all? Sure, if you can get
> paid to do it, great, but don't expect to find an academic job afterwards,
> unless you are prepared to start jumping through all of the "research
> excellence" hoops from the get-go.
>
>
> And in terms of having perhaps found an academic job, what about the myths
> of the academic   
> labour<http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1300/653>
>  market <http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1300/653>?
>
>
> *Myth 1: There Is a Job Market For Which You Must Be Competitive *
>
> *
> *
>
> *Myth 2: There Is a Ladder to Climb*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Myth 3: The Liberal Arts Are Less Valuable Than Other Fields*
>
> *
> *
>
> *Myth 4: We Are Not Workers*
>
>
> But what's going to change? How many creative practitioners within academic
> institutions are actually challenging the status quo?
>
>
> And finally, some material taken from the conclusion of my doctorate thesis
> (a practice based thesis by the way). I was asked to remove it for the
> final version.
>
>
> ....On one side there is an institutionally based infrastructure that
> supports the activities of a specialist community, on the other, a culture
> industry that commodifies music, dictates trends, and establishes the
> market value for all music based goods. The audience for experimental music
> is   
> minuscule,[2]<file:///E:/Desktop/Desk/Research%20Library/PDF%20RESEARCH/PHD/CORRECTIONS/DRyan%20-%20Thesis%20Corrections%2027-01-12.doc#_ftn2>
> and
> even mainstream music has been commercially devalued to such an extent that
> the independent producer cannot hope to make a reasonable income from "unit
> sales" alone; unless they are somehow capable of providing a product that
> has mass appeal in the popular domain. Within the institution, though it
> may offer a means to sustain a compositional career, the duties that come
> with upholding an academic position can place great pressures on the
> individual; often to the detriment of "creative output". It also forces
> creators to justify the worth of their compositional activities in relation
> to its value as *music research*; research, that in accordance with the
> institutions administrative regime (and its overarching ethos), must
> somehow equate with ?excellence.? In this climate, worryingly for some,
> free creative expression may perhaps be unsustainable. Arguably, the
> combined forces of the market economy (driven by popular notions of
> artistic worth) and institutions that are obsessed with producing *excellent
> * research (concerned also with the market as they try to move up the
> league tables) may in fact be stifling genuine "innovation"...
>
> [2]<file:///E:/Desktop/Desk/Research%20Library/PDF%20RESEARCH/PHD/CORRECTIONS/DRyan%20-%20Thesis%20Corrections%2027-01-12.doc#_ftnref2>
>  Landy (2009:521) cites Maurice Fleuret's observation that concerts of such
> works are comparable to Kleenex: ?use once throw away ? thus suggesting
> that a work?s *premiere* is also its *derniere*. Such remarks typify the
> odd situation known to many late 20th century contemporary music composers:
> few performances, few recording opportunities, and even fewer broadcasts.?
>