A defense of artistic research
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21814/diacritica.5032Keywords:
Artistic research, Requirements of research for art, Empowerment, ExemplificationAbstract
In this article I will try to defend, first, that there is a sense in which research is not only possible but desirable in art. Second, that there is a minimal set of written/physical components that are the minimal conditions for something to be considered research for art (in Frayling’s sense). Third, that the epistemic value of the results is derived from the concept of exemplification as a retriever of value in a dense universe of artistic possibilities. And finally, that artistic research is a toolfor empowering the artist if it is done within a set of parameters that gives it some epistemic value.
References
Beardsley, M. (2012). An aesthetic definition of Art. In P. Lamarque & S. H. Olsen(Eds.), Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art.Oxford: Blackwell.
Benjamin, W. (1996). The task of the translator. In M. J. M.Bullock(Eds.), Walter Benjamin – Selected Writings, Vol.I, 1913–1926.London: Harvard University Press.
Biggs, M. A. (2002). The rhetoric of research. Common Ground, Proceedings of the Design Research Society International Conference at Brunel University(pp. 111–118). Stoke-on Trent, UK: Staffordshire University Press.
Bologna(1999). The Bologna Declaration of 19 June 1999.Education, Joint declaration of the European Ministers.
Bunge, M. (1983). Treatise on basic philosophy 5: Epistemology & methodology I –exploring the world.Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Carroll, N. (2004). Art and the Moral Realm. In P. Kivy(Ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Aesthetics(pp. 126–151). Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756645.ch7
Dickie, G. (2012). The new institutional theory of Art. In P. Lamarque & S. H. Olsen(Eds.), Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art.Oxford: Blackwell.
Durrant, A. C., Vines, J., Wallace, J. & Yee, J. S. (2017). Research through Design: Twenty-First century makers and materialities. DesignIssues,33(3), pp. 3–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00447
Elgin, C. (1991). Understanding: Art and Science. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 16.196–216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-4975.1991.tb00239.x
Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against method(3rded.). London: Verso.
Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers,1(1), 1–5.
Freeland, C. (1997). Art and moral knowledge. Philosophical Topics 25, 11–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics19972518
Friedman, K. (2008). Research into, by and for Design. Journal of Visual Arts Practice, 153–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1386/jvap.7.2.153_1
Gibson, J. (2003). Between thruth and triviality.British Journal of Aesthetics, 43(3), 224–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjaesthetics/43.3.224
Goodman, N. (1968). Languages of art: An approach to a theory of symbols.Hobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.
Gould, G. (1994). Forgery and imitation in the creative process. Grand Street,50,53–62.doi:10.2307/25007782 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/25007782
Green, M. (2010). How and what we can learn from fiction. In G. L. Hagberg & WalterJost(Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Literature(pp. 350-366). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315592.ch18
Irvin, S. (2005). The artist’s sanction in contemporary Art. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism,63(4), 315–326. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8529.2005.00214.x
John, E. (2005). Art and knowledge. In B. Gaut & D. M. Lopes(Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics(pp. 329–340). London: Routledge.
Jones, T. (1978). A discussion paper on research in the visual fine Arts prepared for the Birmingham Polytechnic. Leonardo,13(2), 89-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1577976
Karmel, P. (1999). Jackson Pollock: Interviews, articles, and reviews. New York: The Museum of Modern Art: Distributed by H.N. Abrams.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of Scientific revolutions(2ndenlarged ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lamarque, P. (2010). Literature and truth. In G. L. Hagberg & W. Jost(Eds.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Literature(pp. 367–384). Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444315592.ch19
Latour, B. (1993). We Have Never Been Modern.(C. Porter, Trad.)Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lesage, D. (2009). Who’s afraid of artistic research? On measuring artistic research output. ART&RESEARCH: A Journal of Ideas, Contexts and Methods, 2(2).
McAllister, J. (2004). Seven claims. In A. W. Balkema & H. Slager(Eds.), Artistic Research.Lier en Boog, Series of Philosophy of Art and Art Theory, vol. 18.Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.
OED. (n.d.). Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved 12 2017, from Oxford University Press:<https://en.oxforddictionaries.com>.
Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A very short introduction.New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780192802835.001.0001
Pitz, H. (2004). Seven remarks. In A. W. Balkema & H. Slager(Eds.), Artistic Research.Lier en Boog, Series of Philosophy of Art and Art Theory, vol. 18.Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.
Pollock, J. (1947). My painting. Possibilities (Winter 1947-48). Wittenborn, Schultz, Inc.
Popper, K. (2002). The logic of Scientific discovery.Routledge Classics.
Read, H. (1944). Education through Art.London: Faber and Faber.
Simuforosa, M. & Wiseman, M.(2016). A guide to conducting research: A student handbook paperback. Strategic Book Publishing & Rights Agency.
Slager, H. (2004). Methododicy. In A. W. Balkema & H. Slager(Eds.), Artistic Research. Lier en Boog. Series of Philosophy of Art and Art Theory, vol. 18.Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.
Slager, H. (2015). The pleasure of research. Hatje Cantz Verlag.
Snow, C. P. (1998). The two cultures.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stolnitz, J. (1992). On the cognitive triviality of Art. In P. Lamarque & S. H. Olsen(Eds.), Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art;The analytic tradition: An anthology(pp. 337–343). Oxford: Blackwell.
Uidhir, C. M. & Magnus, P. (2011). Art concept pluralism. Metaphilosophy, 42(1-2),83–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9973.2010.01678.x
Verwoert, J. (2006). School’s out!-? In V. Abu Eldahab & Waldvogel, F.(Eds),Notes for an art school(p. 60). Nicosia: Dexter Sinister.
Vidmar, I. (2015). Literature and Philosophy: Intersection and boundaries. Arts 4(1),1–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/arts4010001
Vidmar, I. (2010). Against the cognitive triviality of Art. Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics, vol. 2., 516-531.
Vries, G. de(2004). Beware of research. In A. W. Balkema & H. Slager(Eds.), Artistic Research. Lier en Boog,Series of Philosophy of Art and Art Theory, vol. 18.Amsterdam/New York: Editions Rodopi B.V.
Weitz, M. (2012). The role of theory in aesthetics. In P. Lamarque& S. H. Olsen(Eds.), Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art (pp. 12-18). Oxford: Blackwell.[first publ. 1956]
Zimmerman, J. & Forlizzi, J. (2014). Research through Design in HCI. In J. Olson & W. Kellogg(Eds.), Ways of Knowing in HCI(pp. 167–189). New York: Springer Science+Business Media. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0378-8_8
Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J. & Evenson, S. (2007). Research through Design as a method for interaction Design research in HCI. SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems(pp. 493–502). ACM. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Pedro Alegria
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
