[-empyre-] Practice in Research - some questions

[Phi Shu]

@Adrian Miles

you state: "...many examiners can be unsympathetic to such experimentation
as being academics have gone through honours themselves and internalised
the conservative values of what counts as research in the academy..."

Surely the "internalisation of conservative values" is something that
should be resisted, especially in the context of creative practice (even
when it is "research").

If we are to ensure that "creative practitioners remain at the heart of art
and design education and are facilitated through their institutional role,
beyond drawing a salary, as practising artists and mentors of the next
generation” (Biggs in Smith & Dean 2009:81) shouldn't we perhaps
challenge said values?

If the "internalisation of conservative values" results in utilitarianism,
is this a good thing? And  in terms of any impact this might have on the
arts more generally, is "art" perhaps becoming more conservative? And if it
is, does it matter?





** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au [mailto:
> empyre-bounces at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au] *On Behalf Of *Adrian Miles
> *Sent:* 21 January 2013 22:50
> *To:* soft_skinned_space
>
> *Subject:* Re: [-empyre-] Practice in Research****
>
> ** **
>
> ah, that is just sad, isn't it? At RMIT I've seen a successful Business
> PhD that was a box containing objects (I remember a teddy bear only), and
> loose sheets that was the exegesis. Concealed under a false bottom of the
> box was a huge archive of notes, quotes, additional free form writing. this
> was how the candidate got round the admonition to not go over the word
> limit, etc. In the honours program I work in we embrace mess, but in terms
> of creative research practices it is risky as the work has to be examined
> (and many examiners can be unsympathetic to such experimentation as being
> academics have gone through honours themselves and internalised the
> conservative values of what counts as research in the academy), and in
> honours a place in a PhD program (and a scholarship) rests on the outcome.
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> -- ****
>
> an appropriate closing****
>
> Adrian Miles****
>
> Program Director Bachelor of Media and Communication (Honours)****
>
> RMIT University - www.rmit.edu.au****
>
> http://vogmae.net.au/****
>
> ** **
>
> On Tuesday, 22 January 2013 at 5:14 AM, Phi Shu wrote:****
>
> @Anne-Sarah****
>
> ** **
>
> they justified the removal of that and other critical/questioning content
> in terms of it not "adding to knowledge," it was an expression of
> subjective experience, so was irrelevant to the concerns of the PhD thesis.
> They were also, for the most part, less than enthused about ideas such as:
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> ...Danykin (2004:6) cites Marcus (1998) in suggesting the use of “messy
> texts” as a means of avoiding “a suggestion of linearity and coherence
> where these may not exist”. Such a text can “engage with multiple meanings,
> conveying the whole without invoking totality. [It can] resist the
> dominance of the researcher, recognising that work is incomplete without
> readers' responses...” ****
>
> ** **
>
>  “...poststructuralism suggests two important ideas to qualitative
> writers. First, it directs us to understand ourselves reflexivity as
> persons writing from particular positions at specific times. Second, it
> frees us from trying to write a single text in which everything is said at
> once to everyone. Nurturing our own voices releases the censorious hold of
> “science writing” on our consciousness as well as the arrogance it fosters
> in our psyche; writing is validated as a method of knowing.” Richardson
> (2000:962)****
>
> ** **
>
>  “...research within the creative arts suffers from an inferiority complex
> in relation to other established academic areas of knowledge. That
> inferiority complex is not the result of a less valuable knowledge or the
> novelty of creative arts research but the result of a constant need to
> justify that research/practice through aims, methods and outcomes that are
> external to the creative arts.” Santos in Biggs (2009:79).****
>
> ** **
>
> "The apprehension of musical content and structure is linked to the world
> of experience outside the composition, not only to the wider context of
> auditory experience but also to non-sounding experience. Approached from
> the multiple perspectives of life outside music, the materials and
> structure of a musical composition become the meeting-place of sounding and
> non-sounding experience.” (Smalley 1996:83)****
>
> ** **
>
> I tend to agree with Simon's last statement re:practice based
> PhD candidates:   ****
>
> ** **
>
> "It's debatable whether...critical enhancement would have happened if they
> didn't do the PhD...If the candidate doesn't wish to work in such a
> critical and contextualised manner then a PhD is probably not the right
> solution for them."****
>
> ** **
>
> But, for some, critical enhancement can be a bit of a curse.****
>
> ** **
>
> PS****
>
> ** **
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20130122/06a04bb9/attachment-0001.htm>