[-empyre-] Research in Practice, week three, January 21-28

[Miguel Santos]

Hi everyone, 

I think about my artistic and research practices as having very similar interests (if not the same) but located in different contexts and, consequently, having different requirements, forms and currencies – two different languages to represent the same practice (of being curios). Similarly, I think that, academic researchers who sustain an artistic practice and artists that sustain a research practice have the ability (or willingness) to speak the two languages. The coexistence of the different contexts (artistic and academic) –as different– might be important due to their complementary and challenging relation to one another. Thus, I am thinking that it might be important to value the mobility between the two different representations (research and artistic) of a winder and more complex practice of enquiring.

This ongoing discussion of artists doing research in an academic context is a good example of the reflexivity and level of enquire that artist can bring to any context that they operate, which can be extremely valuable but highly problematic, as well. I find it difficult not to consider the approaches that other disciplines (e.g. physics, biology, philosophy) have developed in their more established existence in academic contexts: were those disciplines equally concerned with their role and operating context as artist are? Or were they simply concern with doing the thing (enquiring)? And, If they weren’t similarly reflective, why weren’t they? After all, an interesting outcome of artists doing PhDs is that by the time an artist is awarded with a PhD his or her artistic practice (and role) has been questioned and reconsidered to an extended that would otherwise be difficult (if not impossible) within the art world.   

From my experience, the process of doing a PhD is somehow unique (with its highs and lows) and contingent to a variety of factors (some of which are often overlooked: research community, supervisors, institutions, working language, finances, to name a few). But regardless of the methodologies and outcomes, awarding a PhD is to recognize that someone can conduct independent research in a rigors manner rather than being an awarded for services to the art world. Consequently, I support the need for a written thesis (between 40.000 and 60.000 words) critically reflecting and contextualizing the PhD project (not only the artistic but also the research practice). Further, the written requirement (which as a few people in the discussion have already mentioned can be extremely valuable in the understanding of ones practice) can, also, make an exciting long-term contribution to the process of artists reclaiming their role in the production and dissemination of discourses regarding the artistic practice, which (many times) can only be suggested from an insider’s perspective.

Last words, I would not say that I become a better artist after my PhD but I am definitely a different artist, and I am glad. 

All the best,

Miguel

---

www.santosmiguel.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20130122/0128c1a2/attachment.htm>